(10-19-2005) Bush, Bono Have Lunch at the White House - Yahoo* - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > 'Zine (archived) > U2 News
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-09-2005, 03:35 PM   #41
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: nazi punks fuck off
Posts: 21,864
Local Time: 07:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BOYO3221
and don not even mention kennedy, i can destroy that argument..lol.
I'd really like to see you try.

Here's one for you - Lyndon B. Johnson and the Civil Rights Movement.

How about this one - Bill Clinton and Kosovo? If you're basing your argument on Iraq's "liberation", surely you must feel the same about Kosovo.

By the way, it's bad debating form to get proven horribly wrong on a point and then add a condition to your original question to attempt to nullify the rebuttal of your first point.

You're so far off here it's not even funny.

Actually, I think you'd get along quite swimmingly with STING2. You could both have parties and watch Fox News together. Maybe Ann Coulter could stop by and you could all pop some popcorn.
__________________

DaveC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2005, 03:51 PM   #42
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
djerdap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 7,512
Local Time: 11:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BOYO3221
honest to god, i have never seen so many uninformed people on politics, name a prsedident that has done more for humanity. Including numerous reforms on education that was sooo desperately needed and written by a democrat too. including creating millions of jobs in the last 3 years, he turned around our US economy from recession to strong again!. good lord, sometimes i think you people are like sheep just following the pop culture on hating bush, but never ever documenting facts ever NEVER FACTS THAT ARE TRUE?????????????????????? Love him or hate him, the man has done tons for this country and Africa and listen to the thousands of Iraqi civilians that still thank him for overturning saddam that the U.N. should have done 10 years ago when he violated the Un agreement 27 times for disarmamnet when he surrendered after gulf war 1991-92
You've got to be fuckin' kiddin' me.
__________________

djerdap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2005, 06:15 PM   #43
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,723
Local Time: 01:42 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by babyman
Of course, for the once that believe that politics will really solve the poverty in Africa...........................
It's not only celebrities, it's not only organizations, it's not only economists, and it's not only politicians who resolve the problems of Africa.

But all together can encourage the people of our countries to do something about it. Leaving out the President of the United States, whether you like him or not, doesn't help at all. Because he has the power to allocate the money from taxes to the places in Africa where it is needed.
It doesn't help if on the one hand you want America to support Africa and on the other hand you ignore the leader of this country.
Vincent Vega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2005, 10:24 PM   #44
The Fly
 
BOYO3221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: new york state
Posts: 184
Local Time: 07:42 AM
wow still more clueless, statements Johnson and the civil rights movement, ohh my god you are truy not a political historian. congress did ten times more for the civil rights movement than johnson did. and as far as clinton and kosovo, dont even get me started, it took him forever to respond and he ONLY did after countless cries from the un and the earth. Still Kosovo is no where near the level of Bush's effort in Africa. This movement will always be remembered in the history books. And as far as me being defeated in the argument, umm please. that comeback was so ridiculous, it neede at rebuttal , Abraham Lincoln for god sakes, the Country was not even close to the same country it has been for the past 90 years. I'm talking post industrial revolution. And just like liberals when they cant write facts they have to take the ann coulter or fox news cracks. So stupid. The point is this, If Bill Clinton had done the work Bush has done for Africa, the liberal media would have proclaimed him the second coming of Abraham Lincoln, for helping the Blacks of the world. There is no doubt about it, Clinton would have been label a Humanitarian God. But liberals have to bash him based on a war that was overwhelmingly supported to happen in 1998 , but clinton did not want to kill his image as the peoples president. not until his scandal did he decide to do something. just look at all the numerous non-responses to terror in his era. PATHETIC!!!!!!. You cant argue or piss and moan about a war that dems and repubs wanted in 1998 becasue of the same intel clinton recieved. If there were no WMD's how did all the thousands upon thousands of KURDS DIE????????? do they not count now ,because a republican is in the office? please. this logic is ON POINT
BOYO3221 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2005, 09:12 AM   #45
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: nazi punks fuck off
Posts: 21,864
Local Time: 07:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BOYO3221
[B]and as far as clinton and kosovo, dont even get me started, it took him forever to respond and he ONLY did after countless cries from the un and the earth.
Wow, a President who actually cares about the US' world image, and even - gasp - listens to the UN! Imagine that...

Quote:
Still Kosovo is no where near the level of Bush's effort in Africa.
OK...so where are the troops in Darfur then? There's a mass genocide happening right now as we speak. The US is one of the principle members of the UN arguing against sending peacekeeping troops.

Quote:
This movement will always be remembered in the history books. And as far as me being defeated in the argument, umm please. that comeback was so ridiculous, it neede at rebuttal , Abraham Lincoln for god sakes, the Country was not even close to the same country it has been for the past 90 years. I'm talking post industrial revolution.
Hell, you're the one who asked the question at first. You got an answer you didn't like, so you just call the other person "ridiculous" and change the original question. Real classy.

Quote:
And just like liberals when they cant write facts they have to take the ann coulter or fox news cracks. So stupid.
Right, cause conservatives never make cracks against liberals. You sure love those sweeping generalisations though, that's for damn sure.


Quote:
The point is this, If Bill Clinton had done the work Bush has done for Africa, the liberal media would have proclaimed him the second coming of Abraham Lincoln, for helping the Blacks of the world. There is no doubt about it, Clinton would have been label a Humanitarian God.
What exactly has Bush done for Africa that's so vastly superior to everything anyone else has ever done? There's a genocide in Darfur, a full-blown civil war in Rwanda, AIDS is a pandemic, famine in West Africa, Somalia doesn't even have a ruler, Mugabe's a tin-pot dictator...things haven't improved in Africa over the past 5 years. While I admit they haven't gotten drastically worse either, Bush hasn't really done a whole lot when you think about it.

Quote:
But liberals have to bash him based on a war that was overwhelmingly supported to happen in 1998 , but clinton did not want to kill his image as the peoples president. not until his scandal did he decide to do something. just look at all the numerous non-responses to terror in his era. PATHETIC!!!!!!. You cant argue or piss and moan about a war that dems and repubs wanted in 1998 becasue of the same intel clinton recieved.
I assume you're talking about Bush now. This whole thing is one big run-on sentence, it looks like a 12 year old wrote it. Good lord, man, it's damn near unreadable.

I don't recall anyone pushing the war any farther than a hypothetical in 1998. People weren't screaming for blood, and Clinton wasn't demonizing Saddam Hussein to anywhere near the extent that Bush did in 2002-2003. Arguably, OK, if Clinton had pushed the war with anywhere near the intensity that GWB did, we may have had the popular support to go. Clinton didn't have the bloodlust that Bush has, so he didn't press the issue.

Quote:
If there were no WMD's how did all the thousands upon thousands of KURDS DIE????????? do they not count now ,because a republican is in the office?
The Halabja incident took place in 1988, when it was common world knowledge that he had open stockpiles of chemical weapons.

In 2002 there had been no WMD found for years, there has been no WMD found since the war started, there will be no WMD found at any time because quite simply Saddam Hussein did not possess any stockpiles at the time. I won't argue that he did prior to the arrival of UN inspectors, that's a fact that he had them. But there was a little thing called Gulf War I in the middle there that kinda threw things into a bit of disarray for Saddam.

You seem to be one of the last people to be clinging to the WMD thesis. Even members of the administration now can admit there were none. But you keep drinking that Kool-Aid.

PS: If you reply again, please bust up your post into paragraphs...I can hardly read it if it's in that kind of run-on sentence. And you can refrain from calling me stupid again, please.
DaveC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2005, 03:05 PM   #46
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
djerdap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 7,512
Local Time: 11:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BOYO3221
wow still more clueless, statements Johnson and the civil rights movement, ohh my god you are truy not a political historian. congress did ten times more for the civil rights movement than johnson did. and as far as clinton and kosovo, dont even get me started, it took him forever to respond and he ONLY did after countless cries from the un and the earth. Still Kosovo is no where near the level of Bush's effort in Africa. This movement will always be remembered in the history books. And as far as me being defeated in the argument, umm please. that comeback was so ridiculous, it neede at rebuttal , Abraham Lincoln for god sakes, the Country was not even close to the same country it has been for the past 90 years. I'm talking post industrial revolution. And just like liberals when they cant write facts they have to take the ann coulter or fox news cracks. So stupid. The point is this, If Bill Clinton had done the work Bush has done for Africa, the liberal media would have proclaimed him the second coming of Abraham Lincoln, for helping the Blacks of the world. There is no doubt about it, Clinton would have been label a Humanitarian God. But liberals have to bash him based on a war that was overwhelmingly supported to happen in 1998 , but clinton did not want to kill his image as the peoples president. not until his scandal did he decide to do something. just look at all the numerous non-responses to terror in his era. PATHETIC!!!!!!. You cant argue or piss and moan about a war that dems and repubs wanted in 1998 becasue of the same intel clinton recieved. If there were no WMD's how did all the thousands upon thousands of KURDS DIE????????? do they not count now ,because a republican is in the office? please. this logic is ON POINT
You've got to be REALLY fuckin' kiddin' me.
djerdap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2005, 09:42 PM   #47
The Fly
 
BOYO3221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: new york state
Posts: 184
Local Time: 07:42 AM
dave c well put argument , while i disagree on some, you have made an intelligent argument. As for this cluless DJ whatever let me say. people who just cut and paste someone eleses statements and make a single line comment are worthless!!!!!!!! ( see above post!!!!!).

But Dave there were 4 other attacks on kurds other than halabja. but it was nice to see someone who did know , some things.

The whole thing about saddam comes down to this and this cannot be defeated, because its true and even true dems like Joe Biden agree. : Saddam broke the UN surrender agreement 37 times. The point being when he surrendered, he agreed to not BREAK ONE RULE or be ousted and INVADED. HE basically stuck his finger up at us and he walked all over Clinton and the UN and no one did anything. That is the worst statement youcan make to a dictator, you beter obey or else, and then do nothing it's like a parent saying one more time and you'll get punished. AND THEN NEVER DOING ANYTHING. This is why Al QAEDA started to lose all sense of fear of us, he even said it when he saw no response from the mogadishu event , that he knew the president was gutless. I am saying that this should not have taken till Bush to oust saddam.

As far as grammar goes, it's the internet, JAYZUS get over yourselves people it's not English Class. I think the point is more important than the grammar of it.
__________________

BOYO3221 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 06:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×