Author
|
Topic: The John Kerry/George W. Bush thread (Read 66469 times)
|
Lukipela
Enlightened
 Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 3620
The Ancient One
|
Luki:
Ouch, man. I like you, but that was low. We (Americans) took the fight to their soil only after they blew the hell out of a good chunk of the world economy. If you want to talk about irony, we gave Al Qaeda, Hezbollah and other groups of the time weapons to fight the Soviets back in the 80's.
True, but it was meant to be. If you read through the conversation carefully, you'll see that I was trying to shake Bios attitude around. What annoys me more than anything else is people that believe that because something horrible happened to them, it's quite alright to go bomb some other innocent country. Yes, the WTC bombings were horrible, and completely unjustified in my eyes. However, people who cry in horror at the WTC, yet just say "Well there are always some civilian causalties/we're just taking the fight to them" when they invade a country that had no part in the WTC bombings is just as bad. That's saying "It's alright when it happens to someone else", which is why a large part of the world hates western countries.
Luki:
Taking an antiethnocentrist point of view, perhaps some countries don't function well under democracy. Shoot this if you want, but it's what I think.
In a way yes. But that's only because some countries have no experience of democracy. Think of Europe bout 500 years ago. If anyone ahd told you they'd be what they are now, you'd have laughed at them, and killed a few peasants. for democracy to feel natural, it either had to come gradually, or it has to be around for quite a bit, so that you have a generation that has grown up under democracy, and to whom the old ways are just scary stories. This is actually one point where i disagree with the people pointing at Iraq as a dismal failure. It is a tghe moment, but it won't neccessarily always be. Much more follow-through will be needed though. Same goes fro Afghanistan.
Luki:
Actually, it's their C.O.'s that are the problem. Arrogant little rich boys that got some brass pinned on their shoulders and think they can rule the goddamn world because of it. Originally, Al-Sadr was FOR the U.S. because it got rid of Saddam, who just happened to execute Sadr's father and uncle, who were also both priests. We even gave him a newspaper from with which to write about to the people of Iraq. Unfortunately, we overstayed our visit and he started writing some bad stuff about us. What'd the CO's do? Agreed to close the newspaper plant permanently. No wonder he hates us now. When we, America, bringers of peace, personal liberty and free speech decide that, because someone using their newfound powers writes bad stuff on us, we close them down. Kinda like kicking yourself in the ass.
Let me clarify this for you. The entire army setup stinks, not just the COs. just bnlaming those in charge is seeking an easy way out. An army that takes in people who actually want to kill, for whatever reasons rather than one where people are drafted to do their duty is in trouble. I'm not saying that everyone in the US army is an psychotic murderer, but the percentage is higher when most of the people who are in the army are there because they volunteered. Granted, you'll loads of real heroes as well, but that's another story.
Luki: WMD's weren't our reason. They were our cover. We wanted to "oust the evil dictator and gain control of his vast wealth in oil". Bush lied about it, but the supposed economic gain from all our new oil wells made up for it, I guess... 
Again, we don't know that. We just believe it. When you start believeing theories as fact without evidence, you're in trouble.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
What's up doc?
|
|
|
Shiver
Guest
|
Let me clarify this for you. The entire army setup stinks, not just the COs. just bnlaming those in charge is seeking an easy way out. An army that takes in people who actually want to kill, for whatever reasons rather than one where people are drafted to do their duty is in trouble. I'm not saying that everyone in the US army is an psychotic murderer, but the percentage is higher when most of the people who are in the army are there because they volunteered. Granted, you'll loads of real heroes as well, but that's another story.
Normally I agree with you Lukipela, but this one statement strikes me as borderline moronic. You're saying the entire US military should be made up of draftees? Most volunteers are sadists? Pretending for a sec that a draftee and a volunteer end up as the same caliber soldier (which is laughable), do you know how much drafts piss off the general populace? It's the sort of thing that, justifiably, starts riots nation-wide. I don't doubt the military has some kill-happy types in it (especially the Marines), but you should keep in mind that the military is probably the only productive career available for someone of that temperment. If they weren't off shooting at foreign enemies on the battlefield, they'd be preying on bystanders (in some form or another) back home. Additionally, after these sorts of people come back they're so conditioned into following a structured life-style that they have very little probability of doing anything criminal. Soldiers aren't the ones that decide when and where to start wars, so it's of little consequence that some of them actually like their job.
It's best to wage a war as efficiently as possible, leading to the fewest casualties on both sides. An army loaded with draftees is almost guaranteed to suck, develope low morale and in turn result in more Abu Ghraib-like incidents than we have now. Israel is a big exception to what I'm saying about draftees (as I'm pretty sure they have everyone over 18 do some kind of military service), but that's because they're collectively cornered and in danger. Bush will tell you otherwise, but the United States is not.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 13, 2004, 04:32:57 am by Shiver »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shiver
Guest
|
I didn't think Luki was going in that direction,
That aside, I disagree with the volunteer vs. draftee statement. After
all there are many many countries in the world that draft soldiers.
As I understand, most east-block countries drafted. During war time
up until the 70s the USA drafted soldiers. During the second world war,
nearly every country in the conflict drafted its armies. To state that
those armies sucked (relatively) is a huge generalization and one without
evidence.
No dammit, he's saying the whole military should be drafted. As in, people who want to join can't and lots of people who want no involvement with the armed forces are required to. I'm not making "a huge generalization" when I say that's a horrible idea, not to mention totally against what's supposed to be a free democratic society. Those other militaries and ours have been a volunteer-draftee mix which is entirely different from what Lukipela was talking about. In our case, the previous drafts were because the country was in great danger and needed every warm body it could get. It's not like that right now.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Art
Guest
|
I'm not entirely against the concept of universal conscription, but I do think that it wouldn't fly well in this country for a number of reasons. Number one is obviously the huge relative size of this country's population; it'd probably cost more to give every new generation of young males a basic military training and a low-grade salary than you'd possibly make back from finding them pissant military jobs to do. The US military, especially, is being designed for maximum efficiency by functioning at a high-tech, high-skill level in which the basic-training draftee grunt of yesteryear has little place.
Number two is the different attitude of Americans. Say what you will, but I don't think Americans are terribly patriotic in the traditional sense, and that may be a positive thing. Americans are unlikely to see their country as an abstract ideal worth sacrificing everything for, and, indeed, the American system has often largely been built around the idea of America being a place where people are free to look out for themselves and their families' interests (hence the traditional American emphasis on "Freedom" rather than "Honor" or "Pride" or "Virtue"). There are pretty good arguments that even if the 13th Amendment against involuntary servitude doesn't ban drafts outright, it's a strong argument against a universal draft. The military here is not identified with the glory and reputation of the country; it's a tool to make the country safe for us to grow rich and happy in, and so we'd really rather not allow it to control our lives to the point that it actively keeps us from being rich and happy by drafting us.
That means that you're much more likely to get Conscript Syndrome among American draftees. From what I can see the number of outright sadists anywhere, including in the military, is pretty small -- the actual reason most volunteers join is because this country doesn't do a great job of taking care of its poor, and there are a lot of young men who can't afford to go to college and who see this as a productive thing they can do to help people and make money. That in itself may be a problem, but it's very different from saying that most volunteers are middle-class layabouts who want to give up their comfortable lives so they can legally kill people. The biggest source of likely problems in the military is resentment from people who have to go to war who don't want to fight; that was the source of the frags and mutinies in Vietnam, and the much greater stress, resentment and anger someone is likely to feel at a situation they had no choice over is more likely to cause blowups like Abu Ghraib or My Lai.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Fsi-Dib
*Many bubbles*
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 182
The Crimson Corporation
|
Whoah... you sure have babbled all kinds of crap here. I might add some notes some you people haven't noticed. I'm not gonna join the conversation, I don't want to be labeled as a politician. 
As you might know, some people on these boards are finnish (surprise), and finnish people are very critical. Towards everyone, USA is just the biggest spot to criticize about. Oh but you all knew this... I hope.
The next thing is US citizens. Some don't seem to take criticism well at all. Then they start threatening and mocking the person who criticized. I remember a scene at slashdot.org, when Star Wreck: In the Pirkinning's trailer was published. It contains a gag about Bush in the beginning, and some americans were ready to nuke Finland, just for that. Tsk, tsk, where's the tolerance?
And today I read some threads from IMDB about Michael Moore ... what's wrong with right wingers? Most posts were straight insults and threatenings. Gives a good picture of all the right wingers, doesn't it?
Let's not forget the inauguration day (I hope I chose the right word from my dictionary) when Bush's limo was thrown by eggs. And he's the first president to recieve this kind of treatment.
Also I've noticed most americans who use internet (and/or IRC) have a better knowledge of the surroundings and consequences. I am not sure do I even know a single american who uses IRC who would vote for Bush.
Give me a break. I wrote way too much. And even thinking of the faulty "democracy" of United States of America makes me sick.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The unofficial music critic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kaiser
Zebranky food
Offline
Posts: 39
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
|
Whoah... you sure have babbled all kinds of crap here. I might add some notes some you people haven't noticed. I'm not gonna join the conversation, I don't want to be labeled as a politician.
And yet you join anyway 
As you might know, some people on these boards are finnish (surprise), and finnish people are very critical. Towards everyone, USA is just the biggest spot to criticize about. Oh but you all knew this... I hope.
Also known a few who were just plain delusional...
The next thing is US citizens. Some don't seem to take criticism well at all. Then they start threatening and mocking the person who criticized. I remember a scene at slashdot.org, when Star Wreck: In the Pirkinning's trailer was published. It contains a gag about Bush in the beginning, and some americans were ready to nuke Finland, just for that. Tsk, tsk, where's the tolerance?
Because like it or not, we typically defend our own against non-Americans. You want to criticize our country, become a citizen.
And today I read some threads from IMDB about Michael Moore ... what's wrong with right wingers? Most posts were straight insults and threatenings. Gives a good picture of all the right wingers, doesn't it?
Or all those insults Moore and other ultra-leftists have spouted against our President and any other Republican or Democrat who is voting for him?
Sure, liberals threatening conservatives because of who they vote for is just dandy. 
Let's not forget the inauguration day (I hope I chose the right word from my dictionary) when Bush's limo was thrown by eggs. And he's the first president to recieve this kind of treatment.
Right word.
That's because many Democrats are sore losers. (not all)
Also I've noticed most americans who use internet (and/or IRC) have a better knowledge of the surroundings and consequences. I am not sure do I even know a single american who uses IRC who would vote for Bush.
*is a Republican, an IRC junkie and is voting for Bush*
As are most other Americans on IRC that I know. Even some people I know who hate Bush are voting for him because Kerry is a worse choice.
Give me a break. I wrote way too much. And even thinking of the faulty "democracy" of United States of America makes me sick.
Our REPUBLIC is fine. The only way it'd collapse is if Kerry is elected. Our defense, with military and intelligence capabilities, would be gutted. Just as he's voted for in the past.
Flipflopflipflop
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
0xDEC0DE
*Many bubbles*
Offline
Posts: 175
|
OK, I think I've just about reached my limit on half-wit hyperbole. As a counter-point, the sky is not falling, the world will not end if the election does not go to a Republican, and Democrats will not single-handledly destroy the country. Get the fuck over yourselves.
For fuck's sake, if Kerry is elected, the Congress will still be controlled by the Republicans, which in this overly-partisan climate, means deadlock. i.e., nothing will get done, which given lawmakers' ability to complicate the most simple matters, means "it won't get any worse." Given that people go to the polls to vote against candidates rather than for them, I'd say this is the best situation you can hope for without election reform.
As for Bush, I'm afraid to say that I'm a single-issue voter this year: we invaded a sovereign nation based on faulty intelligence. Disregarding all the tangential issues around that invasion, there are two possibilities: Either our intelligence organizations are incompetent, or the intelligence was fabricated. In the former case, we need to replace the cabinet-level intelligence positions, which would give a mandate to change the organizations, and in the latter, we need impeachment, and preferably a firing squad. Either way, it means the person currently holding the job of chief executive should lose it.
They could exhume Stalin's corpse and run it against Bush and I'd vote for it, that's how strongly I feel about the current state of affairs. That the Democrats are running a dfferent animated corpse for President this year is a bonus.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"I’m not a robot like you. I don’t like having disks crammed into me… unless they’re Oreos, and then only in the mouth." --Fry
|
|
|
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3873
We did. You did. Yes we can. No.
|
The only way it'd collapse is if Kerry is elected. Our defense, with military and intelligence capabilities, would be gutted. Just as he's voted for in the past.
Summary of the main Kerry votes that Bush likes to put forward:
#1) Kerry votes against buying modern air fighters.
Of other interest is that both Dick Cheney and Bush Sr. also voted against these air fighters. It was the end of the cold war, the army was being restructured away from defeating the USSR. Yes, this was like 13 years ago.
#2) Kerry voted against the $20 billion funding for Iraq troops.
True. He voted against this $20 billion measure because he voted for a $60 billion measure that Bush opposed on the grounds that the war should be cheap and easy.
#3) Kerry opposed the formation of the Department of Homeland Security.
If you look back, actually BUSH opposed the formation of the DHS, at about the same time, for the same reasons. But you don't call HIM a flip-flopper, nor weak on security.
Check the congressional record if you really want to see what was going on. It doesn't look anything like what the advertisements say.
Because like it or not, we typically defend our own against non-Americans. You want to criticize our country, become a citizen.
This makes about as much sense as, "If you don't like Picasso, buy up everything he painted so you can burn it legally."
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 22, 2004, 10:40:51 pm by Death_999 »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Lukipela
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3620
The Ancient One
|
You want to criticize our country, become a citizen.
So, if a certain president wanted to criticize a country such as.. oh Iraq, Iran, North Korea or Sudan, he should first emigrate to said country? Or is this a rule that only applies to filthy non-US citizens??
The point of having a democracy boy, is that we're allowed to speak our minds. Granted, our arguments are more impressive if we know what we're speaking about, but only a true fool would discount someones opinion based on where they live.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 23, 2004, 07:00:51 pm by Lukipela »
|
Logged
|
What's up doc?
|
|
|
Vassago_Umara
Frungy champion
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 85
Spathis rule!
|
Back to the topic at hand. All Kerry complains about is Bushh is leading us to war, anyonw with common sense will realize that if you let the terrorists slide they WILL do it again, if you don't retaliate with force, which is the only language relifous fanatics understand, you shall remain the victim. If Bush is so wrong I'd like to know what would do better, since he hasn't said a word of what his plans are. From what I've read of "Unfit for Command" Kerry is the reason he only did 90 day in nam' he cited a 3 Purple Heart rule which required him at his own request to be put on inactive status, and what did he do? he ran for Congress and founded the label of Vietnam Veterans as "Baby Killers." In case you don't know a standard tour of duty is a year so if even one of his purple hearts are a fraud he owes the United States Navy 9 months of active duty. Another interesting fact is that only one of his Swift boat colleges supports him, the rest are on the "Swift Boat Veterans For Truth". It is known that his "First" purple heart was "awarded" for a wound which was a result of his own stupidity, a fragment of a grenade which he fired from a grenade launcher, and from the description I read, it was the size of a Frosted Flake, Required not incision, removed with forceps, did NOT break the skin and was covered with a BAND-AID. If you think it's bad that "Bush lied" why was Clinton re-elected? He lied and was caught I didn't see a media frenzy until the trial. Just some food for thought. Have fun trying to swallow it.
Bush lied to take us to war, and a thousand Americans have died as a result. Clinton lied about sex with a secretary, which one is worse? If that BJ had killed a thousand people I wouldn't have voted for Clinton. As for Kerry's complaints about GWB going to war, he has a valid point. When Bush said we would go to war with Iraq only as a last resort, he lied we didn't go as a last resort. He didn't wait for weapons inspectors, supposedly so that Saddam couldn't hide them, yet we didn't find any anyways. Smart move... When he lied about the connection between Saddam and September the 11th, when all intelligence said there was no connection. Another good one. In my eyes this president has gone against the convictions that this great nation stands for, and in the process reduced the world's opinion of the U.S. from one of great respect and admiration, to one of wariness and unease. Choke on that
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Time is never wasted, if you are wasted all the time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
