To the undecided or moronic (Plus election poll omg!)

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 15, 2004, 5:23 pm

Xzion- wrote:
Akaran_D wrote:
Causing more anti american feeling than ever before with your proud ignorant patriotism
Because being proud to be in america is such a fucking bad thing.

[.
Our countrys "power of pride" is our countrys greatest weakness.

And you're our biggest embarrassment. Back to Spain with you!

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » October 15, 2004, 5:23 pm

IToo much of it is a bad thing.
But if you tell me not to be proud to be an american, I will laugh your ass off of this board.

Xzion- · Post by **Xzion-** » October 15, 2004, 6:31 pm

Winnow wrote:
Xzion- wrote:
Akaran_D wrote:
Causing more anti american feeling than ever before with your proud ignorant patriotism
Because being proud to be in america is such a fucking bad thing.

[.
Our countrys "power of pride" is our countrys greatest weakness.
And you're our biggest embarrassment. Back to Spain with you!

So winnow, how would you rate bush as a president?

Stop dodging the godamn question

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 15, 2004, 6:43 pm

Xzion- wrote:
Stop dodging the godamn question

Here's my top rated presidents:

Abraham Lincoln
Ulysses Grant
Rutherford Hayes
James Garfield
Chester Arthur
Benjamin Harrison
William McKinley
Theodore Roosevelt
William Taft
Warren Harding
Calvin Coolidge
Herbert Hoover
Dwight Eisenhower
Richard Nixon
Gerald Ford
Ronald Reagan
George Bush
George W. Bush

Homercles · Post by **Homercles** » October 15, 2004, 6:48 pm

Are those in any particular order?

noel · Post by **noel** » October 15, 2004, 6:51 pm

You whiners need to STFU!

Stable democracy will erupt in Iraq any day now. Just be patient!

I know things look bad now, but thank God G.W. has an exit strategy!

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 15, 2004, 6:56 pm

Homercles wrote:Are those in any particular order?

Yes, they are in order of oldest to most recent presidents.

Look here for info.

noel · Post by **noel** » October 15, 2004, 7:00 pm

John F. Kennedy didn't make your list?

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 15, 2004, 7:03 pm

noel wrote:John F. Kennedy didn't make your list?

I'm fucking with Xzion. Check the link.

Presidents who killed people outside of war (or who were accused thereof)

George Washington - accused of murdering a French ambassador during peacetime.
Andrew Jackson - killed a man in a duel

Presidents who had extramarital affairs

Thomas Jefferson
James Garfield
Warren Harding
Franklin Roosevelt
John Kennedy
Lyndon Johnson
Bill Clinton
Presidents with an alcohol problem
Franklin Pierce
Ulysses Grant
George W. Bush

Presidents who owned slaves

George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
James Madison
Andrew Jackson
James Polk
Zachary Taylor

Presidents with facial hair

Martin Van Buren - large mutton-chops
Abraham Lincoln - beard
Ulysses Grant - beard and mustache
Rutherford Hayes - beard and mustache
James Garfield - beard and mustache
Chester Arthur - mustache and sideburns
Grover Cleveland - mustache
Benjamin Harrison - beard and mustache
Theodore Roosevelt - mustache
William Taft - mustache

Presidents who joined the Confederacy

John Tyler

President who slept the most

Calvin Coolidge - slept 10 hours a day.

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » October 15, 2004, 7:13 pm

Heh, its been a while since a president had facial hair.

noel · Post by **noel** » October 15, 2004, 7:14 pm

Funny.

Drolgin Steingrinder · October 15, 2004, 7:30 pm

noel wrote:Fucking thing ate the first half of my post ><

Since when did the American people accept this in their democratic land of the free? You are making fools of yourselves even letting him stay in this long. And everyone else in the world sees this.
Again, you place the blame where the blame does not belong. You want to blame the US citizens for the actions of our elected officials. Keep in mind that though it's true Bush lost the popular vote, he won the electoral college vote. Also keep in mind that A LOT of people voted for Bush. He didn't lose the popular vote by much. Research the electoral college and try to understand it. You CANNOT fault the American people for the foreign policies of the Bush administration. If you want to point fingers at Wolfowitz, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfield, or Bush himself, I have no problems with that, but it is wrong to make it as though the US population is at fault.

I agree with you, Noel. The American people aren't directly to blame for the current administration. However, should the American people decide to vote for Bush for another term, full well knowing his policies...

[Show]: Also, teeny is a muffin of

Tenuvil · Post by **Tenuvil** » October 15, 2004, 9:18 pm

Xzion- wrote:
Akaran_D wrote:
Causing more anti american feeling than ever before with your proud ignorant patriotism
Because being proud to be in america is such a fucking bad thing.

[.
Our countrys "power of pride" is our countrys greatest weakness.

Pride goeth before a fall. Ironic how that saying is from the Bible.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » October 17, 2004, 10:28 am

Wow, lots of responses.

Ok guys, I should refine I guess. As Drolgin states, if the U.S people vote for Bush a second time, then whether you like it or not, they represent you and thus they are your responsibility. I agree with you Noel my good man, I just wanted to put the pressure on those to not vote for Bush, every little helps

This is not about biting the hand that feeds you, being jealous of number 1 etc. I am afraid you guys thinking that are jacking off a little hard about your country here.

Kilmoll, or Winnow, or Akaran, etc, you guys have not killed anyone, nor are you necessarily stupid people (cept Winnow!!!!1) but realise that in reality your, and therefore my, local superpower has not done a great job with this war on terror issue.

Would you like to deny that?

Also, being proud of where your parents fucked? I have never got that and never will. It's pointless. And your countries zealousness (OMG DISCLAIMER FROM AN OUTSIDERS PERSPECTIVE!) to defend your pride is what got you this war in the first place.

My anger shines through in these posts, because I see morons come back with these stupid proud unenlightened arguments, or some tit for tat shit about Sunday Bloody Sunday.
On a side note, I grew up here and avoided that shit because its for retards. The war on terror is a global war on retards, the U.S is simply doing a shit job with it.

It is right, just, necessary to point this out.

Just because you are a powerful country does not mean you are above moral decency.

Thanks for having a good wee chinwag about it though, I have enjoyed this. Cheers Lohrno

And Akaran, or anyone that thinks Im a big Irish hippy sticking his nose where it don't belong, your too bloody right!!

Hi Drolgin Much

for teh supar d0rf ! /clap

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » October 17, 2004, 12:29 pm

Oh, I don't disagree, and I've said it many times.
I think we've horribly botched the 'war on terror'.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 17, 2004, 3:33 pm

You say we've done a poor job on the war on terror...what are you basing this on? What's the litmus test for terror in the world being handled?

All the fluffy words from people who think they can handle terror better doesn't mean shit.

If Ireland was able to handle their own terrorists I'd be impressed much less world terror.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » October 17, 2004, 3:34 pm

I am sure Ireland would handle their own terrorists a lot better if Americans didn't pump so much money into IRA. That said, they did handle it. And that is more than can be said about Afghanistan or Iraq.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » October 17, 2004, 3:53 pm

Yeah it's easier to critize than be constructive I agree Winnow.

Here is how to be constructive, get Bush outta there!
He is bullshitting you.

This time the bullshit is attacking a country that had nothing. I repeat. Nothing to do with Sept 11th or Al-Quada. To give you, the voters, the impression you were being looked after (the war over there instead of our turf!) while also bumping off his daddy's arch nemesis, making his buddies a hell of a lot richer in contracts (in totally legal ways of course!), showing everyone else who was boss by unilaterally making the decision, going against the expressed wishes of the International community. Real diplomatic. And reasonable!

Just so certain people could be protected (such as the Saudi's) and you could be distracted from the fact that Bin Laden hadn't been found. You remember him? The actual enemy, not a faceless "TERROR", a group of people called Al-Queda.

Terrorist action is never going to stop. Its a war you will not win. Simply because the outlines are so vague.
If therefore, the US outlines are to protect your country, I ask you, how was/Is Iraq a threat? Is the U.S and her allies less despised? No. Because the real reasons for the hatred have not been explored or accepted.

In truth here Winnow, Northern Ireland's death toll due to terrorists this year, zero. All we got here is infighting between political and terrorist groups. The terrorists being jokes compared to the ones prepared to fly planes into your buildings.

Assuming I don't have a worthwhile opinion because of my country's history?

k.....

?

The litmus test is whether there is any less hatred towards the U.S since 9/11. The answer is no. There is more hatred.
I find it hard to believe someone couldn't have done a better job, if they had any sense in their head what so ever.

You don't agree?

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » October 17, 2004, 3:54 pm

Winnow wrote:You say we've done a poor job on the war on terror...what are you basing this on? What's the litmus test for terror in the world being handled?

how about the fact you aren't even looking in the right fucking country for bin laden, dumbass?

noel · Post by **noel** » October 17, 2004, 4:40 pm

Actually Winnow, it's quite well documented that we have horribly botched the war on terrorism by: focusing completely on the wrong country, not building a real coalition, polarizing the ideologies in the middle east against us, not giving support to countries that are in danger of being overthrown by radical fundamentalists, and setting up a world environment that's a breeding ground for terrorism.

Other than that... at least W has an exit strategy! Oh wait...

You don't have to take my word for it though:
Richard Clarke - Against All Enemies

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 17, 2004, 7:01 pm

kyoukan wrote:
Winnow wrote:You say we've done a poor job on the war on terror...what are you basing this on? What's the litmus test for terror in the world being handled?
how about the fact you aren't even looking in the right fucking country for bin laden, dumbass?

Hi there dipshit. You think we are only looking for Bin Laden in Iraq? God damn you're an idiot.

Rekaar. · Post by **Rekaar.** » October 17, 2004, 7:06 pm

There are 12k troops on the ground in afghanistan, you think they're just twiddling their thumbs?

Iraq has 25 million people in it, it requires a proportionately larger force. The war on terror is being waged in both places. I think the challenge is that none of you have any grasp of the ebb and flow of a war. It's not going to be all hippies and rose petals dancing in the streets.

Hell even in our own country we have people that would subvert the war efforts, why is it such a fucking shock that people in a war torn region would have differing opinions? Another subject though

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » October 17, 2004, 7:15 pm

Rekaar. wrote:There are 12k troops on the ground in afghanistan, you think they're just twiddling their thumbs?

Actually I know they are just twiddling their thumbs. The entire country of Afghanistan outside Kabul is a wasteland of warlord-controlled areas that the coalition has not the manpower nor the will to venture into. It's pure anarchy while your 12k troops (although more realistically it is less than 1000 US troops in afghanistan, it's well known that even the canadians outnumber you there) don't do anything but patrol a tiny area around the capital city, too frightened and ill equipped adn supported to do anything else. You let the pakistani army, the fucking pakistani army conduct your hunt for bin laden in the mountains. lol? probably 99% of the pakistani army would just as soon shoot you in the fucking face and shit on your corpse than look at you. why don't you just hire al'quada operatives to conduct your search for bin laden? you'd get the same fucking results. the pakistani military is probably the ones hiding bin laden in the first place.

Iraq has 25 million people in it, it requires a proportionately larger force. The war on terror is being waged in both places.

Yes it has 25 million people in it. each and just about every one of them having absolutely nothing to do with 9/11, or international terrorism in general. why don't you neocon rejects just fucking admit that you invaded iraq to exploit it's natural resources and to flext your armchair general penises about what a bunch of fucking bad asses the USA is?

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 17, 2004, 7:17 pm

kyoukan wrote: It's pure anarchy while your 12k troops (although more realistically it is less than 1000 US troops in afghanistan, it's well known that even the canadians outnumber you there)

Back that up with some sources. You're full of shit.

noel · Post by **noel** » October 17, 2004, 8:14 pm

kyoukan wrote:Yes it has 25 million people in it. each and just about every one of them having absolutely nothing to do with 9/11, or international terrorism in general. why don't you neocon rejects just fucking admit that you invaded iraq to exploit it's natural resources and to flext your armchair general penises about what a bunch of fucking bad asses the USA is?

Prior to the Iraq invasion, 70% of the US citizens believed that Iraq was sponsoring terrorism and contained WMDs. They believed this because this was what the current administration told them. Even though they had zero evidence of the former, and only circumstantial evidence of the latter. The reason they don't admit it is because they don't understand it, and only believe what they are spoonfed.

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » October 17, 2004, 8:14 pm

25% of my heritage is Irish, and I undestand now why Brian Boru was the last Irish king, and the Brits have owned them for centuries.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » October 17, 2004, 9:18 pm

Hi there dipshit. You think we are only looking for Bin Laden in Iraq? God damn you're an idiot.

So are you once again trying to link bin Laden to Iraq? You've failed that more times than Bush have.

There are 12k troops on the ground in afghanistan, you think they're just twiddling their thumbs?

Nah they are also having a good time losing control of the country and handing it over to warlords who are as bad or close to as bad as Taliban.

Iraq has 25 million people in it, it requires a proportionately larger force.

But.. I thought you had the full support of the Iraqi people?? Bush said so!

Prior to the Iraq invasion, 70% of the US citizens believed that Iraq was sponsoring terrorism and contained WMDs. They believed this because this was what the current administration told them.

That just proves how naive 70% of Americans are..

25% of my heritage is Irish, and I undestand now why Brian Boru was the last Irish king, and the Brits have owned them for centuries.

And Ireland cheers that they got rid of your family, while the other 75% of whatever it is your are made up of are crying.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 17, 2004, 9:34 pm

noel wrote: Prior to the Iraq invasion, 70% of the US citizens believed that Iraq was sponsoring terrorism and contained WMDs. They believed this because this was what the current administration told them. Even though they had zero evidence of the former, and only circumstantial evidence of the latter. The reason they don't admit it is because they don't understand it, and only believe what they are spoonfed.

Unless you are an atheist, you're logic about being spoonfed bullshit is moot.

noel · Post by **noel** » October 17, 2004, 10:29 pm

Try to stay on topic for just a moment Winnow. We're talking about what our administration leaks to the press and the propaganda they propogate, not religion.

The fact is, our adminstration spoonfed us bullshit. Some of us still believe that bullshit even though it has been proven in multiple places that there was no connection between Iraq and Al Quaeda and that Iraq had no WMDs.

Congratulations to our government for freeing the Iraqi people. Now our own people are in more danger than they were prior to 9/11.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · October 17, 2004, 10:56 pm

noel wrote:Try to stay on topic for just a moment Winnow. We're talking about what our administration leaks to the press and the propaganda they propogate, not religion.

The fact is, our adminstration spoonfed us bullshit. Some of us still believe that bullshit even though it has been proven in multiple places that there was no connection between Iraq and Al Quaeda and that Iraq had no WMDs.

Congratulations to our government for freeing the Iraqi people. Now our own people are in more danger than they were prior to 9/11.

What bullshit have you been led to believe you were fed again? I know I wasn't fed any bullshit. Maybe Bush has the ability to selectively send his bullshit to individual TV's....LOL

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » October 17, 2004, 10:59 pm

Or maybe you decide to selectively listen to what supports your bigoted view of the world.

Bush "Iraq has WMDs! We must kill them!"
Midnyte "YEAH!"
Bush "Iraq has no WMDs."
Midnyte sticks fingers in his ears "NANANANANANANANANANA"

noel · Post by **noel** » October 17, 2004, 10:59 pm

1. Iraq had WMDs

2. Iraq sponsored terrorism, specifically Al Quaeda

3. Al Quaeda was operating out of Iraq

4. The world/US is safer because of our presence in Iraq, and our overthrow of Sadaam Hussein

In reality, the world probably is a better place without Sadaam leading Iraq, but the world is sure as hell not a safer place.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » October 17, 2004, 11:22 pm

I disagree. It made zero difference for the world in a positive way. However, it has divided the world more so the Iraq war had a negative impact on the world.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · October 17, 2004, 11:39 pm

Kelshara wrote:I disagree. It made zero difference for the world in a positive way. However, it has divided the world more so the Iraq war had a negative impact on the world.

You must wear blinders or something. What a sadly narrow view of the world you have. You need to go back to school, and maybe this time, listen.

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » October 18, 2004, 12:17 am

The removal of a power hungry dictator is never a bad thing.
There may be better things, or maybe having him in power may be better than the consequences - but it can never be a totally bad thing.

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » October 18, 2004, 12:50 am

Hrmm... the US isn't always against dictators http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB113/

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » October 18, 2004, 12:53 am

Did I say we were always against them?
Do I deny that we've helped Saddam in the past, or other 'evil' countires when it suits our needs?
Have I ever said I'm proud of my country when it does it?

I'm not. I never will be.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » October 18, 2004, 12:01 pm

This would be a whole fuckload easier if the Democrats had pushed forward a good candidate instead Herman Munster, King of the Waffle House. If Bush get re-elected, it's their fault.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 18, 2004, 1:16 pm

masteen wrote:This would be a whole fuckload easier if the Democrats had pushed forward a good candidate instead Herman Munster, King of the Waffle House. If Bush get re-elected, it's their fault.

I also blame the democrats.

You've got a candidate that is worse than Bush.

-Kerry is outright lying about the draft. He's sending fake draft post cards to the 18-26 year olds. Even the liberal bozos on this board should understand that it's more likely for Kerry to hold a draft than Bush. Bush has said outright there will be no draft and no one is even suggesting it except the democrats. Kerry needs the draft to fill up his new two full divisions for the military...where are these divisons coming from?

-Kerry is telling senior citizens their social security will go away if Bush is elected. Another outright lie also used in 2000 and now the democrats are jumping all over Bush for trying to give the people a little more choice in how they invest their Social Security funds.

-Kerry is blaming the flu vacination shortage on Bush. Another total bullshit claim.

-Of course the most obvious is Kerry's campaign already screaming bloody murder over voter fraud that hasn't happened and is most likely to come from the demorats if it does.

Kerry is a grade-A loser who isn't better than Bush. He gets props for being the dirtiest campaigner yet but it's disgusting that you are falling for this guy. This guy is a greed and power hungry fool. There's no doubt he's sold out america to the highest bidders on his campaign.

I'll take Bush. I know exactly where he stands. Your "anyone but Bush" rational is going to get you fucked up the ass with this guy.

Lohrno · Post by **Lohrno** » October 18, 2004, 1:19 pm

Winnow wrote: Kerry is a grade-A loser who isn't better than Bush. He gets props for being the dirtiest campaigner

No offense, but theres no way in hell Bush isn't (the dirtiest). Especially with the Karl Rove bug thing, and Jeb rigging the votes in FL.

-=Lohrno

VeeshanVault

To the undecided or moronic (Plus election poll omg!)

Who do you hope will win?

Re: To the undecided or moronic (Plus election poll omg!)