Be careful what you wish for......

[Multidigits]

This is what George should be announcing? It's worth the read!

We all have our disagreements with President Bush. Immigration, U.S. Attorney firings, Iraq, Darfur, etc... are all hot topics these days. The following "speech" was written by an ordinary 'Maine-iac.' While satirical in nature, all satire must have a basis in FACT to be effective. An excellent piece by a person who does not write for a living. Sent with the author's permission.

***

The speech George W. Bush SHOULD give:

Normally, I start these things out by saying "My Fellow Americans..."

Not doing it this time If the polls are any indication, I don't know who more than half of you are anymore. I do know something terrible has happened, and that you're really not fellow Americans any longer.

I'll cut right to the chase here: I quit. Now before anyone gets all in a lather about me quitting to avoid impeachment, or to avoid prosecution or something, let me assure you, there's been no breaking of laws or impeachable offenses in this office. The reason I'm quitting is simple. I'm fed up with you people.

I'm fed up because you have no understanding of what's really going on in the world. Or of what's going on in this once-great nation of ours. And the majority of you are too danged lazy to do your homework and figure it out.

Let's start local. You've been sold a bill of goods by politicians and the news media. Polls show that the majority of you think the economy is in the tank, and that's despite record numbers of homeowners including record numbers of MINORITY homeowners. While we're mentioning minorities, I'll point out that minority business ownership is at an all-time high. Our unemployment rate is as low as it ever was during the Clinton Administration. I've mentioned all those things before, but it doesn't seem to have sunk in.

Despite the shock to our economy of 9/11, the stock market has rebounded to record levels and more Americans than ever are participating in these markets. Meanwhile, all you can do is whine about gas prices, and most of you are too dang stupid to realize that gas prices are high because there's increased demand in other parts of the world, and because a small handful of noisy idiots are more worried about polar bears and beach front property than your economic security
We face real threats in the world. Don't give me this "blood for oil" thing. If I were trading blood for oil, I would've already seized Iraq's oil fields and let the rest of the country go to hell, and don't give me this 'Bush Lied, People Died' crap either. If I were the liar you morons take me for, I could've easily had chemical weapons planted in Iraq so they could be 'discovered.' Instead, I owned up to the fact that the intelligence was faulty. Let me remind you that the rest of the world thought Saddam had the goods, same as me. Let me also remind you, regime change in Iraq, was official US policy before I came into office. Some guy named 'Clinton' establ ished that policy. Bet you didn't know that, did you?

You idiots need to understand that we face a unique enemy. Back during the cold war, there were two major competing political and economic models squaring off. We won that war, thanks in large part to my Dad's predecessor, but we did so because fundamentally, the Communists wanted to survive, just as we do. We were simply able to outspend and out-tech them.

That's not the case this time. The soldiers of our new enemy don't CARE if they survive. In fact, they WANT to die. That'd be fine, as long as they weren't also committed to taking as many of you with them as they can, but they are. They want to kill you, and the b- - - - - -s are all over the globe.

You should be grateful that they haven't gotten any more of us here in the United States since September 11, but yo u're not. That's because you've got no idea how hard a small number of intelligence, military, law enforcement and homeland security people have worked to make sure of that. When this whole mess started, I warned you that this would be a long and difficult fight. I'm disappointed how many of you people think a long and difficult fight amounts to a single season of 'Survivor'.

Instead, you've grown impatient. You're incapable of seeing things through the long lens of history, the way our enemies do. You think that wars should last a few months, a few years, tops.

Making matters worse, you actively support those who help the enemy. Every time you buy the New York Times, every time you send a donation to a cut-and-run Democrat's political campaign, well, dammit, you might just as well Fedex a grenade launcher to a Jihadist. It amounts to the same thing.

In this day and age, it's easy enough to find the truth. It's all over the Internet.& nbsp; It just isn't on the pages of the New York Times or on NBC News (if in fact those media sources even CARE about the truth.) Even if it were, I doubt you'd be any smarter. Most of you would rather watch American Idol.

I could say more about your expectations that the government will always be there to bail you out, but you're too stupid to leave a city that's below sea level and has a hurricane approaching. I could say more about your inane belief that government, not your own wallet, is where the money comes from, but I've come to the conclusion that were I to do so, it would sail right over your heads.

So I quit. I'm going back to Crawford.

I've got an energy-efficient house down there (Al Gore could only dream) and the capability to be fully self-sufficient. No one ever heard of Crawford before I got elected, and as soon as I'm done here, pretty much no one will ever hear of it again. Maybe I'll be lucky enough to die of old age before the last pillars of America fall.

Oh, and by the way, Cheney's quitting too. That means Pelosi is your new President. You asked for it. Watch what she does carefully, because I still have a glimmer of hope that there are just enough of you remaining who are smart enough to turn this thing around in 2008.

So that's it. God bless what's left of America. Some of you know what I mean.

The rest of you, http://s4.images.proboards.com/huh.gif??????.

"W"

[Xi Bowhunter]

IMO, good riddance. He's done a terrible job, and had the lowest approval rating of any U.S. president. He lost the war because he doesn't know what he is doing. I could only pray that it happens this way and soon. I feel bad for him sometimes, and him resigning might save him the embarrassment of being impeached. If he's fed up with Americans then he should know by the polls and approval ratings that the vast majority of America is fed up with him. Go back to your ranch in Texas G.W., and save yourself further embarrassment.

[Multidigits]

I disagree that the war is lost.....troops in the field do as well. Comments like yours are an embrassesment, not the job that our president is doing in trying times.

[mmayes]

Multi- I rarely agree with your views this time I am 100% in agreement with that speach. The vast majority of Americans have no real clue as to what is going on. They let the loudest politicians and media "educate" them. No one thinks for themselves anymore.

Mayes

[turkeytalker]

War lost?Wow i never thought i'd hear a bowhunter give up and retreat,guess you stumble out of the woods after 30 minutes of hunting, kicking up leaves with a :( .

Oh well,those deer probaly didn't have any AMD's (Antlers of Mass Distraction) anyway.At least you be home in time to watch The View

[grouseguy]

Sounds to me it would be the best idea W ever had...problem is "it isn't his idea" and he'll never follow through with it, but I still like the thought.:D

[EKY.MTN.HUNTER]

I sure am glad the Bush administration decided to pick this fight. We'd all be screwed if Bush hadn't decided to go recovery all of saddam's weapons of mass destruction.:rolleyes: The world is much more safe now.

"Comments like yours are an embrassesment, not the job that our president is doing in trying times."- multi


Get real man. Have you just decided to overlook the fact that the Bush administration created a false basis which scared Americans into supporting an Iraq invasion? Is this no big deal to you multi? Why are we there (i want an answer)? If we went because of weapons, its clear we made a mistake, right?

Bush dug his own damn hole, he created these "trying times" that you refer to.

[Wildcat]

I sure am glad the Bush administration decided to pick this fight. We'd all be screwed if Bush hadn't decided to go recovery all of saddam's weapons of mass destruction.:rolleyes: The world is much more safe now.

"Comments like yours are an embrassesment, not the job that our president is doing in trying times."- multi


Get real man. Have you just decided to overlook the fact that the Bush administration created a false basis which scared Americans into supporting an Iraq invasion? Is this no big deal to you multi? Why are we there (i want an answer)? If we went because of weapons, its clear we made a mistake, right?

Bush dug his own damn hole, he created these "trying times" that you refer to.

Yep, I agree with you. It was the DEMOCRATS that first put out the FALSE basis!!

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

[kybowhunter64]

I disagree that the war is lost.....troops in the field do as well. Comments like yours are an embrassesment, not the job that our president is doing in trying times.


why are they an embrassement? So your saying George W. Bush is one of the best presidents that you've seen in your life time?;) Come on Multi.

[EKY.MTN.HUNTER]

January 26, 1998


The Honorable William J. Clinton
President of the United States
Washington, DC



Dear Mr. President:
We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor.
The policy of “containment” of Saddam Hussein has been steadily eroding over the past several months. As recent events have demonstrated, we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War coalition to continue to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections. Our ability to ensure that Saddam Hussein is not producing weapons of mass destruction, therefore, has substantially diminished. Even if full inspections were eventually to resume, which now seems highly unlikely, experience has shown that it is difficult if not impossible to monitor Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons production. The lengthy period during which the inspectors will have been unable to enter many Iraqi facilities has made it even less likely that they will be able to uncover all of Saddam’s secrets. As a result, in the not-too-distant future we will be unable to determine with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not possess such weapons.

Such uncertainty will, by itself, have a seriously destabilizing effect on the entire Middle East. It hardly needs to be added that if Saddam does acquire the capability to deliver weapons of mass destruction, as he is almost certain to do if we continue along the present course, the safety of American troops in the region, of our friends and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a significant portion of the world’s supply of oil will all be put at hazard. As you have rightly declared, Mr. President, the security of the world in the first part of the 21st century will be determined largely by how we handle this threat.

Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which depends for its success upon the steadfastness of our coalition partners and upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate. The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.
We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your Administration's attention to implementing a strategy for removing Saddam's regime from power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic, political and military efforts. Although we are fully aware of the dangers and difficulties in implementing this policy, we believe the dangers of failing to do so are far greater. We believe the U.S. has the authority under existing UN resolutions to take the necessary steps, including military steps, to protect our vital interests in the Gulf. In any case, American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council.
We urge you to act decisively. If you act now to end the threat of weapons of mass destruction against the U.S. or its allies, you will be acting in the most fundamental national security interests of the country. If we accept a course of weakness and drift, we put our interests and our future at risk.
Sincerely,
Elliott Abrams Richard L. Armitage William J. Bennett
Jeffrey Bergner John Bolton Paula Dobriansky
Francis Fukuyama Robert Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad
William Kristol Richard Perle Peter W. Rodman
Donald Rumsfeld William Schneider, Jr. Vin Weber
Paul Wolfowitz R. James Woolsey Robert B. Zoellick




Look at all the names on the bottom of this letter. They couldn't get Clinton to pick the fight, but they didn't have much trouble getting ole W to cowboy up. Hey if were fighting to "protect our vital interest in the middle east" that fine. But when you decide to actually start a war, let your peeps know what they're really supporting.

[turkeytalker]

Wildcat do you mean to tell me that President Bush wasn't setting around the ranch one day and said hey Dick let's go get that Saddam feller?

Do you mean to tell me that he didn't fool all but 13 democrats into voting to go to war?

Do you mean to tell me that he didn't make the CIA and other international intelligence agencies comply with his agenda?


YEAH RIGHT!:cool: ,i guess you're also gonna tell me he didn't steal the election.

Please Wildcat don't piss on the liberals parade anymore:D

[mmayes]

I didn't know this forum was SO liberal leaning. That suprises me.

Mayes

[Xi Bowhunter]

War lost?Wow i never thought i'd hear a bowhunter give up and retreat,guess you stumble out of the woods after 30 minutes of hunting, kicking up leaves with a :( .

Oh well,those deer probaly didn't have any AMD's (Antlers of Mass Distraction) anyway.At least you be home in time to watch The View
If you don't have anything intelligent to contribute to the conversation then why don't you just stay out? I gave my opinion about the first post, and all you have to say is slanderous remarks about my hunting ability. You didn't post anything about the subject. My hunting ability has nothing to do with this post. At least I have an opinion that I am not afraid to voice. Lets hear your "vision" of whats going on with the American President right now, I'm sure it's a HOOT:rolleyes:

[Xi Bowhunter]

I didn't know this forum was SO liberal leaning. That suprises me.

Mayes
Liberal leaning?! Man you got it wrong. If you are any where close to liberal you are the scum of the earth:rolleyes:

[slickhead slayer]

Get real man. Have you just decided to overlook the fact that the Bush administration created a false basis which scared Americans into supporting an Iraq invasion? .

You were just shown that Clinton, Gore, Hillary, Allbright, Sen Levins, daschle, Pelosi, kerry and other Dems all claimed this "false basis" years before Bush ever took office.
Anyone who claims Bush created this is just showing their ignorance.
In hindsight, I wish we hadn't gone into Iraq either. But to suggest the claims were made up is nothing but partisan garbage.

[Multidigits]

Liberal leaning?! Man you got it wrong. If you are any where close to liberal you are the scum of the earth:rolleyes:


Finally, we agree on politics in general. ;) (just kidding?)

[Xi Bowhunter]

Finally, we agree on politics in general. ;) (just kidding?)
Hey, even I don't agree with everything the libs do and say:eek:. Both sides have gone way to far from the middle ground.

[mmayes]

Hey I am not a liberal by a long shot. I was just suprised at all those who want to claim Bush is the root of all evil isn't that the rhetoric all the liberals spew all the time. I personally like this President. Like it or not he has stayed the course he said he would. clinton always sided w/the polling data. I personally held clinton in contempt for his lack of leadership and charactor.

Mayes

[Multidigits]

Hey, even I don't agree with everything the libs do and say:eek:. Both sides have gone way to far from the middle ground.

That's crap....if you vote for them, then you are condoning EVERYTHING they do when they ae in. Can you honestly say you could approve of Pelosi being president????

[Xi Bowhunter]

That's crap....if you vote for them, then you are condoning EVERYTHING they do when they ae in. Can you honestly say you could approve of Pelosi being president????
No I don't condone everything they say and do, that is not how it works when your options are limited to one side or the other. What do you want me to do, not VOTE because I don't agree with everything one side or the other says? I have to take the good with the bad. And I happen to agree with more Democrat policies than republican ones. I will continue to vote for what party I agree with the most and who I think will do the best job in the country's best interest. What exactly do you do when you vote? Do you actually agree with EVERYTHING your party says and does?

[mmayes]

XI- just a question not to stir up trouble. You say the majority of the things you agree with are from the democratic party. What are those thing you agree with most? I am curious thats all.

Mayes

[turkeytalker]

If you don't have anything intelligent to contribute to the conversation then why don't you just stay out? I gave my opinion about the first post, and all you have to say is slanderous remarks about my hunting ability. You didn't post anything about the subject. My hunting ability has nothing to do with this post. At least I have an opinion that I am not afraid to voice. Lets hear your "vision" of whats going on with the American President right now, I'm sure it's a HOOT:rolleyes:



I said nothing of you'r hunting ability,but i sense it rubbed a rash on you so i'm sorry:o .DO YOU CARE TO APOLOGIZE TO THE BRAVE MEN AND WOMEN WHO ARE KICKING THE @#$% OUT OF TERRORISTS TO PROTECT MY CHILDREN NOW?

[killinmammals]

I like Bush, he has made a mistake or 2 hear and there, but what freaking president hasn't. I liked that letter Multi. I know where my vote is going, but that doesn't mean I agree with everything the party says...hell both are corrupt and lie....come on, they are polititions!:D

[KYhunter79]

Wow. The rampant liberalism in a HUNTING FORUM no less is surprising to say the least.

[Xi Bowhunter]

If you don't have anything intelligent to contribute to the conversation then why don't you just stay out? I gave my opinion about the first post, and all you have to say is slanderous remarks about my hunting ability. You didn't post anything about the subject. My hunting ability has nothing to do with this post. At least I have an opinion that I am not afraid to voice. Lets hear your "vision" of whats going on with the American President right now, I'm sure it's a HOOT:rolleyes:



I said nothing of you'r hunting ability,but i sense it rubbed a rash on you so i'm sorry:o .DO YOU CARE TO APOLOGIZE TO THE BRAVE MEN AND WOMEN WHO ARE KICKING THE @#$% OUT OF TERRORISTS TO PROTECT MY CHILDREN NOW?

I have never said anything going against the troops. They are there doing their job and I commend them for it. However, they are not in control, they take their orders from the Prez and his staff. They are just doing what they are told to do, and doing the best they can I'm sure. If any troops take my comments as bashing them, I apologize, they are not intended that way. They are over there doing the job that I cannot do, because of injury reasons, and I feel sorry for them that they are even put in that situation.

[Xi Bowhunter]

XI- just a question not to stir up trouble. You say the majority of the things you agree with are from the democratic party. What are those thing you agree with most? I am curious thats all.

Mayes
I believe in the standard rule adopted by the early Democratic party : "Do unto others as you would have done unto you". I like the way they analyze rules and laws and try to change with the times and the changing people. We are not the same nation we were 100 years ago. I DO NOT agree with every policy of the far left, and I try to stay in the middle ground. I don't think that just because you are an American, it gives you the right to do what ever you want to who ever you want with no repercussions. For example, I don't agree with abortion, but I am not for taking away the rights of women to make their own decisions. A common ground should be found to prevent abortions, but also give the mother options if it is an unwanted pregnancy. I am for gun control to prevent crime, criminals ever owning a gun, and strict background checks, but I am opposed to taking away gun rights totally. IMO, there can be a middle ground that makes sense to most people with some compromise from both sides.

[slickhead slayer]

I believe in the standard rule adopted by the early Democratic party : "Do unto others as you would have done unto you". .

I sure didn't know the Dems had a monopoly on that statement. Like Mmays, I am curious as to your comment about agreeing with more Democrat policies. Can you give us 5 or 6 policies of the Dems that you agree with?

[huntr467]

Let's start local. You've been sold a bill of goods by politicians and the news media. Polls show that the majority of you think the economy is in the tank, and that's despite record numbers of homeowners including record numbers of MINORITY homeowners.
I have a problem with this statement. With risinig costs of health care, taxes, energy, food, gas and everything else in this country, everywhere in this country, the increasing number of home foreclosures due to that great increase in home owners who got subprime loans (minorities), the increase or lack of home owners insurance in FL, Miss, AL, and La due to hurricanes, how many of you can really say you are better of than you were several yrs ago? The middle american is struggling, the small businesses are struggling, Its a great economy for the wealthy and the corporate world but it is not for the majority of this country.
I voted for Bush and the one reason over all others was I felt like he would not take my guns from me...not so sure about the other options. Bush is about as a matter a fact a guy as we have had in a long time. I support his stance on the war...... But, We need to turn our attention to this country and get it back on track and control some of our issues here at home before its too late. It is evident that we are fighting a battle that we are not going to win. they have foughty for thjousands of years and will continue fighting no matter waht we do.

[buckfever]

I believe in the standard rule adopted by the early Democratic party : "Do unto others as you would have done unto you". . . . .For example, I don't agree with abortion, but I am not for taking away the rights of women to make their own decisions. A common ground should be found to prevent abortions, but also give the mother options if it is an unwanted pregnancy. .

Interesting dichotomy of viewpoints. . . .On the one hand, you don't agree with abortions. The only reason anyone would be against abortions on any level is b/c you give the fetus some standing in your mind as a living person.

On the other hand, you strive to abide by the golden rule of "do unto others".

Hmmm. . . .I wonder if those aborted fetuses are feeling all that love.

All those golden rules are fine and dandy and all, until they become inconvenient.

[Xi Bowhunter]

I sure didn't know the Dems had a monopoly on that statement. Like Mmays, I am curious as to your comment about agreeing with more Democrat policies. Can you give us 5 or 6 policies of the Dems that you agree with?
You know as well as I do that they don't have a "monopoly" on that statement:rolleyes: it is just sort of a mission statement adopted by the early democratic party. And why should I explain what I believe in to you, so you can just bash my ideas and tell me why I am so stupid? These political arguments go no where, you can't voice an opinion without getting some smart *** comment, and nobody takes the time to think about what people believe in. The mentality is that you don't think like me so you are just wrong and let's find the best way to make fun of you.

[Xi Bowhunter]

Interesting dichotomy of viewpoints. . . .On the one hand, you don't agree with abortions. The only reason anyone would be against abortions on any level is b/c you give the fetus some standing in your mind as a living person.

On the other hand, you strive to abide by the golden rule of "do unto others".

Hmmm. . . .I wonder if those aborted fetuses are feeling all that love.

All those golden rules are fine and dandy and all, until they become inconvenient.
What's so confusing about this? I don't believe in abortion, but if the mother doesn't want the child, there should be alternatives to abortion to avoid killing the child or having it raised in a family by a mother that resents it was ever born.

[Xi Bowhunter]

Interesting dichotomy of viewpoints. . . .On the one hand, you don't agree with abortions. The only reason anyone would be against abortions on any level is b/c you give the fetus some standing in your mind as a living person.

On the other hand, you strive to abide by the golden rule of "do unto others".

Hmmm. . . .I wonder if those aborted fetuses are feeling all that love.

All those golden rules are fine and dandy and all, until they become inconvenient.
By the way, sorry I try to live a "Christian" life style, it's just my way you know. Sometimes doing the right thing by God takes full president over the thinking of man.;)

[turkeytalker]

Now thats one thing the democratic party stands for "A Christian Lifestyle":eek:

[buckfever]

What's so confusing about this? I don't believe in abortion, but if the mother doesn't want the child, there should be alternatives to abortion to avoid killing the child or having it raised in a family by a mother that resents it was ever born.

Yep, but it's just what I said earlier - "All those golden rules are fine and dandy and all, until they become inconvenient."

It's infinitely easier and more convenient for the mother to abort the baby than to take up the "alternatives".

I'm not casting stones here, but I just don't see how it's possible to rationalize anyone committing an abortion (if you believe we're actually talking about infants) as being somehow associated with being Christian.

Seems to me that Christianity would place the life of any person, regardless of how small and undeveloped, over the selfish needs of the parents that created the child in the first place.

I'm not saying that there's any easy answers out there to solve the problem of unwanted babies, but abortion and Christianity don't seem to fit together in my book.

[PhilpotHunter]

Man XI, you are taking a beating!:eek:

Bush is leaving soon, and for that I thank God.

I just talked to a Marine today that just returned from Iraq on his 3rd tour of duty there. We were talking about some security clearence paperwork issues he was having, and I asked his opinion about what was going on. He said, "Thank God we are getting out in March of 08, because nothing is changing over there". When I told him that Bush vetoed that, he said"Huh, that sucks. Well, look at it this way, at least our boys are getting some good combat experience. The ones that aren't having mental problems when they get back anyways."

He will return to Iraq as soon as he finishes up some more training. He has no problem fighting for his country. He believes he was put on this earth to be a Marine. But even he believes it is time to get out.

[PhilpotHunter]

Yep, but it's just what I said earlier - "All those golden rules are fine and dandy and all, until they become inconvenient."

It's infinitely easier and more convenient for the mother to abort the baby than to take up the "alternatives".

I'm not casting stones here, but I just don't see how it's possible to rationalize anyone committing an abortion (if you believe we're actually talking about infants) as being somehow associated with being Christian.

Seems to me that Christianity would place the life of any person, regardless of how small and undeveloped, over the selfish needs of the parents that created the child in the first place.

I'm not saying that there's any easy answers out there to solve the problem of unwanted babies, but abortion and Christianity don't seem to fit together in my book.


I think he (XI) is in agreement with you on that one Buck

[Xi Bowhunter]

Man XI, you are taking a beating!:eek:

Bush is leaving soon, and for that I thank God.

I just talked to a Marine today that just returned from Iraq on his 3rd tour of duty there. We were talking about some security clearence paperwork issues he was having, and I asked his opinion about what was going on. He said, "Thank God we are getting out in March of 08, because nothing is changing over there". When I told him that Bush vetoed that, he said"Huh, that sucks. Well, look at it this way, at least our boys are getting some good combat experience. The ones that aren't having mental problems when they get back anyways."

He will return to Iraq as soon as he finishes up some more training. He has no problem fighting for his country. He believes he was put on this earth to be a Marine. But even he believes it is time to get out.
I always do Philpot....I always do.:o

Buck, I think I took your comment wrong, sorry. I think we are on the same page now.

[buckfever]

I think he (XI) is in agreement with you on that one Buck

No, I don't think he is. He said he was against abortion, but against taking away the right of a woman to choose.

I'm not trying to bash Xi either. I just don't think that Christians (who actually believe that aborted fetuses are infants) can justify the concept of "abortion" on the grounds of societal convenience.

I guess the logic is sort of. . . "I'm against abortion personally, b/c I think it's un-Christian to kill another living person, but I'm against the Gov't stopping a woman from killing their infant b/c it's her choice."

What the Church says about human life is not the same thing as what the Supreme Court (in Roe v. Wade) says about it, and you cannot, as a Christian, ever escape that reality.

No political party is a religious party, b/c both hold views that are inconsistent with the teachings of Christianity.

[aceoky]

No political party is a religious party, b/c both hold views that are inconsistent with the teachings of Christianity.

I think you meant to say "neither" party???.....There are plenty of "religious parties" out there in the world.....as the fighting in the middle east proves ;)

Also "Religion" and Christianity are not the same thing, while Christianity IS a religion so is Satanism, only to mention one exactly opposite of Christianity.... :)

Islam is a religion and there are many political factions of it, and they ALL want us (Christians and Jews).... (and everyone in fact NOT Muslim e.g. "infidels" to them) Killed...And for "their particular faction to "rule"....not very Christian but a Religion still......IMO

[Xi Bowhunter]

No, I don't think he is. He said he was against abortion, but against taking away the right of a woman to choose.

I'm not trying to bash Xi either. I just don't think that Christians (who actually believe that aborted fetuses are infants) can justify the concept of "abortion" on the grounds of societal convenience.

I guess the logic is sort of. . . "I'm against abortion personally, b/c I think it's un-Christian to kill another living person, but I'm against the Gov't stopping a woman from killing their infant b/c it's her choice."

What the Church says about human life is not the same thing as what the Supreme Court (in Roe v. Wade) says about it, and you cannot, as a Christian, ever escape that reality.

No political party is a religious party, b/c both hold views that are inconsistent with the teachings of Christianity.
I didn't give enough details. I am against abortion, but for a womans right to choose an "alternative" way of giving up the baby. If a woman doesn't want the child, don't just kill it, but find some other way to give it up so it doesn't have to die, but the mother doesn't have to take care of it. I am against abortion of any kind 100% and I don't think it should even be a choice.

[Multidigits]

I didn't give enough details. I am against abortion, but for a womans right to choose an "alternative" way of giving up the baby. If a woman doesn't want the child, don't just kill it, but find some other way to give it up so it doesn't have to die, but the mother doesn't have to take care of it. I am against abortion of any kind 100% and I don't think it should even be a choice.

How many UNWANTED babies are you raising?????

[turkeytalker]

The Consequences of Roe v. Wade
48,589,993Total Abortions since 1973


Hard to believe any Christian could even be in the same group as these murderers.

[mmayes]

XI- you say you are for gun control. How about a comprimise the govt enforces the laws we have now. Any new gun control measures just hurt the law abiding citizens and do nothing to prevent criminals from possesing firearms.

I am not trying to create a stir just have a civil discussion here. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

The Democratic party today is unfortunately run by the extreme left. There are some good middle of the road people, but they are overshadowed by the Pelosi's, clintons, Jesse Jackons etc. He who shouts the loudest gets his/her way.

Mayes

[Xi Bowhunter]

XI- you say you are for gun control. How about a comprimise the govt enforces the laws we have now. Any new gun control measures just hurt the law abiding citizens and do nothing to prevent criminals from possesing firearms.

I am not trying to create a stir just have a civil discussion here. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

The Democratic party today is unfortunately run by the extreme left. There are some good middle of the road people, but they are overshadowed by the Pelosi's, clintons, Jesse Jackons etc. He who shouts the loudest gets his/her way.

Mayes
That is part of the problem. Not everyone in the "left" is evil, but the "nuts" are the ones that get all the attention.

[Xi Bowhunter]

How many UNWANTED babies are you raising?????
Multi, you are usually pretty insightful, but what point are you trying to make here?:confused: Just because I'm not raising UNWANTED children doesn't mean I don't have an opinion about the abortion issue.

[Multidigits]

Multi, you are usually pretty insightful, but what point are you trying to make here?:confused: Just because I'm not raising UNWANTED children doesn't mean I don't have an opinion about the abortion issue.


Your opinion is selfish and not practical. You don't want abortion as an option, yet your not stepping up to help place one of those unwanted children in a home. For everyone of those abortions, somebody else had to do it. The point is that you just want to problem to go away and offer no solution. The solution is that YOU need to support some of those babies if you don't support the mothers right to abort.

[Auk1124]

That is part of the problem. Not everyone in the "left" is evil, but the "nuts" are the ones that get all the attention.

Eh, same way with both parties. The squeaky wheels on the fringes get greased on both sides of the aisle. Someone ought to revive one of those old defunct parties from days gone by (Bull Moose? Know-Nothing? Free Soil?) and come up with a centrist platform. Someone that isn't insane, like Perot of Jesse the Body. Might be surprising how much support they'd get.

[Auk1124]

The solution is that YOU need to support some of those babies if you don't support the mothers right to abort.

Interesting. If everyone that opposed abortion would pay for the delivery and take an unwanted baby or two home, no need for abortion.

I don't see it happening though. Nah, not very practical either.

[Xi Bowhunter]

Your opinion is selfish and not practical. You don't want abortion as an option, yet your not stepping up to help place one of those unwanted children in a home. For everyone of those abortions, somebody else had to do it. The point is that you just want to problem to go away and offer no solution. The solution is that YOU need to support some of those babies if you don't support the mothers right to abort.

Ok, so me not wanting to see babies killed in abortion is selfish? Wanting alternatives to abortion is selfish? Sending the unwanted children to foster care, adoption, or orphanages is a better solution to aborting them IMO. How is that selfish? There are plenty of Americans who go to other countrys to adopt when they could be adopting HERE if the process were a little faster and simpler. How have any of my statements even remotely pointed in the direction that I just want the problem to "go away"? Come on and man up, are you actually FOR abortion? You sure are pointing yourself in that direction. If wanting to find an alternative to killing thousands of babies each year is selfish then label me selfish.

[turkeytalker]

Interesting. If everyone that opposed abortion would pay for the delivery and take an unwanted baby or two home, no need for abortion.

I don't see it happening though. Nah, not very practical either.

Auk,unless its a rape maybe the women shouldn't lay down spread eagle so much.

Conservatives are all about PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY,liberals are all about blaming someone else.

[Multidigits]

Interesting. If everyone that opposed abortion would pay for the delivery and take an unwanted baby or two home, no need for abortion.

I don't see it happening though. Nah, not very practical either.

Typical, another one that wants "someone else" to carry the load. Bad thing is, we're running out of those "someone elses".

[Auk1124]

Typical, another one that wants "someone else" to carry the load. Bad thing is, we're running out of those "someone elses".

Well I assume you are opposed to abortion (and BTW before you start spouting "typical" sneers I never said I was for abortion, matter of fact I'm opposed) and I suppose you have a house full of unwanted kids that you paid to be delivered that would make Angelina and Brad green with envy.

Before you start casting stones check your own conscience.

[trust me]

I knew a girl that had two abortions before she graduated high school. She tried for a third shortly after and the doctors wouldn't do it, for what reason I'm not sure, whether medical or otherwise. My wife's friend had an abortion when she got pregnant right after marriage; the timing just wasn't right, she said.

That's the only abortions I'm personally aware of and none were necessary and all could have been avoided, either by abstinence or acceptance of responsibility.

[Multidigits]

Well I assume you are opposed to abortion (and BTW before you start spouting "typical" sneers I never said I was for abortion, matter of fact I'm opposed) and I suppose you have a house full of unwanted kids that you paid to be delivered that would make Angelina and Brad green with envy.

Before you start casting stones check your own conscience.

You assumed wrong. A mother should have a right to choose. The care of those million babies that would have been aborted need not be a drain on the tax payers. Those that want it stopped, should put their name in the pot and take some of the load.

[Xi Bowhunter]

I knew a girl that had two abortions before she graduated high school. She tried for a third shortly after and the doctors wouldn't do it, for what reason I'm not sure, whether medical or otherwise. My wife's friend had an abortion when she got pregnant right after marriage; the timing just wasn't right, she said.

That's the only abortions I'm personally aware of and none were necessary and all could have been avoided, either by abstinence or acceptance of responsibility.
I know a married couple who drove a young girl and her mother to an abortion clinic years ago to have an abortion performed because the daughter and mother didn't have a car and they wanted it done because he child was conceived out of wedlock. This couple has never forgiven themselves for just driving the girl and her mother to the clinic, and that was over 20 years ago.

[Xi Bowhunter]

You assumed wrong. A mother should have a right to choose. The care of those million babies that would have been aborted need not be a drain on the tax payers. Those that want it stopped, should put their name in the pot and take some of the load.
So you are the selfish one who doesn't want to pay any more "TAXES" to support the life of a child that would have otherwise been killed?

[Auk1124]

That's the only abortions I'm personally aware of and none were necessary and all could have been avoided, either by abstinence or acceptance of responsibility.

Exactly and that is why I don't like abortion - it ducks the responsibility for bringing a child into this world. But at the same time I don't see the law changing very much either, and I don't think anyone has a practical solution that will work. I don't know of anyone who has an answer that will work. Its a shame because I think Multi actually had a very good solution - easier and cheaper adoptions, but at the same time I don't think it would work as a practical matter.

[turkeytalker]

XI, I would love to say you're like the majority of my family that the democrat party has left,but you seem to understand(unlike my family) all of the present liberal positions.Thats why i think you're a true liberal.My family are FDR democrats not Klintonites.

They have no quarter for any talk of gun control or abortion,but still agree with SOME social issues.Anyway after soul searching they have not voted the last 4 cycles,their party has left them.

I would love to send you a book called "A Party No More",it will help you.I'm sure you are a good Christian with a pure heart and if so you will recognize whats going on.

[Xi Bowhunter]

XI, I would love to say you're like the majority of my family that the democrat party has left,but you seem to understand(unlike my family) all of the present liberal positions.Thats why i think you're a true liberal.My family are FDR democrats not Klintonites.

They have no quarter for any talk of gun control or abortion,but still agree with SOME social issues.Anyway after soul searching they have not voted the last 4 cycles,their party has left them.

I would love to send you a book called "A Party No More",it will help you.I'm sure you are a good Christian with a pure heart and if so you will recognize whats going on.
I would be more than happy to read your book, I may even learn something. I am always up to reading about different points of view. Just don't be too upset if I don't come out of the reading a changed man, but stranger things have happened.

[Multidigits]

So you are the selfish one who doesn't want to pay any more "TAXES" to support the life of a child that would have otherwise been killed?


Yeah, I'm pretty much against welfare and free handouts all the way arround. Pretty much been working a job now for 45 years and really tried of spending the money when there is no reason for some of those having the babies to stop having the babies. The more they have, the more money they get in the mail. As ole Barney once said - Nip it, nip it in the bud...:cool:

[Xi Bowhunter]

Yeah, I'm pretty much against welfare and free handouts all the way arround. Pretty much been working a job now for 45 years and really tried of spending the money when there is no reason for some of those having the babies to stop having the babies. The more they have, the more money they get in the mail. As ole Barney once said - Nip it, nip it in the bud...:cool:
Ok, I LOVE that quote.:) I see your point, but IMO, every conception deserves a chance at life, welfare or not.

[Multidigits]

Ok, I LOVE that quote.:) I see your point, but IMO, every conception deserves a chance at life, welfare or not.

Back to square one....how many are you going to adopt and raise. The part your not getting is that by the time the mother decides to abort, she's not willing to do it, one way or the other. That leaves YOU pal, because you don't want her to have the option behind door #1.

[turkeytalker]

Being an equal oppurtunity basher,MULTI you are no different than any other liberal.You shouldn't have to pay my kids way,if i'm man or woman enough to have sex i'm man or woman enough to feed them.If you look back through history you'll see that babies wasn't popping out of babies when it was hard to feed you'r self much less a child,when you actually had to work to eat.

You're theory is socialism at best,kinda like XI not demanding that the liberals come back to earth,you're saying that its better to kill a baby than demanding reform of our tax system,welfare system,and PRESIDENT BUSH'S more of the same socialist programs thats dooming the country.

President Bush's only failure has been more of the same,on National Security he will go down in history as one of the best presidents in history and his legacy will stick unlike klintons feel good 70ish lovefest that bred osama bin laden in Africa.

[HillBillyFiveO]

So you are the selfish one who doesn't want to pay any more "TAXES" to support the life of a child that would have otherwise been killed?

Matt,

I'll have to agree with Multi on this one.

A true liberal opinion, you possess. Just jack up the taxes and let everyone else pay for it. If you wanna pay for these bastard children, pay for 'em my friend. Me, I'm quite tired of seeing my money go to free-loading, non-working, baby machines who aren't old enough to work but are coddled because they now have a child. Health care is expensive some say. Not for the freeloaders. Housing expensive? Not for the freeloaders.

I'll tell ya what, I'll keep what I earn and you keep what you earn. Please, just stay out of my pocket. I get sick of some people believing that the rich don't pay enough taxes. It's their freakin' money and they EARNED it. More than I can say for a good portion of society.

Floyd T.

[turkeytalker]

Ok Multi,apparently you can type faster than me

[turkeytalker]

I would be more than happy to read your book, I may even learn something. I am always up to reading about different points of view. Just don't be too upset if I don't come out of the reading a changed man, but stranger things have happened.


Is Philpot around Breckinridge County?Rough River Lake?

[HillBillyFiveO]

I am for gun control to prevent crime, criminals ever owning a gun, and strict background checks, but I am opposed to taking away gun rights totally. IMO, there can be a middle ground that makes sense to most people with some compromise from both sides.

This typifies the belief that the Gov't should take care of you. Aside from the idiot in Virginia, most crimes are committed by "illegally" obtained weapons. If we just enforce the laws on the books, and hold the criminals accountable with stiffer sentences, we don't need stiffer gun laws. Gun control has never worked and never will.

Since it is your belief, and you mentioned a "middle ground" compromise, what is your idea for this? No really, I'm sure you've thought of a solution for the problems guns create.

You can give away your rights, and money, but please leave mine alone.

Floyd T.

[Xi Bowhunter]

Is Philpot around Breckinridge County?Rough River Lake?
I am 30 mins from rough river lake. Just down hwy 54

[Xi Bowhunter]

Matt,


Just jack up the taxes and let everyone else pay for it.

I pay taxes, just the same as you. Letting everyone else pay for it has ME included.

[turkeytalker]

I am 30 mins from rough river lake. Just down hwy 54


You know where McDaniels is at?There is a store/bait shop right beside the lake and i've worked on that slope in front of it for about two months,next time i'm up there i'll leave it with the store owner who is a heck of a nice guy.I'll let you know when you can pick it up

[Xi Bowhunter]

You know where McDaniels is at?There is a store/bait shop right beside the lake and i've worked on that slope in front of it for about two months,next time i'm up there i'll leave it with the store owner who is a heck of a nice guy.I'll let you know when you can pick it up
I'll be up there as soon as my boat gets back from the shop to do some fishing, I'll be sure to pick it up and give it a read.

[HillBillyFiveO]

I pay taxes, just the same as you. Letting everyone else pay for it has ME included.

Correct! And if you don't mind giving more of your hard earned money to these slackers, then more power to you. Just please leave MY money alone. The welfare system is an absolute joke and needs to be seriously overhauled. Screw more gun laws, revamp/eliminate this no return, money pit! :mad:

Floyd T.

[Art]

After reading through a couple of pages of this I have once again come to the conclusion that it's not our President (or any politician) who is killing America, it's our own people. This country is going in the wrong direction at speeds much greater then any of us can imagine and it has nothing to do with Bush. He's just a small tree in the path of the avalanche.

Life has been made too easy for the citizens of this country. People have forgotten what it's like to work and to fight for what you have outside of a Starbuck's or a Play Station 3. If times are good then it's only because of you, if times are bad it's because of someone else and they owe you. If someone has it better than you, then they deserve to have it taken away.

Personally, I love talking to older people and listening to their wisdom. I love to hear how the people think that made this country great before they all die off. This country won't be worth a damn in 50 years, probably less, with the people we are turning out of our institutions that are getting to the controls by default. Everyone talks about a civil war in Iraq, but IMO we have one going on right here, right now. It's just not a traditional war of blood and guts, but more of an ideological war.

[Wildcat]

After reading through a couple of pages of this I have once again come to the conclusion that it's not our President (or any politician) who is killing America, it's our own people. This country is going in the wrong direction at speeds much greater then any of us can imagine and it has nothing to do with Bush. He's just a small tree in the path of the avalanche.

Life has been made too easy for the citizens of this country. People have forgotten what it's like to work and to fight for what you have outside of a Starbuck's or a Play Station 3. If times are good then it's only because of you, if times are bad it's because of someone else and they owe you. If someone has it better than you, then they deserve to have it taken away.

Personally, I love talking to older people and listening to their wisdom. I love to hear how the people think that made this country great before they all die off. This country won't be worth a damn in 50 years, probably less, with the people we are turning out of our institutions that are getting to the controls by default. Everyone talks about a civil war in Iraq, but IMO we have one going on right here, right now. It's just not a traditional war of blood and guts, but more of an ideological war.

Good post Art, I agree.

[huntr467]

[/QUOTE]Everyone talks about a civil war in Iraq, but IMO we have one going on right here, right now. It's just not a traditional war of blood and guts, but more of an ideological war[QUOTE]

Everyone tries to blame the other for whats not going their way. Whether it be a racial, politaical party, income level, nationality, or gender differences.
THis country was built on diversity not division. I don't think our founding fathers really invisioned the problems of the whole melting pot theory after 200 some odd yrs. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that it just ain't working. But its not our presidents or any other governments faults, it's the peoples just as ART stated. Rep. or Dem. neither can solve all the problems and both are guilty of contributing to the problems... I don't know how or have any ideas, but like someone else posted earlier, we need to get back to the middle ground and do whats best for the country. We could make a good start by getting rid of all the lobbyist in washington.
One ol fella told me "this would be a great place to live if it weren't for the lawyers, polititions and a few other groups I won't mention."

[B.G.O. of Kentucky]

Multi- I rarely agree with your views this time I am 100% in agreement with that speach. The vast majority of Americans have no real clue as to what is going on. They let the loudest politicians and media "educate" them. No one thinks for themselves anymore.

Mayes


I have to say I agree too. I would have liked to see Clinton in office during these past 6-7 years. Our country would be in the poor house. I think we were wrong about the WMD's, but Sadaam needing to be brought to justice. I do feel we are fighting an unwinnable war, like drugs.

Clinton was president during the tech stock boom, I could have made the economy flourish as "he" did.

Bush is a moron, but economy wise, we are much better off than I thought we would be after 9/11.

[mmayes]

Art insiteful post. Thanks. I agree 100%

For those who are talking about welfare. How much do you really know? I can with reasonable certainty tell you all you want to know. Why you ask, because that is the job I perform for the State and Fed gov't here in Kentucky. I have worked foodstamp and medicade cases for over 5 years.

The welfare system would truly shock most people that have never been around it. I know when i first started my eyes were opened wide. They system on a whole is wasteful and a drain on our state and country as a whole. Now the other side of the coin is take it away and you don't hurt the adults on the system you hurt the kids. I have no solution to how do you make adults stand up and take responsibility for their actions.


Mayes

[slickhead slayer]

I have a problem with this statement. With risinig costs of health care, taxes, energy, food, gas and everything else in this country, everywhere in this country, the increasing number of home foreclosures due to that great increase in home owners who got subprime loans (minorities), the increase or lack of home owners insurance in FL, Miss, AL, and La due to hurricanes, how many of you can really say you are better of than you were several yrs ago? The middle american is struggling, the small businesses are struggling, Its a great economy for the wealthy and the corporate world but it is not for the majority of this country.
.

A couple things. The numbers show that very few things are rising. Taxes certainly aren't. They were lowered across the board for all that work. Record homeownership means record foreclosures. The largest debt to most American families is their mortgage payment, they are considerable lower after the low interest rates.
I am middle America, and yes I can say I am doing MUCH better. I am not sure how most middle Americans couldn't be better off than before. Taxes were lowered for all of us, which means we are all keeping more of our money. My largest expense, my home mortgage, dropped significantly.
With my taxes lowered and my largest expense lower, I have no complaints.

[big300mag]

I'm not a die hard Bush supporter. I'm a very conservative thinker who looks past party affiliations to hopefully vote for the best man for the job! A lot of the arguements I hear, especially from the left side of the arguement, tends to be based a lot on personal feelings and opinions rather than on facts! Now I'm not saying that Bush has been a great or even good President, but to hear some of the b.s. that's said about him and knowing what these same people probably thought about Clinton is enough to make me want to puke! If you were a Clinton supporter, and you feel that he was one of our greatest Presidents, than you have already proven that your opinion is hardly worth listening to.

[big300mag]

After reading through a couple of pages of this I have once again come to the conclusion that it's not our President (or any politician) who is killing America, it's our own people. This country is going in the wrong direction at speeds much greater then any of us can imagine and it has nothing to do with Bush. He's just a small tree in the path of the avalanche.

Life has been made too easy for the citizens of this country. People have forgotten what it's like to work and to fight for what you have outside of a Starbuck's or a Play Station 3. If times are good then it's only because of you, if times are bad it's because of someone else and they owe you. If someone has it better than you, then they deserve to have it taken away.

Personally, I love talking to older people and listening to their wisdom. I love to hear how the people think that made this country great before they all die off. This country won't be worth a damn in 50 years, probably less, with the people we are turning out of our institutions that are getting to the controls by default. Everyone talks about a civil war in Iraq, but IMO we have one going on right here, right now. It's just not a traditional war of blood and guts, but more of an ideological war.


Amen, Art! Well said and ooow so true!

[beaver396]

Taking Saddam out of power was the worst thing we could have done, and now we are living with the reprcusions. I know quite a few of our soldiers that have came back with the same mind set.

Saddam was a brutal SOB but, he kept his country in line. Something that we arent able to do. Those idiots over there do not understand rules unless it is enforced with several shots to the head.

I am not a Saddam supporter, but what happens now to that country that had some kinda of ruleing that no longer has any ruleing, It goes to turmoil which is what its in now.

The only reason we are there now is because if we leave then iran takes over. Iran would have never taken over if we had left saddam there, and he would stil be in power keeping that poor chicken **** country in line.

Can someone tell me what staying the course is going to do? what has it done? it is pretty hard to fight a fight against a country with no army or leader.

One this about vietnam that was better is there was a clear enemy, and we had the total support of one part of that country.

WE clearly have no support of the people of iraq. so why do we help them?



A simple solution is we leave that place and blow any country away that tries to intervene. Let them sort it ou on thier own.

[eddiejohn4]

There are many reasons that Saddam needed to be removed. Saddam was funding and training terrorists in his country and had been for some time. this is cheackable. just type in Saddams ties to terrorists. Saddam paid the families of suicide bombers for the americans that they killed . easily checkable. Saddam invaded another country in which we made him take his hand out of the cookie jar. this did not endear us to him.

Saddam had WMDS and used them. so that old bs he did not have them does not hold up. what he did with them that is the question. Rather then fight anymore over it I yhink this administration has made the decision to cut their loss there and move on. But mark my word he had them.


Saddam gave sancuary to many terrorists that killed americans and some of them we killed right in bagdad. this is also easy for those that seek the truth. hard to dispute the pics of their dead bodies. but you will not see this on the news.

We have given the Iraqis their chance at freedom. but if they chose instead to kill each other then so be it. But we cannot give sancuary or another country to these barbarians that have been killing us for thirty years.

Take a look at the statements made by AL qaeda's second in control made yesterday and maybe some will wake up to the nature of these goofs. They want you dead period and again this was stated that they want 300,000 of us dead now.


I served in a special force unit for 8 years and Im telling you this is the fight that was waged on us thirty years ago. This will not go away because some of our senators want to run and play nice. Or as Pelosi stated the road to peace is through Syria. Is she nuts, these are the people that killed 241 of my brothers in Beruit in 1983. And have helped to kill many many more of us. we will fight now or lets all wait for them to develop some nukes and then see if the pansies in this country want to fight then.

Did all think that Iraq was going to be a fast battle ground. this is a long hard fight. And Iraq will take many years ,but I am afraid Bush is right you have to start by planting the tree of freedom to give it any chance to grow. And only through the people that yearn for freedom will a change take place. I n the mean time lets kill the bas----s

[grouser68]

There are many reasons that Saddam needed to be removed. Saddam was funding and training terrorists in his country and had been for some time. this is cheackable. just type in Saddams ties to terrorists. Saddam paid the families of suicide bombers for the americans that they killed . easily checkable. Saddam invaded another country in which we made him take his hand out of the cookie jar. this did not endear us to him.

Saddam had WMDS and used them. so that old bs he did not have them does not hold up. what he did with them that is the question. Rather then fight anymore over it I yhink this administration has made the decision to cut their loss there and move on. But mark my word he had them.


Saddam gave sancuary to many terrorists that killed americans and some of them we killed right in bagdad. this is also easy for those that seek the truth. hard to dispute the pics of their dead bodies. but you will not see this on the news.

We have given the Iraqis their chance at freedom. but if they chose instead to kill each other then so be it. But we cannot give sancuary or another country to these barbarians that have been killing us for thirty years.

Take a look at the statements made by AL qaeda's second in control made yesterday and maybe some will wake up to the nature of these goofs. They want you dead period and again this was stated that they want 300,000 of us dead now.


I served in a special force unit for 8 years and Im telling you this is the fight that was waged on us thirty years ago. This will not go away because some of our senators want to run and play nice. Or as Pelosi stated the road to peace is through Syria. Is she nuts, these are the people that killed 241 of my brothers in Beruit in 1983. And have helped to kill many many more of us. we will fight now or lets all wait for them to develop some nukes and then see if the pansies in this country want to fight then.

Did all think that Iraq was going to be a fast battle ground. this is a long hard fight. And Iraq will take many years ,but I am afraid Bush is right you have to start by planting the tree of freedom to give it any chance to grow. And only through the people that yearn for freedom will a change take place. I n the mean time lets kill the bas----s

Eddiejohn, while we share at least 2 major commonalities, USMC, and respect, our opinions on Iraq are like night and day.

My opinions clash with yours on every count, but I will just point out one.

Your comment: In the meantime lets kill the bas----s.Thats all fine and good, sounds very American, very patriotic, very much like a Marine.But,to most it would seem the new "push" the Bush admin. integrated just is'nt cutting the mustard. We have ended up only losing more of our brave young men and women, with absolutely no gain. We are averaging 3-4 brave patriots losing their lives a day now.

I am not a war monger, but I do believe in an eye for an eye. Lets get after the terrorists that hit us!We need to refocus our attentions. IMO we need to pull back out of the populated areas in Iraq and let THEM fight THEIR civil war.We can watch Iraq's borders, from Iraq's borders, not from the towns where insurgients are only wanting to kill Americans.

Back to the thread topic..........No, we need to keep Bush until his time is up! He has in my opinion done very little right, but Cheney would most likely finish off running us in the ground.

Eddiejohn, the entire Marine Corps IS a special force!Semper Fidelis!

[Art]

Iraq is a problem for sure, but I don't think there is any one reason or person we can pin this on.

Here's the question. Do we stay and continue down the same path and hope that at some point something will give and things will start to work out for the better? OR, do we cut our loses now and shag ass out of there because we feel that there's nothing left for us to do and the Iraqis are just going to kill each other anyways?

It's easy to make the quick decision because it looks so obvious right here, right now. The most important issue at hand with our differences on Iraq is simple. Hindsight is ALWAYS 20/20. Do we look short term or do we look long term?

I have a hard time swallowing this, and I would think that some of you military guys find it even tougher. Are we to the point where we are ready to admit we lost? You can't pin this all on Bush- we either win or we lose. Are we ready to say that our mighty Marines, Army, ect. with all our firepower and technology got beat down by some skinny rag heads with old Russian AK's, similar to Nam? Are we ready to say that when times got tough we'd prefer to run away to save our own ass rather than stay and fight? Are we ready for all the backlash from the arabs preaching to the world about how weak America is? Will this make future groups of terrorist or other countries such as Iran more bold in their attempts to provoke or attack us? Could be a good move, could be tragic.

On the otherhand, we can bring our troops home. Less people will be killed and we will stop spending trillions of dollars. Perhaps our country will start to close the huge divide among it's citizens that has developed. We can hope that once we pull out that the harsh feelings towards America in the region will eventually go away and things will improve over time.. It could be a good move or it could be tragic.

I can't say that I know what is best because I don't, and neither does anyone else IMO. The bottom line is that we must prepare ourselves for one of the 2 senarios I have listed above. I'm proud of what our armed forces have done to this point and I think it needed to be done. I also think mistakes and failures have been made, but remember what I said about hindsight.

[beaver396]

Did all think that Iraq was going to be a fast battle ground. this is a long hard fight. And Iraq will take many years ,but I am afraid Bush is right you have to start by planting the tree of freedom to give it any chance to grow.


That is were i respectfully disagree, We planted the tree 5yrs ago and none of the iraqi's are wanting to water the thing, so we are setting over there doing it for them.

I really dont think we can force freedom ideaology on a country that has never had it nor wants it. They are really to stupid to know what to do with it.

[john4]

That tree needs some dam Miracle Grow



And, it's all Clintons fault.

[grouser68]

That tree needs some dam Miracle Grow



And, it's all Clintons fault.

:D :D :D Goodin' John, goodin'!

[turkeytalker]

http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/images/2002/08/15/image518837x.jpg

Get use to it people!Thats his spot.ABC,NBC,CBS can't fool all of us.Heck they couldn't even fool france.

He will go down in history as one of the greatest presidents of all time.

[Xi Bowhunter]

http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/images/2002/08/15/image518837x.jpg

Get use to it people!Thats his spot.ABC,NBC,CBS can't fool all of us.Heck they couldn't even fool france.

He will go down in history as one of the greatest presidents of all time.
BAWHAAAAAAAHAHAHA! Man that was great! That is the funniest thing I have heard all year!

So you can be one of the "best presidents of all time" and have the lowest approval rating of ANY president?:D Just giving you a hard time TT!

[turkeytalker]

XI, if you will watch all three parts of this you will understand.By the way this is the author of "A PARTY NO MORE"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fENTx9gMB4w&mode=related&search=



After you watch tell me what you think

[Wildcat]

I don't know what history will really say about W but this is history fact. In 1864 Abraham Lincoln was the most hated man in the United States. The one and only reason he won the election was the Union Army voted for him in one mast block. Each one was enough to give him the Electoral vote in a majority of the states. Had the Union Army not voted for him he never would have won re-election. It wasn't until after his death did people come to realize what he had to go though while he was president.

[trust me]

So you can be one of the "best presidents of all time" and have the lowest approval rating of ANY president? Just

That just about describes Abe to a "T".

[turkeytalker]

Hey boys don't set the hook yet,let them run a while.

[Wildcat]

Something else. Look at the picture of Mt Rushmore. How many democrats are there on it??;)

[turkeytalker]

Oh crap,just heard the Queen is on her way to the White House to KNIGHT President Bush.This must be devastating to the socialists,and he didn't even make time's top 100.

Hasn't she been listening to the same polls XI has?:p

[eddiejohn4]

Grouser, the entire marine corps is certainly special forces but force recon is under socom, as I served with the 1rst force I had a different mission set then maybe you. I have no idea as I have no idea what you did while in. I will agree with one thing and that is I disagree with your position on the Iraqi war also.

We cannot let them just kill themselfs as this just gives leverage to the enemy.T o simply pull out and say go at it gentleman and let Al Qaeda and other radical factions sit like vultures ready to move in and set up camp is not the way to stem further violence against this nation.
As too your statment that Bush has done nothing right I could say that about many war time presidents such as truman, TR, Eisenhower. Many mistakes are always made in war. you as a marine know this.


This fight has been a long time comming and I care not what soil its fought on as long as not home soil. They are there we are killing them there. we have lost less men in this war then any that has come before. if you can name one war with less please post it. as I have not heard or read of it .

Being a marine you of all people should kn ow what Semper Fi stands for and the respect given to the office of the CIC if not then I guess we served in two different times . disent is one thing but viseral hate is quite another, and is unfounded. ( not talking about you)

We are in a war make no mistake ,read what the 2nd in command in AL qaeda put out yesterday on the islamic web sites and you will maybe see why we are where we are. Grouser we have been killing the ones that have killed our men and have been doing so for thirty years. Take a look at my post again for just some of the names of terrorists killed in Iraq. Reread my post on this site wake up america as I have gone into detail of just who we killed there. Including plo members hamas Al Qaeda. Iranian guard members have been picked up there. Please what does it take ? how many of these goofs do you have to see the bodies of to understand that they are there and were there before we went to war.

Semper Fi

[eddiejohn4]

Beaver it took this nation thirteen years to radify the constitution after the revolutionary war . You think just five years to a culture that has not seen freedom for two thousand years is too long?

That is what is wrong with america today ,we think all should just go by fast. we should have won already. They however are patient. they have been killing us across the globe for thirty years.

[Xi Bowhunter]

That just about describes Abe to a "T".
If you think you can compare Goober W. Bush to ABE LINCON then you are more delusional than I thought.

[mmayes]

XI- while I respect your opinions, Why not compare the 2. He was making a comparision to a president hated at the time he was in office and latter remembered as a great president and the potential for the same thing out of W. Where was that so wrong?

Mayes

[trust me]

If you think you can compare Goober W. Bush to ABE LINCON then you are more delusional than I thought.

Delusional?

Please explain where I compared Bush and Lincoln. I merely stated that Abe was hugely unpopular during his term and weathered a storm of controversy during an unpopular war.

Also, please describe in detail what posts I've previously made that indicate to you I am delusional.

[schuyler olt]

Taking Saddam out of power was the worst thing we could have done, and now we are living with the reprcusions. I know quite a few of our soldiers that have came back with the same mind set.

Saddam was a brutal SOB but, he kept his country in line. Something that we arent able to do. Those idiots over there do not understand rules unless it is enforced with several shots to the head.

I am not a Saddam supporter, but what happens now to that country that had some kinda of ruleing that no longer has any ruleing, It goes to turmoil which is what its in now.

The only reason we are there now is because if we leave then iran takes over. Iran would have never taken over if we had left saddam there, and he would stil be in power keeping that poor chicken **** country in line.

Can someone tell me what staying the course is going to do? what has it done? it is pretty hard to fight a fight against a country with no army or leader.

One this about vietnam that was better is there was a clear enemy, and we had the total support of one part of that country.

WE clearly have no support of the people of iraq. so why do we help them?



A simple solution is we leave that place and blow any country away that tries to intervene. Let them sort it ou on thier own.

Beaver, your comments about Viet Nam are off the mark. The NVA and the VC were two different entities--aligned, intertwined, but very different. Who the enemy was was a difficult and sometimes impossible thing to tell.

And the problem was also that we had very little support in the south. Heck, 99% of the ground war took place in the south. The vast majority of VC were southern villagers. The ARVNs were notorious for cutting and running, and the "government" was horribly corrupt.

Based on what I've seen, we have far more popular support in Iraq than we ever had in Viet Nam.

[quackrstackr]

"I'm Tired"

Two weeks ago, as I was starting my sixth month of duty in Iraq, I was forced to return to the USA for surgery for an injury I sustained prior to my deployment. With luck, I'll return to Iraq to finish my tour.

I left Baghdad and a war that has every indication that we are winning, to return to a demoralized country much like the one I returned to in 1971 after my tour in Vietnam. Maybe it's because I'll turn 60 years old in just four months, but I'm tired:

I'm tired of spineless politicians, both Democrat and Republican who lack the courage, fortitude, and character to see these difficult tasks through.

I'm tired of the hypocrisy of politicians who want to rewrite history when the going gets tough.

I'm tired of the disingenuous clamor from those that claim they 'Support the Troops' by wanting them to 'Cut and Run' before victory is achieved.

I'm tired of a mainstream media that can only focus on car bombs and casualty reports because they are too afraid to leave the safety of their hotels to report on the courage and success our brave men and women are having on the battlefield.

I'm tired that so many Americans think you can rebuild a dictatorship into a democracy over night.

I'm tired that so many ignore the bravery of the Iraqi people to go to the voting booth and freely elect a Constitution and soon a permanent Parliam ent.

I'm tired of the so called 'Elite Left' that prolongs this war by giving aid and comfort to our enemy, just as they did during the Vietnam War.

I'm tired of antiwar protesters showing up at the funerals of our fallen soldiers. A family who's loved ones gave their life in a just and noble cause, only to be cruelly tormented on the funeral day by cowardly protesters is beyond shameful.

I'm tired that my generation, the Baby Boom -- Vietnam generation, who have such a weak backbone that they can't stomach seeing the difficult tasks through to victory.

I'm tired that some are more concerned about the treatment of captives than they are the slaughter and beheading of our citizens and allies.

I'm tired that when we find mass graves it is seldom reported by the press, but mistreat a prisoner and it is front page news.

Mostly, I'm tired that the people of this great nation didn't learn from history that there is no substitute for Victory.

Sincerely,
Joe Repya,
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
101st Airborne Division

[aceoky]

VERY good post Quackr thanks for sharing that, many needed to read exactly that........ :)

[Xi Bowhunter]

XI- while I respect your opinions, Why not compare the 2. He was making a comparision to a president hated at the time he was in office and latter remembered as a great president and the potential for the same thing out of W. Where was that so wrong?

Mayes
i just don't see how ANYBODY can think GW will go down in history as a great american president:confused: He has been terrible IMO. I will agree with one thing though, both Abe and Bush were HATED for a while, but that is where the similarities stop. Bush even came out in a big public display and stated "we won" when the war was clearly far from over. All would be forgiven, for me anyway, if he would come out as publicaly and boldly as his "we won" fiasco and say "we lost.....I'm sorry". GW will never be in the same league as Abe. Abe did a great thing for his country, and was wisely remembered as so. GW has made many mistakes, and should be forgotten as a great american MISTAKE. But we should learn from his term, and give us a clue as what NOT to do. To think GW is even close to the visionary that Abe Lincon was, is just absurd IMO.

[KYCatBirdHunter]

not to mention Abe Lincoln took a nation that was the definition of divided and did a pretty good job of uniting them under one banner, where Bush took a nation that was undeniably united and split it into two warring factions.

[turkeytalker]

not to mention Abe Lincoln took a nation that was the definition of divided and did a pretty good job of uniting them under one banner, where Bush took a nation that was undeniably united and split it into two warring factions.



ROFLMAO,that is funny.Did you just get that off CNN or was it the new york times?

[Auk1124]

"I'm Tired"


Sincerely,
Joe Repya,
Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army
101st Airborne Division

Some might be interested to know that Repya was apparently the co-chair of Veterans for Bush when he wrote that, and is currently involved in a power struggle to take over control of the Minnesota state Republican Party.

[yote hunter]

not to mention Abe Lincoln took a nation that was the definition of divided and did a pretty good job of uniting them under one banner, where Bush took a nation that was undeniably united and split it into two warring factions.
youve got to be kidding.sure abe brought the nation back to gether but at the point of a gun and at the cost of at least 600,000 lives and a ruined economy in the south for decades.you liberals cry about the patriot act but you dont have a clue about all the civil rights lincoln trampled on.

[F250Stroke]

Is it just me or do all the bird hunters hate George Bush?:)

[yote hunter]

Is it just me or do all the bird hunters hate George Bush?:)
i think its just one person:D

[Wildcat]

not to mention Abe Lincoln took a nation that was the definition of divided and did a pretty good job of uniting them under one banner, where Bush took a nation that was undeniably united and split it into two warring factions.


I don't know where you get your history books but Lincoin never did that except like yote hunter said, by the point of a gun costing 600,000 AMERICAN LIVES.

Heck Lincoln was a major cause of the start of the Civil War. Americans hated him so bad some wanted to kill him before he ever got to Washington to take the office of the President for the very firsat time. He came into Washington disguised as someone else. This was in 1860, BEFORE war broke out.

Lincoln ordered federal troops and ships to fire on the citizens of New York City to bring them under control.

As for trying to bring the North and South back together, the guy was DEAD. The Vice President Andrew Johnson became President and HE tried to bring the country back together and what did they do to him?? He became the first President to be impeached.

Lincoln didn't bering anybody back together.

[KYCatBirdHunter]

To think that Lincoln had anything to do with the start of the Civil War is ridiculous. Something as big as a civil war doesn't happen through the actions of one man any more than my spending influences the stock market. As for Lincoln being dead when the war ended, it doesn't matter. He laid the groundwork and built the resources to win the war, and then rebuild the country when it was over.

[aceoky]

i think its just one person:D

Actually IMO it's a couple of people who make the "facts" up as they go along to try to make a "point", I also happen to believe (my opinion) most here clearly see through that..... :D :D :D

[Wildcat]

To think that Lincoln had anything to do with the start of the Civil War is ridiculous. Something as big as a civil war doesn't happen through the actions of one man any more than my spending influences the stock market. As for Lincoln being dead when the war ended, it doesn't matter. He laid the groundwork and built the resources to win the war, and then rebuild the country when it was over.

This is from Wikipedia;

The election of Abraham Lincoln (along with other reasons) caused seven Southern states, led by South Carolina, to declare their secession from the United States and form the Confederate States of America by February 1861, before Lincoln took office. Confederate forces seized control of federal forts and customs houses within their boundaries, mostly without incident. However, a few Union strongholds remained, including Fort Monroe (near Norfolk, Virginia), Fort Pickens, Florida, and Fort Sumter (near Charleston, South Carolina).

Here's more about Lincoln breaking NORTHERN citizens civil rights during the entire war;

Lincoln believed that his ends justified his means. He used war to destroy the U.S. Constitution in order to establish a powerful central government.

Lincoln assumed dictatorial military powers. He used them to suppress all Northern opposition to his illegal and unconstitutional acts.

Lincoln violated every constitutionally guaranteed civil right. He ignored rulings hand-delivered to him by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Roger Taney ordering Lincoln to respect and faithfully execute the laws of the United States and to protect civil rights.

Lincoln replied by suspending habeas corpus, by instituting a secret police, and by arbitrarily arresting without warrants or due process thousands of leading citizens of Northern cities, state legislators, U.S. Congressmen, newspaper owners and editors, ministers, bankers, policemen--literally everyone who expressed the slightest reservation about Lincoln’s aims and means or who was anonymously denounced by a rival or envious neighbor.

In the thoroughness with which Lincoln suppressed dissent, he prefigured 20th century totalitarians.

Lincoln’s “train of abuses” far exceeded those that provoked our Founding Fathers to declare independence from Britain.

[trust me]

Delusional?

Please explain where I compared Bush and Lincoln. I merely stated that Abe was hugely unpopular during his term and weathered a storm of controversy during an unpopular war.

Also, please describe in detail what posts I've previously made that indicate to you I am delusional.

So, how about it, Xi Bowhunter? I know you wouldn't perform a "hit n' run", by throwing a sucker punch and then diving for cover. I'm still waiting for a reasoned, rational response to the questions. You can provide that, can't you? Or can you?

[Xi Bowhunter]

So, how about it, Xi Bowhunter? I know you wouldn't perform a "hit n' run", by throwing a sucker punch and then diving for cover. I'm still waiting for a reasoned, rational response to the questions. You can provide that, can't you? Or can you?
Check your inbox:cool:

[Art]

You guys are way to political these days. :D You guys are just wasting your time trying to convince each other. The facts are not going to change anyone's mind around here.;)

[trust me]

Check your inbox:cool:

You started it here, let's address it here, not in the Inbox.

[mmayes]

XI- I am one of those who think Bush is a good president. So I guess I am delusional or stupid. :confused:

I will go out on a limb here and further state why I think he is a good president. We as Americans have a short attention span. We live in a right here and right now world. We never look past the short term. Bush said it was going to be a LONG HUAL. Apparently everyone has forgotten that fact. He has stuck to what he said he would do. He hasn't bowed to the liberal fools. Clinton was a prime example of not having the fortitude to stick behind any decision he made. Remember Moghadeshu(sp) we lost alot of Rangers and Delta operaters. What did Clinton do he Hightailed it like the coward he is out.

Mayes

[grouser68]

XI- I am one of those who think Bush is a good president. So I guess I am delusional or stupid. :confused:

I will go out on a limb here and further state why I think he is a good president. We as Americans have a short attention span. We live in a right here and right now world. We never look past the short term. Bush said it was going to be a LONG HUAL. Apparently everyone has forgotten that fact. He has stuck to what he said he would do. He hasn't bowed to the liberal fools. Clinton was a prime example of not having the fortitude to stick behind any decision he made. Remember Moghadeshu(sp) we lost alot of Rangers and Delta operaters. What did Clinton do he Hightailed it like the coward he is out.

Mayes

It appears Clinton was'nt the only one lacking the fortitude to stick behind his decisions, and hightail it like a coward(your words)

2/7/84
President Reagan announces plans to get the Marines out of Beirut, describing the action as “decisive new steps.” Larry Speakes explains, “We don't consider this a withdrawal but more of a redeployment

And this after the FIRST terror bombing that took 241 of my brothers.BTW, the terrorist in charge of that operation, was also involved in 9/11

History is a wonderful thing, we can either embrace it as a learning tool..........or not!

[eddiejohn4]

I loved Reagan ,but he was wrong here. He tried as those that followed to address this as a criminal act instead of an act of war as it most certainly was.

Clinton did not just redeploy he did not act in any way. somalia was a perfect example of his cut and leave policy when american lives were taken.

Reagan also bombed targets within syria at that time and was considered to be the largest navel engagement since the Viet Nam war.his decision to withdraw Marines was under much pressure put forth by you guessed it congress.

Even after withdraw Reagan kept up bombings on anti goverment positions in Beruit under new rules of engagement that he helped to inact.

You have to state all the facts inorder for a complete picture.

[aceoky]

I loved Reagan ,but he was wrong here. He tried as those that followed to address this as a criminal act instead of an act of war as it most certainly was.

Clinton did not just redeploy he did not act in any way. somalia was a perfect example of his cut and leave policy when american lives were taken.

Reagan also bombed targets within syria at that time and was considered to be the largest navel engagement since the Viet Nam war.his decision to withdraw Marines was under much pressure put forth by you guessed it congress.

Even after withdraw Reagan kept up bombings on anti goverment positions in Beruit under new rules of engagement that he helped to inact.

You have to state all the facts inorder for a complete picture.

YEP..........but "some people" love to "spin" and disregard fact" (and hope some would join them, though IMO they're in the wrong place)

IOW, some people don't want ANY real facts ever expressed, and when they're faced with exactly that.....they have no choice but to personally attack the poster.........:eek:

[Auk1124]

Clinton did not just redeploy he did not act in any way. somalia was a perfect example of his cut and leave policy when american lives were taken.

(snip)

You have to state all the facts inorder for a complete picture.

The complete picture on Somalia (and Haiti for that matter) is not as clear cut against Clinton being a wuss as a lot of people like to think. In both cases Congress pressured him for a timetable to withdraw, and also threatened to cut off troop funding for Somalia after the Black Hawk Down fiasco. And Congress was screaming about him usurping their war powers.

Sound familiar? Funny thing is a lot of Republicans in Congress were in favor of those proposals, with at least one funding cut-off bill introduced by a Republican who was from Florida, I think. But now if anyone threatens to play the same political game they are un-Amurrrican, by Gawd, cause there's a Repub in the White House. Hypocrisy and subterfuge in politics are the rules, not the exceptions.

[Xi Bowhunter]

XI- I am one of those who think Bush is a good president. So I guess I am delusional or stupid. :confused:

I will go out on a limb here and further state why I think he is a good president. We as Americans have a short attention span. We live in a right here and right now world. We never look past the short term. Bush said it was going to be a LONG HUAL. Apparently everyone has forgotten that fact. He has stuck to what he said he would do. He hasn't bowed to the liberal fools. Clinton was a prime example of not having the fortitude to stick behind any decision he made. Remember Moghadeshu(sp) we lost alot of Rangers and Delta operaters. What did Clinton do he Hightailed it like the coward he is out.

Mayes
Sticking to your word is one thing, but staying around and not budging even when it is getting you nowhere is a whole other story. Bush needs to change with the times and situations IMO.

[GSP]

Sticking to your word is one thing, but staying around and not budging even when it is getting you nowhere is a whole other story. Bush needs to change with the times and situations IMO.



So why don't you answer post #100, 115 &118????:rolleyes:

[grouser68]

Can I please answer post # 100?

Also, please describe in detail what posts I've previously made that indicate to you I am delusional.Quote from Trust Me post#100

Actually, no post indicates that Trust Me is delusional, but I just happen to KNOW that he is!Here is how Websters defines delusional:



de·lu·sion http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/premium.gif http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/speaker.gif (https://secure.reference.com/premium/login.html?rd=2&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.reference.com%2Fbrowse%2 Fdelusional) (dĭ-lōō'zhən) Pronunciation Key (http://cache.lexico.com/help/ahd4/pronkey.html)
n.


The act or process of deluding.
The state of being deluded.
A false belief or opinion: labored under the delusion that success was at hand.
Psychiatry A false belief strongly held in spite of invalidating evidence, especially as a symptom of mental illness: delusions of persecution.Trust Me suffers the delusion that every time he heads out the door with gun and dog, he's gonna get his limit of grouse!

Trust Me suffers delusional dreams that he can sit on his back porch and watch 40 grouse a grazin'

Trust Me suffers the delusion that with each year the cycle will be on the upswing.

Trust Me suffers the delusion that going north to hunt is almost magical(ok, maybe that one is true!)

Trust Me suffers these delusions, and many more..........most all of which are bird related! But, not really to the point of being mental(I think!) I know all of this.......because I suffer from the same dang delusions!

I hope that has suffiently answered post #100 for everyone!:D

[eddiejohn4]

Auk reread your post. one republican I wonder how many bills were introduced by dems so far. lol

As far as somalia, theres the difference ,Bush did not run he is still in Iraq. The media, congress and the libs and far lefties have been screaming for all the years he has been in office, and he still is doing what he knows to be right.

I would love to go into some detail here about somalia and other Clinton mis steps but it would be a long lengthy and probably useless process.

Clinton was no worse then alot before him ,but the fact is he was weak on foreign policy. And north Korea was another prime example.

[Auk1124]

Auk reread your post. one republican I wonder how many bills were introduced by dems so far. lol

As far as somalia, theres the difference ,Bush did not run he is still in Iraq. The media, congress and the libs and far lefties have been screaming for all the years he has been in office, and he still is doing what he knows to be right.

I would love to go into some detail here about somalia and other Clinton mis steps but it would be a long lengthy and probably useless process.

Clinton was no worse then alot before him ,but the fact is he was weak on foreign policy. And north Korea was another prime example.

I'm not saying he was great - personally I agree that he was weak on foreign policy. Just pointing out that the other aisle (a lot more than just one Repub - McCain, Jesse Helms, Mitch McConnell, Robert Dorner, etc etc. etc.) was pushing him for withdrawal and timetables and funding cutoffs, same as the Dems are doing to Bush now. It is politics as usual now, as it was then.

[Multidigits]

I'm not saying he was great - personally I agree that he was weak on foreign policy. Just pointing out that the other aisle (a lot more than just one Repub - McCain, Jesse Helms, Mitch McConnell, Robert Dorner, etc etc. etc.) was pushing him for withdrawal and timetables and funding cutoffs, same as the Dems are doing to Bush now. It is politics as usual now, as it was then.


Post up where McCain or Mitch McConnell asked for withdrawal without victory first. If you can, it's news to me.

[Wildcat]

As far as somalia, theres the difference ,Bush did not run he is still in Iraq. The media, congress and the libs and far lefties have been screaming for all the years he has been in office, and he still is doing what he knows to be right.



You forgot that the terriorst in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and the rest of the world have also been screaming for all the years he's been in office.

[KYCatBirdHunter]

Those same terrorists have been screaming for thousands of years. No news there.

[ptbrauch]

First off, let me begin by saying that I agree with a lot said in the initial letter. As I read through some of the posts, I get the idea that a lot of people think that because of the turmoil there now, removing Saddam was a big mistake, that Iraq will never recover, etc.

But I also see some comparisons to Iraq and the beginnings of our country. To demonstrate the comparisons AND to back up the gist of the initial letter of the short-sightedness of American, here's a brief history quiz:

Question 1: Everyone knows that July 4th, 1776, America declared its independence from England. But when did the Revolutionary War END?

Question 2: When was the US constitution put into effect?

[KYCatBirdHunter]

there are similarities, with one major distinction. The people that fought the Revolution all wanted a new country and a new government. They showed this by packing up their stuff and sailing to another continent. Then once they were there they organized a militia and told King George straight up they were splitting off, and if he had anything to say about it he could come over and make his point. Then the people of the new country fought tooth and nail to keep the redcoats where they belong.

Iraq is not our country. If they want a new government and a new life, they can get it themselves.

[ptbrauch]

there are similarities, with one major distinction. The people that fought the Revolution all wanted a new country and a new government. They showed this by packing up their stuff and sailing to another continent. Then once they were there they organized a militia and told King George straight up they were splitting off, and if he had anything to say about it he could come over and make his point. Then the people of the new country fought tooth and nail to keep the redcoats where they belong.

Iraq is not our country. If they want a new government and a new life, they can get it themselves.

And the French weren't here during any of this?

[john4]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070511/wl_mideast_afp/iraqpoliticsusmilitary_070511104840

[Xi Bowhunter]

So why don't you answer post #100, 115 &118????:rolleyes:
Answered in post 104:)

[grouseguy]

Can I please answer post # 100?

Also, please describe in detail what posts I've previously made that indicate to you I am delusional.Quote from Trust Me post#100

Actually, no post indicates that Trust Me is delusional, but I just happen to KNOW that he is!Here is how Websters defines delusional:



de·lu·sion http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/premium.gif http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/speaker.gif (https://secure.reference.com/premium/login.html?rd=2&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.reference.com%2Fbrowse%2 Fdelusional) (dĭ-lōō'zhən) Pronunciation Key (http://cache.lexico.com/help/ahd4/pronkey.html)
n.


The act or process of deluding.
The state of being deluded.
A false belief or opinion: labored under the delusion that success was at hand.
Psychiatry A false belief strongly held in spite of invalidating evidence, especially as a symptom of mental illness: delusions of persecution.Trust Me suffers the delusion that every time he heads out the door with gun and dog, he's gonna get his limit of grouse!

Trust Me suffers delusional dreams that he can sit on his back porch and watch 40 grouse a grazin'

Trust Me suffers the delusion that with each year the cycle will be on the upswing.

Trust Me suffers the delusion that going north to hunt is almost magical(ok, maybe that one is true!)

Trust Me suffers these delusions, and many more..........most all of which are bird related! But, not really to the point of being mental(I think!) I know all of this.......because I suffer from the same dang delusions!

I hope that has suffiently answered post #100 for everyone!:D

Wow, I seem to suffer from some of the same "delusions" ...is it contagious?:eek: ...is there a cure or treatment?;) :cool:

[trust me]

I don't have a problem. I don't need any help. I can quit anytime I want to. Leave me alone.

(Did I miss any?)

[aceoky]

I think you covered them quite well IMHO...

[KYCatBirdHunter]

you forgot the other delusion..

I didn't miss that bird. It flew behind a tree.

[Wildcat]

there are similarities, with one major distinction. The people that fought the Revolution all wanted a new country and a new government. They showed this by packing up their stuff and sailing to another continent. Then once they were there they organized a militia and told King George straight up they were splitting off, and if he had anything to say about it he could come over and make his point. Then the people of the new country fought tooth and nail to keep the redcoats where they belong.

Iraq is not our country. If they want a new government and a new life, they can get it themselves.


Is that right?

If you would look it up in a American History book you will see that more than half the people in America wanted the British to stay and to remind under British rule, most went out of their way to help the British soliders and turned in the rebels. After the war a lot of them packed up and went to Canada.

[KYCatBirdHunter]

I know that. I said "The people that fought the Revolution". The loyalists are not included in that statement. But the people that actually fought the British were the ones with a stake in the fight.

Yes, I know the French were there, but they were merely helping. They didn't start the war, they didn't occupy the country. They didn't ask for a say in our government. They just helped us fight a war. If the Iraqis had started a rebellion and tried to overthrow their government and then given the U.S. a call for help, I would be all for this.

Instead, we went in and said, "You guys need a new government. Here, we'll help. Wait around while we impose our military forces on your country and install our vision of government for you. Don't worry about what will happen when we leave, cause we're not going to."

[ptbrauch]

If the Iraqis had started a rebellion and tried to overthrow their government and then given the U.S. a call for help, I would be all for this.

You haven't talked to any Kurds lately, have you? Oh yeah, probably because the ones who started a rebellion were gassed to death--along with the rest of their towns--several times.

[ptbrauch]

Question 1: Everyone knows that July 4th, 1776, America declared its independence from England. But when did the Revolutionary War END?

Question 2: When was the US constitution put into effect?

Here's the answers:

1. The war ended in 1783. Thats 7 years for anyone keeping score at home. And France, Spain, and the Netherlands all participated on the side of the Americans.

2. The US Constitution was not ratified by the majority of states until 1788--5 years after the war ended.

So, to sum it up, it took 12 years from the start of the war until we had an effective constitution. And yet, 231 years later, its still being debated.

Americans need to begin thinking for themselves and quit taking the opinions of the talking heads of CNN, NBC, and even Fox as facts. Contrary to what you see on TV, wars aren't fought and won in 2 hours. Nations aren't reborn in 6 weeks.

[aceoky]

Here's the answers:

1. The war ended in 1783. Thats 7 years for anyone keeping score at home. And France, Spain, and the Netherlands all participated on the side of the Americans.

2. The US Constitution was not ratified by the majority of states until 1788--5 years after the war ended.

So, to sum it up, it took 12 years from the start of the war until we had an effective constitution. And yet, 231 years later, its still being debated.

Americans need to begin thinking for themselves and quit taking the opinions of the talking heads of CNN, NBC, and even Fox as facts. Contrary to what you see on TV, wars aren't fought and won in 2 hours. Nations aren't reborn in 6 weeks.
.

Great points (and facts) thank you for posting that!

[Auk1124]

Post up where McCain or Mitch McConnell asked for withdrawal without victory first. If you can, it's news to me.

Sorry, I've been busy last couple of days.

I listened carefully to the President’s remarks at a news conference that he held earlier today. I heard nothing in his discussion of the issue that would persuade me that further U.S. military involvement in the area is necessary. In fact, his remarks have persuaded me more profoundly that we should leave and leave soon.

I can tell you what will erode our prestige. I can tell you what will hurt our viability as the world’s superpower, and that is if we enmesh ourselves in a drawn-out situation which entails the loss of American lives, more debacles like the one we saw with the failed mission to capture Aideed’s lieutenants, using American forces, and that then will be what hurts our prestige.

We suffered a terrible tragedy in Beirut, Mr. President; 240 young marines lost their lives, but we got out. Now is the time for us to get out of Somalia as rapidly and as promptly and as safely as possible.

John McCain, 1993


It is time for the Senate of the United States to get on with the debate, to get on with the vote, and to get the American troops home.

Dirk Kempthorne (R-ID), 1993

What I cannot continue to support is the continuing endangerment of Americans in the service of a policy that remains absolutely mysterious and totally muddled.

Alan Simpson, 1993

There are more but you get the idea.

McCain introduced a bill in 93 to cut off all funding for troops in Somalia except funding for immediate withdrawal. The Senate Republicans including Mitch McConnell voted for it. Senate Republicans also lambasted Clinton over Haiti and called for immediate withdrawals and time tables. Republicans like John Kyl were fussing and wanting timetables for withdrawal in Kosovo.

There is nothing new here with these timetables etc. Congress has been doing this for a long time. In both aisles. So this talk about cowardice/cutting and running etc. from Congressional Repubs is pretty disengenuous, if not downright hypocritical.

[Multidigits]

I figured you couldn't post the proof. Because it doesn't exist. What you did search for and post is a bit dated to say the least. Why not just admit that your first reference was 100% fabricated and false?

[Auk1124]

I figured you couldn't post the proof. Because it doesn't exist. What you did search for and post is a bit dated to say the least. Why not just admit that your first reference was 100% fabricated and false?

What the heck are you talking about? I've posted quotes from Repubs back in 93 calling for immediate withdrawal from Somalia, and there was a Repub bill proposed back then cutting off funding, which is exactly what I was saying in that post. Reread that quote from McCain, he wasn't wanting withdrawal after "victory" in Somalia, he was wanting withdrawal Right Then, Right There.

These quotes and plenty, plenty, plenty more are all over the net, just Google "Republicans Somalia" if you don't believe me, for whatever reason. Sheesh. Here's even a video clip of McCain calling for "cutting and running" from Haiti immediately: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=palbo-ilalU

If you can't handle the truth that your party also has a history of calling for immediate withdrawals from military interventions, "victory" be damned, stick your fingers in your ears, close your eyes, and hum "I'm Proud To Be an American" as loudly as you can, cause this stuff is everywhere. :D

[Backwoods Boy]

George W. Bush, hmmmm I wonder how he will looked upon in the future? He has not been afraid to take a stand that goes against the polls. Of course Bill Clinton would never have done that! Did W. lie about WMDs, I guess we will never know. Of course congress is completely without blame! :rolleyes:

The one thing I keep thinking is why do we all beleive the media, and ignore what most of the troops are saying?

[slickhead slayer]

So, how about it, Xi Bowhunter? I know you wouldn't perform a "hit n' run", by throwing a sucker punch and then diving for cover. I'm still waiting for a reasoned, rational response to the questions. You can provide that, can't you? Or can you?

I propose that we start a thread with all the times XI has stated something as fact, but has yet to back it up with any iota of proof to back it up. The only problem is that it would take too much bandwidth.
I am still waiting on him to tell us how presidents can make gas prices higher?

[PhilpotHunter]

I propose that we start a thread with all the times XI has stated something as fact, but has yet to back it up with any iota of proof to back it up. The only problem is that it would take too much bandwidth.
I am still waiting on him to tell us how presidents can make gas prices higher?

I'll say this, I have seen XI state a "fact" and when he was proven wrong man up and admit it on more than one occasion. Never seen you do that ole slickhead?:rolleyes: Must be because your never wrong huh?

[slickhead slayer]

I'll say this, I have seen XI state a "fact" and when he was proven wrong man up and admit it on more than one occasion. Never seen you do that ole slickhead?:rolleyes: Must be because your never wrong huh?

I have been corrected on more than one occasion in the past, and will probably be corrected more in the future. But thanks for asking.
You can go back to rubbing XI's feet now.

[PhilpotHunter]

You can go back to rubbing XI's feet now.

Typical response when cornered:rolleyes:

[PhilpotHunter]

XI refering to Beavers

Doing damage to what? A tree or two? Give me a break:rolleyes:. I know they can be a pain sometimes, but they don't do that much damage.

You are probably one of those people who think we have a "cat" problem in the state of KY too:rolleyes:. Nothing aganist you, but we won't see eye-to-eye on this issue.

AS YOU CAN SEE SLICK, YOU WERE INVOLVED IN THE CONVERSATION;)

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. We had a hell of a beaver mess, and still do at a farm we hunt in trimble county. The farm is right on the Ohio River, so I assume thats where they came from.
But they have ruined a whole bottom, and they did it with some pretty damn big trees. It was amazing the damage they did in just a week.
I have killed my share of muskrats over the years that ruined pond dams also. I don't see the problem with taking care of nuisance animals.

If you give us all directions to your farm or your house, we would be happy to relocate these beavers to your place. I think about hundred beavers on your place would be sweet.

And notice here......


Well, even though you are being a smart @$$, I did some further research, and reading the post on this topic, I would say they do a little more damage than I was once taught. So I guess I learned a couple of things, 1- Beavers do more damage than I thought, and 2-I should have checked some more sources before I got into this argument:o. But my main point is that the beavers were shot and not even the fur was taken, and I feel that is a waste, and wondered if I should call a CO. I appreciate how you can't have an argument with out posting smart-elic comments and making someone feel like a complete idiot. Thanks Quack;)



So there you go slick, you have been presented with a fact in the current discussion. And your response will be what? More attacks?:rolleyes:

[slickhead slayer]

Typical response when cornered:rolleyes:

Cornered? What was I cornered on? All I said in my last post was that I indeed have been wrong before, and corrected on it. How was that controversial or an "attack"?
I didn't know you and XI were dating, I will try not to talk about your "sweety" like that anymore.:rolleyes:

[Xi Bowhunter]

Philpot, it is ok. I have even personally PM'ed slick with an apology for being wrong on facts, taking things too seriously, and posting personal opinions that upset him and he still doesn't quit attacking me and every comment I make. I'll be the first to admit I have been wrong on numerous occasions, but slick just won't let it go. Slick, I'll assure you that Philpot is a happily married man, and not my type anyway:D. But I do respect his opinion, and thank him for trying to stand up for me. I have give up on arguing with you Slick, you are just like every other hard-core right winger I have ever met. You are 100% right on all subjects and I am a babbling dumba$$ and you will never see past that. I just hope one day we can meet face to face so I can show you that I am a good and decent person and I don't deserve all the attacks for my personal opinions. Slick, you also need to get your facts straight before running off at the mouth all the time. I never said that the president was 100% or even 25% the cause of high gas prices. I only stated that IMO, I think he has TIES to many oil related people and companies. Slick, I am sure you are a sane and good individual, but the personal vendetta is getting old buddy, lets let things go will ya?

[PhilpotHunter]

Slick, how old are you? 13? Get a life man.

I love watching "grown" men say things on the internet that would other wise get them punched in real life, knowing they are safe behind a screen name. Shows some real cahones:rolleyes:

[slickhead slayer]

Slick, how old are you? 13? Get a life man.

I love watching "grown" men say things on the internet that would other wise get them punched in real life, knowing they are safe behind a screen name. Shows some real cahones:rolleyes:

I am 13, but I will be 14 in June, so I am older than you think. Philpot, you take all this way too serious, its the internet man.:rolleyes:

[PhilpotHunter]

I am 13, but I will be 14 in June, so I am older than you think. Philpot, you take all this way too serious, its the internet man.:rolleyes:

I only try to say things on here that I would say to a guys face. Sometimes people type something with a smile on there face but the reader doesn't know that.

And, I have stressfull developments going on right now that have me a little on edge:o