SpidermanTuba
Rookie
- Banned
- #121
manu1959 said:would you rather live in a country ruled by clinton or sadam?
Clinton has never ruled a country, so I wouldn't know what to expect.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
manu1959 said:would you rather live in a country ruled by clinton or sadam?
SpidermanTuba said:Clinton has never ruled a country, so I wouldn't know what to expect.
manu1959 said:somehow i knew that question would be too complicated for you and you would get caught up :wank: in the semantics of "rule" and avoid having an opinion.
SpidermanTuba said:You mean the "definition" of rule? I don't live in a country where any one man in ruler. I seriously doubt the Founding Fathers or anyone who loves this great Democracy would consider the difference between "ruler" and "President" to be one of semantics.
manu1959 said:damn i could have a blast with this ...... if this is true how can everything be bushies fault
Harmageddon said:I meant to say that there were no alternatives that could bring even better advancement to the countries that are, apparently, to be invaded.
There was no alternative for the Romans, the French or Spanish posed an alternative to British rule, but their targets were mostly unaware of the other European colonial powers until they had been transformed into a colony.
Nowadays, there is the Internet, and television, and telephone networks, in short: global communication. Mostly thanks to America, truly, appreciated throughout the world. But that means that the nations that are on the lists to be invaded, know of all the other forces in the world. And all the other forces can see how the game is being played. Which makes us far more aware of the dirty business that is global politics and war.
This instills in many a sense we should look for alternatives.
Looking back through history for clues as to what may be a wise choice, I think it is fair to say "regime change" has proved to be a very blunt tool that often resulted in killing the "patient" so to speak.
manu1959 said:damn i could have a blast with this ...... if this is true how can everything be bushies fault
SpidermanTuba said:Who are you to decide that they shall shed their blood for freedom? Do you think Iraqi's are less of a human than American's? Because if you think all men and women are equal - it stands to reason that if we can decide we want freedom and fight for it and earn it - so to could the Iraqi's have.
SpidermanTuba said:He at least lied when he said that was his reason for going.
SpidermanTuba said:Clinton has never ruled a country, so I wouldn't know what to expect.
SpidermanTuba said:Who are you to decide that they shall shed their blood for freedom? Do you think Iraqi's are less of a human than American's? Because if you think all men and women are equal - it stands to reason that if we can decide we want freedom and fight for it and earn it - so to could the Iraqi's have.
SpidermanTuba said:LuvRPgrl said:You just CONFIRMED IT,
The only reason Iraqi conscripts were trying to kill our boys is because we were there -seems to be a subtlty you glossed over.
You avoided the question as usual, (which means even YOU dont like YOUR answer)
Do you see a difference between killing someone who is trying to kill you, and killing someone because they wont join your army?
(YOU are the one who mentioned that whats the big deal since we are over there killing them anyways, like as though its the same thing)
SpidermanTuba said:If you think that not speaking out against a war you don't agree with is a "reasonable limit" on free speech - like I said, build a time machine, go back to 1939, and join Hitler's SS..
SpidermanTuba said:Actually, while I would be charged with verbal assault, you would be charged with assault and battery on me. Soooooo...... what's your point?.
SpidermanTuba said:If supporting the soldiers means I need to keep my mouth shut when the President is sending them off to die for his political purposes - well, then perhaps you should build that time machine, head back to 1939..
SpidermanTuba said:So do I have a right to speak out against wars I don't agree with or not? Make up your damn mind, you seem to be waffling back and forth. And if I do have that right - why would a Marine who risked his own life fighting for my right to have it beat me up for exercising it?
I have gotten into debates with a couple of Marines about this war. And with both we argued alot and shouted at each other - but neither of them even looked for a second like they were going to assault me. I think you give our Marines less credit than they deserve, they are perfectly capable of tolerating opposing views without being moved to break the law. They aren't the Nazi SS soldiers you wish they were - they are killers in combat and gentlemen outside of combat.
SpidermanTuba said:So, right, like I said, the people didn't pick the President in 2000. Unless of course by "pick" you mean that the 2nd highest vote getter is "picked". Most elections the people's pick corresponds to the electors pick, but not all..
Uhh, so, mr picky unny about words, I said " is appointing..." that means is in the process of, so you are WRONG...eat it buddy, hahahhahahahha, ITS FACTUALLY CORRECT, here, I will save you some time, POST number 62..........read it and weep........SpidermanTuba said:Uhh, so guess what, you said Bush has already appointed two Supreme Court Justices - and that is as of now factually incorrect..
hmmm, so you are admitting you are acting like a five year old, good !SpidermanTuba said:The epitome of childishness is to act like a 5 year old because you think your opponent is acting like a 5 year old..
Please dont, two are adults now and doing just fine, much better than their peers who were raised by anti war liberal types, my sons peer is already in prison for stealing cars,,, yea, his parents believed in letting him make his own decisions, even at a very young age, oh, he wants to get tats, fine,,dont want to stifle his creativity....now on the other hands both my adult kids are doing wonderfully well,,,,SpidermanTuba said:I'll pray for them.
SpidermanTuba said:Well if you're using the Roman's as your standard of what is civilized, I suppose you agree with slavery and religious persecution.
SpidermanTuba said:They tried and Shrub Sr. stood by and offered no assistance. This is part of why I doubt the right wingers have the best interest of the Iraqi people at heart.
SpidermanTuba said:Of course, you know why Shrub Sr. didn't help the Shiites, right? Because the Shiites are as radical and fundamentalist as you can get.
SpidermanTuba said:Government only rules over people because the people decide to allow it. I could cite numerous examples of the people deciding they no longer wanted to be ruled by their government - but I'll cite just one. The people of the British Colonies. Only about half even supported breaking away from Britain - and that was enough to get the job done. If the Iraqi people wanted to get rid of Hussein they could have done it, provided they paid a price in blood. Instead it is the blood of American soldiers that is being paid for their freedom. In the end they may have needed our help like we needed the help of the French to boot out England - but offering assistance to a people who are currently involved in paying blood for freedom is profoundly different from deciding yourself that they, and you, will pay blood for their freedom.
SpidermanTuba said:What is your point? Since when is the job of the U.S. military to enforce God's will? I don't see that written anywhere in the Constitution, do you?
SpidermanTuba said:Wow - there's an exception to a rule, that never happens.
SpidermanTuba said:Unlike Mr. I'm not for Nation Building wait yes I am President.
SpidermanTuba said:Well then I guess that's what makes us different. You like violence, I don't.
SpidermanTuba said:The idea that it is the reponsbility of the United States to deal with the world's dictators is even more ridiculous - especially considering how many of them we've propped up over the years.
SpidermanTuba said:Here's a little clue for you - when a dictator is good for the people in Washington - we let him remain a dictator. Doesn't matter what he's doing to his people, doesn't matter how many women and children he has murdered or how many villages he gasses - when that dictator no longer behaves like the people in Washington want him to, then all of a sudden, out of left field, here comes this great outpouring of compassion from Washington for the people being ruled by this dictator.
Happens everytime. We put the Taliban in power - we put them in power knowing how they treated their women, how they dealt with political dissidents - then after 9/11 all of a sudden Washington cared about the people of Afghanistan.
SpidermanTuba said:You're a sucker if you think the powers in Washington every sent a single American soldier into combat to alleviate the suffering of innocent people.
SpidermanTuba said:You mean the Roman Empire - hmm, not around anymore, are they?
SpidermanTuba said:Or the Greeks.
SpidermanTuba said:In fact - every Great Empire in history has fallen.
SpidermanTuba said:Except Britain is still there - they realized the error of their ways.
SpidermanTuba said:Hey look, France is still there, and they've been around longer than us.
SpidermanTuba said:If you think the failure to beat people up when you don't need to beat people up makes you weak, you're wrong. Strength comes in having great power but exercising it only when absolutely neccessary.
SpidermanTuba said:If you want to talk about stupid analogies you've just brought one up. Last I checked, Saddam Hussein wasn't in the business of conquering the world.
SpidermanTuba said:Here's a clue - we didn't find any WMD in Iraq. So one of two things happened
A) Saddam Hussein never wanted to make WMD
B) The sanctions and inspections were preventing him from making WMD
Which do you think is more likely?
SpidermanTuba said:So what does that have to do with Iraq?
SpidermanTuba said:So you honestly believe we should go on this great crusade of toppling dictators, one by one, starting with Shrub's Pappie's personal enemy?
SpidermanTuba said:So when George Bush said in 2000 that he wasn't for nation building, what he meant was that he was for a prolonged, multi-decade, period of nation building?
SpidermanTuba said:No WMD.
Neither were the Nazis.
LuvRPgrl said:Is this gonna become a "post per page" thread? hahah
Jimmyeatworld said:Looks like it. Pretty interesting read, I have to say. I haven't bothered joining in because it's the same crap as it always is, just from different sources. Pretty much following the "Far Left Wing Politics for Dummies" handbook.
Bush lied.
Revisionist History 101.
Twist facts.
If you can't twist a fact, just ignore it.
When faced with a question you can't answer, find a way not to answer it.
When all else fails, compare them to a Nazi.