Democratic National Convention Thread - Page 16 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-28-2008, 12:27 AM   #226
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
Irvine you must be drunk.
<>


i'm angry.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 12:28 AM   #227
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 04:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2isthebest View Post
Well, for starters, I'm disappointed he originally supported the Iraq war. Most of Congress did at that point, and I'm not holding it against any of them, Republican or Democrat. They were given faulty evidence by the CIA
Bingo !!

That is the whole ball of wax, there was bad information cooked up by Cheney and his cohorts. (no one knew it at the time.)

Senators had clearance to see these files.

Anyone that voted for it-
did a reasonable thing.


In 2002 Obama was just an Illinois State Senator
he did not have clearance to see what the Senators were given.
He did have a close relationship with Tony Rezko, a now convicted felon, that may have been mixed up with Saddam Hussein- In the "oil for food" scam.
So Obama was against removing Saddam. What a surprise.
American Thinker: Obama's Iraqi Oil for Food connection

He gave a speech, so what.

This is the crux of his great judgment??

He did not campaign against the war when he ran for U S Senate in 2004.
He pulled the speech off of his website then.

When he was elected to the Senate, he did not vote with Dennis Kucinich, and all the other end the war Senators.
He voted with Biden, Hillary and all the ones that voted to authorize the war.
__________________

__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 12:38 AM   #228
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 04:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mobvok View Post
In the Twin Cities when Republicans talk about Obama I doubt they'll praise his charming life story when they're wailing about tax and spend and Iraq surrender and whatever.

All the GOP talking heads on TV are making nice remarks about the historical significance of the first African American to be nominated be a major party.

I do expect the the GOP to hit on his lack of experience in the executive field and his judgment.
__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 12:47 AM   #229
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,462
Local Time: 07:13 PM
john mccain is a great candidate for president.. but honestly, yea... he's running into an absolute buzzsaw in barack obama. the comparisons to john f. kennedy aren't just just comparisons... he IS the next JFK, god willing without the same end results. but damn.. he just has that electricity that very few in the history of america have ever had.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 12:49 AM   #230
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:13 PM
another JFK comparison i'd like not to repeat -- his very, very, very narrow victory over Nixon in '60.

people forget this. but many thought the only reason JFK won was because a few hundred thousand women swooned over how good he looked at the first ever series of televised debates.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 12:51 AM   #231
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,462
Local Time: 07:13 PM
honestly... assuming obama gives a legit speach tomorrow, wich of course we all do... if he were to lose the election, then, frankly, the democratic party should just disband.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 12:51 AM   #232
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
mobvok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: boom clap
Posts: 4,433
Local Time: 04:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
Bingo !!

That is the whole ball of wax, there was bad information cooked up by Cheney and his cohorts. (no one knew it at the time.)

Senators had clearance to see these files.

Anyone that voted for it-
did a reasonable thing.


In 2002 Obama was just an Illinois State Senator
he did not have clearance to see what the Senators were given.
He did have a close relationship with Tony Rezko, a now convicted felon, that may have been mixed up with Saddam Hussein- In the "oil for food" scam.
So Obama was against removing Saddam. What a surprise.
American Thinker: Obama's Iraqi Oil for Food connection

He gave a speech, so what.

This is the crux of his great judgment??

He did not campaign against the war when he ran for U S Senate in 2004.
He pulled the speech off of his website then.

When he was elected to the Senate, he did not vote with Dennis Kucinich, and all the other end the war Senators.
He voted with Biden, Hillary and all the ones that voted to authorize the war.
that Obama-Rezko-Saddam link is lame.
__________________
mobvok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 12:53 AM   #233
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 12:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
you have FAILED at the single task presented to you after 9-11. bring Bin Laden to justice. .
There was not a single task presented to the United States after 9/11. In case you did not know, this was not the first time that Bin Ladin and the Al Quada organization had attacked the United States. But the Bush Administration is the first time that the United States actually destroyed Al Quada's main bases of operation. Bush administration policy in Afghanistan has been vastly more successful than Clinton administration policy there.

Quote:
instead, you used it as an excuse to invade Iraq, shred the constitution, and allow torture to become common practice.
Saddam was another security issue that the Clinton administration had kicked down the road to the Bush administration which successfully resolved the issue of Saddam.


Quote:
look at McCain's history and how he's responded to the crisis in Georgia. it is one of bellicosity. one that says, "don't fuck with us." it has no time for the neocon good-vs-evil constant state of warfare. that will not do anything to curb Jihadism.
McCain has been well ahead of the curve on Russia encouraging a stronger stance against Russia than the Bush administration or other countries in Europe wanted to take. They along, with Barack Obama and Joseph Biden, are playing catch up to where McCain has been on Russia for some time now.

Quote:
yes, as i've said, as Obama said, OF COURSE there are time when military action is needed. but military action is a sign of FAILURE. it's a sign that diplomacy has failed. we need shrewd diplomacy and an actual understanding of the cultures we are dealing with and the knowledge that strength is oftentimes restraint.

bombs are not an effective geopolitical tool. war is an absolute last resort.
Had their been military intervention in Bosnia prior to 1995, thousands of lives could have been saved. Instead the world watched 10% of the Bosnian population get slaughtered over 4 years while Diplomacy attempted to resolve the issues, and military force was avoided. Military intervention as an absolute last resort led to the deaths of 250,000 people in Bosnia.

Military intervention as an absolute last resort because of the horrors of World War I helped to create the much greater horror of World War II.

Its not a matter of reserving military intervention only as a last resort, but knowing when military intervention is necessary as opposed to diplomacy or other means of action.


Quote:
sorry, kiddo, no one accepts the false pretense of your statement.
Colin Powell, Kenneth Pollack, and Michael O'Halon, despite being from different political party's, all agree that removing Saddam was necessary and that the United States, the Persian Gulf Region, and the World is better off as a result.
__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 12:54 AM   #234
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:13 PM
go John Kerry:
Quote:
When John McCain stood on the deck of an aircraft carrier just three months after 9/11 and proclaimed, "Next up, Baghdad!", Barack Obama saw, even then, "an occupation of "undetermined length, undetermined cost, undetermined consequences" that would "only fan the flames of the Middle East." Well, guess what? Mission accomplished.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 12:56 AM   #235
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
McCain has been well ahead of the curve on Russia encouraging a stronger stance against Russia than the Bush administration or other countries in Europe wanted to take. They along, with Barack Obama and Joseph Biden, are playing catch up to where McCain has been on Russia for some time now.


since this is the only thing you haven't already posted before, ad nauseum, let's take a look at this.

are you saying that the McCain position on Russia -- snarling, advocating that Georgia be admitted to NATO!?!?! -- is actually an admirable position and one that others are scrambling to adopt?
__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 12:57 AM   #236
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,462
Local Time: 07:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
There was not a single task presented to the United States after 9/11. In case you did not know, this was not the first time that Bin Ladin and the Al Quada organization had attacked the United States. But the Bush Administration is the first time that the United States actually destroyed Al Quada's main bases of operation. Bush administration policy in Afghanistan has been vastly more successful than Clinton administration policy there.
i voted for bush twice. am i sorry for that? no. he was the best candidate the first time around, and the democrats could not put forth a better candidate the second time around.

that said, he fucked up a tremeondous opportunity. there's no other way to put it. the fact that he went after iraq instead of finishing the job in afghanistan, and then would not admit his mistake, is one of the main reasons why, despite my absolute love of john mccain, i am currently leaning towards voting for barack obama.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 12:59 AM   #237
ONE
love, blood, life
 
namkcuR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kettering, Ohio
Posts: 10,290
Local Time: 07:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
i voted for bush twice. am i sorry for that? no. he was the best candidate the first time around, and the democrats could not put forth a better candidate the second time around.

that said, he fucked up a tremeondous opportunity. there's no other way to put it. the fact that he went after iraq instead of finishing the job in afghanistan, and then would not admit his mistake, is one of the main reasons why, despite my absolute love of john mccain, i am currently leaning towards voting for barack obama.
So you're a Republican, then?
__________________
namkcuR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 01:01 AM   #238
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,462
Local Time: 07:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by namkcuR View Post
So you're a Republican, then?
i used to think i was.. i currently consider myself an independent, because frankly, the ideology of both parties pisses me off to a level i prefer not to go to.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 01:02 AM   #239
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 12:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
i voted for bush twice. am i sorry for that? no. he was the best candidate the first time around, and the democrats could not put forth a better candidate the second time around.

that said, he fucked up a tremeondous opportunity. there's no other way to put it. the fact that he went after iraq instead of finishing the job in afghanistan is one of the reasons why, despite my absolute love of john mccain, i am currently leaning towards voting for barack obama.
Thats like saying the United States had the luxury of going after Japan before it went to war with Germany 60 years ago. The United States does not have the luxury of dealing with threats to its security one at a time.

In addition, troop levels in Afghanistan actually increased with the start of the war in Iraq, and most of the units deployed to operation Iraqi Freedom, heavy armored brigades would never be used in much of the terrain where Al Quada had based itself in Afghanistan. .
__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 01:02 AM   #240
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 04:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mobvok View Post
Boils down to two ideas: either you're opposed to the Iraq war because you're irrational and unreasonable, or you're a corrupt sellout.

We see the war mentality here in a nutshell. War isn't bad. It's just one of several options available to any president. Door A has diplomacy, Door B has the U.N, Door C has invasion/war. Which do you prefer today?

If someone thinks a leader has failed if he goes to war, in his responsibilities to pursue all diplomatic options before sending men to die.

he's looney, or a sellout.




I am just saying he was not in the loop in 2002
Obama did not get the evidence people like Joe Biden, John Kerry and Hillary that were in the Senate.



In 2000 the Democrats would not even give Obama a ticket to their convention in Los Angeles. He tells a story of going to L A and being turned away at the door. Quite an amazing turn of events.
__________________

__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com