View Poll Results: Who do you think the terrorist want as President

Voters
22. You may not vote on this poll
  • Bush

    11 50.00%
  • Kerry

    11 50.00%
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25
  1.    #1  
    You gotta take a minute to think about this, Who do you think the terrorists want as the next president on the USA.
    If only for that you should vote for the opposite, I know what will happen here, I put a poll, and like all other sites that have one, the D party runs to vote against Bush... But YOU know the truth, and it hurts. If terrorists should vote, Kerry would win with a landslide.

    THINK ABOUT THIS, and then vote...
  2. #2  
    My thinking is along a completely different path.

    The terrorists definitely want the President in power. Why? All of the good will and global support (who spoke against us) after 9/11 has been dissapated by the war in Iraq. The US is now considered a lone wolf by many countries. In fact, quite a few of our longstanding allies have deserted us and will not support the war in Iraq. Say what you want about France and Germany (as prime examples) but they have supported us in our past run-ins. In Egypt (one of our key allies in the Mid East), 98% of the population does not feel that the US wants peace in the Middle East. We have been isolated.

    The thing the terrorists fear the most is a US led, world-wide concerted effort against terrorism. It happened in the early 1970's and can happen again. Senator Kerry has said he would rebuild our relationships with our allies. The Prime Minister of Iran has stated that they prefer a Republican in the White House because the Democrats focus much more heavily on human rights and global pressure to address problems and issues.

    The terrorists have already begun to succeed. The great Western Bloc (Europe and North America) has been divided. Soon, without change, they feel they will be able to conquer.

    Senator Kerry believes in a global coalition, the President does not. One man has a go it alone attitude, the other has a mess with me and you mess with my friends attitude. Over the long haul, which strategy do you feel will be successful?
    << My command as we escape Palm HQ with a new Pre 3>>.

    Treo 300 >> Treo 600 >> Treo 650 >> Treo 755 >> Instinct >> Pre- >> TouchPad
  3. #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by Mahootzki
    You gotta take a minute to think about this, Who do you think the terrorists want as the next president on the USA.
    If only for that you should vote for the opposite, I know what will happen here, I put a poll, and like all other sites that have one, the D party runs to vote against Bush... But YOU know the truth, and it hurts. If terrorists should vote, Kerry would win with a landslide.

    THINK ABOUT THIS, and then vote...
    As far as I know terrorists don't vote. Asking us, Americans, to THINK about this is preposterously insane.
    You don't stop laughing because you grow old. You grow old because you stop laughing.
    -Michael Pritchard
  4. #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by tjd414
    My thinking is along a completely different path.

    The terrorists definitely want the President in power. Why? All of the good will and global support (who spoke against us) after 9/11 has been dissapated by the war in Iraq. The US is now considered a lone wolf by many countries. In fact, quite a few of our longstanding allies have deserted us and will not support the war in Iraq. Say what you want about France and Germany (as prime examples) but they have supported us in our past run-ins. In Egypt (one of our key allies in the Mid East), 98% of the population does not feel that the US wants peace in the Middle East. We have been isolated.

    The thing the terrorists fear the most is a US led, world-wide concerted effort against terrorism. It happened in the early 1970's and can happen again. Senator Kerry has said he would rebuild our relationships with our allies. The Prime Minister of Iran has stated that they prefer a Republican in the White House because the Democrats focus much more heavily on human rights and global pressure to address problems and issues.

    The terrorists have already begun to succeed. The great Western Bloc (Europe and North America) has been divided. Soon, without change, they feel they will be able to conquer.

    Senator Kerry believes in a global coalition, the President does not. One man has a go it alone attitude, the other has a mess with me and you mess with my friends attitude. Over the long haul, which strategy do you feel will be successful?
    Sounds like a big happy peace party. But, is there any evidence that the rest of the world even takes Kerry seriously? Is there any indication that the "allies" will jump in and win the war just because Kerry thinks they should.
  5. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #5  
    that's the sobering reality which I wish these democrats would recognize - the nations who oppose the war ARENT coming onboard just because kerry, who calls it the wrong war, deems them to.

    that's preposterous, everybody.
    let's be serious here. who is kerry going to fool into going into a "mess" like iraq? would YOU? if before you opposed the invasion, suddenly you're onboard with the us and at the table with kerry?

    I think this is a misguided hope that most people have in kerry. they think once he's in office, everybody will run in to help us again.

    TIME FOR A REALITY CHECK.
    I gotta have more cowbell
  6. #6  
    Time for a reality check indeed - terrorists currently have booming business thanks to Bush. Who do they want? The guy who gives them more recruits.
    Animo et Fide
  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by PeterBrown
    Time for a reality check indeed - terrorists currently have booming business thanks to Bush. Who do they want? The guy who gives them more recruits.
    so who motivated them to recruit for their two attacks on the world trade center while clinton was in office, peter?

    who motivated them to attack the us cole then, peter?

    outrageously ridiculous argument, you guys make there, peter.

    terrorists = hatred of america no matter who the hell is in office, peter...

    THATS THE REALITY CHECK.

    look into it.
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    so who motivated them to recruit for their two attacks on the world trade center while clinton was in office, peter?

    who motivated them to attack the us cole then, peter?

    outrageously ridiculous argument, you guys make there, peter.

    terrorists = hatred of america no matter who the hell is in office, peter...

    THATS THE REALITY CHECK.

    look into it.
    True, as far as it goes, but don't forget that under Bush attacks are increasing, not going down. They certainly don't appear to be on the run do they?
    Animo et Fide
  9. #9  
    Depends on the goals of the terrorists..
    If they want an all out religous war, then they'd prefer Bush since he seems to escalate things more than nip them in the but...

    If they want a peacefull sollution they may want to vote for Kerry since he seems to be heading that way more..

    But I never met a terrorist so I couldnt tell...
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    But I never met a terrorist so I couldnt tell...
    Let me introduce you to my wife in....<checking calendar> about 5 days...then you will have met one.
    "Do the Chickens have large talons?" Napoleon Dynamite
  11. #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg
    Sounds like a big happy peace party. But, is there any evidence that the rest of the world even takes Kerry seriously? Is there any indication that the "allies" will jump in and win the war just because Kerry thinks they should.
    Outside of Tony Blair, I don't think any leader takes President Bush very seriously.

    Besides, what's wrong with a peace party?
    << My command as we escape Palm HQ with a new Pre 3>>.

    Treo 300 >> Treo 600 >> Treo 650 >> Treo 755 >> Instinct >> Pre- >> TouchPad
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by tjd414
    Outside of Tony Blair, I don't think any leader takes President Bush very seriously.

    Besides, what's wrong with a peace party?
    I was simply saying.... That is the only part of Kerry's BS that even remotely resembles a coherent thought. The problem is that Bush never pushed the world away they chose not to join. Kerry makes it sound like all you have to do is send an invite and they'll come running in. I havent heard any rational reasoning that says the world would support Kerry in the war efforts any more than they support Bush.

    That being said I do believe that the rest of the world will be standing in line wanting to participate in the rebuilding of Iraq. I have no doubt Kerry would welcome that and then chalk it up as coalition effort.
  13. #13  
    introduce me to a terrorist who has interest in dealing with the us "peacefully".

    if you think that's possible, I've got a great bridge to sell you! eek!

    terror attacks were on the increase during the clinton administration, guys! they were stepping up the attacks then - NO intention of reducing them just because you change a president!

    come on! that's just naive! unreal!

    it appears that you are simply saying these things just to put kerry in place.

    reality is, the pace of terrorism if anything will continue to rise - why? jihad. not bush. jihad.

    I can't believe people think terrorists will calm down just because a democrat is in office.
  14.    #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by treobk214
    introduce me to a terrorist who has interest in dealing with the us "peacefully".
    OSAMA BIN LADEN, He actually bombed the WTC in 93, & the USS Cole, ALL FOR PEACE
  15.    #15  
    Oh I forgot to mention, WE took away the weapons...
    Kerry is not mentioning it anymore, they took it off his websitem Ads ect. Why ?
  16. #16  
    Just using the term "The Terrorists" is so moronic I cannot reply to this question.


    Edited to add:Video may show explosives at Iraqi site after U.S. arrived.
  17. #17  
    Personally, I'm not really worried about who the "terrorists" want in the white house. Their our ENEMIES. What's more important to me is who our ALLIES want in the white house.

    Of course, all of this is insignificant compared to who I want OUT of the white house.

    Not to hijack this thread or anything...but why do you guys think the terrorists are fighting this war in the first place? It comes across like many of you buy into the "they hate freedom" rhetoric. Do you?

    Nareau
  18. #18  
    As for using the word "Terrorist"--I used to agree with you that it's an inexact term. But if you look up the word, it applies pretty well to the likes of Al Qaeda.

    Nareau
  19.    #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Just using the term "The Terrorists" is so moronic I cannot reply to this question.
    Oh, I forgot, they are just a "NUASANCE" (hope i spelled it good, but you know what I mean...)
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by Mahootzki
    Oh, I forgot, they are just a "NUASANCE" (hope i spelled it good, but you know what I mean...)
    You're taking what Kerry said in the article out of context.

    Edit -- Both parties take what the other candidate says out of context all the time and use it to their advantage, so both groups are at fault here.
    Palm III > HS Visor > Treo 600 > Treo 650 > Treo 750 > Treo Pro > PrePlus GSM

    "95% of all software issues are due to USER ERROR."
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions