Who would you vote for President? - Page 5

37L1 · 03-30-2004, 07:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farmer Fred

Consuming cheap Chinese crap from Mal-Wart, maybe. But they're sending their money to their home countries, not paying taxes, and in at least one instance with which I am intimately familiar, not purchasing automobile insurance or learning to drive.

Sweeping generalization alert!!!!!!

Coug · 03-30-2004, 10:57 PM

What has the war in Iraq done to fight radical Islamic terrorism?

-Created another 100+ Bin Ladens for our kids to deal with.
-Squandered a window of opportunity for Arab nations to reign in Islamic radicalism.
-Diverted intellegence and military resources from Afgahnistan, where the real fight is.
-Got rid of Saddam which is nice, but it would be nice to get rid of Fidel, Kim Il Sung , and all the other despots of the world too.
-Transformed Al Qaida into a multi-headed organization with more cells all over the world (see Time this week).
-Killed almost 600 brave American men and women (they don't show the funerals on TV anymore, but I see them at Tahoma National all too frequently)
-Wounded thousands more brave American men (anybody catch Hardball a couple nights ago?)

I have not seen anything to show for this war, and the Bush Administration hasn't justified it other than to say "We got Saddam".

Let's be real. There are no WMD, and they won't ever be found.

What's the real real reason we went to war in Iraq?

jd1973 · 03-31-2004, 06:46 AM

Coug

Can't argue with the "facts" from reliable sources such as Newsweek and Hardball. You don't think they just might be trying to sell some advertising by juicing up stories?

As a veteran I'm heartbroken over the loss of lives, but we in the military understand its part of the commitment. Wars cost lives. It's between losing some people over there or more over here. Take your pick because the world is not a nice place. We lose a lot more people in traffic accidents than the 600 we have lost in the year in Iraq and Afganistan. Maybe we should just send over a lot of cars and some of our most aggressive drivers.

There has never been a window of opportunity for Arab nations to reign in Islamic radicalism. Half of those nations support the bad guys. They have been killing each other for years before we made an appearance. I guess you can decide that it's better to have them killing each other than to come here.

I agree Afganistan is more important in the current war but I can also argue that the govt is not going to share all its intel with the public, and rightfully so. And this is true for whoever is in the white house or congress. I have no reason to believe one way or another the existance of WMD in Iraq. I just don't want them here!!

People seem to forget that we lost a few people in New York on 911. Mostly these were people who didn't give a rats butt about events in the Middle East but paid the price anyway. I wasn't too concerned but guess what, maybe we should have been. Ignoring the problem will not make it go away. Either we trust our leadership, the guys in the UN, or France, or Germany, etc, all of which are highly political. It's way above my paygrade.

JD

Optimist · 03-31-2004, 07:04 AM

On the same theme JD, what would Kerry do?

It’s hard to cut through the BS, so lets look at who is running against Bush.
Anyone keep on eye of the foreign markets? Look at what has happened to Spain since the latest tragic event. Even still with appeasement its south. Security is a big issue in my book, it’s important for me too look at the significant decisions that Kerry has been involved in, in this regard.

Consider, Kerry voted to cut back on: the Patriot missile system, Tomahawk cruise missile, Trident missile system, B-1 bomber, B-2 stealth bomber, the Apache helicopter, the F-15, F-14A, F-14D, F-16, AV-8B Harrier jet, the M1 Abrams tank, Bradley Fighting Vehicle. In 96, he voted to freeze defense spending for 7 years to or a loss of $34 billion. His philosophy was when we create innovative ways to protect ourselves we are encouraging others to follow suite…Hu? Like those that hate are going to sit on the sidelines & not carry on? We did nothing while several attacks came our way during the 90’s so reasoning & doing nothing didn’t help so I would rather have the best defense & information network & be pro-active on other soil then it hitting in our backyard …

We don’t need any more proof that the US is vulnerable, & consider the impact to the economy.

jd1973 · 03-31-2004, 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Optimist

On the same theme JD, what would Kerry do?

It’s hard to cut through the BS, so lets look at who is running against Bush.
Anyone keep on eye of the foreign markets? Look at what has happened to Spain since the latest tragic event. Even still with appeasement its south. Security is a big issue in my book, it’s important for me too look at the significant decisions that Kerry has been involved in, in this regard.

Consider, Kerry voted to cut back on: the Patriot missile system, Tomahawk cruise missile, Trident missile system, B-1 bomber, B-2 stealth bomber, the Apache helicopter, the F-15, F-14A, F-14D, F-16, AV-8B Harrier jet, the M1 Abrams tank, Bradley Fighting Vehicle. In 96, he voted to freeze defense spending for 7 years to or a loss of $34 billion. His philosophy was when we create innovative ways to protect ourselves we are encouraging others to follow suite…Hu? Like those that hate are going to sit on the sidelines & not carry on? We did nothing while several attacks came our way during the 90’s so reasoning & doing nothing didn’t help so I would rather have the best defense & information network & be pro-active on other soil then it hitting in our backyard …

We don’t need any more proof that the US is vulnerable, & consider the impact to the economy.

Trust me I'm definately on your side. I agree any Democrat would be inclined to slashing defense, but with GOP controlling both houses it would be tough. I believe in projecting power, especially with all the nuts out there. We're the only superpower, let's act like it!!!

Farmer Fred · 03-31-2004, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Consider, Kerry voted to cut back on: the Patriot missile system, Tomahawk cruise missile, Trident missile system, B-1 bomber, B-2 stealth bomber, the Apache helicopter, the F-15, F-14A, F-14D, F-16, AV-8B Harrier jet, the M1 Abrams tank, Bradley Fighting Vehicle. In 96, he voted to freeze defense spending for 7 years to or a loss of $34 billion.

Funny how Bush's record gets overlooked in the rush to find things to smear Kerry with.

Yeah, we needed all that expensive crap against a bunch of guys with box cutters, and against RPG and home-made-bomb wielding Iraqi "insurgents". Meanwhile Bush is chopping veterans' benefits, and being obsessed with Iraq even before 9/11, instead of paying attention to OBL.

jd1973 · 03-31-2004, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farmer Fred

Funny how Bush's record gets overlooked in the rush to find things to smear Kerry with.

Yeah, we needed all that expensive crap against a bunch of guys with box cutters, and against RPG and home-made-bomb wielding Iraqi "insurgents". Meanwhile Bush is chopping veterans' benefits, and being obsessed with Iraq even before 9/11, instead of paying attention to OBL.

Sure, maybe we can just go after the bad guys with rocks and sticks. Who needs technology anyway? You always want to fight on an equal playing field with your enemy. Maybe we should equip our elite fighting forces with box cutters. Maybe a bunch of RPGs. And they should fly into combat commercial, or by horseback, or camel... If only those bad guys would just stand still long enough for us to throw our rocks.

Our advantage over our enemies is our technology and training.

Inferior weaponry and training equals more dead and injured soldiers. Liberal democrats don't seem to understand that fact.

By the way wasn't it you smearing Bush in the previous posts? And what is the lesson here? Listen to what I say not what I do?

TITAN21 · 03-31-2004, 04:38 PM

taking care of business

http://members.cox.net/macallan_the/...ush1_Start.htm

pagerdaddy · 03-31-2004, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jd1973

Sure, maybe we can just go after the bad guys with rocks and sticks. Who needs technology anyway? You always want to fight on an equal playing field with your enemy. Maybe we should equip our elite fighting forces with box cutters. Maybe a bunch of RPGs. And they should fly into combat commercial, or by horseback, or camel... If only those bad guys would just stand still long enough for us to throw our rocks.

Our advantage over our enemies is our technology and training.

Inferior weaponry and training equals more dead and injured soldiers. Liberal democrats don't seem to understand that fact.

By the way wasn't it you smearing Bush in the previous posts? And what is the lesson here? Listen to what I say not what I do?

Maybe Farmer Fred could send over a bunch of his migrant workers with
no insurance to Iraq. Haliburton could secure Dodge Hemi's for them to
drive around in. I'm sure plenty of them would prefer that to doing the
dirty jobs for little pay that most Americans won't do. It's strange to see
a liberal bashing minorities.

Farmer Fred · 04-01-2004, 05:40 AM

A lot of those weapons programs are just more corporate welfare for military contractors. I have no problem voting for someone who voted against them.

37L1 · 04-01-2004, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farmer Fred

A lot of those weapons programs are just more corporate welfare for military contractors. I have no problem voting for someone who voted against them.

C'mon Fred, I know you can do better than that.

Farmer Fred · 04-01-2004, 11:38 AM

We spend more than anyone in the world on our military. Isn't this enough?

Quote:

Military spending accounts for 17.8 percent of the entire federal budget.

=According to the Senate Budget Committee minority staff, since President Clinton's initial fiscal 2001 budget request for the Department of Defense of $291.1 billion, spending for that agency will have increased in 2003 by $88.2 billion, or 30.3 percent in nominal terms and 24.7 percent in real terms.

=Military spending comprises over half (53 percent) of total discretionary spending ($755 billion). This is an increase from 48% in fiscal 2001. Discretionary spending is money that Congress and Administration have direct control over.

=Our military budget is greater than the entire economies (Gross Domestic Product) of each of the following countries Austria, Belgium, Chile, Colombia, Denmark, Egypt, Finland, Norway, Greece, Hong Kong, Ireland, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Singapore, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, Pakistan, Vietnam and Venezuela.

=The proposed military budget of $396.1 billion is 15 percent higher than the average Cold War budget even in today's dollars. From 1946 to 1989 the United States budget authority for defense was an average of $343 billion a year (fiscal 2003 dollars).

=In terms of outlays, according to the Senate Budget Committee minority staff, the proposed spending in fiscal 2003 exceeds the Cold War average by $44 billion.

And this doesn't even include the huge off-budget requests for Iraq and Afganistan.

tikigod · 04-04-2004, 01:11 AM

http://www.ehowa.com/show/picture.ht...calpopquiz.gif

SoldOnNissan · 04-04-2004, 09:14 AM

Change of heart tikigod? Nice link but I thought you were leaning towards Kerry (here I go assuming again). Kinda hard to figure out what he stands for huh? Just depends on who he's talking to and what he thinks they want to hear to get their vote. Too bad his beliefs and actions are well documented!!

tikigod · 04-04-2004, 03:27 PM

no i just like humor in any form. Im not partial to kerry or bush. It is unfortunate that there isnt a person that can appeal to a broader range of people but thats only a dream. What we need is someone that is going to improve our image as americans, provide a better life for americans, and led help to other nations when americans have been taken care of.