OT: Big Brother is on his way, Whats next? Options

[aircooledboy]

Toast,

The photo you posted was acknowledged by the RNC about 3 weeks ago as a Photoshop creation. While it was showing up fairly often in soft money materials, the RNC has now denounced it as a fake and distanced themselves from it.

[nebreitling]

This is a man that denounced his military service.

This was a man who had an alliance with the treason queen herself who was famous for befriending the enemy.

This is a man who was the head of the antiwar movement.

This is a man who not only called for, but embraced the idea of men to dodge the draft and move to Canada.

This is a man who called for men to turn their back on their country.

This is a man that called combat murder..............

This is a man who, in saying those things, actually knew what he was talking about from EXPERIENCE, not empty chickenhawk ideology.

Kerry has multiple Purple Hearts. Bush has a pay stub and a dental record from the Guard. If Kerry wanted to return his awards/medals, that's his perogative. If he wanted to denounce his own service, that's his perogative. He, for one, earned it.

just saying...

[Toast]

Toast,

The photo you posted was acknowledged by the RNC about 3 weeks ago as a Photoshop creation. While it was showing up fairly often in soft money materials,  the RNC has now denounced it as a fake and distanced themselves from it.

Ok. This was sent to me via email, so i thought I would post it.

I dont care for bush or his father or regan or any of the presidents that have served since I have been alive (carter).
I am also not very impressed by the current canidates running.
I hope someone will get voted in and make some changes for the better before its to late.

In the mean time...... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/givemebeer.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smoke.gif)

[SirAndy]

damm, Jane Fonda was HOT back then!
do you think she would have dated a 10 year old german?

can't say the same about kerry, then and now ...

(IMG:http://www.914world.com/bbs2/uploads/post-2-1084471412.jpg)

[dmenche914]

Belgium I believe has something like 25% of all young people (like under 21 years or something like that) as first generation newcomers that are muslim. France has a huge muslim population (recall recent news about bans on head scarfs, burning of jewish synagoges, and graves)

There are many muslims in the former Yugoslavia and south east europe. recall the muslims invaded europe before the crusades, took much of spain.

If europe is so important for us to please, or get permission from, it is right to ask what their record has been like in the past. It ain't been stellar. Maybe we should ask for N. Korea's permission also???? Maybe their opposition has to do with oil contracts, and arms deals. German designed and built bomb shelters in iraq, french missle systems, and all kinds of things, that saddam owed money for, money they knew they wouldn't get if we toppled saddam. This ain't the past, this is present, seems like a sell out. It is good to look at history, you tell me to read my history, but then say that the past is no longer important, which is it??????

The French gave up pretty quick to the nazis, along with ignoring the growing threat before the war started. Yes there were french resistance fighters that helped, but the nation basically gave up, except for the Vichy french, that actually sided with the nazis and shot at us. Now we find the french had sweet contracts with saddam and that is likely why they went aginst us. recall they told us they would support the war, right up to the eve of the war, then turned on us. Collin Powell was "shocked" when he learned on the news that france had changed its mind on the war at the last minute, dispite assurances to him otherwise.

Europe has brought good things, and bad things to the world. Right now we are trying to stop bad things (saddam, muslim terrorists etc....) If europe wishes to be aginst us, then that kind of makes them bad. Good god, how many did saddam kill, and france still supported him? kind of like they did nothing about hitler before he got too much power to be able to stop him easily.

Yes I have been to europe, and the middle east, but that doesn't mean anything.

The average american is pretty educated it think. Just because europeans do not like our policies does not make us dumb.

Maybe if the europeans could get together with a common language they'd get along better amoungst themselves. for me too learn the languages of europe is a bit of a waste, as there are so many. My knowledge of european languages will get me around england just fine, the rest will require a translation book. Knowing the native language is not a prerequisit to know whats going on, there are plenty of translations. Of course if we did not stop hitler, I suppose all of europe would be speaking german now anyway, which would make my choice of a foriegn language easier for my next trip. oh well


must say the germans made some damn fine cars however.

[nebreitling]

Good god, how many did saddam kill, and france still supported him? kind of like they did nothing about hitler before he got too much power to be able to stop him easily.

Just like the U.S., on both counts.

[SirAndy]

German designed and built bomb shelters in iraq, french missle systems, and all kinds of things, that saddam owed money for, money they knew they wouldn't get if we toppled saddam. This ain't the past, this is present, seems like a sell out. It is good to look at history, you tell me to read my history, but then say that the past is no longer important, which is it??????

are you talking about the same saddam that was an US ally in the '80s? that had the US train his soldiers so they could be a counterweight to the then perceived enemy IRAN?
that the US sunk a s**tload of money into as "aid" to buy weapons?

the same saddam was killing and torturing his own people back then but NO-ONE in the US gave a f**k. why? because it wasn't in your interest ...

why did you leave out this important piece of the puzzle in your "history" lesson?

did the french sell weapons to iraq? sure.
did the germans sell weapons to iraq? sure.
so did the US.


you either don't know, don't want to know or deliberately ingoring the facts.
none of which is very flattering.

Andy

[dmenche914]

The difference between france and germany, verses us, is that we understood the problem saddam became, (regardless if we helped him in the past) and decided to do something about it. France and Germany decided to ignore the problem, and continued on. (much as france did with hitler in the early days of his reign) Yeah we were not perfect, but at least we are cleaning up the mess of saddam and trying to give those people over there a decent government. And we are not insisting that the others that helped create the mess help clean it up, so why is france and germany bitching at us?, it is all of our mess, and we are fixxing it. As i have said, we aint perfect, but at least we are trieing to fix the problem, we removed a tyrant, what has france or germany done to right their past wrongs in iraq???

And iran is also a problem, trying to make nukes with a bunch of nut case imans running the nation. Thats all we need, muslim terror atom bombs.

[mike_the_man]

Why did you remove the tyrant? What gives the U.S .the right to go in and take out Saddam. Just because you don't agree with his policies doesn't give you the right to bomb the hell out of the country and take over. If that is your logic, then it's ok for the Taliban or Musllims to bomb the U.S., because they don't agree with capitalism, or anything else the U.S. stands for.

There were obviously no weapons of Mass Destruction, so that reason is out.

And starting a war to prevent a war??? That idea confuses the hell out of me? Either way you get a war, so how does that help.

Seems to me like there were alternative reasons for attacking Iraq. Somebody was holding a grudge, and somebody wanted more oil.

These are my own opinions. I certainly don't have all the facts, but I highly doubt that anybody really does. To me, there was no reason for a war in the first place, and now that it's over, there's no reason to stay. It's pretty obvious that Iraq doesn't want the U.S. there, so screw em and leave.

Religion seems to be the underlying cause for almost all of the worlds crap. I vote that we just do away with religion. Maybe then we could all get along! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smlove2.gif)

[SirAndy]

The difference between france and germany, verses us, is that we understood the problem saddam became, (regardless if we helped him in the past) and decided to do something about it.

errr, right. the infamous WMD's. yes. i see.

very well. so, france, germany and the US sold him weapons first, then the US became afraid he (saddam) might be using them against the wrong people (not the US mind you, but not IRAN either, like planned), so then the US decides to go after his sorry ass.

didn't work out well the first time, so then Bush Jr. comes up with the ingenious idea of WMD's.
and we all know how that worked out.

funny how NO-ONE here talks about WMD's anymore.
do a search here on the board and find some OT topics from way back then. it was ALL about wmd's. forgotten now. zero. zilch.
now we're the "humanitarian" trying to help those poor iraqi's to get rid of a dictatorship. how noble of us! (honestly, have you EVER given a damm f**k about how people in iraq go about their lives? has anyone else (including myself)?) does the word "hypocrite" mean anything to you?

yeah, i think i understand what you mean with "that we understood the problem" ...

<_< Andy

[Toast]

Religion seems to be the underlying cause for almost all of the worlds crap. I vote that we just do away with religion.

Finally! Now somebody is talking!! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/clap56.gif)

One of the strongest hardships that I have personally delt with lately is because someone withnessed "god speaking to him", and "these are the things I was told to do", and "out of respect".

[B]MY ASS[SIZE=1]

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/pissoff.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/finger.gif)

[nebreitling]

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif)

[mike_the_man]

Yup, religion seems to cause a lot of problems. I'm not a religious person myself, so maybe I just don't understand, but if you're willing to kill yourself, or somebody else because of religion, I don't see how that can be a good thing. Even feeling guilty about how you lead your life, because according to religion everything you do is a sin. How is this a good thing??? While there must be some good that can come out of it, to me it seems that the negatives far out weigh the positives. How many people have died in the name of religion? Maybe I should start my own anti-religion. But the it would still be a religion. Hmm, a dilema.

[dmenche914]

The WMD was one part of over serveral reasons to get rid of saddam, not the only reason. We may still find them, he had lots of time to hide them, it doesn't take much, a small garage will hold enough ebola or anthrax to kill a lot of people. The UN, including france, and germany was in agreement with us that he had WMD, remember the UN vote on this? So maybe we never find it, ok but that means alot of nations, including france and germany were wrong. Facts that the world used to conclude he had WMD include his use of them on the kurds and iranians, and the fact, even when faced with war, he hampered the inspectors, and kicked them out, like it was some game of his. We understood the problem when he invaded other nations, killed his own, tortured thousands, gave money to suicide bomber families, and had terror groups as guests in his nation.

Yes I do care about the iraqis, I want them, and everyone in the world to be free of tyrants.

I see where you are coming from, you said it, you do not give a fuck about them, in which case maybe saddam would be your choice for the power in iraq. But even so, you might consider the threat saddam was to us, regardless if you care about the people in iraq or not.

I for one want better for the iraqi people. I believe removing saddam is better for them, and better for us (I believe he was a threat with his support of terror). We may have supported him in the past, but that was a mistake, and we might even owe it to the iraqis to remove him in that case.

[SirAndy]

I for one want better for the iraqi people. I believe removing saddam is better for them, and better for us (I believe he was a threat with his support of terror). We may have supported him in the past, but that was a mistake, and we might even owe it to the iraqis to remove him in that case.

convinient way of twisting things around after the fact, but i for one don't buy into your "i want the world to be a better place" reasoning.

if you, or the american public, or the american government, or the UN, or the german government, or the french were really driven by this, your troops would be all over the world trying to put out fires in all those hotspots we currently have.

too bad countries like "Rwanda" don't have anything any of the big players want. living under a tyrant is obviously not enough ...

"hypocrite" is still on my mind,
<_< Andy

[dmenche914]

i guess you are saying if we can not solve all the worlds problems, right now, we ought to solve none of them???? We picked Afganistain to fix first, and Iraq was next. We need time to get all the bad spots fixed, will this make you happy?

Believe me, If I had been in charge, upon finding out about the rawanda masacure, I would have done something to stop that, but i was not in charge. Believe it or not, i do not control the government single handed. It made me mad as hell this went on, i even wrote the white house about it, i was pissed, fucking clinton!

so what is it, you want us to use force to solve problems when needed or not?

The UN, which many libs, and europeans regard as the final authority did nothing about rawanda, little chance they would have solved the saddam problem, in fact one car bomb in iraq, and the UN bugged out fast. Worthless buracrates is what they is, and thats the best of them.

So I do not understand, are you saying let tyrants rule, as long as they do not rule you, is that what you are wanting? I believe that is wrong.

Now the USA has many times given more aid to nations that were hit by disasters than anyone else. USA aid is there during famine, and diesese. We haven't helped everytime, but by golly we have done more than alot of others. The USA sent a ton of disaster relief to Iran after there recent earthquake, yes that is the american nature, to help. That aid was from both government and private (and i was one of them). Our sworn enemy, who thinks we are satan, got earthquake aid from the great satan. How's that for american help around the world?

I do not think I twisted anything here, I want a better world for everyone, but know that in order to achieve that, we might need to kill a bunch of bad guys first, and possibly have civilian causilties too (unfortunate reality). I also know we will piss off the pacifists that would rather see someone else suffer under a tyrant, so be it.

We also aided britian against hitler before we got in to the war. The reason had to do with doing the right thing, protecting other free nations from a tryant. Yes there was some self interest there also, as we knew pretty well if hilter got britian, we'd be next on his list. I think we are in iraq for both reasons, to help others, by stopping a tyrant, and protecting ourselves. If it was just about oil, we would have done as france did, and made sweet oil deals with saddam, and lifted the embargo, traded oil for arms, or what ever saddam wanted. Clearly it wasn't all about oil, we could have gotten it much easier by appeasing saddam.

Would you even have to ask an afganistaininan women if she is better off now that the taliban are gone? I think you know the answer (hell you got to be a pretty smart person, you own a 914!), i sure do.

[RAR]

Communication between the FBI and the CIA, and internally within the FBI, would have in all likelihood prevented 9-11. The Patriot Act is meant to override "We the People". Our system of law works just fine (for some time now) to deal with terrorists. The PA is largely unnecessary.
We can't afford the 85% of the tax cut that goes to the very rich. We can afford the 15% that goes to average Americans.
The terrorists we were concerned about aren't in Iraq. We should be pursuing them world wide, not bogged down in a nation that doesn't want us there (check the polls). Saddam was bad, but not a sponsor of international terror as claimed. We can't police the World alone, Viet Nam taught us that.
Comparisons between a decorated combat veteran who saw things first hand and realized the problems, and a Barbie doll who lands on an aircraft carrier are ludicrous. Even Colin Powell wasn't keen on going into Iraq, and he led the first Gulf War.
The French may may march to their own drummer, but many Americans lived into old age because of the efforts of the Resistance. Credit where credit is due.
Most of all, I don't want to see the faces of the brave young men and women at the end of the news on PBS, and I don't mean they shouldn't be showing them.

I'm gonna drill out those spot welds this month if it kills me. Stiff rockers are the hot ticket.

[dmenche914]

yes saddam did publicaly support international terror, he gave I believe $25000 to the family of each suicide bomber aginst Isreal. There are also reported terror training camps in Iraq including one with a 707 fuselage reported to be used for hijack training. Saddam was host to one wanted terrorist also, he was public about it, but I forgot his name at the moment. There has also been reports of his governments close connection with other terror groups. He was neck deep in terror. At anyrate, al quida is in iraq now, osamas right hand number 2 man Zarquairi butchered Nick Berg on video just this week in or about Baghdad. We now have an idea where he is, so hopefully we will get him soon.

Good plan by Bush, we are drawing these human filth out from their holes, into the open and our brave troops are killing them one by one. This is probably why we might be in Iran next, rumur is number 1 (osama) is guest of the iranian mullahs.

The terrorist must win in Iraq, else they know they will loose support as iraq, and other nations in the area become free. That is why the terrorists are all heading to Iraq to take on our troops. It is far better to have the terrorists concentrated on fighting our troopsin iraq, rather than us civilians at home. Our troops are well prepared for battle, unlike us civilians. We owe each one of these brave troops our eternal gratetude for taking on the terrorist heat for us. They are doing it to keep us safe at home.

I doubt we were much wanted in germany after WWII, I am sure a poll taken then would have us not wanted in germany immediatly following the war. Sometimes nations are like childern, and do not understand what is really good for them in the long run. Maybe they do not believe that we really do not intend to occupy their nation any longer that needed to get it up and running and free of terror. Maybe the arab mind just cannot understand this concept of a victor doing anything less than inslaving all the remaining enemy, and plundering all the wealth as is custom in their first century culture. I believe in a decade or so, they will all have a lot of gratitude for what we are doing.

Are you also saying that the United States should be thankful that France had some resistance, thus making our job of saving France less deadly? well by golly, THANK YOU FRANCE FOR SO THOUGHTFULLY HELPING US SAVE YOURSELF! (except for the Vichy French forces, which killed a bunch of us, to think they joined the axis, jee whiz)

[Rusty]

Didn't you guys get enough of this crap over on the other thread?

Come on... let it go. Let's talk about cars. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/MDB2.gif)

-Lawrence