chemist- There is no honor in war. You are killing other human beings when you go to war, this is not an honorable job at all. The pro-American, pro-Military, pro-Killing is honorable movement probably did die during Vietnam. Why? Because so many people realised that killing isn't honorable, especially when it is unneccesary. I believe there is a huge difference between defending the nation and what is going on in Iraq, and that's one of the reasons that I am against war, at least at this particular time. If America sets a standard that pre emptive war is acceptable, this world is in trouble. India and Pakistan both have Nukes now, and they both know that the other would love to use those nukes to kill millions, does that give them the right to 'attack now, ask questions later'?
-I guess I stated this wrong: There is always the possibility of having to go to war through the draft. It's like a passage into adulthood.
-Granted we don't draft anymore because there are far more people enlisted in the Armed Services now there is always the possibility of being called for service.
Chemist,
I am not sure where you are coming from with your questions
-Someone had posted earlier that they knew of someone who's son was leaving and the mother was upset that her son had to go. That's where it came from.
chemist- There is no honor in war. You are killing other human beings when you go to war, this is not an honorable job at all.
-Do you want to restate this?
I believe there is a huge difference between defending the nation and what is going on in Iraq
-so by your "belief" the following "wars" were unnecsessary: WWI, WWII, the attack on Japan after Pearl Harbor, lets throw the civil war in there also.
India and Pakistan both have Nukes now, and they both know that the other would love to use those nukes to kill millions, does that give them the right to 'attack now, ask questions later'?
-So your are comfortable w/ a country that has nukes that has an itchy trigger finger?
-Who is using the "'attack now, ask questions later'" idea? I don't think it is America otherwise we would have already attacked Sadam months ago.
Let me ask you something. If you could go back to July of 2001 and we were going over to Afghanistan to take out a guy named Bin Laden who had done some bad things at that point, a guy not many had heard of what would you have said ?
L2F- because hind sight is always 20-20, of course I would have shut down his opperation, but that point is mute, because we can't see the future. But because we are playing silly "go back in time" games, lets go back to the cold war when the CIA was paying Bin Laden billions of dollars to kill soviets, I would have put an end to that.
L2F- because hind sight is always 20-20, of course I would have shut down his opperation, but that point is mute, because we can't see the future.
Of course you can't but you also learn from your mistakes. I will tell you that if we had gone after him in a real manner in July 2001 many people would have been up in arms. Aww c'mon, you don't know for sure if he did the U.S.S Cole bombing, you don't know if he was behind the embassy bombings in Africa. Heck some were even saying it after 9-11.
But because we are playing silly "go back in time" games, lets go back to the cold war when the CIA was paying Bin Laden billions of dollars to kill soviets, I would have put an end to that.
It wasn't going directly to him, that's a myth. He was a small player back in those days. Russia was also our biggest threat back then.
fold, apparently these "go pills" have been given to military pilots for decades when flying 12-16 hour missions. I wonder how long a mission the 2 F-16 pilots were on? Were they on an extended mission or a short range one where stimulants should not be needed?
I may have missed the news, that they have proven anything.
L2F- The money may have not gone directly to him, but then again he wasn't the one that actually flew planes into the WTC. That money was used for training and for weapons. The Soviets were are biggest enemy at the time, we were really afraid of them, and nothing happened, they never attacked. Why can't we learn from that?
And Osama Bin Laden is not a nickname for Saddam Husain. Bush wants to attack Iraq, and Bin Laden is not the leader of Iraq, it's a completely different issue. Contrary to what you may believe, Iraq is not interchangable with terrorism. Two seperate things, Iraq-Terrorism.
I may have missed the news, that they have proven anything.
The U.N. resolution reads that Saddam has to prove that he has dismantled his weapons of mass destruction and destroyed them. The burden of proof is on Saddam not Bush.
I don't know what I would do. I have 15yrs before MY first son reaches age. I just hope that through my stories adn his study of what others have done tensure his freedom in this great nation that he too will feel the same way I do.
To ask such a question would be like asking an Anti-Abortion activist if they would still love their daughter after she had an abortion.
People can act different from their beliefs when put into a comprimising position.
One thing, I would probably be upset for sure. But to not love unconditionally is a stretch.
I wrote: At one time it was clear serving your country was honorable. With the direction the liberals are taking us I am having second thoughts on the subject.
fold responded: Just what the hell does this mean?
It means what it says. I am having second thoughts on the subject that it is honorable to serve this country based on the direction liberals are trying to take it. This is not the same country it was 60 years ago. It isn't the same country it was 35 years ago. I am not sure that I would want to serve and protect the values, or the lack thereof, that this country seemingly is championing. I am fairly certain that when my son becomes old enough to serve in the military that it most certainly would not be the thing to do
I am a "Liberal", and I volunteered, when many were running for the borders. How many Liberals and how many Conservatives serve in the military? During WWII, you dope, most everyone in uniform was a Roosevelt-Liberal, and still they served, without question. Liberals want to fight for the wrong things. Liberals wanted to go into Bosnia where the US had no interest. Liberals don't want to go into the middle east where we do have an interest. The liberal values are screwed up. My guess is you won't find many liberals in the military.
What gives YOU the right to call Liberals "cowards", when you never served a Minute in uniform...? I have the right to call anyone a coward if I believe it to be true.
fold, be specific, where did I call liberals cowards? I went back and the only reference to cowards I could find was one directed at democrats for holding up the process on judges and one calling former Gov. Ryan of Illinois a coward for his commutation of all the death sentences in his state. Are you trying to say, somehow, that I called liberals cowards with the statement: "At one time it was clear serving your country was honorable. With the direction the liberals are taking us I am having second thoughts on the subject?"
Oh I found another post where I called liberals cowards. See:
jethro bodine - (PFID:13d2d6) - 09:08am Jan 8, 2003 PST (# 48 of 70) "Feel the love. And then take responsibility for it instead of trying to butcher it on a whim you corrupt, immoral liberal". I see no bullies but I do see cowards. Â Â
I may have missed the news, that they have proven anything.
Well there is that matter of the mustard gas they "misplaced" and about 400 tons of an explosive used for nuclear detonation that they also misplaced somewhere with the keys to the Sadamnmobile.
L2F- The money may have not gone directly to him, but then again he wasn't the one that actually flew planes into the WTC.
Ah so because he wasn't an actual participant we shouldn't go after him ? A guy hires a hitman to kill his wife and he's just as guilty of murder as the hitman.
That money was used for training and for weapons. The Soviets were are biggest enemy at the time, we were really afraid of them, and nothing happened, they never attacked. Why can't we learn from that?
Tim, the situations are totally different. For one the Russians were not motivated by twisting a religion into fantatical hatred, they did not have madras schools teaching kids from age 5 to hate Americans. They did fear us however and we feared them. But they were also reasonable and knew war would assure their destruction as it did ours. In the end the thing that allowed us to win the cold war was our strong military that undid them, it was also a desire by people who had been lied to about communism and saw it's folly, it's failed or is failing all over the world. They wanted change and they made it happen with a little push.
Why can't we learn from that?
You're right though Why didn't we learn from dealing with terrorists and rogue states before ? As far as terrorists go, The Marine baracks in Beirut was attacked in 83' We pulled out, We took casualties in Somolia and we pulled out, (the Somolians are begging us to come back now) The U.S.S Cole was attacked and we sent a few missles and said some harsh words, two U.S Embassies in Africa were attacked and we did little or nothing again. Osama and his ilk counted on us to do the same the minute we took casualties. He was wrong and hopefully dead wrong.
When it comes to rogue nations like Sadamn the lesson learned is to never trust him. He's broken every deal he made to save his skin in the Gulf War. So finish the job. If he had abided by the agreements made with the international community, not starved, and killed his own people Iraq wouldn't even be discussed and they would have probably recovered by now. Yet it's our fault for holding him responsible for the agreements he made ? Everyone will say yea he's bad, he needs to go, yea he's a murderous thug,,,,,,,but . But what ? Wait until he actually has nukes ? Want to go in there now if he has a nuke ? Think a guy like that wouldn't use them on his neighbors or Israel. He's used chem weaposn and publicly stated years ago that he wanted them. Should we wait until then ? Think the cost to troops and civilians would be high now ? Just wait until he has a nuke.
And Osama Bin Laden is not a nickname for Saddam Husain. Bush wants to attack Iraq, and Bin Laden is not the leader of Iraq, it's a completely different issue. Contrary to what you may believe, Iraq is not interchangable with terrorism.
I agree, please show me where I've ever linked him to terrorism. Please don't put words in my mouth. There is some eviddence to that but I haven't personally seen it. You are right though they are separate things, so is North Korea but it doesn't mean you ignore one for the other. Japan attacked us, Germany never did but it declared war and guess what, we put the bulk of our forces up against the Germans first and held on in the pacific. Did it mean we shouldn't have done either ? Or left England alone to face Germany while we dealt with the Japanese because they were the ones to actually attack ?
So what do you propose Tim, 10 more years of sanctions ? 10 more years of hoping that he doesn't have WMD's ? 10 more years of agreements being broke ? 10 more years of his own people getting killed and imprisioned not to mention starved while he builds palaces?
Why do you think he agreed to let inspectors back in ? Do you think it might have somethuing to do with the first real threat in over 10 years ? When would be a good time to deal with him ?
Just fine, for the time being. The problem comes when they ask you to risk your life for the gay agenda, a Godless society and the rest of the liberal agenda.
It means what it says. I am having second thoughts on the subject that it is honorable to serve this country based on the direction liberals are trying to take it. This is not the same country it was 60 years ago. It isn't the same country it was 35 years ago. I am not sure that I would want to serve and protect the values, or the lack thereof, that this country seemingly is championing. I am fairly certain that when my son becomes old enough to serve in the military that it most certainly would not be the thing to do
That has to be the lamest thing you've ever posted, and you've had some doozies. So just because you don't like a policy you'd have second thoughts about defending or serving your country. I don't like this so I'm taking my marbles and going home? Well guess what Jethro I don't like alot of what goes on in this country so I'll do what I can do to change it. Meanwhile I'm also going to fight for the right for left and the middle and anyone else who lives here. When you are in battle with someone you don't give a shit what party they vote for, they are Americans plain and simple. You're a sunshine patriot then apparently because you don't know if it would be honorable to serve because you don't like liberal policies. I don't like certain things liberals say but guess what I'd die to protect their right to say something that offends me. If you don't like it get off your ass and work to change it. I'd rather serve with any liberal any day of the week then to serve with you. Don't ever accuse someone of being a coward because apparently you have little room to talk since you wouldn't even bother to serve in the first place.
Are you evil, crabby? Do you think I'm evil? Is Rick evil? Bill Fold?
I don't subscribe to the concept...unless of course it's forced on me like it has been here.
If the president is gonna go around calling people evil, well, I want to know why. And when why turns out to be things that we are guilty of ourselves...well, it shows our president as a hypocritical namecaller.
That has to be the lamest thing you've ever posted, and you've had some doozies. It may be one of the most accurate.So just because you don't like a policy you'd have second thoughts about defending or serving your country. It isn't like the policy issues regard taxes and expenditures. The policies at issue are moral issues. I do not believe that one should sacrifice oneself for immoral policies.I don't like this so I'm taking my marbles and going home? It is much more important than that.Well guess what Jethro I don't like alot of what goes on in this country so I'll do what I can do to change it. That is fine. I don't believe people should sacrifice themselves for immoral causes. That is exactly what the left told us in the '60's.Meanwhile I'm also going to fight for the right for left and the middle and anyone else who lives here. Good for you.When you are in battle with someone you don't give a shit what party they vote for, they are Americans plain and simple. I am sure that is true. I just don't want to get in to a battle protecting a decaying and immoral nation.You're a sunshine patriot then apparently because you don't know if it would be honorable to serve because you don't like liberal policies. If you would read carefully I said I was having second thoughts.I don't like certain things liberals say but guess what I'd die to protect their right to say something that offends me. But that would not be what you would be fighting for. You would be fighting for their right to stifle your opinion that offends them.If you don't like it get off your ass and work to change it. I am not sure what you mean here.I'd rather serve with any liberal any day of the week then to serve with you. I don't care what you think of me. Apparently you don't care about my right to say something that offends you.Don't ever accuse someone of being a coward because apparently you have little room to talk since you wouldn't even bother to serve in the first place. I looked into joining twice. I went as far as taking the physical. Then they wanted to put me in a different area of work than they had initially told me. I said no.
Amen to That...And just as you would serve, so would I, with anyone at ALL that wanted to defend this Nation from ANY outside threat, and I am proud to know that you feel this way Rob.
Plainly, I was correct about YOU Jethro. You cannot have it both ways. Either you are a patriot for everything and everyone we are, or you are not.
There are many ways to serve America, but sitting on the sidelines calling other people "cowards" serves only the interests of our enemies.
If I am going to fight I want to be fighting for what is right. As I said the country has changed in major ways since WWII and even the Vietnam war. The values aren't the same. I am not convinced the country, as it now stands, is worth the sacrifice. My fear is that in the near future that I will know for sure that it isn't.
It isn't like the policy issues regard taxes and expenditures. The policies at issue are moral issues. I do not believe that one should sacrifice oneself for immoral policies.
You know who else has said something very similar ? Dennis. Well you're in good company.
Guess what Jethro, there were people who fought in WW2, Korea and Vietnam who didn't like policies that politicians were making and yet they went.
I just don't want to get in to a battle protecting a decaying and immoral nation.
So if you were asked to go to Afghanistan you wouldn't go ? Yea, I hate liberals so why bother. Nice.
"I don't like certain things liberals say but guess what I'd die to protect their right to say something that offends me."
But that would not be what you would be fighting for. You would be fighting for their right to stifle your opinion that offends them.
Yes it would be, it's called this little thing called freedom, maybe you've heard about it. My opinion is only stiffled if I let them do so. Last time I looked I could say what I wanted, thanks to those who made the ultimate sacrifice, those who saw the value of freedom to say what you want.
I don't care what you think of me. Apparently you don't care about my right to say something that offends you.
Sure I do, am I stopping you. That's what you don't get, even if I disagreed with what you say or policies you favor. I'd never want that right taken away.
First world, modern, capitalist for the most part. Benignly authoritarian, one party rule. Strict regulation of press and media (no damn liberals bad-mouthing the country). Print and broadcast censorship. Probably no Christina Aguleria videos. Don't know about abortion laws.
Last time I was there, I was told that "Wheel of Fortune" was the most popular show, and the most informative.
Brutal justice system. Death penalty for drug dealing. Severe corporal punishment. Beatings are commonplace.
Benignly authoritarian, one party rule. Strict regulation of press and media (no damn liberals bad-mouthing the country). I don't have a problem with the bad mouthing. My problem is that the liberals want to stop conservatives from speaking their mind.
if they pass it anywhere , it's to the stockholders...but not before the top execs take huge bonuses for it.
Sorry but the job of a corporation is to serve its stock holders.
so quit tryin' to say that by not paying their taxes they are lowering costs for consumers.
they don't pay taxes so they can make more money for the stockholders, and the richer the stockholder, the more of that tax money they get.
lower prices...come now
Chemist,
I am not sure where you are coming from with your questions. We have an all volunteer force and no draft in effect.
chemist- There is no honor in war. You are killing other human beings when you go to war, this is not an honorable job at all. The pro-American, pro-Military, pro-Killing is honorable movement probably did die during Vietnam. Why? Because so many people realised that killing isn't honorable, especially when it is unneccesary. I believe there is a huge difference between defending the nation and what is going on in Iraq, and that's one of the reasons that I am against war, at least at this particular time. If America sets a standard that pre emptive war is acceptable, this world is in trouble. India and Pakistan both have Nukes now, and they both know that the other would love to use those nukes to kill millions, does that give them the right to 'attack now, ask questions later'?
what kind of world do you choose to live in?
-I guess I stated this wrong: There is always the possibility of having to go to war through the draft. It's like a passage into adulthood.
-Granted we don't draft anymore because there are far more people enlisted in the Armed Services now there is always the possibility of being called for service.
Chemist,
I am not sure where you are coming from with your questions
-Someone had posted earlier that they knew of someone who's son was leaving and the mother was upset that her son had to go. That's where it came from.
chemist- There is no honor in war. You are killing other human beings when you go to war, this is not an honorable job at all.
-Do you want to restate this?
I believe there is a huge difference between defending the nation and what is going on in Iraq
-so by your "belief" the following "wars" were unnecsessary: WWI, WWII, the attack on Japan after Pearl Harbor, lets throw the civil war in there also.
India and Pakistan both have Nukes now, and they both know that the other would love to use those nukes to kill millions, does that give them the right to 'attack now, ask questions later'?
-So your are comfortable w/ a country that has nukes that has an itchy trigger finger?
-Who is using the "'attack now, ask questions later'" idea? I don't think it is America otherwise we would have already attacked Sadam months ago.
Are you saying that we should attack India and Pakistan too?
Last I checked Sadam hasn't attacked us, like the Japanese did.
Prove that Sadam has weapons of mass destruction AND the ability to attachk America AND show that he intends to, and then attack.
You are right, we haven't attacked yet, and if we don't I will thank God.
Tim,
Let me ask you something. If you could go back to July of 2001 and we were going over to Afghanistan to take out a guy named Bin Laden who had done some bad things at that point, a guy not many had heard of what would you have said ?
prove that the USA has weapons of mass destruction AND the ability to attack, well..pretty much anyone on the planet AND show that Bush intends to...
oh great, you have just validated our being the bad guys in WWIII
swell
well...we had him on the payroll, so it's not like he's a stranger
L2F- because hind sight is always 20-20, of course I would have shut down his opperation, but that point is mute, because we can't see the future. But because we are playing silly "go back in time" games, lets go back to the cold war when the CIA was paying Bin Laden billions of dollars to kill soviets, I would have put an end to that.
Of course you can't but you also learn from your mistakes. I will tell you that if we had gone after him in a real manner in July 2001 many people would have been up in arms. Aww c'mon, you don't know for sure if he did the U.S.S Cole bombing, you don't know if he was behind the embassy bombings in Africa. Heck some were even saying it after 9-11.
It wasn't going directly to him, that's a myth. He was a small player back in those days. Russia was also our biggest threat back then.
fold, apparently these "go pills" have been given to military pilots for decades when flying 12-16 hour missions. I wonder how long a mission the 2 F-16 pilots were on? Were they on an extended mission or a short range one where stimulants should not be needed?
People here against the war are holding the Bush administration to "proof beyond all doubt".
That's not even the level jurrors are held to when convicting someone from speeding to murder.
"Proof beyond a reasonable doubt". That level has been met.
I may have missed the news, that they have proven anything.
L2F- The money may have not gone directly to him, but then again he wasn't the one that actually flew planes into the WTC. That money was used for training and for weapons. The Soviets were are biggest enemy at the time, we were really afraid of them, and nothing happened, they never attacked. Why can't we learn from that?
And Osama Bin Laden is not a nickname for Saddam Husain. Bush wants to attack Iraq, and Bin Laden is not the leader of Iraq, it's a completely different issue. Contrary to what you may believe, Iraq is not interchangable with terrorism. Two seperate things, Iraq-Terrorism.
I may have missed the news, that they have proven anything.
The U.N. resolution reads that Saddam has to prove that he has dismantled his weapons of mass destruction and destroyed them. The burden of proof is on Saddam not Bush.
meanwhile we crank up another nuclear weapons program
meanwhile we crank up another nuclear weapons program
Oh yeah, that's our fault.
what?
is someone forcing us to make more nukes?
and if we can make them, why can't others?
crabgrass 1/16/03 5:35am
I assumed you were refering to North Korea.
What gives YOU the right to call Liberals "cowards", when you never served a Minute in uniform...?
Quit beating your chest.
Just because someone hasn't served doesn't mean they aren't allowed an opinion.
that describes us pretty well.
I never said that someone HAD to "Serve"
No, but you insinuate all the time that the opinion of those that haven't served, isn't as valid as those that have.
Geez, you even brought up CSC & Luv2Fly.
that describes us pretty well.
And so the circle is complete.
We're once again back to what an evil nation we are.
if the shoe fits
Are you evil, crabby?
Do you think I'm evil?
Is Rick evil?
Bill Fold?
Nice mouth on ya there Bill Fold.
And you say I'm always freaking out and cussing at you?
Anyway, I don't care that you haven't ever played that game on me.
I've never worn a uniform so when you make comments like that, you make them toward me as well.
I actually don't care that you used it. I love the word. It's a great word to use when you're upset.
I was just pointing out your hypocrisy.
OK, I don't really care about the swearing. It's just that you've given me guff about it in the past.
I do care about your mentality about those that haven't served.
That being said, I don't agree with Jethro calling Liberals cowards.
My Grandfather was a old school Liberal and he was no coward. My Father's got his medals to prove it.
OK but the issue still stands.
I don't know what I would do. I have 15yrs before MY first son reaches age. I just hope that through my stories adn his study of what others have done tensure his freedom in this great nation that he too will feel the same way I do.
To ask such a question would be like asking an Anti-Abortion activist if they would still love their daughter after she had an abortion.
People can act different from their beliefs when put into a comprimising position.
One thing, I would probably be upset for sure. But to not love unconditionally is a stretch.
I wrote: At one time it was clear serving your country was honorable. With the direction the liberals are taking us I am having second thoughts on the subject.
fold responded: Just what the hell does this mean?
It means what it says. I am having second thoughts on the subject that it is honorable to serve this country based on the direction liberals are trying to take it. This is not the same country it was 60 years ago. It isn't the same country it was 35 years ago. I am not sure that I would want to serve and protect the values, or the lack thereof, that this country seemingly is championing. I am fairly certain that when my son becomes old enough to serve in the military that it most certainly would not be the thing to do
I am a "Liberal", and I volunteered, when many were running for the borders. How many Liberals and how many Conservatives serve in the military? During WWII, you dope, most everyone in uniform was a Roosevelt-Liberal, and still they served, without question. Liberals want to fight for the wrong things. Liberals wanted to go into Bosnia where the US had no interest. Liberals don't want to go into the middle east where we do have an interest. The liberal values are screwed up. My guess is you won't find many liberals in the military.
What gives YOU the right to call Liberals "cowards", when you never served a Minute in uniform...? I have the right to call anyone a coward if I believe it to be true.
fold, be specific, where did I call liberals cowards? I went back and the only reference to cowards I could find was one directed at democrats for holding up the process on judges and one calling former Gov. Ryan of Illinois a coward for his commutation of all the death sentences in his state. Are you trying to say, somehow, that I called liberals cowards with the statement: "At one time it was clear serving your country was honorable. With the direction the liberals are taking us I am having second thoughts on the subject?"
"I am not sure that I would want to serve and protect the values, or the lack thereof, that this country seemingly is championing."
Then how could you live in such an awful place?
Oh I found another post where I called liberals cowards. See:
But it had nothing to do with the military.
Tim the Hunter,
Well there is that matter of the mustard gas they "misplaced" and about 400 tons of an explosive used for nuclear detonation that they also misplaced somewhere with the keys to the Sadamnmobile.
Ah so because he wasn't an actual participant we shouldn't go after him ? A guy hires a hitman to kill his wife and he's just as guilty of murder as the hitman.
Tim, the situations are totally different. For one the Russians were not motivated by twisting a religion into fantatical hatred, they did not have madras schools teaching kids from age 5 to hate Americans. They did fear us however and we feared them. But they were also reasonable and knew war would assure their destruction as it did ours. In the end the thing that allowed us to win the cold war was our strong military that undid them, it was also a desire by people who had been lied to about communism and saw it's folly, it's failed or is failing all over the world. They wanted change and they made it happen with a little push.
You're right though Why didn't we learn from dealing with terrorists and rogue states before ? As far as terrorists go, The Marine baracks in Beirut was attacked in 83' We pulled out, We took casualties in Somolia and we pulled out, (the Somolians are begging us to come back now) The U.S.S Cole was attacked and we sent a few missles and said some harsh words, two U.S Embassies in Africa were attacked and we did little or nothing again. Osama and his ilk counted on us to do the same the minute we took casualties. He was wrong and hopefully dead wrong.
When it comes to rogue nations like Sadamn the lesson learned is to never trust him. He's broken every deal he made to save his skin in the Gulf War. So finish the job. If he had abided by the agreements made with the international community, not starved, and killed his own people Iraq wouldn't even be discussed and they would have probably recovered by now. Yet it's our fault for holding him responsible for the agreements he made ? Everyone will say yea he's bad, he needs to go, yea he's a murderous thug,,,,,,,but . But what ? Wait until he actually has nukes ? Want to go in there now if he has a nuke ? Think a guy like that wouldn't use them on his neighbors or Israel. He's used chem weaposn and publicly stated years ago that he wanted them. Should we wait until then ? Think the cost to troops and civilians would be high now ? Just wait until he has a nuke.
I agree, please show me where I've ever linked him to terrorism. Please don't put words in my mouth. There is some eviddence to that but I haven't personally seen it. You are right though they are separate things, so is North Korea but it doesn't mean you ignore one for the other. Japan attacked us, Germany never did but it declared war and guess what, we put the bulk of our forces up against the Germans first and held on in the pacific. Did it mean we shouldn't have done either ? Or left England alone to face Germany while we dealt with the Japanese because they were the ones to actually attack ?
So what do you propose Tim, 10 more years of sanctions ? 10 more years of hoping that he doesn't have WMD's ? 10 more years of agreements being broke ? 10 more years of his own people getting killed and imprisioned not to mention starved while he builds palaces?
Why do you think he agreed to let inspectors back in ? Do you think it might have somethuing to do with the first real threat in over 10 years ? When would be a good time to deal with him ?
Then how could you live in such an awful place?
Just fine, for the time being. The problem comes when they ask you to risk your life for the gay agenda, a Godless society and the rest of the liberal agenda.
Jethro,
That has to be the lamest thing you've ever posted, and you've had some doozies. So just because you don't like a policy you'd have second thoughts about defending or serving your country. I don't like this so I'm taking my marbles and going home? Well guess what Jethro I don't like alot of what goes on in this country so I'll do what I can do to change it. Meanwhile I'm also going to fight for the right for left and the middle and anyone else who lives here. When you are in battle with someone you don't give a shit what party they vote for, they are Americans plain and simple. You're a sunshine patriot then apparently because you don't know if it would be honorable to serve because you don't like liberal policies. I don't like certain things liberals say but guess what I'd die to protect their right to say something that offends me. If you don't like it get off your ass and work to change it. I'd rather serve with any liberal any day of the week then to serve with you. Don't ever accuse someone of being a coward because apparently you have little room to talk since you wouldn't even bother to serve in the first place.
I don't subscribe to the concept...unless of course it's forced on me like it has been here.
If the president is gonna go around calling people evil, well, I want to know why. And when why turns out to be things that we are guilty of ourselves...well, it shows our president as a hypocritical namecaller.
Evil is an invention of religion.
I don't subscribe to it.
Hey Crabby,
Did you hear about the supposed "plague" theft you were talking about yesterday, it was a hoax and the guy has been arrested.
That has to be the lamest thing you've ever posted, and you've had some doozies. It may be one of the most accurate.So just because you don't like a policy you'd have second thoughts about defending or serving your country. It isn't like the policy issues regard taxes and expenditures. The policies at issue are moral issues. I do not believe that one should sacrifice oneself for immoral policies.I don't like this so I'm taking my marbles and going home? It is much more important than that.Well guess what Jethro I don't like alot of what goes on in this country so I'll do what I can do to change it. That is fine. I don't believe people should sacrifice themselves for immoral causes. That is exactly what the left told us in the '60's.Meanwhile I'm also going to fight for the right for left and the middle and anyone else who lives here. Good for you.When you are in battle with someone you don't give a shit what party they vote for, they are Americans plain and simple. I am sure that is true. I just don't want to get in to a battle protecting a decaying and immoral nation.You're a sunshine patriot then apparently because you don't know if it would be honorable to serve because you don't like liberal policies. If you would read carefully I said I was having second thoughts.I don't like certain things liberals say but guess what I'd die to protect their right to say something that offends me. But that would not be what you would be fighting for. You would be fighting for their right to stifle your opinion that offends them.If you don't like it get off your ass and work to change it. I am not sure what you mean here.I'd rather serve with any liberal any day of the week then to serve with you. I don't care what you think of me. Apparently you don't care about my right to say something that offends you.Don't ever accuse someone of being a coward because apparently you have little room to talk since you wouldn't even bother to serve in the first place. I looked into joining twice. I went as far as taking the physical. Then they wanted to put me in a different area of work than they had initially told me. I said no.
the only thing that was a hoax is the guy saying he still had it.
they have a "bio-terror" lab and they had bubonic plague...what happened is that the guy said he lost it when he had actually destroyed it.
that's how I heard it at least, isn't that what happened?
"Then how could you live in such an awful place?
Just fine, for the time being. "
Is there some place that looks particularly attractive to you in the long term? I'm very curious.
Amen to That...And just as you would serve, so would I, with anyone at ALL that wanted to defend this Nation from ANY outside threat, and I am proud to know that you feel this way Rob.
Plainly, I was correct about YOU Jethro. You cannot have it both ways. Either you are a patriot for everything and everyone we are, or you are not.
There are many ways to serve America, but sitting on the sidelines calling other people "cowards" serves only the interests of our enemies.
If I am going to fight I want to be fighting for what is right. As I said the country has changed in major ways since WWII and even the Vietnam war. The values aren't the same. I am not convinced the country, as it now stands, is worth the sacrifice. My fear is that in the near future that I will know for sure that it isn't.
Is there some place that looks particularly attractive to you in the long term. I'm very curious.
I don't know. I'll have to wait and see. But if the country becomes the same as any other run of the mill country what would be the point.
What country would you consider run of the mill?
Besides the United States, is there a country that is not run of the mill?
I think Singapore would be good for you, jethro.
You know who else has said something very similar ? Dennis. Well you're in good company.
Guess what Jethro, there were people who fought in WW2, Korea and Vietnam who didn't like policies that politicians were making and yet they went.
So if you were asked to go to Afghanistan you wouldn't go ?
Yea, I hate liberals so why bother. Nice.
"I don't like certain things liberals say but guess what I'd die to protect their right to say something that offends me."
Yes it would be, it's called this little thing called freedom, maybe you've heard about it. My opinion is only stiffled if I let them do so. Last time I looked I could say what I wanted, thanks to those who made the ultimate sacrifice, those who saw the value of freedom to say what you want.
Sure I do, am I stopping you. That's what you don't get, even if I disagreed with what you say or policies you favor. I'd never want that right taken away.
Not that I can think of right now.
Again pay attention to what I wrote. It said I was having second thoughts.
Singapore:
First world, modern, capitalist for the most part. Benignly authoritarian, one party rule. Strict regulation of press and media (no damn liberals bad-mouthing the country). Print and broadcast censorship. Probably no Christina Aguleria videos. Don't know about abortion laws.
Last time I was there, I was told that "Wheel of Fortune" was the most popular show, and the most informative.
Brutal justice system. Death penalty for drug dealing. Severe corporal punishment. Beatings are commonplace.
Pretty hot. Interesting ethnic sections.
Benignly authoritarian, one party rule. Strict regulation of press and media (no damn liberals bad-mouthing the country). I don't have a problem with the bad mouthing. My problem is that the liberals want to stop conservatives from speaking their mind.
I don't think so, jethro.
I think you have a severe problem with people who don't agree with you. And I think you'd love to see some type of authority to shut them up.
Aside from that, Singapore look good to you?