Respectful Debate

[Giancarlo]

I will destroy yet another lengthy post of nothing.

You display immense ignorance, no wonder the state of 'your' country is so bad when there are people such as yourself given a vote, You SHOULD weigh up all options, looking at agendas, and not just previous political history, There is a lot that can be said about the previous political career of the current persident, and a lot that can be said about his actions as current persident, and even more that could be said about his ideas for the future...

You are the one who displays immense ignorance and stupidity. You don't know what this world is really about. The president has done a lot to improve the world. Weighing up nothing. We have two options. The right option and the wrong option. You are not sure what to believe in honestly. You keep talking about weighing up all the options.

Suffice to say that since sarting his reign of terror the US economy has seen recessions caused by almost constant political turmoil or war, (china, libia, Afganistan, Iraq), the guy is directly responsible for sending hundreds of people to a war zone (and consiquently to their death).

There wasn't a recession in 2001. There has to be two consecutive periods of negativity in the GDP. You again have no clue on how the economy works. You don't know what you are talking about. The war was justified. We have made sacrifices in the past. You are nothing more then a traitor.

The part highlighted bold is exactly why you hould assess all the options, Clinton was left and he did good things for america, Stalin was left and he did terrible things for russia!. conversly both hilter and thatcher were on the right, and they did terrible things, (In actual fact hittler wasn't really right wing, he was more central, but also fascist)proof

Clinton didn't do good things for America. Our economy slide into a slowdown towards the end of his second term (check out corporate profits in the 4th quarter of 1999 when they collapsed, that was the actual start of the slow growth. Clinton also signed the "Defense of Marriage Act" which prohibited gay people from seeking over 1,000 entitlements. Clinton did other things that were terrible too.. like raising taxes on everyone and doing nothing about Osaam Bin Laden.

I have not seen you post one single fact backed up with evidence.

I haven't seen anything you post. You want something? Tell me what you want? Here is some information on recent job creation, and the fact that there was no recession in 2001 (because of Bush's tax cuts):

http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/116084|top|07-30-2004::08:50|reuters.html

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Not only was the U.S. recession in 2001 the shallowest on record, it may not have been one at all -- at least in the classic sense of two straight quarterly declines, new government data show."

What else you want? How about estimations on recent job growth:

http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_np=0&u_pg=46&u_sid=1246062

"Employers probably added 175,000 workers to payrolls in October, while the unemployment rate held at a three-year low of 5.4 percent, according to the median forecast in a Bloomberg News survey of economists."

It was your mindless opinion staing, presented as if it were fact, with no credible backed up base that insighted people, besides which you are the one who started the flames, with starting to call people idiots based on their political opinions.

You are the one with mindless opinions and you have no credibility. Your opinions are quite, wrong in reality.

My suggestion was that everyone should take, or should at least be allowed to express interest in politics, and I feel that the furture depends on this very much,If nobody is able to talk about politics, or even express an interest in politics, then people will end up like you...

Closed minded, playing up to the most favorite in a popularity contest rather than deciding the serious furutre of their country.

I'm not telling anybody to not have interest in politics. I'm just telling overly ignorant people in Europe and other countries not to tell people how to vote. If you want to voice your opinions and tell who you would vote for, fine. But once you tell us how we should vote, I have problems with you. You are close-minded, wrong, arrogant and ignorant. Playing up to the more favorite option? Wake up fool, I take into account the future of this country. That's why I vote for Bush.

And my post was longer, better and more informative.

 

[root]

You are the one who displays immense ignorance and stupidity. You don't know what this world is really about. The president has done a lot to improve the world. Weighing up nothing. We have two options. The right option and the wrong option. You are not sure what to believe in honestly. You keep talking about weighing up all the options.

You are being small mionded and narrow minded, that is why I say you are being ignorant to the options. In politics there is never a clearly defined right and wrong option, there is only a difference of opinion, the 'right' option is usualy defined by who has the most popular opinion, or who won.

I'll give reference to the british queen visiting dresden, polititans in germany have been aplying pressure to the xcase that the british queen should make a formal appology for the actions of the british during the war.
-at first the report I read in the paper left me livid at the thought,
after all the attrocities (carpet bombing is an attrocity) were carried out in the name of disposing hitler from power, In the end the allied forces won the war, and hence 'our story' was told most, and generally accepted as the truth, the right thing to have done. Whilst the Nazi german story was generally accepted as the wrong story, My point being that had the Nazi's won the war we would have been educated to believe their morals and values, and hence accept that as the truth. The right way to be.

I'll say again, there is no right and wrong in politics, only opinion.

You don't know what you are talking about. The war was justified. We have made sacrifices in the past. You are nothing more then a traitor.

It's people such as yourself who bring your country nito such disrepute so as to make it the target of terorists, If you took your head out of your arse for just a minute you'd realise that Yes the war in afganisan was justified (in the search for Osama Bin Laden), however the war should have been in Saudi Arabia (since the majority of the 911 terrorists came from and were trained in Saudi Arabia).
There were no, still is no, and there are unlikely to be uncovered any links between Osama Bin Laden and Sadam Hussain, Speaches about the ending of a dictatorship mean nothing when America activly supports the Saudi Arabian dictaors and their public beatings and executions, and the muchtouted violation of human rights forcing women to wear headscarf/veil/bourka (durnig the war in afganistan this was billed as an issue at the top of the human rights billing)(but ofcourse Saudi Arabia suplpy America with cheap oil [perhaps this is how you avoid recession -bringing instability to other countries?]).

In adition to this, nobody has found any weapons of mass destruction. It seems that Bush Jr came into power with the same administration as bush Snr, and Bsh Snr administration picked up right where it left off all those years earlier (gulf war)

I'll say it once, twice, a thousand times, yes, sometimes it is necessary to make sacrifices, however I don't think that the sacrifices should have been made in Iraq.

(just one thing to point out, what/who exactly is america sacrificing, more british soldiers have died as a result of misplaced american bullets (friendly fire) that have been killed by Iraqi insurgents. -now the britsh army (well the scottish Black watch regiment) are having to more out of their sectors to help out american soldiers, [it seems the worlds Super Power is not so super after all!]). -I say that with at least 20 members of my family actualy being or having been in the american army/navy or airforce. as well as my girlfriends dad currently serving in saudi arabia

But no I am not a traitor, I fully support the Armies over seas, and I realise the dangers they are in, (not least from iraqis but americans as well!)

like raising taxes on everyone and doing nothing about Osaam Bin Laden.

Despite forewarning from the previous administration, the Bush administration also failed to do anything about Osama Bin Laden, in fact it was a quarter of the way through bushes term before action was taken, even then action was only taken because of a direct atack on america!
Bush is far from a hero.

You are the one with mindless opinions and you have no credibility. Your opinions are quite, wrong in reality.

Not wrong just different to yours,

really you need to understand the meaning of what you are saying, this could go on forever.

You are wrong

no you are

no, you are

I'm not telling anybody to not have interest in politics. I'm just telling overly ignorant people in Europe and other countries not to tell people how to vote.

Rakedog (according to his profile) lives in america, so in addition to telling europeans not to have an interest in global politics, you are also telling 'your fellow americans' that they know nothing about the elections happeneing in their own countries. -as america is the worlds only super power (since the dilluition of the USSR) US elections are a global agenda. and should be openly and franky discussed by anyone who feels they should.

If you want to voice your opinions and tell who you would vote for, fine. But once you tell us how we should vote, I have problems with you.

I've not even said who I would vote for, I'm simply pointing out that politics is not as simple, clear cut, black and white right and wrong as you would have us believe. I point out innacuracies/inconsistencies in your argumets.

You are close-minded, wrong, arrogant and ignorant. Playing up to the more favorite option?

And that exactly why (like you) I would favour bush to win,
I don't agree with Kerrys politics policies attidudes or political leanings, I don't like his attitude to the war, I don't like his policies on IT (a global market practically dictated by US Law).

And my post was longer, better and more informative.

Yeah, well my dick is bigger.

 

[alvino]

Well root's gotta point. You should lighten up giancarlo, he isnt even talking about your highly revered G. Bush.... at least he wasnt earlier, until you provoked him..... Hes just saying that free debate and opinions are right, wether it be this election or the next election or the one after......sheesh

 

[alvino]

And the debates and opinions could be for both sides..... Republican, Democrat, Green Party etc. And im talking about other people that actually want to have a fun debate and be able to express their opinions, not you narrow minded people who think that they are the center of the universe and what you say is the law *ahem, giancarlo*.

 

[IAntDemo]

Sorry guys cant be botherd even reading what the long ones about its to dam long lol. thats like a full letter telling someone how to build a 2mill house. lol

 

[IAntDemo]

it takes about 1 hour to scroll all the way down the page. wow lol

 

[broknhabit]

And the debates and opinions could be for both sides..... Republican, Democrat, Green Party etc. And im talking about other people that actually want to have a fun debate and be able to express their opinions, not you narrow minded people who think that they are the center of the universe and what you say is the law *ahem, giancarlo*.

thank you for stating that alvino

 

[alvino]

lol your welcome.... i had to do what was right.

 

[Giancarlo]

Root doesn't have points, please understand that. I'm going to go through this again in complete terms, once again. If Kerry wins, I'll accept it.. sure. Life doesn't end. I'll just wait till 2008.

You are being small mionded and narrow minded, that is why I say you are being ignorant to the options. In politics there is never a clearly defined right and wrong option, there is only a difference of opinion, the 'right' option is usualy defined by who has the most popular opinion, or who won.

You are ignorant to the reality. You are small minded, simple minded and dumb. Not very educated about the reality facing the United States and the world with tomorrow's election. The right option is not defined by who has the most popular opinion, but what policy would actually work in practice, in this case Bush's.

I'll give reference to the british queen visiting dresden, polititans in germany have been aplying pressure to the xcase that the british queen should make a formal appology for the actions of the british during the war.

This is not really relevant to what is being discussed. This has nothing to do with what happened during WWII. This has nothing to do with who wins, but it has to do with what policies would work in combating terrorism and be successful. For the most part, Bush's policies have been successful.

It's people such as yourself who bring your country nito such disrepute so as to make it the target of terorists, If you took your head out of your arse for just a minute you'd realise that Yes the war in afganisan was justified (in the search for Osama Bin Laden), however the war should have been in Saudi Arabia (since the majority of the 911 terrorists came from and were trained in Saudi Arabia).

Actually wrong. It is people like you who endorse terrorism and allow it to happen because of your arrogant inaction. You think by being isolationist that nothing will happen. It is people like you who let terrorism happen. It is people like you and Clinton who failed to act on tips and left Bush a mess. By September 10th, 2001.. most of Bush's spending bills to improve intelligence were stuck in the Senate. Bush didn't even get his budget passed until later. So please understand the facts and please read the book "Dereliction of Duty". The Saudi government had nothing to do with 9/11.

There were no, still is no, and there are unlikely to be uncovered any links between Osama Bin Laden and Sadam Hussain, Speaches about the ending of a dictatorship mean nothing when America activly supports the Saudi Arabian dictaors and their public beatings and executions, and the muchtouted violation of human rights forcing women to wear headscarf/veil/bourka (durnig the war in afganistan this was billed as an issue at the top of the human rights billing)(but ofcourse Saudi Arabia suplpy America with cheap oil [perhaps this is how you avoid recession -bringing instability to other countries?]).

Again more I have to refute. Let me make myself clear there are clear links between Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. There were never links between 9/11 and Saddam. Nobody in the adminstration ever said that. The group Ansar-Al-Islam which was being backed Hussein to fight kurds, is an al qaeda sponsored group. I have plenty of problems with what Saudi Arabia is doing and want something to change, but Kerry does not promise to do anything about that. He doesn't really care. He only cares about getting elected. Heck Bush probably cares about getting elected too. But Bush is a far better option then Kerry. And cheap oil? I don't call $49/barrel cheap oil. Another fact is, the US only gets 20% of its oil from Saudi Arabia. There are other sources.

In adition to this, nobody has found any weapons of mass destruction. It seems that Bush Jr came into power with the same administration as bush Snr, and Bsh Snr administration picked up right where it left off all those years earlier (gulf war)

But there was intent. And Saddam's successor and son, Udai (now deceased) expressed great interest in getting weapons of mass destruction. Furthermore, there was evidence that Iraq did in fact get uranium from Africa. The statement made by that former Ambassador turned out to be a lie.

I'll say it once, twice, a thousand times, yes, sometimes it is necessary to make sacrifices, however I don't think that the sacrifices should have been made in Iraq.

I think you're wrong. That's my opinion. I don't think you understand the repercussions of leaving Saddam Hussein in power any longer. And I don't think you would understand the horrific problems with letting Udai Hussein take over after Saddam died. Udai Hussein was one of the most evil person in the entire world. He surpasses his own father in brutality. Invading Iraq was a chance that I would of been willing to take if I was in charge.

(just one thing to point out, what/who exactly is america sacrificing, more british soldiers have died as a result of misplaced american bullets (friendly fire) that have been killed by Iraqi insurgents. -now the britsh army (well the scottish Black watch regiment) are having to more out of their sectors to help out american soldiers, [it seems the worlds Super Power is not so super after all!]). -I say that with at least 20 members of my family actualy being or having been in the american army/navy or airforce. as well as my girlfriends dad currently serving in saudi arabia

This is a war and accident happen. There was a communication breakdown a few times (but that happens in the chaos of a battle). I however, think there should of been more of a command. Quite a few of my family members are also in the US military (or have been at one point in time, including my now passed away uncle who served in Vietnam for 24 months).

Despite forewarning from the previous administration, the Bush administration also failed to do anything about Osama Bin Laden, in fact it was a quarter of the way through bushes term before action was taken, even then action was only taken because of a direct atack on america!
Bush is far from a hero.

Wrong again. Very stupid answer. There has been plenty done about Osama Bin Laden. In fact the number of troops in Afghanistan was scaled up (redirection of forces from South Korea to Afghanistan). There has always been intense searches done. In fact in Osama's last tape, Osama complained that his organization has been damaged by the Americans (the original tape released by the organization Al Jazeera mentioned this, this part was not included when aired on US news stations). Bush is very much of a hero. He is better then John Kerry and his impudent supporters.

Rakedog (according to his profile) lives in america, so in addition to telling europeans not to have an interest in global politics, you are also telling 'your fellow americans' that they know nothing about the elections happeneing in their own countries. -as america is the worlds only super power (since the dilluition of the USSR) US elections are a global agenda. and should be openly and franky discussed by anyone who feels they should.

I'm European but a US naturalized citizen (my dad was born in the US, but I was born in Spain). I never said anybody shouldn't have an interest in any kind of politics. I'm telling that this our decision, not the decision of those who can't vote for one reason or the other. You are not quite sure what you are talking about at any rate.

I've not even said who I would vote for, I'm simply pointing out that politics is not as simple, clear cut, black and white right and wrong as you would have us believe. I point out innacuracies/inconsistencies in your argumets.

Your arguments are full of inaccuracies and inconsistencies. You are for the most part wrong and I have pointed that out. The sad thing is you really believe it so much.

Crushed you again.

 

[alvino]

ok maybe you have better points (considering you have a major in political science), but the part about you saying that ppl who want to vote for kerry are "idiots", i got a problem with that.