Real World Event Discussions

Our President

POSTED BY: howdyrockerbaby1
UPDATED: Wednesday, May 21, 2025 16:36
VIEWED: 49385
PAGE 16 of 24

CONNORFLYNN

Sunday, May 2, 2004 1:01 AM

Well..here is where personal convictions play a part in making decisions. I wouldn't want to be the leader of the greatest country in the free world (I'm American hehe..Im sure all you other Browncoats who live in other countries feel the same about your own countries hehe:biggrin ), because their actions are under constant scrutiny, with everyone second guessing every move.

As I've said in previous posts, I personally don't feel the War in Iraq was anything more then a strategic move to put huge pressure on Iran (the true hotbed for extremism) and to have the Islamafascists fighting our "Armies not our civilians" on their own soils. Thats my opinion. Take it as you will.

As for striking first, Well, hindsight is 20/20. It is my opinion that 9/11 has changed the way wars will be waged in the future and I see Pre-emption as a necessary evil, particularly in the case of radical Islamafascism. There can be no reasoning with the Islamafascists, when their sole purpose on this earth is to convert the world to Radical Islam or become a martyr. When fighting that kind of mindset, it seems unrealistic and weak to deal with the situation with kids gloves on.

PS. I figured the partial report you posted was probably taken from another site. I just wanted to show the whole excerpt, because the "Cropped" one was misleading in my opinion. I have a hard time visiting websites that are partisan. It gives me great headaches to wade through the spin, to find a smidge of truth LOL. Too many people take spin as hard fact. I hope you didn't take it as an attack, because that was not the intent.

And for all you conspiracy theorists..here's a website I came across today in my internet perusing.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/

I found this lil diddy intriguing and feel to a degree that Gary Shmidt hit the nail on the head.

"The question is whether Rumsfeld and his generals have learned from past mistakes. Or rather, perhaps, the question is whether George W. Bush has learned from Rumsfeld's past mistakes. After all, at the end of the day, it is up to the president to ensure that the success he demands in Iraq will in fact be accomplished. If his current secretary of defense cannot make the adjustments that are necessary, the president should find one who will."

America needs to win the war against the Islamafascists. Personally, I don't think Rumsfeld has the ability to make that happen.

SIGNYM

Sunday, May 2, 2004 4:37 AM

Oh goody, another discussion!

But there is SO MUCH confusion and misdirected thinking!

First of all, I'm sorry to say this but George "dubya" Bush doesn't have the smarts to be "in charge". Apparently Cheney is George's Svengali. George is a man of convictions, but I'm not sure that he's capable of independent thought. (I know what I'm talking about. Since my daughter is borderline retarded I know what that looks like.)

The proof of the rightness of one's opinions is the ability to predict what's going to happen in the future.

EVERY YEAR for five years before 9/11 I would sigh and think- "Well, we squeaked by another one." After the embassy bombings and the Cole, and the TERROR ALERT that was broadcast ONE MONTH b4 9/11. did anyone really think that an ocean and unguarded borders were going to keep us safe???? Now. if I can see that with no special access, why couldn't Cheney?

I predicted (on-line, on another website) that we would invade Afghanistan, that we would bomb, that we would set up an oil guy, that biological warfare would start. Apparently my predictions were just a little TOO timely, so I was followed by the FBI for a couple of days.

I predicted that we would invade Iraq MONTHS before it happened, that it had NOTHING to do with WMD because the weapons never existed, and that it would be like Vietnam.

How did could I predict all of this??? BY following the money, and following the ideology. I expect the worst from the gang of thugs and hypocrites in the Aministraiton, and they haven't disappointed me yet!

SIGNYM

Sunday, May 2, 2004 5:18 PM

Well, nobody responded.

OK, I'm going to have a "Mal" moment here- when I believe in nothing and reveal my true inner bitterness.

You might wonder why I'm telling YOU. It's because I believe that I undertsand Mal, and so some of you might understand me too.

Mal is the ultimate realist. His beliefs- in God, in the concern of the authorities, in the might of justice, the providence of Nature, the essential goodness human beings - were burned away in the crucible of experience.

While I can't claim to have Mal's battlefield experience, I've had many "Mal" moments- in my touch with insanity when I had to make a conscious choice to believe in my senses, when my daughter was born with a brain bleed so severe the doctors thought she would die or be profoundly retarded and when they threw up their hands six years later and said "We're up a creek without a paddle", when my MIL died on my watch and I was there for her agonal breaths, and then the same thing happened with my dad- who saw more as a Pole in WWII than you would ever want to be burdened with, when I had to pick up a gun and sit on a friend's porch waiting for the stalker to come by, when I saw "Hearts and Minds" and finally connected with the pain of our victims.

Most Americans (70%) are incapable of independent thought. I believe you are different.

Having lived nearly 50 years, I have the benefit of remembering Vietnam... and Grenada, and Panama, Afghanistan, and Gulf War I, and Gulf War II. Grenada, Panama, Afghanistan, and Gulf War II were all strangely similar. First, the Administration would announce that they "suddenly" found a problem: Grenada had a stockpile of Cuban weapons, Noriega was a big "drug runner", Afghanistan was harboring ObL, Saddam had WMD. There would be the drumbeat to war. It was urgent. It was a severe threat to the USA. It had to be taken care of RIGHT AWAY. No delay was allowed! Not a year! Not a month! Not even a week!

The timing was all off because it was all pre-planned. Folks- don't look at the content of the headlines, look at the timing if you want to see what's going on.

So here we are: the threat of Grenada has been neutralized, the tide of drugs had been stemmed, ObL has been captured, and those WMD have been destroyed. Right?

I'm just going to add a couple more things- for those who have followed me tihs far.

None of the above makes sense if you think that Republicans Presidents, and THIS President and his neocon administration (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Wolfowitz, Perle, Wurmser, Feith, Libby, Abrams) lay awake at night worrying about us and the future of the USA.

The answer to my question- If I could see [9/11] why couldn't Cheney? - is that of course he could see it. He just didn't give a damn, and he still doesn't. Other administration folks have written extensively about how getting rid of Saddam would make the world safe- for Israel. I could give you links to the papers if you want- it's all published.

One of them- Wurmser- even postulated years before the fact that Chalabi would make a good puppet government. (also published). And of course Wurmser and Feith set up that "Office of Special Plans" that funneled "special" intelligence (from Chalabi and probably from Mossad) to Cheney outside of the normal CIA and military intelligence channels. The point of this is:

Please, disabuse yourselves of the notion that these people lay awake and worry about the USA. I do- they don't.

One other point- some of you folks are in the military, some are died-in-the-wool libertarians, some are leftover Confederate rebels. The one thing you all have in common is that you identify strongly with the underdog, which is why you like FF in the first place.

And then you take your helicopter gunships and daisy cutter bombs and the threat of nuclear weapons, your megacorporations and banks, your God-fearing religion and democracy, and smack Central and South America, Africa, central Asia and the Mid-East with rapacious dictators, torture (either by proxy or directly), a blood-sucking economy, a

STEVE580

Sunday, May 2, 2004 5:44 PM

Quote:
Most Americans (70%) are incapable of independent thought.

What the fuck? Just where in the hell did that statistic come from?

Bastard.
-Steve

SIGNYM

Sunday, May 2, 2004 5:46 PM

I watch the polls.

But, all I need to do is check out how many people think they want to buy SUVs, and how many really believe that god has spoken to them!

Friend, I'm ahead of the curve most of the way in figuring out what's going to happen. I take the notion to test my assumptions against reality.

DARKJESTER

Sunday, May 2, 2004 8:41 PM

SignyM

I'm not saying you are wrong, because I have no experience in much of what your first post said. But the way your post was written won't make you any friends or converts, in my opinion. It seems that you were saying that your experiences and perceptions of reality are the only things of importance, and the opinions of the others, the "not-you", are purposefully ignorant and pitifully niave. It also seems to me that you don't care if you change anyone's thoughts or opinions. And that seems to be a common theme throughout this thread.

It seems to me that this whole thread is a long string of inaccuracy. Opinions masquerading as informed comprehension. Facts presented as Truths, and vice-versa. It seems that we cannot even agree on what a "fact" consists of.

I once read an article in a newsletter on different forms of lying (I AM NOT implying that ANYONE on this thread has knowing told an untruth!!). Lies of omission, of mis-direction, etc. One example given by the author was of a friend telling how she was forced off a porch at a party, and told to leave. She and the host were argueing, and according to the woman it happened to, the host said "Get out of here!". While telling this story, the woman made pushing gestures with her hands, IMPLYING non-verbally that she had been pushed. The author of the article, however, had witnessed the whole scene, and could report that at no time did the host touch this woman. He had pointed to the stairs, and told the woman to leave.
Did the woman lie? Yes, by implying something that did not physically happen.
Did the woman tell the truth? Yes, by expressing how she felt at the time.

This is how I see a number of the "sweeping statements" made in this thread. Perhaps not "FACT" in the strictest sense, but certainly not lies, either.

But may I propose that simply because you cannot be proven WRONG does not mean your arguements and/or beliefs are RIGHT in shiny big letters. And as long as we keep insisting that other people recognize and acknowledge OUR truths, there will be less dialogue and more people spouting "facts" and saying to each other "No, you're wrong, moron".

As Browncoats, I think we can do better....
(but I could be wrong...)

MAL "You only gotta scare him."
JAYNE "Pain is scary..."

GHOULMAN

Sunday, May 2, 2004 8:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Connorflynn:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Quote:
Originally posted by Connorflynn:
Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Hey spelling Nazi... when you call people names why don't YOU look up the meaning?
-------------------------------------
ELITIST - e·lit·ism or é·lit·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (-ltzm, -l-)
n.

1. The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.
2.
1. The sense of entitlement enjoyed by such a group or class.
2. Control, rule, or domination by such a group or class.
---------
And I love how you basically rationalized yourself into labeling me an embittered Socialist. You're a real nut.

Still - your kind can only attack people by calling them names while the rest of us post actual facts, opinions, and knowledge.

It seems that I have struck a nerve by posting actual facts, opinion and well rounded knowledge. I also believe that you did indeed act and post in an embittered elitist fashion, while speciously misusing AND mispelling words outside your vocabulary.

Quote:
Liar.

You didn't post one little fact. I made a FRICKIN' LIST. What's your problem?

Awful defensive aren't ya? ;) As for your list of "FACTS" There is a difference between "Opinion" and "Fact". Everything you have posted up to now has been pure conjecture and 100% poorly worded opinion with zero fact.

I posted a number of facts, along with the sources.

Quote:
I'll tell ya. You are a liar! If someone says GWB is bad, you will disagree without hesitation. Does that sound rational? No, but it does sound familiar.

I don't believe I've really disagreed with anyone who has posted a rational (emphasis on rational) thought on this topic. I may correct or add my own 2 cents, but not disagree. Everyone is entitled. If you'll notice, I haven't attacked any politician or nationality or political affiliation (Except for Islamafascism, which I find abhorrent). I don't mock our leaders, even if I find them amusing.

Quote:
I didn't call anyone names but you jumped right up and called me an ELITIST. Dead giveaway as using that word in this context is only found comming from the mouth of GWB and other White House language police. Oh, and elitist doesn't mean that as I've already demonstrated above... which you still ignored just like everything else everyone else posted.

I'm not sure I follow you on this one? Too much rambling. This is actually entertaining. As for the Elitist part..I still believe it fits the bill. The republican administration doesn't have the corner on the market for the use of that word. It has been around for ages.

Quote:
Rush Limbaugh called and he wants his rhetoric back!

Hehe..good one. What rhetoric did I steal from him again? Since I don't listen to him. Maybe I should start listening to him.

Quote:
And I noticed Connerflynn is far more fast and loose with facts than anyone here and he refuses to offer any facts that he can stand behind. Worse, he childishly side steps issues as if that's an Ok thing to do in a debate. Well, it isn't.

One minute I don't use facts, next minute they are loose? LOL. What issue(s) have I sidestepped? Again, I have offerred a multitude of facts and their sources.

Saying Bill Clinton sucks, or George W. Bush is ignorant are opinions not facts(though in some cases I suppose a good argument could be made, with the use of various evidence)

Quote:
For example - When Connerflynn states that 9/11 has been investigated in detail, why would anyone believe that?

WOW..

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/911.html

And that's just one source. How many ya want?

Quote:
We all recently know that the families of the 9/11 Attacks are trying desperately to get the White House to stop CENSORING THAT VERY INFORMATION!

Once again pure conjecture with no basis

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

STEVE580

Sunday, May 2, 2004 9:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
I watch the polls.

But, all I need to do is check out how many people think they want to buy SUVs, and how many really believe that god has spoken to them!

Friend, I'm ahead of the curve most of the way in figuring out what's going to happen. I take the notion to test my assumptions against reality.

Yeah yeah, nice. I asked where you got that statistic from. A survey, or scientific study; was it given in a news article somewhere?

Don't just make shit up. Especially if what you are saying slanders my entire family and all of my friends. That tends to upset me.
-Steve

RUXTON

Sunday, May 2, 2004 10:51 PM

SignyM, well said. Those of us who think we are capable of independent thought most likely agreed so much with what you said there was little need for response, other than to note that some of the rest of us also knew what would happen post-invasions. For those with sufficient interest to have looked into things, the situations today in Iraq or Afgh. are not big surprises.

After reading your second post above, I must say I agree with most if not all you said. You didn't mention that Chalabi is a convicted (for fraud, as I recall, without looking anything up) criminal.

No, the Dem's don't have anything to offer. I personally like Kucinich.

Concerning "thinking": I once took a long drive of about 12 hours, in a car with no radio. When I arrived, my friend asked me how I could stand being in the car that long without a radio. I told her I enjoy thinking, and a radio interferes with that, in my case. I regretted the journey's end because I hadn't thought enough things through. Thinking seems to be a dying art, commonly among the younger set. (I'm a bit older than you.)

I'm pleased to see you have much the same attitude as I do, in that you find it unnecessary to violently defend your well-informed position against the blindness some posters here exhibit. Those with fixed opinions won't be swayed by the truth, even if it hits them smack in the face. Those who have taken great steps to illustrate the reasoning behind their posts, as I have (far above), are shunned by those who think they have all the facts, when actually they don't have a clue. One poster here seemed to think the US went to Iraq to prevent Iraqis from coming here -- as if they could actually get here. (Of course, they might load their one and only model airplane with firecrackers and hope it lands somewhere near the White House.) Others cry foul at thoroughly researched facts but bring nothing to the forum that supports their beliefs, and express outrage that anyone could think differently from them.

I went to great pains above to give an example of how I arrive at ALL my conclusions, but the dummies here are incapable of making a simple connection, and still seem to think I subscribe to one or another conspiracy theories. One fellow thought I was insulting him or his beliefs, because I have taken very considerable steps and vast amounts of time to learn what's going on, and he has not.
------------------------
Ghoulman, your grasp of facts is mostly irreproachable. Most of the posters here seem agree with you. I'd suggest you ignore all three major dummies, as I have, and not waste your valuable time and energy responding to them.
------------------------
Steve580, you said:
"Yeah yeah, nice. I asked where you got that statistic from. A survey, or scientific study; was it given in a news article somewhere?"

Seems to me SignyM was able to make predictions based on his (her?) personal research. It matters not where he got the facts, as long as they showed him the path to be able to make such accurate predictions. Can you not do the same?

.......Ruxton

HKCAVALIER

Sunday, May 2, 2004 11:26 PM

Quote:
"Seems to me SignyM was able to make predictions based on his (her?) personal research. It matters not where he got the facts, as long as they showed him the path to be able to make such accurate predictions. Can you not do the same?

.......Ruxton"

OMFG! Somebody thinking for themselves? Making judgments based on their own experience? Assessing the political scene using their own god-given powers of discernment? Pretty radical claims there, Rux, don't want to scare the children!!! LOL

What's most troubling to me about our situation in this country is that "rational discourse" seems to be entirely out of favor, which is extremely perilous for us since Democracy cannot exist without it. If simple reason cannot be respected (as for instance: X says he never said Q. A transcript of X saying Q is produced. Ergo, X lied), how can anyone be held accountable? Without a reality check, reality doesn't matter. Ignorance is Strength, War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery. Make the pie higher! Put food on your family!

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.