what are the implications of...

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
H

Humboldt High

Sicc OG
#1
Apr 25, 2002
3,372
16
0
45
#1
bush attacking iraq a country with no nuclear weapons and ignoring a country that threatened us and has nuclear weapons?

Bush is in effect saying that the USA, a bully country will attack a weak country for natural resources, instead of dealing with a country who poses a real threat.

So what message has been sent to countries that fear the USA. It is simple all you have to do is amass nuclear weapons and brandish them to be safe.

So here we are again another arms race mired in distrust, agression and war. The cold war all over again but with several countries.

Thank you Bush you shit face for leading the wold down a path of nuclear annilation. THIS IS OUR FUTURE.
 
Gizmo

Gizmo

Sicc OG
#5
Nov 8, 2002
1,693
31
48
47
#5
If Korea was next that would Shut alot of people up, Right?

Cause they Keep saying "Bush wont mess with Korea".
If he does, What will be your Complant then?

PS
I like GWB. But please dont put me in a Voting Class.
 
Blight

Blight

Sicc OG
#6
May 12, 2002
3,583
101
0
GoProGraphics.com
#6
KORES is starving and need leverage. Were beating them by not even talking ot them. Also, im sure there will be a time when we do meet. It wont be pretty, we are tchnically still at war.

Fuck Nuclear.
 
M

Mcleanhatch

Sicc OG
#7
May 8, 2002
4,729
0
0
48
#7
Humboldt High said:
Thank you Bush you shit face for leading the wold down a path of nuclear annilation. THIS IS OUR FUTURE.
Click to expand...
thats what eveery1 said about Ronald Reagan and it never materialized. under Reagan we won the Cold War. under Bush we will win the war against terrorism
 
M

Mcleanhatch

Sicc OG
#8
May 8, 2002
4,729
0
0
48
#8
Gizmo said:
If Korea was next that would Shut alot of people up, Right?
Click to expand...
no, they would then just say that we are going to beat up on a country with a starving population that has done nothing to us.

the thing is alote of these protestors are either true pacifists who wouldn't fight to defend themselves if some1 drove a tank through their fuckin livingroom, and alote of others are just plain ole "anti-americans". although there are a few who truly believe (for whatever reason) that we shouldnt use force against Iraq

Gizmo said:
Cause they Keep saying "Bush wont mess with Korea".
If he does, What will be your Complant then?
Click to expand...
these liberals and anti-americans are just using the korean situation as an excuse to lable bush a bully
 
P

P-Nut

Sicc OG
#9
Sep 23, 2002
8,128
6
0
44
#9
Nuclear war is cowardly, its basically sayin "Ok, I'm gonna bomb you so I dont risk losing lives of my own soldiers". But the more "state of the art" the world becomes, the lazier it gets. War is still senseless at the same time,what do you accomplish from it? Lives are lost on both ends so who "really" is the victor?
True that sometimes you gotta stand up and fight and words aint always the answer, but the ppl who are supposed to be "representatives" of the ppl should listen to the ppl before making these kinda decisions. But that will never happen, Bin Laden will most likely walk up to the White House wavin a white flag before that shit happens. :confused:
 
H

Humboldt High

Sicc OG
#10
Apr 25, 2002
3,372
16
0
45
#10
bush has ducked the korea issue since the get go. i doubt he will fucc with korea, after all dear old dad never treded in those waters so i doubt jr. will have the balls or brain por to address the issue let alone do anything.
but u wanna know what my complaint will be- why have we taken to the domino theory of agression in war. that would be 3 wars in a row within one presidential term. but i have no complants though.

Mclean - you dont win a war when your competetor gives up. thats called default. we beat them economically. it was the manufacturing machine that america is know for that gave us the ege. not a republican president. and by the way historically economies are stronger when a democrat is in office.

The mindless conservative rhetoric is srtong in this one. cop out republican bantar. this country was built on protest and revolution think about that before you degrad some1 for having an informed opinion other than that of you and the o'rielly factor.

alot of veterans do not support war. people over 60, who have been in this country thru the good and the bad and who have the most life experience, are more in favor of not going to war. check the latest time magizine for that fact, i know you like it too, it has a good journalistic slant that gels well with your born again christian conservatism. (since we are judgementally grouping parties)
 
M

Mcleanhatch

Sicc OG
#11
May 8, 2002
4,729
0
0
48
#11
Humboldt High said:
and by the way historically economies are stronger when a democrat is in office.
Click to expand...
lets see about that.
dems.

1. kennedy/johnson--ok
3. carter--economy was bad
4. clinton--economy was good (until march 2000)

reps.

1. nixon/ford-same as kennedy/johnson
2. reagan-economy was good
3. bush41- economy was bad
4. bush43-economy is bad (but it was also inherited from clinton-gore also) and 9-11 has had alote to do with this recession.

Humboldt High said:
this country was built on protest and revolution think about that before you degrad some1 for having an informed opinion other than that of you
Click to expand...
ok, how did i degrade you. how have i degraded any1 who is a legitimate protestor to the war. anyway this is what i said in quotes right below. tell me how i degraded you with my response

Originally posted by Mcleanhatch
thats what every1 said about Ronald Reagan and it never materialized. under Reagan we won the Cold War. under Bush we will win the war against terrorism
Click to expand...

i have said several times here that people have the right to protest the war and that i have nothing against them, it is their constitutional right. i only get mad when protestors are really ANTI-AMERICANS, OR ANTI-BUSH and use the guise or anti-war to protest bush.
 
M

Mcleanhatch

Sicc OG
#12
May 8, 2002
4,729
0
0
48
#12
Humboldt High said:
check the latest time magizine for that fact, i know you like it too, it has a good journalistic slant that gels well with your born again christian conservatism. (since we are judgementally grouping parties)
Click to expand...
i dont read time magazine

Humboldt High said:
check the latest time magizine for that fact, i know you like it too, it has a good journalistic slant that gels well with your born again christian conservatism. (since we are judgementally grouping parties)
Click to expand...
i am not a born again christian.
 
H

Humboldt High

Sicc OG
#13
Apr 25, 2002
3,372
16
0
45
#13
u degrade me by calling me anti american for disagreeing with a war and the path our nation is headed down. i luv my country but i do not relish war. unlike others

economies are measured with numerical statistical yardsticks. good bad and ok are descritive statistics kindergardners use, and prove relatively nothing other than how a 5 year olds lunch tastes. nice try though but being an economics graduate i have to laugh at your feeble analysis. check the numbers.
another interesting fact is that several of the most destinguished economists from numerous colleges did a collective report on bushs new economic policies and found that his ideas have no economic basis and that his tax plan benefits very few let alone will spur that economy. They all signed the paper and sent it to universities across the us for instructors to show their students. i saw a copy my roommate brought home from class.
 
M

Mcleanhatch

Sicc OG
#14
May 8, 2002
4,729
0
0
48
#14
Humboldt High said:
u degrade me by calling me anti american for disagreeing with a war and the path our nation is headed down.
Click to expand...
i have stated several times here that i have no problem with the many people who truly feel that it isnt in our best interest to remove Sadam Hussein and that they have every right to protest. the problem that i have is with the anti-american portion of the crowd that is really anti-bush, anti-conservatism, anti-american. many of whom are communists that wish for our countries destruction. those are the ones i call anti-americans not people like you who claim to really believe that this is wrong
and you are obviously not an anti-american who a statement like this here below

Humboldt High said:
i luv my country but i do not relish war.
Click to expand...
at worst one could maybe?? call you a pacifist but not an anti-american.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom