Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 98
  1. Talldog's Avatar
    Posts
    157 Posts
    Global Posts
    291 Global Posts
    #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by NCTreo600
    Quick question: if Kerry is so friendly with leaders of other nations, why isn't he doing something now to bring them into the fold on Iraq and saving our warrior's lives than waiting until he is President? I understand the President has a road paved for Iraq, but why can't Kerry do some of his "summits" now? Why wait? Seems odd.
    Because it's a crock, that's why. France and Germany have made it crystal clear that they're not going to help with Iraq no matter who's elected. Kerry has been forced to concede as much:

    http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...1859-5099r.htm

    Of course, now he says he'll get other countries to contribute, but since he's spent the last several months claiming that every U.S. ally who's not France, Germany, or Russia is bribed or coerced or a puppet of the Bush administration, it's not clear how he'd pull that off.
    Talldog
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by Talldog
    Of course, now he says he'll get other countries to contribute, but since he's spent the last several months claiming that every U.S. ally who's not France, Germany, or Russia is bribed or coerced or a puppet of the Bush administration, it's not clear how he'd pull that off.
    Somehow the Australian puppet got re-elected.
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  3. #23  
    you know what? something doesn't sit right. if these nations disapprove of this war now, THEY`RE NOT COMING BACK JUST BC OF KERRY!

    why do people think otherwise?
    just because he brings a new style is by NO means assurance that anything drastically different will be done in iraq.

    he even said, its the military's job to win the war, and the president`s job to win the peace - so if he's already stated that one component is independent of him, what the hell does he think will be done differently?

    kerry is all about the un. THE UN WAS BRIBED BY SADDAM! Bought off and manipulated by the almighty dollar. even the un succumbed to "MONEY TALKS"! WILL YOU FEEL SAFER?

    So even though world collaboration sounds rosey, is it really what we think it is? is it always legitimate? did this latest evidence of saddam buying off the un leave you with confidence In kerry's philosophy?
    it scares me. with kerry, we'd submit our security interests to the whims of other nations who may not genuinely give a hoot about us, esp if there are any underlying gripes with us. I don't care how eloquently kerry can communicate to them.
    and my gut says kerry lied about not raising taxes. he's going to have to raise them. He squirmed out of saying how he will stop outsourcing, when even charlie the interviewer called his bluff that if it costs ibm $12 / hr to hire overseas and $56 /hr in the us, how the hell can you eliminate outsourcing?
    charlie asked TWICE how kerry will cut the deficit in half, and TWICE kerry failed to answer concretely how he will do this.

    I just don't believe this guy. he sounds great, but my gut tells me we will be disappointed with how his approach serves itself out when in office. I really doubt you're going to get what you voted for if kerry is in office.
    Last edited by treobk214; 10/09/2004 at 02:14 PM.
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    I just don't believe this guy. he sounds great, but my gut tells me we will be disappointed with how his approach serves itself out when in office. I really doubt you're going to get what you voted for if kerry is in office.
    And BUSH and Co. are any better???
  5. #25  
    there are faults on both sides. neither is perfect. but i think bush is guided more by OUR interests, and kerry is guided by how POPULAR our interests are with europe.

    he stated he wants to work with france. sweet mother of god, doesnt that set off pangs of nausea in your stomach?

    france is for all intents and purposes our political enemy. no president, plain-spoken or eloquent is going to throw an arm around the french in total harmony and friendship.

    they DONT LIKE US. why does kerry insist on involving a nation.. THAT DOESNT LIKE US? how will an opinion from a nation of that stance help our situation for the better? that is simply a very scary idea.

    bush calls the french for what they are and does what he thinks is best for our country, he doesnt do what he is told to do by nations who may have hidden agendas against us but superficially feign cooperation. how do you know if any of these nations` decisions will be "bought off" by the next tyrannical dictator?

    its naive to think the un will be pro-us. that behind closed doors these nations dont whisper how they hope to see the us fail despite meeting with us at un summits.

    if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself. its great to bring your friends, but who are you going to trust with the matters of greatest value? strangers? or family?

    this is why bush is better.
    Last edited by treobk214; 10/09/2004 at 02:50 PM.
  6. #26  
    Thats why we are in this mess in Iraq, because of France? I guess bashing them does serve to distract us from the real source of the problem............. Bush's incompetence as a foreign leader.
  7. #27  
    Of course, now he says he'll get other countries to contribute, but since he's spent the last several months claiming that every U.S. ally who's not France, Germany, or Russia is bribed or coerced or a puppet of the Bush administration, it's not clear how he'd pull that off.
    How about getting these countries to help with money or outside Iraq security training of Iraqis? And yes, there is something to bring them back, the oil.

    And can we stop the frog bashing. It's so ignorant.
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by Eurokitty
    And BUSH and Co. are any better???
    i know it's sad but it may come down to the devil you know vs the devil you don't know
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by webslappy
    i know it's sad but it may come down to the devil you know vs the devil you don't know

    Bush, on the right, certainly looks more presidential
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  10. #30  
    oh now bashing the french is a distraction, where do you people come up with this stuff? pfft. ignorant huh? I guess you wouldn't consider negotiations with a nation that hates us to be ignorant, would you? no, probably not. it would be all fine and dandy.

    war is war. even best-laid plans rarely work 100% the way planned in war.

    come on, do you honestly think we'll be out of iraq in 6 mths "if every thing is done the way I've outlined it to be" - as kerry stated? what exactly is "everything I've outlined"? does that kind of sound like a line of bullsh@t to you or what?

    please. kerry seems to have snowed you pretty well with these lines about not raising taxes while looking directly into the tv.
    he's snowed you although he couldn't explain how he will stop outsourcing.
    I think its pretty entertaining watching him spew his promises while knowing full well that he'll have to retract half of those promises to bring even a fraction to fruition.

    just laughable. and I wonder which promises he will change his mind about if he wins. oh wait, he change his mind about ALL of them, most likely, that's right.
  11. #31  
    So BK...
    I get the feeling from your post that you too want to be out of Iraq and bring our troops home.... I think we all agree....
    War is war...
    I doubt too we will get out in 6 years, never mind 6 months...

    Just answer me one question....
    If you had an employee that did a really bad job, really got the company into a bad situation that never should have happened because he didn''t do his homework, hurting the company's image and prestige...

    And the associate refuses to admit to ANY mistake...

    Do you as a boss reward him with a new 4 year contract????
    Kerry may be a flip flopper , but at least he has the common sense to recognize a mistake, especially obvious mistakes...

    btw The real reason Bush refused to be bound by treaty for war crimes, is that right now, based on the facts of invading a soveriegn nation to remove wmds that were not that, he could be indicted as leader for possible war crimes!
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by NCTreo600
    Quick question: if Kerry is so friendly with leaders of other nations, why isn't he doing something now to bring them into the fold on Iraq and saving our warrior's lives than waiting until he is President? I understand the President has a road paved for Iraq, but why can't Kerry do some of his "summits" now? Why wait? Seems odd.
    Because he's a craven politician bent with unifocal clarity on being president, period. That, to me , is inherently undesirable in a president. On the other hand, GWB obviously never dreamed in his wildest fantasies that he would ever be president, or else he would have learned long ago, as did his opponent, that elocution and syntactically intelligible language are (or should be) pre-requisites of being the leader of the free world.
  13. #33  
    Thanks to Buck Andrews. WW II, with three REAL Purple Hearts!


    THIS IS VERY POWERFUL STUFF.. READ IT ALL.. AND PASS IT ON...
    Unlike McCain, Bush, and Gore.... Kerry has adamantly refused to authorize the release of his military records. Most think it's because of his phony battle medals. The probable real reason is below.

    He was not granted an Honorable Discharge until March 2001, almost 30 years after his ostensible service term had ended! This is very much out of the ordinary, and highly suspect.

    There are 5 classes of Discharge: Honorable, General, Other Than Honorable, Bad Conduct, and Dishonorable. My guess is that he was Discharged in the '70s, but not Honorably. He appealed this sometime while Clinton was doing trouser-tricks in the Oval Office. Political pressure was applied, and the Honorable Discharge was then granted.

    His file is probably rife with reports of this, submissions and hearings on the appeal, reports of his "giving aid and comfort" to the enemy, along with protests that were filed with respect to his alleged valor under fire. Hopefully, this will blow up in his face before October 15th.

    ======================================================

    On 18 Feb. 1966, John Kerry signed a 6 year enlistment contract with the Navy (plus a 6-month extension during wartime).

    On 18 Feb. 1966, John Kerry also signed an Officer Candidate contract for 6 years -- 5 years of ACTIVE duty & ACTIVE Naval Reserves, and 1 year of inactive standby reserves (See items #4 & #5).

    Because John Kerry was discharged from TOTAL ACTIVE DUTY of only 3 years and 18 days on 3 Jan. 1970, he was then required to attend 48 drills per year, and not more than 17 days active duty for training. Kerry was also subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Additionally, Kerry, as a commissioned officer, was prohibited from making adverse statements against his chain of command or statements against his country, especially during time of war. It is also interesting to note that Kerry did not obtain an honorable discharge until Mar. 12, 2001 even though his service obligation should have ended July 1, 1972.

    Lt. John Kerry's letter of 21 Nov. 1969, asking for an early release from active US Navy duty falsely states "My current regular period of obligated service would be completed in December of this year."

    On Jan. 3, 1970, Lt. John Kerry was transferred to the Naval Reserve Manpower Center in Bainridge, Maryland.

    Where are Kerry's Performance Records for 2 years of obligated Ready Reserve, the 48 drills per year required and his 17 days of active duty per year training while Kerry was in the Ready Reserves? Have these records been released?

    Has anyone ever talked to Kerry's Commanding Officer at the Naval Reserve Center where Kerry drilled?

    On 1 July 1972, Lt. John Kerry was transferred to Standby Reserve - Inactive. On 16 February 1978, Lt. John Kerry was discharged from US Naval Reserve.

    Below are some of the crimes Lt. Kerry USNR committed as a Ready Reservist, while he was acting as a leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the War:

    1. Lt. Kerry attended many rallies where the Vietcong flag was displayed while our flag was desecrated, defiled, and mocked, thereby giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

    2. Lt. Kerry was involved in a meeting that voted on assassinating members of the US Senate.

    3. Lt. Kerry lied under oath against fellow soldiers before the US Senate about crimes committed in Vietnam.

    4. Lt. Kerry professed to being a war criminal on national television, and condemned the military and the USA.

    5. Lt. Kerry met with NVA and Vietcong communist leaders in Paris, in direct violation of the UCMJ and the U.S. Constitution.

    Lt. Kerry by his own words & actions violated the UCMJ and the U.S. Code while serving as a Navy officer. Lt. Kerry stands in violation of Article 3, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution. Lt. Kerry's 1970 meeting with NVA Communists in Paris is in direct violation of the UCMJ's Article 104 part 904, and U.S. Code 18 U.S.C. 953. That meeting, and Kerry's subsequent support of the communists while leading mass protests against our military in the year that followed, also place him in direct violation of our Constitution's Article 3, Section 3, which defines treason as "giving aid and comfort" to the enemy in time of warfare.

    The Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3, states, "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President ... having previously taken an oath to support the Constitution of the United States, [who has] engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."

    THIS IS VERY POWERFUL STUFF.. READ IT ALL
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by TrySpammingMe
    So BK...
    I get the feeling from your post that you too want to be out of Iraq and bring our troops home.... I think we all agree....
    War is war...
    I doubt too we will get out in 6 years, never mind 6 months...

    Just answer me one question....
    If you had an employee that did a really bad job, really got the company into a bad situation that never should have happened because he didn''t do his homework, hurting the company's image and prestige...

    And the associate refuses to admit to ANY mistake...

    Do you as a boss reward him with a new 4 year contract????
    Kerry may be a flip flopper , but at least he has the common sense to recognize a mistake, especially obvious mistakes...

    btw The real reason Bush refused to be bound by treaty for war crimes, is that right now, based on the facts of invading a soveriegn nation to remove wmds that were not that, he could be indicted as leader for possible war crimes!

    mistakes that he voted on himself? which would have led us to war as well, anyway?
    kerry would realize a mistake and then back out to leave iraq amid total chaos and malcontent. is that what you think is the better idea? would that redeem our country`s image?

    so kerry would start something, change his mind, and leave it unfinished because it was a mistake or unpopular or another better idea crosses his mind, right? that`s what you`re saying would be the wiser way to vote?

    good lord! id fire an employee who couldnt get his positions straight and failed to demonstrate his OWN sense of right and wrong. thats who id fire.
    id fire an employee who bolstered diplomacy with a un that was proven to be corrupt, bought off, thereby buying time for the company`s enemies to strengthen themselves for a future, deadlier attack on the company.. thats who id fire.

    a glad hand who tells you one thing but does another, repeatedly, on BIG ISSUES, such as defending the company.

    you get rid of weak or dead wood. you fire the weakest link. if you find that an employee compromises the company`s position as a result of trying to please competing companies... he is outta there. that concept is referred to as "conflict of interests".

    individuals who fight with conviction for the defense of a company through thick and thin are the ones you consider valuable. every company goes through mistakes,,, its the ability to defend yourself and work through tough times to succeed ... these are the abilities that drive one to succeed. in life and politics... bush has them. who ever succeeded by starting projects and then quitting them? would THAT not be an employee you`d fire?

    kerry swings from one tree to the next.

    id fire the monkey
    Last edited by treobk214; 10/10/2004 at 01:37 AM.
  15. #35  
    id advise you to consider the following sentences, and then think very, very carefully about who you are supporting as for our president for the next four years....

    The Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3, states, "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President ... having previously taken an oath to support the Constitution of the United States, [who has] engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."

    THIS IS VERY POWERFUL STUFF.. READ IT ALL who do you want to vote for as our president?
  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by Gasmeister
    Because he's a craven politician bent with unifocal clarity on being president, period. That, to me , is inherently undesirable in a president. On the other hand, GWB obviously never dreamed in his wildest fantasies that he would ever be president, or else he would have learned long ago, as did his opponent, that elocution and syntactically intelligible language are (or should be) pre-requisites of being the leader of the free world.
    do you want an eloquent poet of the english language? or do you want a leader who will tell it to you straight? do you prefer the confusion of equivocation? or would you prefer the plainly-spoken word? particularly when he is talking about matters of NATIONAL SECURITY?

    who was that character in lord of the rings, gasmeister, wormtongue? who spoke with such soothing, melodic elocution and syntactically intelligible language that he spun the once powerful king into a coma-like sleep that changed him into an incapable old man?

    id rather have a plainly spoken, genuine individual in the president`s office than a master of the spoken word.... who might also spin his own..."weapons of mass deceptions..." catch my drift?

    ok, now im stepping away from the keyboard.. and yes i will take a deep breath... inhale... exhale... much better now.
    Last edited by treobk214; 10/10/2004 at 01:39 AM.
  17. #37  
    So what were Bush's 3 personell mistakes?

    -Keeping on a Counter Terrorism Adivsor... Richard Clarke who ratted out the administration when Clarke testified he never had a meeting with the President prior to 9/11
    -Appointing his first Treasury Secretary O'Neil who said Bush planned to invade Iraq from the begining of the administration well before 9/11
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3387941.stm

    -Not making certain generals retire sooner... General Zinni
    http://www.thenation.com/capitalgame...?bid=3&pid=977
    Guess they all violated Ronald Reagan's ''11th Commandment'': Never speak ill of a Republican!
    Gee thats pretty good , 3 3/4 years as president, and only made 3 mistakes!

    I guess George trading Sammy Sousa to the Cubs is still his biggest mistake.
    I for one am impressed that he is man enough to even admit that!
  18. #38  
    that's a repeating misleading claim by kerry about retiring gen zinni. I believe he announced his retirement in 2002 BEFORE he made any recommendations to the bush administration on the war. kerry is trying to make it sound like bush fired him because of what he was told. no. the general announced his retirement a year before all this was taking place - nothing at all to do with bush firing someone who was teliing him something he didn't want to hear. I think that's total misrepresentation.
  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by TrySpammingMe
    I guess George trading Sammy Sousa to the Cubs is still his biggest mistake.
    Ummmm...I cant remember. Did the Cubs win the World series with Sammy and his corked bat??
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  20. #40  
    bush didn't retire him - he retired himself!
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions