kirottu Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 (edited) "So, US should attack some new country after Irak has been dealt with?" That's for them tod ecide. If they feel it's worth the risk, and they believe they have reason to feel threatened by said country enough to warrant an attack then they should so what they must. That goes for any country. I guarantee you if countries like Iran, or North Korea could attack the US and successfully beat them; they'd do it. In a heart beat. No questions asked. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So we Edited September 12, 2006 by kirottu This post is not to be enjoyed, discussed, or referenced on company time.
Xard Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 Even as powerful as the US is, they aren't capable of successfully attacking a mass of countries like they did Iraq with a full ground war. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Nuke time! ) How can it be a no ob build. It has PROVEN effective. I dare you to show your builds and I will tear you apart in an arugment about how these builds will won them. - OverPowered Godzilla (OPG)
alanschu Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 Bashing Bush seems to be the trendy, fashionable thing to do now-a-days.
Pop Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 Bashing Bush seems to be the trendy, fashionable thing to do now-a-days. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It is, but to absolutely fair, his executive decisions concerning the war haven't been exactly smart. Most of those track back, at least indirectly, to the influence of Donald Rumsfeld. Join me, and we shall make Production Beards a reality!
alanschu Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 I'm curious how a different president would do. I have heard people criticize Bush for not having just cause (i.e. the WMDs) for attacking Iraq, yet they forget that Clinton (under the same guise, suspected WMDs with intelligence being less than accurate) did the same thing.
LoneWolf16 Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 Bashing Bush seems to be the trendy, fashionable thing to do now-a-days. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It is, but to absolutely fair, his executive decisions concerning the war haven't been exactly smart. Most of those track back, at least indirectly, to the influence of Donald Rumsfeld. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It's not like bush is running things anyway. He's more like a chimp in a suit at the county fair...you're laughing at him while the carnies pick pocket you. I had thought that some of nature's journeymen had made men and not made them well, for they imitated humanity so abominably. - Book of Counted Sorrows 'Cause I won't know the man that kills me and I don't know these men I kill but we all wind up on the same side 'cause ain't none of us doin' god's will. - Everlast
Volourn Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 "So we DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
Lucius Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 Well Alan, he's a retarded cowboy, in charge of the most powerful nation on earth. What's not to laugh about? :D DENMARK! It appears that I have not yet found a sig to replace the one about me not being banned... interesting.
6 Foot Invisible Rabbit Posted September 12, 2006 Author Posted September 12, 2006 (edited) I'm curious how a different president would do. I have heard people criticize Bush for not having just cause (i.e. the WMDs) for attacking Iraq, yet they forget that Clinton (under the same guise, suspected WMDs with intelligence being less than accurate) did the same thing. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The difference here is that when Clinton did so he did not commit ground troops to remove Saddam from power, occupy the nation, and destabilized the country that it is on the verge of civil war. When Clinton attacked it was very noncommital and from afar so that if the Intelligence was proven false or at error we can just go "oops" and forget about it. We couldn't in the way Bush handled the situation. Edited September 12, 2006 by 6 Foot Invisible Rabbit Harvey
Dark Moth Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 At the risk of being OT, can't you just stick to your regular account, Hades (aka giant pink bunny)?
Checkpoint Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 Hades, I mean the pink bunny, doesn't know who you're talking about. ^Yes, that is a good observation, Checkpoint. /God
6 Foot Invisible Rabbit Posted September 12, 2006 Author Posted September 12, 2006 At the risk of being OT, can't you just stick to your regular account, Hades (aka giant pink bunny)? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Eh? Why? Everyone has alts. Just look at Llyr and li'l Nicky. Besides whats wrong being a pink bunny once and a while? Harvey
alanschu Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 I guarantee that Llyr and Nick are NOT alts.
6 Foot Invisible Rabbit Posted September 12, 2006 Author Posted September 12, 2006 Close enough for government work. Harvey
Blank Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 Partisan politics should not come into play on a national day of mourning. It should be a day of reflection and have it be the one moment that both sides can stow the rhetoric.... The fault of the Democrats is that they are too focused on criticizing the decisions of this administration and yet not giving any good ideas to help solve the problems over there. Cut and run my sound good on paper but doing that will only destabilize the region even worse. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> We need to focus on the future, not how we got here. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I agree with these statements.
alanschu Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 Close enough for government work. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Not at all. They don't even live in the same country.
Colrom Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 We need to focus on the future, not how we got here. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I agree with these statements. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Tell that to God when you see him. As dark is the absence of light, so evil is the absence of good. If you would destroy evil, do good. Evil cannot be perfected. Thank God.
Calax Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 We need to focus on the future, not how we got here. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I agree with these statements. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Tell that to God when you see him. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I say hi... to me... (after all I am god!) anyway.. I was bashing bush when it was a cardnial sin to do so. (my "clique" started a school riot during highschool by doing so) And using 9/11 to say "I needed to!" is utter crap.... after all he said we were going into iraq in the first place to get WMD's (which we showed to the UN) and to get the Al Queda because they had moved there after we had demoished afganistan (which we have completly forgotten about) If bush starts up the draft I'm gonna get the heck out of Dodge and move to canada. Victor of the 5 year fan fic competition! Kevin Butler will awesome your face off.
Darque Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 Bashing Bush seems to be the trendy, fashionable thing to do now-a-days. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well, given recent revelations... he seems to have brought it on himself.
Colrom Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 What Bush should have done is give a speach about how we miss the people who were killed on 9/11 and how we appreciate the efforts of those who responded to our needs on that day and the days following. End of speach. Instead he sought to use the occasion to rationalize the wars and other controlling actions he has pursued since then. He reminds me of MacBeth. Has anyone looked at his hands closely lately? Is there an open sore there or is it just my imagination? As dark is the absence of light, so evil is the absence of good. If you would destroy evil, do good. Evil cannot be perfected. Thank God.
6 Foot Invisible Rabbit Posted September 12, 2006 Author Posted September 12, 2006 Close enough for government work. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Not at all. They don't even live in the same country. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Okay. Close enough for U.S. government work. Harvey
Dark Moth Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 (edited) Tell that to God when you see him. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What was that for? Are you deliberately trying to be a smartass? Edited September 12, 2006 by Dark Moth
Dark Moth Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 (edited) anyway.. I was bashing bush when it was a cardnial sin to do so. (my "clique" started a school riot during highschool by doing so) And using 9/11 to say "I needed to!" is utter crap.... after all he said we were going into iraq in the first place to get WMD's (which we showed to the UN) and to get the Al Queda because they had moved there after we had demoished afganistan (which we have completly forgotten about) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It was never a 'cardinal sin' to do so, except maybe for a few months after 9/11. And yes, there were al-Quaida operatives in Iraq. And yes, Iraq and al-Quaida did have links before 9/11. But they never collaborated, and Iraq just didn't have anything to do with 9/11, which Bush never claimed anyway. Edited September 12, 2006 by Dark Moth
alanschu Posted September 12, 2006 Posted September 12, 2006 Okay. Close enough for U.S. government work Not at all. They aren't alts in any way shape or form, because they are completely different people. Posting asinine statements like "Close enough for government work" (which doesn't even really make sense in this case) is just pointless. However, the 6 Foot Invisible Rabbit is being posted by the same person as Judge Hades. (Coincidentally, it's also a way to, at least temporarily, by pass the ignore setting people may have put on your other account). For the record, I'm 100% against alternate accounts. I hated it when Ender used them, and I actually liked Ender. Not to mention a host of other absolutely bizarre stuff that happened because of an alternate account. They really don't serve any other purpose outside of possibly being deceitful. If someone wishes a new account for whatever reason, then there's no need for them to hold on to their previous one.
Recommended Posts