The Ur-Quan Masters Home Page Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 10, 2022, 03:26:40 am
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Celebrating 30 years of Star Control 2 - The Ur-Quan Masters

+  The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum
|-+  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release
| |-+  Starbase Café (Moderator: Death 999)
| | |-+  The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 17 Print
Author Topic: The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread  (Read 62757 times)
Art
Guest


Email
Re: The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread
« Reply #135 on: August 25, 2004, 06:21:22 am »

Third and last point: The actual Communist Party of the United States of America (cpusa.org) has no mention of Kerry himself on it that I can find, only a flyer giving their reasons for wanting to oust Bush from power. Wanting to get rid of Bush is not exactly surprising from the Communists; it certainly doesn't mean that they think of John Kerry as one of them (nor would they be likely to; all those Dean supporters back in the primary were ragging on Kerry for not being much of a liberal).
Logged
Baltar
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 109



View Profile
Re: The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread
« Reply #136 on: August 25, 2004, 10:14:13 am »

Quote


Back to Kerry's "Purple Hearts" as you may or maynot know, purple hearts are awarded to someone who is seriously injured in battle, 3 oF them in 4 months is a little farfetched don't you think? I mean the human body can only take so much. I know that at least two of them are bogus. One was awarded on a date where he was not invouvled in armed conflict, the only way that makes sense is that if bullet from an ally's weapon or his own. Another one was awarded and the very next day he went back with a video camera and re-enacted it, some SERIOUS injury that was. Former NYC mayor Ed Koch(D) seems to agree with me on certain specific points he said http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/1/10/155843.shtml. Do you know what would clear all this BS up? If Kerry allowed his OFFICAL WAR RECORD to be released, he refuses at every pass, why? What secret could be so dark and evil that it can derail any chance of getting elected? I will not offer any suggestions to this as this would be considered speculation when, absolutely not FACTS are known. Onto his buddy Ted Kennedy(the one who supposedly had Kerry pulled out) he keeps saying, "Bush Lied" it seems to be a pattern in order to prove a lie in a scenario which cannot be proved at this current point, you must prove that Bush knew that there were no WMD's in Iraq, and told the people otherwise(my McCarthyist point eariler).


Term,

I'm not sure at this point whether you are just joking around or you really are suffering from some hysterical madness, but I just want to bring up a point of information.  Purple Hearts are for any wound resulting from contact with the enemy, not just 'serious' wounds.  Dunno what your source is but it seems horribly biased.  Check the Wikipedia article dealing with Purple Hearts here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purple_heart.  The qualifications for the Purple Heart indicate that the soldier must have received a wound from enemy action.  There is no reference to the severity of the wound.  That's the only reference I have off hand, though it is fairly common in soldiers' anecdotes, war movies, etc to hear stories of a guy getting a Purple Heart for a minor injury while the guy in the next hospital bed over is crippled for life yet they both get the same reward.

The article you linked makes no mention of Koch's opinion of Kerry's war record.  That website is also poorly written and has a pretty blatant right wing bias.  There's a quite laughable summary of Kerry's interview with Jon Stewart on the Daily Show, which I just saw less than an hour ago.

Funny you should mention Kerry's failure to release his war record; Bush only reluctantly released a censored version of his own.

Suggesting Kerry sustained an injury from himself or friendly fire is also absurd and a little offensive; not only does that NOT qualify someone for a Purple Heart, the accusation of a self inflicted wound is something of such gravity that it shouldn't be brought up unless there is sufficient evidence to suggest it.  Not just some anecdote from a Bush supporter you heard on Rush's talk radio show Wink

Anyways, I grow tired of this; all this talk of war records is a bunch of degrading nonsense.  Face it; Kerry saw combat, Bush merely protected the mainland US from charlie in the air national guard with a service record that is itself highly suspect.  Aside from that, I don't care; all this crap is decades old and gets away from the real issues that you don't seem to want to debate.

Baltar out.
Logged
Lukipela
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3620


The Ancient One


View Profile
Re: The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread
« Reply #137 on: August 25, 2004, 03:19:26 pm »

Quote


Be careful how you word things "PRODUCE" means to create and fabricate, I am NOT Michael Moore, I can't creat something from nothing, I can however reveal the light to those who are cast into the darkness by the veil of the media. It doesn't mean anything, all I have to prove is that he HAD them between the UN resolution and the time we responded. Assuming the weapons were there they are either hidden in bunkers across Iraq or the more likely scenario in Iran, they may be bitter enemies, but if someone you hate offers you something like that with no exchange anyone would take it.


From Dictionary.com:
Quote

pro·duce   Audio pronunciation of produce ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (pr-ds, -dys, pr-)
v. pro·duced, pro·duc·ing, pro·duc·es
v. tr.

1. To bring forth; yield: a plant that produces pink flowers.

2.
a. To create by physical or mental effort: produce a tapestry; produce a poem.

b. To manufacture: factories that produce cars and trucks.

3. To cause to occur or exist; give rise to: chemicals that produce a noxious vapor when mixed.

4. To bring forth; exhibit: reached into a pocket and produced a packet of matches; failed to produce an eyewitness to the crime.[/i][/size]

5. To supervise and finance the making and public presentation of: produce a stage play; produce a videotape.

6. Mathematics. To extend (an area or volume) or lengthen (a line).


If one were a less patient man, one might suggest you learn your own language before starting to nitpick words in sentences. Of course, were that the case, one might also point out several other things. Such as your own inability in the past to use any sort of punctuation or sentence structuring, and how poorly this corresponds with your current nitpicking mode of other peoples sentences. Or possibly, that seeing as your own role model is apparently inable to express himself, you are in no position to criticize others. Of course, it may just be that somehow you realise that you have no points, and turn to nitpicking instead.

Quote
I can however reveal the light to those who are cast into the darkness by the veil of the media.


Funny how all  "the dark veil of the media" seems to be talking about these days is kerrys service record. And guess what? So are you! This would not appear to put you in an ideal position to shine a light on anything.

I see you managed to completely forget the whole "The europeans stalled cuz their evil" thing, so I'll just assume you accepted that was a untrue point.

As for Hussein giving all of his weapons over to Iran without anyone hearing a whipsper, or any satellite footage or counterintelligence noticing even the slightest hint of it, well done. My personal theory is that he cleverly hid it in Finland, so that we can teach the russians a lesson once the red communist tide swarms over us. I'm sure Hussein had all the motivation he needed to give all his wepons to one of his worst enemies, thus depriving himself of any fighting chance. Unless your suggesting this is some sort of conspiracy, and that a power mad dictator like Hussein would gladly sacrifice all his power just to make the US look bad?
« Last Edit: August 25, 2004, 03:22:47 pm by Lukipela » Logged

What's up doc?
Tiberian
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 335



View Profile WWW
Re: The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread
« Reply #138 on: August 25, 2004, 03:20:43 pm »

The highest military command in Finland is positively sure that the only reason for USA to attack Iraq was because they KNEW Iraq didn't have mass-destruction weapons. It was safe for them to invade the oil-fields and not have to worry about nukes flying in their direction.

And this is neither bullshit, nor my own creation, it really is the best war-strategics in Finland, who are sure of it. And I just think it all fits perfectly.
Logged

Author of Star Control novelizations Groombridge Log and Eternal Doctrine. http://www.tommisalminenbooks.com
Zeep-Eeep
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 917


Good Grief


View Profile WWW
Re: The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread
« Reply #139 on: August 25, 2004, 06:19:32 pm »

That's on interesting idea and I don't entirely doubt it. However, could
you please post a link (or two) supporting this?
Logged

What sound does a penguin make?
Baltar
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 109



View Profile
Re: The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread
« Reply #140 on: August 25, 2004, 06:59:23 pm »

My sentimonies exactly; I'd love to see some links regarding this.
Logged
Chrispy
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 917


Vlik Dweller


View Profile
Re: The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread
« Reply #141 on: August 25, 2004, 08:33:13 pm »

I cant help myself from posting here any longer.

It is my belief that the USA went to war with Iraq so that George Bush would get more votes. They brought it to the UN, but attacked early because it was all timed so bring a feeling of patriotism, and national crisis around election time.
Logged

Lukipela
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3620


The Ancient One


View Profile
Re: The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread
« Reply #142 on: August 25, 2004, 08:56:04 pm »

Quote
The highest military command in Finland is positively sure that the only reason for USA to attack Iraq was because they KNEW Iraq didn't have mass-destruction weapons. It was safe for them to invade the oil-fields and not have to worry about nukes flying in their direction.

And this is neither bullshit, nor my own creation, it really is the best war-strategics in Finland, who are sure of it. And I just think it all fits perfectly.



Feel free to provide any links to that, even in Finnish for me, I've not heard bout it.
Logged

What's up doc?
Tiberian
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 335



View Profile WWW
Re: The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread
« Reply #143 on: August 26, 2004, 02:08:00 am »

Naturally the leaders of Finland don't accuse the government of USA like this in public.

I have connections to the military command and this was brought up one night when enjoying sauna+beer.
Logged

Author of Star Control novelizations Groombridge Log and Eternal Doctrine. http://www.tommisalminenbooks.com
Art
Guest


Email
Re: The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread
« Reply #144 on: August 26, 2004, 08:56:14 am »

Quote


Be careful how you word things "PRODUCE" means to create and fabricate, I am NOT Michael Moore, I can't creat something from nothing, I can however reveal the light to those who are cast into the darkness by the veil of the media. It doesn't mean anything, all I have to prove is that he HAD them between the UN resolution and the time we responded. Assuming the weapons were there they are either hidden in bunkers across Iraq or the more likely scenario in Iran, they may be bitter enemies, but if someone you hate offers you something like that with no exchange anyone would take it.


This is a speculation, not a "proof". The fact that any nation that took the weapons would be implicated in future accusations is one reason to doubt this scenario; another is that moving dangerous things like chem/bio weapons around is not as easy as people seem to think.

Bush needs to prove your point a lot more than you need to, and right now he's not doing a very good job of it; even his team has backed away from the WMD argument and is trying to justify the war by other means. The balance of evidence is that there weren't WMDs in Iraq; it's much more likely that there weren't than that there were, even if there are possible ways to explain how they used to be there and disappeared. Ever hear of Occam's Razor?

Quote
Do you know what would clear all this BS up? If Kerry allowed his OFFICAL WAR RECORD to be released, he refuses at every pass, why? What secret could be so dark and evil that it can derail any chance of getting elected? I will not offer any suggestions to this as this would be considered speculation when, absolutely not FACTS are known. Onto his buddy Ted Kennedy(the one who supposedly had Kerry pulled out) he keeps saying, "Bush Lied" it seems to be a pattern in order to prove a lie in a scenario which cannot be proved at this current point, you must prove that Bush knew that there were no WMD's in Iraq, and told the people otherwise(my McCarthyist point eariler).


War records contain personal and often painful information, especially if Kerry is telling the truth about being asked to participate in illegal attacks in Cambodia. In any case he's not obligated to disclose private materials to the public because he's running for office, and his not doing so is no more proof of a deep, dark secret than the numerous records Bush has refused to release. In any case the whole Purple Heart issue does not, in fact, really matter, and it's the media you hate so much who keep bringing it up (because attacking a person's character is easier and more fun than attacking a person's proposed policies).

I don't see why you bring up McCarthyism. People aren't trying to get Bush arrested for a crime, for which you *would* need a lot more evidence than we have. People are trying to get Bush out of office (as people do with *every* president who's up for reelection), and it's perfectly fair game to point out signs of dishonesty as evidence against his competence as a leader, even if we have no absolute proof he lied. Even if he didn't lie, he was misguided; he had direct contact with the intelligence sources that showed a lack of evidence for WMDs in Iraq, and yet told us with great certainty that WMDs were there anyway. Whether he was malicious or incompetent, he was wrong. The main thing is whether he makes the right decision, not whether he makes such decisions with integrity.

Quote
Judging my the number of Death-threats/hate-mail/virused mail I've recieved both at this board and my E-mail address(which happens to be zero, thanks for your concern) that none of the posters that actually read this are not into the ABB(Anybody But Bush) idea. People like Ted Kennedy have conviced people that Bush is Hitler and it's the lowest we could possibly sink.
NOTE: my inital count was mistaken 46,000 are registered in NY & FL 63%(28,900) are registered democrat and 15%(6,900) are registered rupublicain, in an election where 500 votes separated the winner I really doubt it would be that close in a mainly Right-wing state.


Umm... are you used to getting death threats, hate mail or viruses? I've argued with a lot of people whom I've disagreed with and that's never happened to me. FWIW, I'm in favor of Anybody But Bush (within limits) and I feel no need to commit indiscriminate felonies against Bush supporters.

Though I'd point out that even if you haven't gotten any e-mailed death threats, you have gotten a lot of people on this board arguing with you, attacking you and making fun of you, which doesn't seem like a very positive indicator for how convincing you are. And I don't really get your logic for saying that all the people openly disagreeing with you aren't really reading your post, and that there's a much larger number of people who've read your post carefully, understood it, and wish to express their support by doing nothing.

And even though I am in favor of ABB that doesn't mean I think Bush is Hitler or that he's the lowest this country could possibly sink. Please don't put words in people's mouths; maybe some people have said that, but I don't think Ted Kennedy has. (I don't quite understand your fixation with Ted Kennedy; is it just that he's a symbol of the Old Democrats, or did he do something in particular to get your goat?)

Also, what's this last point in reference to? If there are a huge number of registered Democrats compared to registered Republicans in FL yet the vote was surprisingly close, and you think election fraud is a possibility, wouldn't the fraud be committed by the *Republicans*? Indeed, almost all accusations of election tampering are against the Republicans (that I've heard, and FWIW I don't really agree with them). Are you doing that baby-killer thing again, taking some random argument from the opposing side and making it sound like it's an argument for yours? 'Cause it's a bad strategy.
Logged
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3868


We did. You did. Yes we can. No.


View Profile
Re: The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread
« Reply #145 on: August 26, 2004, 10:28:29 pm »

I have heard of Democratic election tampering, but not in Florida. I think it was Illinois. Still, it was pretty small-scale compared to the voter roll purges and shifting 20,000 votes to Buchanan and stuff like that that happened in Fla.

Both parties have people who will try to game the system.
Logged
Terminator
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 308


Obnoxious One Reformed


View Profile
Re: The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread
« Reply #146 on: August 27, 2004, 10:17:44 am »

I wouldn't be surprised if either side resorted to such tactics. Initally wasn't it for dead people voting as oppossed to living people voting twice. About Iraq, put all Polictical agendas aside isn't plausable to assume that the reason to invade Iraq was to cripple Al-Queda's resources? You can't cause terrorism without some sort of funding(it is believed that Arab oil funds Al-Queda).
Logged

We must each create our own paths. Do not mimic mine, I don't even like myself.
Ivan Ivanov
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 296


Internet Piracy


View Profile
Re: The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread
« Reply #147 on: August 27, 2004, 02:36:16 pm »

Quote
(it is believed that Arab oil funds Al-Queda).


Bleeding hell, I see that when it comes to faith, Jesus Christ compared to Bush is an amateur....
Logged

Your bruises are reminders of naivete and trust
Terminator
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 308


Obnoxious One Reformed


View Profile
Re: The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread
« Reply #148 on: August 28, 2004, 08:39:19 am »

Quote


Bloody hell, I see that when it comes to faith, Jesus Christ compared to Bush is an amateur....


I'm a little lost here(okay I'm Dazed and Confused), what really does this mean? Ok Bush is not Jesus, but he sure as hell is not Hitler.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2004, 08:40:17 am by Terminator » Logged

We must each create our own paths. Do not mimic mine, I don't even like myself.
Baltar
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 109



View Profile
Re: The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread
« Reply #149 on: August 28, 2004, 09:59:59 am »

Quote


I'm a little lost here(okay I'm Dazed and Confused), what really does this mean? Ok Bush is not Jesus, but he sure as hell is not Hitler.


He's likening Bush to Jesus in so much as suggesting that Bush inspires a great deal of faith in his supporters to believe in his lies (or the lies the administration peddles through Fox News and friends).

Now please continue with your insane ramblings.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2004, 10:00:38 am by Baltar » Logged
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 17 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!