Note to the Mods: There should be no reason to take out the ban stick for anyone replying to that particular post by Raora. What Mithrandir said is pretty much what I wanted to say, but I have already been smacked with the stick once. Either erase that post or lock this thread, because no good is going to come of it. People are going to defend their friends and family... Again no action should be taken against anyone responding with anger at such a mis-guided / ignorant statement such as that.
nothing wrong with defending friends or family or supporting them as I said before.
and I'm ignorant because you disagree with me? hmm
No I never said you were ignorant...I said that particular statement was ignorant. Even intelligent people say dumb things, if you take that as an extension of your intelligence, then that is on you.
"It is easier to be cruel than wise. The road to wisdom is long and difficult... so most people just turn out to be assholes" Feng (Christopher Walken)
Nice try, but most of the people around here will not heed these words until their home is a smoking crater. The history channel comment was on target. Learn a little about history people. They have been trying to kill and bring an end to western society since they won the fields at Yarmuk in 636. Religion of peace hehe yeah right.
Note to the Mods: There should be no reason to take out the ban stick for anyone replying to that particular post by Raora. What Mithrandir said is pretty much what I wanted to say, but I have already been smacked with the stick once. Either erase that post or lock this thread, because no good is going to come of it. People are going to defend their friends and family... Again no action should be taken against anyone responding with anger at such a mis-guided / ignorant statement such as that.
Relax, 8hammer8. I will be happy to take a fall for this one, if need be. Also, if banned for this, it will more than likely be permanent, as I believe I've used all of my "get out of jail free" cards under the mods newer restrictions. Again, if the mods feel so inclined, so be it.
To Raora:
As an American who loves his country, his family, his friends, and every single person who puts there life, limb, and freedom on the line every day to defend my country and to protect it's citizen's and their freedoms, let me start by simply saying:
FUCK YOU! If you ever need to call on my country's military personnel for help of any kind, may you get an eternal fucking busy signal. And I say "my country" because although you may be granted the same freedoms as every other American, including freedom of speech; I am also given the freedom to denounce you as any sort of representation of the people of America.
Who the fuck do you think you are, to declare who is and who isn't supportive of our troops, wherever they may be deployed? Who the fuck are you, to determine what criteria must be met for someone to be caring of those who fight for us ( who also, sadly, must fight to defend even you)?
Let me tell you what I think of your topic here:
First off, I have neither hate NOR full blind support for President Bush. I will say that he has done some things right, but he has done many wrong.
I believe that dictator genocidal pieces of shit such as Saddam should be taken out of power, by their own people firstly and by ANY country who these fucks have any chance of attacking/causing attacks against.
However, it should have been thought out, and performed after a clear goal was stated presenting Saddam as the target, why he was presented as a target, and all documents/info supporting the need to remove his ass provided to the U.N.
If such time presented itself where he was determined to be a direct threat to America, and permission were denied by the U.N., then a declaration of unsanctioned war should have been declared on Saddam and his military.
The use of the theory of WMD used to initiate the attack against Saddam, and therefore Iraq, was a stupid gamble on very unreliable information by a President whos judgement, in my opinion, was partially impaired by his own personal feelings/agenda ( something which should NEVER be allowed to happen regardless of the siuation at hand). Although progress was made toward a main goal (removing Saddam), the way it was achieved disallowed an easy way to fully justify the action. In my opinion, if there becomes clear that there is overwhelming evidence that the President's personal feelings caused fraudulant evidence of WMD or other threats in Iraq to be created for the sole purpose of justifying the attack on Iraq, he should damn well be impeached.
Regarding the 9/11 attacks:
A clear retaliatory response should have been presented to both the U.N. and the American people, marking the Al-queda terrorist organization and ANY country who openly supported/defended/sheltered them. A no-bullshit approach in a time of war should always be paramount.
No beating around the bush, and quietly asking for the international communities compliance. When attacked, and the attacking force identified, the international communities compliance should be DEMANDED and RECEIVED, regardless of which member nation demands it, so long as there has been an identification of a clear and present danger.
Any member nation of the U.N. which refuses to help, and is not a supporter/aider of the attacker, should make their decision not to aid the attacked nation known, and then shut the fuck up (these nations know who they are).
It should also be made clear that nations who decide to support/harbor the attackers, when the attackers have been shown to have committed an unprovoked attack resulting in multiple loss of life/property on another country's sovereign soil, should be immediately declared as targets of retaliation, unless the harbored attackers are given up or driven out of their nation.
To your comment of non-support of Bush means non-support of troops, you are so full of shit, it's not funny. If you are unable to differentiate between the support of a cause/ action/ individual, and the support of those who are not there to serve their own needs, but the orders/commands of the military which they are a part of, then you are/were a waste of valuable school time which could have been devoted to a brighter student. Bush is an individual, who's job is to run the country. Our troops are a collective of individuals, doing what they are trained to do - their job.
I'm done. I probably made no impact on the dipshit OP, but I feel better.
But the American people are getting exploited, but they allow it because they vote either Democrat or Republican, and the parties are essentially the same and owned by the same people.
Note to the Mods: There should be no reason to take out the ban stick for anyone replying to that particular post by Raora. What Mithrandir said is pretty much what I wanted to say, but I have already been smacked with the stick once. Either erase that post or lock this thread, because no good is going to come of it. People are going to defend their friends and family... Again no action should be taken against anyone responding with anger at such a mis-guided / ignorant statement such as that.
Relax, 8hammer8. I will be happy to take a fall for this one, if need be. Also, if banned for this, it will more than likely be permanent, as I believe I've used all of my "get out of jail free" cards under the mods newer restrictions. Again, if the mods feel so inclined, so be it.
To Raora:
As an American who loves his country, his family, his friends, and every single person who puts there life, limb, and freedom on the line every day to defend my country and to protect it's citizen's and their freedoms, let me start by simply saying:
FUCK YOU! If you ever need to call on my country's military personnel for help of any kind, may you get an eternal fucking busy signal. And I say "my country" because although you may be granted the same freedoms as every other American, including freedom of speech; I am also given the freedom to denounce you as any sort of representation of the people of America.
Who the fuck do you think you are, to declare who is and who isn't supportive of our troops, wherever they may be deployed? Who the fuck are you, to determine what criteria must be met for someone to be caring of those who fight for us ( who also, sadly, must fight to defend even you)?
Let me tell you what I think of your topic here:
First off, I have neither hate NOR full blind support for President Bush. I will say that he has done some things right, but he has done many wrong.
I believe that dictator genocidal pieces of shit such as Saddam should be taken out of power, by their own people firstly and by ANY country who these fucks have any chance of attacking/causing attacks against.
However, it should have been thought out, and performed after a clear goal was stated presenting Saddam as the target, why he was presented as a target, and all documents/info supporting the need to remove his ass provided to the U.N.
If such time presented itself where he was determined to be a direct threat to America, and permission were denied by the U.N., then a declaration of unsanctioned war should have been declared on Saddam and his military.
The use of the theory of WMD used to initiate the attack against Saddam, and therefore Iraq, was a stupid gamble on very unreliable information by a President whos judgement, in my opinion, was partially impaired by his own personal feelings/agenda ( something which should NEVER be allowed to happen regardless of the siuation at hand). Although progress was made toward a main goal (removing Saddam), the way it was achieved disallowed an easy way to fully justify the action. In my opinion, if there becomes clear that there is overwhelming evidence that the President's personal feelings caused fraudulant evidence of WMD or other threats in Iraq to be created for the sole purpose of justifying the attack on Iraq, he should damn well be impeached.
Regarding the 9/11 attacks:
A clear retaliatory response should have been presented to both the U.N. and the American people, marking the Al-queda terrorist organization and ANY country who openly supported/defended/sheltered them. A no-bullshit approach in a time of war should always be paramount.
No beating around the bush, and quietly asking for the international communities compliance. When attacked, and the attacking force identified, the international communities compliance should be DEMANDED and RECEIVED, regardless of which member nation demands it, so long as there has been an identification of a clear and present danger.
Any member nation of the U.N. which refuses to help, and is not a supporter/aider of the attacker, should make their decision not to aid the attacked nation known, and then shut the fuck up (these nations know who they are).
It should also be made clear that nations who decide to support/harbor the attackers, when the attackers have been shown to have committed an unprovoked attack resulting in multiple loss of life/property on another country's sovereign soil, should be immediately declared as targets of retaliation, unless the harbored attackers are given up or driven out of their nation.
To your comment of non-support of Bush means non-support of troops, you are so full of shit, it's not funny. If you are unable to differentiate between the support of a cause/ action/ individual, and the support of those who are not there to serve their own needs, but the orders/commands of the military which they are a part of, then you are/were a waste of valuable school time which could have been devoted to a brighter student. Bush is an individual, who's job is to run the country. Our troops are a collective of individuals, doing what they are trained to do - their job.
I'm done. I probably made no impact on the dipshit OP, but I feel better.
If I am removed for this, it's been fun.
/QFT
/QFE
I really do hope the OP understands to some degree the few of us here are trying to say.
I am crossing my fingers for you Zorvan
"It is easier to be cruel than wise. The road to wisdom is long and difficult... so most people just turn out to be assholes" Feng (Christopher Walken)
I'm British and even I know that the only power that can declare war in the U.S.A is Congress, unless that's changed since the Chimp was elected?
As for support it is possible to despise your President/Prime Minister whilst hoping that your friend/family member doesn't come home in a box. I'll always support someone who's willing to defend their Queen and country with their own lives, but I haven't heard of any politician doing that since Churchill and the Duke of Wellington.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience"
I'm British and even I know that the only power that can declare war in the U.S.A is Congress, unless that's changed since the Chimp was elected? As for support it is possible to despise your President/Prime Minister whilst hoping that your friend/family member doesn't come home in a box. I'll always support someone who's willing to defend their Queen and country with their own lives, but I haven't heard of any politician doing that since Churchill and the Duke of Wellington.
The president has no clear constitutional authority to declare war without congressional approval. However, the U.S. Supreme Court has determined that the president, as commander-in-chief of the military, does have the authority to recognize a "state of war" initiated against the United States and may in these circumstances unilaterally send U.S. troops into battle.
As a member of the United States Military I can understand what both sides are saying. But the fact remains that President Bush is the Commander and Chief and in such position is a part of the US Military. Supporting the Troops and wanting to Support the Morale of the troops also means not trying to tear down our chain of command all the time. People talk big about being supportative, but when we hear all the complaining about what we are doing it doesn't feel very supportative. At least it isn't like Vietnam again, and we don't come home from war to be spit on and called baby killers. But being supportative is more then just hoping we make it home alive.
Currently playing: LOTRO & WoW (not much WoW though because Mines of Moria rocks!!!!)
Looking Foward too: Bioware games (Dragon Age & Star Wars The Old Republic)
I'm British and even I know that the only power that can declare war in the U.S.A is Congress, unless that's changed since the Chimp was elected? As for support it is possible to despise your President/Prime Minister whilst hoping that your friend/family member doesn't come home in a box. I'll always support someone who's willing to defend their Queen and country with their own lives, but I haven't heard of any politician doing that since Churchill and the Duke of Wellington.
The president has no clear constitutional authority to declare war without congressional approval. However, the U.S. Supreme Court has determined that the president, as commander-in-chief of the military, does have the authority to recognize a "state of war" initiated against the United States and may in these circumstances unilaterally send U.S. troops into battle.
Same basic idea as the Korean Conflict. We never actually declared war in that one either.
Currently playing: LOTRO & WoW (not much WoW though because Mines of Moria rocks!!!!)
Looking Foward too: Bioware games (Dragon Age & Star Wars The Old Republic)
I'm British and even I know that the only power that can declare war in the U.S.A is Congress, unless that's changed since the Chimp was elected? As for support it is possible to despise your President/Prime Minister whilst hoping that your friend/family member doesn't come home in a box. I'll always support someone who's willing to defend their Queen and country with their own lives, but I haven't heard of any politician doing that since Churchill and the Duke of Wellington.
The president has no clear constitutional authority to declare war without congressional approval. However, the U.S. Supreme Court has determined that the president, as commander-in-chief of the military, does have the authority to recognize a "state of war" initiated against the United States and may in these circumstances unilaterally send U.S. troops into battle.
Same basic idea as the Korean Conflict. We never actually declared war in that one either.
So that's why there's never been a peace treaty with North Korea? Always wondered about that.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience"
I'm British and even I know that the only power that can declare war in the U.S.A is Congress, unless that's changed since the Chimp was elected? As for support it is possible to despise your President/Prime Minister whilst hoping that your friend/family member doesn't come home in a box. I'll always support someone who's willing to defend their Queen and country with their own lives, but I haven't heard of any politician doing that since Churchill and the Duke of Wellington.
The president has no clear constitutional authority to declare war without congressional approval. However, the U.S. Supreme Court has determined that the president, as commander-in-chief of the military, does have the authority to recognize a "state of war" initiated against the United States and may in these circumstances unilaterally send U.S. troops into battle.
Same basic idea as the Korean Conflict. We never actually declared war in that one either.
So that's why there's never been a peace treaty with North Korea? Always wondered about that.
Well the war never ended. They had a cease fire agreement in 1953 and that is it. Also all US Wars after WW2 have been classified as Police Actions. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_action That way Congress does not have to declare War formally.
Currently playing: LOTRO & WoW (not much WoW though because Mines of Moria rocks!!!!)
Looking Foward too: Bioware games (Dragon Age & Star Wars The Old Republic)
Well the war never ended. They had a cease fire agreement in 1953 and that is it. Also all US Wars after WW2 have been classified as Police Actions. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_action That way Congress does not have to declare War formally.
WAR without the consent of the people duly elected to serve as a Representative body of the American people.
You go to war without the consent of the public, via their duly elected Representatives.
Why have you Americans allowed this? I think it is nutty.
Well the war never ended. They had a cease fire agreement in 1953 and that is it. Also all US Wars after WW2 have been classified as Police Actions. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_action That way Congress does not have to declare War formally.
WAR without the consent of the people duly elected to serve as a Representative body of the American people.
You go to war without the consent of the public, via their duly elected Representatives.
Why have you Americans allowed this? I think it is nutty.
Well the war never ended. They had a cease fire agreement in 1953 and that is it. Also all US Wars after WW2 have been classified as Police Actions. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_action That way Congress does not have to declare War formally.
WAR without the consent of the people duly elected to serve as a Representative body of the American people.
You go to war without the consent of the public, via their duly elected Representatives.
Why have you Americans allowed this? I think it is nutty.
because we would be like the French that is why.
Did you ever consider the possibility that massive corporations earn billions of dollars from it?
It might have a lot less to do with "freedom" or "spreading freedom" by force of arms than people wanting to get more rich....
Well the war never ended. They had a cease fire agreement in 1953 and that is it. Also all US Wars after WW2 have been classified as Police Actions. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_action That way Congress does not have to declare War formally.
WAR without the consent of the people duly elected to serve as a Representative body of the American people.
You go to war without the consent of the public, via their duly elected Representatives.
Why have you Americans allowed this? I think it is nutty.
because we would be like the French that is why.
Did you ever consider the possibility that massive corporations earn billions of dollars from it?
It might have a lot less to do with "freedom" or "spreading freedom" by force of arms than people wanting to get more rich....
whats wrong with getting rich? I own my own business, I do what I love and I make good money. I also work 70+ hours per week. What do you do? If I remember, France is a socialist country. You sit at home thinking it's your right for the government to provide you. sad.
whats wrong with getting rich? I own my own business, I do what I love and I make good money. I also work 70+ hours per week. What do you do? If I remember, France is a socialist country. You sit at home thinking it's your right for the government to provide you. sad.
There is nothing wrong with "getting rich." YOu are not rich because you own your own business. I could go to any US state and register a corporation in 2 hours. You work 70 hours a week. You are not very intellectual, you do not have time to develop yourself in other ways. But if you are happy, so be it.
You have never been to France. You cannot visit France because you are working 70 hours plus a week. LOL. But you are naive enough to believe some of the things you hear about France, as I doubt you ever read any well written book about France.
The American people, if they are comfortable with people profiting from "police actions," are in worse shape than I thought. i hope you understand, if you did not graduate from your public system, that your own Founders wanted to avoid this mess??
whats wrong with getting rich? I own my own business, I do what I love and I make good money. I also work 70+ hours per week. What do you do? If I remember, France is a socialist country. You sit at home thinking it's your right for the government to provide you. sad.
There is nothing wrong with "getting rich." YOu are not rich because you own your own business. I could go to any US state and register a corporation in 2 hours. You work 70 hours a week. You are not very intellectual, you do not have time to develop yourself in other ways. But if you are happy, so be it.
You have never been to France. You cannot visit France because you are working 70 hours plus a week. LOL. But you are naive enough to believe some of the things you hear about France, as I doubt you ever read any well written book about France.
The American people, if they are comfortable with people profiting from "police actions," are in worse shape than I thought. i hope you understand, if you did not graduate from your public system, that your own Founders wanted to avoid this mess??
you made my point. lol
still havent answered the question. What do you do????
still havent answered the question. What do you do????
That is not relevant to the discussion. You started talking about yourself thinking I might be impressed that you work 70 hours a week. Honestly, I feel sorry for you. LOL!
You are unable to engage in a conservation without asking people, "what do you do?" It is very pathetic. You do not know better.
still havent answered the question. What do you do????
That is not relevant to the discussion. You started talking about yourself thinking I might be impressed that you work 70 hours a week. Honestly, I feel sorry for you. LOL!
You are unable to engage in a conservation without asking people, "what do you do?" It is very pathetic. You do not know better.
what do you do?
Now you hurt my feelings. Guess I'll move home and live in my parents basement and collect government welfare like you and we will be equal.
Technically, Vietnam was the U.S.A enforcing the agreement that both sides signed in America I think, trouble was Ho Chi Mihn changed his mind. One side was fighting a war whilst the other was attempting to maintain a status quo, insane but true. As for Desert storm I suppose you could convince some people you were policing the middle east, intervention in Bosnia maybe. Desert shield would be hard to pass off as a police action and Afghanistan was/is a war, we are still fighting there aren't we?
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience"
Now you hurt my feelings. Guess I'll move home and live in my parents basement and collect government welfare like you and we will be equal.
Do you see how naive you are?
well, I would love to continue this insane conversation with you but I have a job to do. You obviously have more time to develop your inner self sitting in your parents basement I'll admit that and good luck with it If you ever in WY. USA look me up and I'll give you a job
Now you hurt my feelings. Guess I'll move home and live in my parents basement and collect government welfare like you and we will be equal.
Do you see how naive you are?
well, I would love to continue this insane conversation with you but I have a job to do. You obviously have more time to develop your inner self sitting in your parents basement I'll admit that and good luck with it If you ever in WY. USA look me up and I'll give you a job
Your job obsession thing is a total perversion. LOL. I do not know what to tell you. I have a job, and I am an Officer of a corporation. However, I will not name them.
Comments
and I'm ignorant because you disagree with me? hmm
No I never said you were ignorant...I said that particular statement was ignorant. Even intelligent people say dumb things, if you take that as an extension of your intelligence, then that is on you.
"It is easier to be cruel than wise. The road to wisdom is long and difficult... so most people just turn out to be assholes" Feng (Christopher Walken)
Nice try, but most of the people around here will not heed these words until their home is a smoking crater. The history channel comment was on target. Learn a little about history people. They have been trying to kill and bring an end to western society since they won the fields at Yarmuk in 636. Religion of peace hehe yeah right.
<imgsrc="http://files1.guildlaunch.net/guild/library/86975/Black_Fire.jpg">;
<ahref="http://profile.xfire.com/aetiuslonginus"><img src="http://miniprofile.xfire.com/bg/sh/type/2/aetiuslonginus.png"; width="450" height="34" /></a>
Give me good reasons to support bush.
Relax, 8hammer8. I will be happy to take a fall for this one, if need be. Also, if banned for this, it will more than likely be permanent, as I believe I've used all of my "get out of jail free" cards under the mods newer restrictions. Again, if the mods feel so inclined, so be it.
To Raora:
As an American who loves his country, his family, his friends, and every single person who puts there life, limb, and freedom on the line every day to defend my country and to protect it's citizen's and their freedoms, let me start by simply saying:
FUCK YOU! If you ever need to call on my country's military personnel for help of any kind, may you get an eternal fucking busy signal. And I say "my country" because although you may be granted the same freedoms as every other American, including freedom of speech; I am also given the freedom to denounce you as any sort of representation of the people of America.
Who the fuck do you think you are, to declare who is and who isn't supportive of our troops, wherever they may be deployed? Who the fuck are you, to determine what criteria must be met for someone to be caring of those who fight for us ( who also, sadly, must fight to defend even you)?
Let me tell you what I think of your topic here:
First off, I have neither hate NOR full blind support for President Bush. I will say that he has done some things right, but he has done many wrong.
I believe that dictator genocidal pieces of shit such as Saddam should be taken out of power, by their own people firstly and by ANY country who these fucks have any chance of attacking/causing attacks against.
However, it should have been thought out, and performed after a clear goal was stated presenting Saddam as the target, why he was presented as a target, and all documents/info supporting the need to remove his ass provided to the U.N.
If such time presented itself where he was determined to be a direct threat to America, and permission were denied by the U.N., then a declaration of unsanctioned war should have been declared on Saddam and his military.
The use of the theory of WMD used to initiate the attack against Saddam, and therefore Iraq, was a stupid gamble on very unreliable information by a President whos judgement, in my opinion, was partially impaired by his own personal feelings/agenda ( something which should NEVER be allowed to happen regardless of the siuation at hand). Although progress was made toward a main goal (removing Saddam), the way it was achieved disallowed an easy way to fully justify the action. In my opinion, if there becomes clear that there is overwhelming evidence that the President's personal feelings caused fraudulant evidence of WMD or other threats in Iraq to be created for the sole purpose of justifying the attack on Iraq, he should damn well be impeached.
Regarding the 9/11 attacks:
A clear retaliatory response should have been presented to both the U.N. and the American people, marking the Al-queda terrorist organization and ANY country who openly supported/defended/sheltered them. A no-bullshit approach in a time of war should always be paramount.
No beating around the bush, and quietly asking for the international communities compliance. When attacked, and the attacking force identified, the international communities compliance should be DEMANDED and RECEIVED, regardless of which member nation demands it, so long as there has been an identification of a clear and present danger.
Any member nation of the U.N. which refuses to help, and is not a supporter/aider of the attacker, should make their decision not to aid the attacked nation known, and then shut the fuck up (these nations know who they are).
It should also be made clear that nations who decide to support/harbor the attackers, when the attackers have been shown to have committed an unprovoked attack resulting in multiple loss of life/property on another country's sovereign soil, should be immediately declared as targets of retaliation, unless the harbored attackers are given up or driven out of their nation.
To your comment of non-support of Bush means non-support of troops, you are so full of shit, it's not funny. If you are unable to differentiate between the support of a cause/ action/ individual, and the support of those who are not there to serve their own needs, but the orders/commands of the military which they are a part of, then you are/were a waste of valuable school time which could have been devoted to a brighter student. Bush is an individual, who's job is to run the country. Our troops are a collective of individuals, doing what they are trained to do - their job.
I'm done. I probably made no impact on the dipshit OP, but I feel better.
If I am removed for this, it's been fun.
I love America.
But the American people are getting exploited, but they allow it because they vote either Democrat or Republican, and the parties are essentially the same and owned by the same people.
It is sad.
ya im all for america
i really just see no reason to be in iraq (or starting all these other wars for that matter, i could understand afghanistan)
its all just about oil, bush wanting to be a war president, and his desire to make money for his oil buddies
thats what im opposed to
Relax, 8hammer8. I will be happy to take a fall for this one, if need be. Also, if banned for this, it will more than likely be permanent, as I believe I've used all of my "get out of jail free" cards under the mods newer restrictions. Again, if the mods feel so inclined, so be it.
To Raora:
As an American who loves his country, his family, his friends, and every single person who puts there life, limb, and freedom on the line every day to defend my country and to protect it's citizen's and their freedoms, let me start by simply saying:
FUCK YOU! If you ever need to call on my country's military personnel for help of any kind, may you get an eternal fucking busy signal. And I say "my country" because although you may be granted the same freedoms as every other American, including freedom of speech; I am also given the freedom to denounce you as any sort of representation of the people of America.
Who the fuck do you think you are, to declare who is and who isn't supportive of our troops, wherever they may be deployed? Who the fuck are you, to determine what criteria must be met for someone to be caring of those who fight for us ( who also, sadly, must fight to defend even you)?
Let me tell you what I think of your topic here:
First off, I have neither hate NOR full blind support for President Bush. I will say that he has done some things right, but he has done many wrong.
I believe that dictator genocidal pieces of shit such as Saddam should be taken out of power, by their own people firstly and by ANY country who these fucks have any chance of attacking/causing attacks against.
However, it should have been thought out, and performed after a clear goal was stated presenting Saddam as the target, why he was presented as a target, and all documents/info supporting the need to remove his ass provided to the U.N.
If such time presented itself where he was determined to be a direct threat to America, and permission were denied by the U.N., then a declaration of unsanctioned war should have been declared on Saddam and his military.
The use of the theory of WMD used to initiate the attack against Saddam, and therefore Iraq, was a stupid gamble on very unreliable information by a President whos judgement, in my opinion, was partially impaired by his own personal feelings/agenda ( something which should NEVER be allowed to happen regardless of the siuation at hand). Although progress was made toward a main goal (removing Saddam), the way it was achieved disallowed an easy way to fully justify the action. In my opinion, if there becomes clear that there is overwhelming evidence that the President's personal feelings caused fraudulant evidence of WMD or other threats in Iraq to be created for the sole purpose of justifying the attack on Iraq, he should damn well be impeached.
Regarding the 9/11 attacks:
A clear retaliatory response should have been presented to both the U.N. and the American people, marking the Al-queda terrorist organization and ANY country who openly supported/defended/sheltered them. A no-bullshit approach in a time of war should always be paramount.
No beating around the bush, and quietly asking for the international communities compliance. When attacked, and the attacking force identified, the international communities compliance should be DEMANDED and RECEIVED, regardless of which member nation demands it, so long as there has been an identification of a clear and present danger.
Any member nation of the U.N. which refuses to help, and is not a supporter/aider of the attacker, should make their decision not to aid the attacked nation known, and then shut the fuck up (these nations know who they are).
It should also be made clear that nations who decide to support/harbor the attackers, when the attackers have been shown to have committed an unprovoked attack resulting in multiple loss of life/property on another country's sovereign soil, should be immediately declared as targets of retaliation, unless the harbored attackers are given up or driven out of their nation.
To your comment of non-support of Bush means non-support of troops, you are so full of shit, it's not funny. If you are unable to differentiate between the support of a cause/ action/ individual, and the support of those who are not there to serve their own needs, but the orders/commands of the military which they are a part of, then you are/were a waste of valuable school time which could have been devoted to a brighter student. Bush is an individual, who's job is to run the country. Our troops are a collective of individuals, doing what they are trained to do - their job.
I'm done. I probably made no impact on the dipshit OP, but I feel better.
If I am removed for this, it's been fun.
/QFT/QFE
I really do hope the OP understands to some degree the few of us here are trying to say.
I am crossing my fingers for you Zorvan
"It is easier to be cruel than wise. The road to wisdom is long and difficult... so most people just turn out to be assholes" Feng (Christopher Walken)
I'm British and even I know that the only power that can declare war in the U.S.A is Congress, unless that's changed since the Chimp was elected?
As for support it is possible to despise your President/Prime Minister whilst hoping that your friend/family member doesn't come home in a box. I'll always support someone who's willing to defend their Queen and country with their own lives, but I haven't heard of any politician doing that since Churchill and the Duke of Wellington.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience"
CS Lewis
The president has no clear constitutional authority to declare war without congressional approval. However, the U.S. Supreme Court has determined that the president, as commander-in-chief of the military, does have the authority to recognize a "state of war" initiated against the United States and may in these circumstances unilaterally send U.S. troops into battle.
As a member of the United States Military I can understand what both sides are saying. But the fact remains that President Bush is the Commander and Chief and in such position is a part of the US Military. Supporting the Troops and wanting to Support the Morale of the troops also means not trying to tear down our chain of command all the time. People talk big about being supportative, but when we hear all the complaining about what we are doing it doesn't feel very supportative. At least it isn't like Vietnam again, and we don't come home from war to be spit on and called baby killers. But being supportative is more then just hoping we make it home alive.
Currently playing:
LOTRO & WoW (not much WoW though because Mines of Moria rocks!!!!)
Looking Foward too:
Bioware games (Dragon Age & Star Wars The Old Republic)
The president has no clear constitutional authority to declare war without congressional approval. However, the U.S. Supreme Court has determined that the president, as commander-in-chief of the military, does have the authority to recognize a "state of war" initiated against the United States and may in these circumstances unilaterally send U.S. troops into battle.
Same basic idea as the Korean Conflict. We never actually declared war in that one either.
Currently playing:
LOTRO & WoW (not much WoW though because Mines of Moria rocks!!!!)
Looking Foward too:
Bioware games (Dragon Age & Star Wars The Old Republic)
The president has no clear constitutional authority to declare war without congressional approval. However, the U.S. Supreme Court has determined that the president, as commander-in-chief of the military, does have the authority to recognize a "state of war" initiated against the United States and may in these circumstances unilaterally send U.S. troops into battle.
Same basic idea as the Korean Conflict. We never actually declared war in that one either.
So that's why there's never been a peace treaty with North Korea? Always wondered about that.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience"
CS Lewis
The president has no clear constitutional authority to declare war without congressional approval. However, the U.S. Supreme Court has determined that the president, as commander-in-chief of the military, does have the authority to recognize a "state of war" initiated against the United States and may in these circumstances unilaterally send U.S. troops into battle.
Same basic idea as the Korean Conflict. We never actually declared war in that one either.
So that's why there's never been a peace treaty with North Korea? Always wondered about that.
Well the war never ended. They had a cease fire agreement in 1953 and that is it. Also all US Wars after WW2 have been classified as Police Actions. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_action That way Congress does not have to declare War formally.
Currently playing:
LOTRO & WoW (not much WoW though because Mines of Moria rocks!!!!)
Looking Foward too:
Bioware games (Dragon Age & Star Wars The Old Republic)
You go to war without the consent of the public, via their duly elected Representatives.
Why have you Americans allowed this? I think it is nutty.
You go to war without the consent of the public, via their duly elected Representatives.
Why have you Americans allowed this? I think it is nutty.
because we would be like the French that is why.
You go to war without the consent of the public, via their duly elected Representatives.
Why have you Americans allowed this? I think it is nutty.
because we would be like the French that is why.
Did you ever consider the possibility that massive corporations earn billions of dollars from it?It might have a lot less to do with "freedom" or "spreading freedom" by force of arms than people wanting to get more rich....
You go to war without the consent of the public, via their duly elected Representatives.
Why have you Americans allowed this? I think it is nutty.
because we would be like the French that is why.
Did you ever consider the possibility that massive corporations earn billions of dollars from it?It might have a lot less to do with "freedom" or "spreading freedom" by force of arms than people wanting to get more rich....
whats wrong with getting rich? I own my own business, I do what I love and I make good money. I also work 70+ hours per week. What do you do? If I remember, France is a socialist country. You sit at home thinking it's your right for the government to provide you. sad.You have never been to France. You cannot visit France because you are working 70 hours plus a week. LOL. But you are naive enough to believe some of the things you hear about France, as I doubt you ever read any well written book about France.
The American people, if they are comfortable with people profiting from "police actions," are in worse shape than I thought. i hope you understand, if you did not graduate from your public system, that your own Founders wanted to avoid this mess??
You have never been to France. You cannot visit France because you are working 70 hours plus a week. LOL. But you are naive enough to believe some of the things you hear about France, as I doubt you ever read any well written book about France.
The American people, if they are comfortable with people profiting from "police actions," are in worse shape than I thought. i hope you understand, if you did not graduate from your public system, that your own Founders wanted to avoid this mess??
you made my point. lolstill havent answered the question. What do you do????
That is not relevant to the discussion. You started talking about yourself thinking I might be impressed that you work 70 hours a week. Honestly, I feel sorry for you. LOL!
You are unable to engage in a conservation without asking people, "what do you do?" It is very pathetic. You do not know better.
That is not relevant to the discussion. You started talking about yourself thinking I might be impressed that you work 70 hours a week. Honestly, I feel sorry for you. LOL!
You are unable to engage in a conservation without asking people, "what do you do?" It is very pathetic. You do not know better.
what do you do?Now you hurt my feelings. Guess I'll move home and live in my parents basement and collect government welfare like you and we will be equal.
Do you see how naive you are?
Technically, Vietnam was the U.S.A enforcing the agreement that both sides signed in America I think, trouble was Ho Chi Mihn changed his mind. One side was fighting a war whilst the other was attempting to maintain a status quo, insane but true. As for Desert storm I suppose you could convince some people you were policing the middle east, intervention in Bosnia maybe. Desert shield would be hard to pass off as a police action and Afghanistan was/is a war, we are still fighting there aren't we?
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience"
CS Lewis
Do you see how naive you are?
well, I would love to continue this insane conversation with you but I have a job to do. You obviously have more time to develop your inner self sitting in your parents basement I'll admit that and good luck with it If you ever in WY. USA look me up and I'll give you a job
Do you see how naive you are?
well, I would love to continue this insane conversation with you but I have a job to do. You obviously have more time to develop your inner self sitting in your parents basement I'll admit that and good luck with it If you ever in WY. USA look me up and I'll give you a job
Your job obsession thing is a total perversion. LOL. I do not know what to tell you. I have a job, and I am an Officer of a corporation. However, I will not name them.Keep being naive.