Give a Legitimate Argument For McCain, Against Obama

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Are you trying to drive me to the right? :wink:

Personally, if you search my posts, I was in favor of attacking Iran right after 9/11....since there is PLENTY of evidence that they aided the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.

Yet another failure of this administration.
 
I'm no big fan of Iran, but out of all the countries in that miserable region, I feel like their population is the most likely to (eventually?) embrace change and carry on a (quiet?) revolution from within. Iran is well educated, with a good infrastructure, more than you can say about any of their neighbours. They have a history of looking to the west, they send large numbers of students abroad, they have some very active and important dissidents who are quite pragmatic when discussing what can be done in the short term, and what is more of a lofty goal. Regardless of their meddling, which is obvious, I can't help thinking that intervening militarily there would be really, really counter-productive in the long run.
 
Dreadsox said:


None of the candiates will be bringing the troops home anytime soon.

And more troops may be necessary for the short term.

Clinton and Obama, especially Obama, are both determined to begin bringing the troops home as soon as possible. Whether that will be possible in terms of Congressional approval remains to be seen, but I'm glad they both are making it a top priority. Myself, and several others have also stated numerous times why more troops would not help the Iraq situation, so I'm not going to address that again. That's nothing against you, I just don't feel like typing everything out again.:wink:
 
In response to your Obama comment.......

I agree, McCain has distorted his position and taken his quotes out of context. I actually believe that Obama is close to my position in respects to Pakistan.
 
Dreadsox said:
I actually believe that Obama is close to my position in respects to Pakistan.

On that we agree. :)

I've been saying the same thing about Pakistan for years and years. I don't understand why things have been allowed to degenerate to such a degree over there.
 
U2isthebest said:


Clinton and Obama, especially Obama, are both determined to begin bringing the troops home as soon as possible. Whether that will be possible in terms of Congressional approval remains to be seen, but I'm glad they both are making it a top priority. Myself, and several others have also stated numerous times why more troops would not help the Iraq situation, so I'm not going to address that again. That's nothing against you, I just don't feel like typing everything out again.:wink:

That is your opinion. I was there before the surge. The surge has worked to a point. My biggest issue is that if there had been an honest attempt a building a coalition from the start - this whole situation would have looked different. We may have had the necessary troops, from ARAB nations, not just the big three US allies in all of this.

The fact is the surge has helped. I think there are enough posts in here where I said I thought McCain and the President were wrong on this. BUT, the fact is, the surge helped turn the corner, and I do not believe it is time to leave and let the place fall to crap.
 
anitram said:


On that we agree. :)

I've been saying the same thing about Pakistan for years and years. I don't understand why things have been allowed to degenerate to such a degree over there.

If you smile at me again, I may have to bevcome Fernando:flirt:
 
Dreadsox said:
BUT, the fact is, the surge helped turn the corner

I don't know if I agree with this "fact" you've given us. Sure, the surge has resulted in increased security. It seems a pretty simple formula that less stability + more troops = more stability. But is it sustainable? Not without real, tangible, and significant political movement. So far movement has been extremely slow in the political realm (to put it mildly). At what point does the risk and cost of putting our troops in harms way outweigh the possibility of an eventually independent, politically functional and secure Iraq? Never? Until the job is done, damn the costs (both monetarily and in human lives)?
 
Dreadsox said:


That is your opinion. I was there before the surge. The surge has worked to a point. My biggest issue is that if there had been an honest attempt a building a coalition from the start - this whole situation would have looked different. We may have had the necessary troops, from ARAB nations, not just the big three US allies in all of this.

The fact is the surge has helped. I think there are enough posts in here where I said I thought McCain and the President were wrong on this. BUT, the fact is, the surge helped turn the corner, and I do not believe it is time to leave and let the place fall to crap.

From what I've researched and studied, I think the situation can only improve if we leave on a war-based military basis focused on diplomacy and humaniatarian efforts. We may need to leave a small number of peace-keeping troops in the region, mainly to help protect our non-goverment workers, ambassadors, and diplomats to the region. We're clearly not going to agree, so I'm not going to discuss it any further here.
 
Irvine511 said:




this obviously isn't personal.

you used a generic, unoriginal slur to describe a female candidate.

you may as have called Obama a n*gger or Liberman a kyke.

so, yeah, fuck off.

Oh give me a break. You want to play a race card or a feminist card or whatever, that's pathetic and shows how little substance there are to your beliefs. Just because she's female doesn't mean the b-word can't be used. And if you're equating the word bitch to n*gger, I'd love for you to test that theory out on some African Americans, male or female.

But fine, I'll play by your rules... she's a collosal freakin jerk. It's well known and well documented and if ol' Bill was here he'd tell you himself. It's why she is losing. So get over it.

And yeah, if you tell someone to fuck off, that's personal. Every time. Just once I'd love to see SOME of you liberals, who believe in freedom of speach, of respecting other peoples point of view actually put substance to your words. You can call conservatives evil, corrupt or greedy, but generally, we're not fucking hyppocrites which in so many cases highlighted daily by you Irvine and some, not all, but too frickin' many of the people who think like you do.

Sorry for the bump on this topic but I was out of town and no way am I going to let someone play a race card on me. No fucking way. If you had any class at all Irv, you should try employing it now. As I've said before, you're overwhelmed. Get out to the real world, your imaginary one is pathetic.
 
Snowlock said:

Just once I'd love to see SOME of you liberals, who believe in freedom of speach, of respecting other peoples point of view actually put substance to your words. You can call conservatives evil, corrupt or greedy, but generally, we're not fucking hyppocrites which in so many cases highlighted daily by you Irvine and some, not all, but too frickin' many of the people who think like you do.


:|
 
What the ?

Test that theory out on Isiah Thomas-oh yeah, he tried it and lost

And anyone with "substance to their words" doesn't have to resort to calling Senator Clinton a bitch, a shrew, etc. in their arguments against her- right?
 
Last edited:
U2isthebest said:
Cyber group-hug everyone!:love:
We should probably all hold hands and sing "He Ain't Heavy (He's My Brother)" since that's all us nutty liberals are good for.:cute:

:lol:

Yep, all a bunch of tree-hugging hippies with no substance to anything we say...
 
Snowlock said:


Oh give me a break. You want to play a race card or a feminist card or whatever, that's pathetic and shows how little substance there are to your beliefs. Just because she's female doesn't mean the b-word can't be used. And if you're equating the word bitch to n*gger, I'd love for you to test that theory out on some African Americans, male or female.

But fine, I'll play by your rules... she's a collosal freakin jerk. It's well known and well documented and if ol' Bill was here he'd tell you himself. It's why she is losing. So get over it.

And yeah, if you tell someone to fuck off, that's personal. Every time. Just once I'd love to see SOME of you liberals, who believe in freedom of speach, of respecting other peoples point of view actually put substance to your words. You can call conservatives evil, corrupt or greedy, but generally, we're not fucking hyppocrites which in so many cases highlighted daily by you Irvine and some, not all, but too frickin' many of the people who think like you do.

Sorry for the bump on this topic but I was out of town and no way am I going to let someone play a race card on me. No fucking way. If you had any class at all Irv, you should try employing it now. As I've said before, you're overwhelmed. Get out to the real world, your imaginary one is pathetic.




erm, you say i have no substance, but you've called Hillary a "bitch" and a "jerk" and ... that's it? really? are you trying to embarass yourself?

i'm sorry you're so consistently outsmarted in here. i really am. mostly because when you get defensive you resort to name calling, and you challenge people's real world experience, or some other personal insult, and it bogs the thread down, and you get into little pissing matches, and most of us just ignore you, but there are times when you've got to be called out on your shit. and now is one of them.

if you had any idea where i was right at this moment, or what i was doing, or what i spend my days doing, you'd know just how foolish you are.

but you don't. and i'll over look that.

and i will, each and every time, as i have done in the past, and as others do as well, take your simplistic, nasty, mean-spirited "arguments" apart, bit by bit, piece by piece, and expose the naked, scared little child that has to hid behind words like "bitch" when he realizes that he really has nothing productive to add.

it's personal now.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom