Poll: World Thinks Potential Terrorist Attack Greater If Bush Wins November Election

[InfectedMushroom]

Originally posted by: dnuggett

You obviously don't read any posts beyond the first one in any particular thread or you would notice I don't ONLY respond to you. And Saddam burned plenty of Karma. But I was talking about the innocent Iraqis. Are you going to hold them responsible for Saddam's actions? Unlike Americans, they didn't get to choose their insane leader.

I am not saying you respond only to me. Please show me where I said that. I am saying you like to quote me and reply with nonsensical remarks. I alos said that you are responding to a question I asked someone else, followed by a comment about stupidity.

Ohhh... you were talking about the innocent Iraqis. I get it. So the Kurds weren't innocent? Once again nonsensical thinking. I am not holding anyone resposible for Saddam's actions but Saddam and his followers. Saddam attacked, maimed and killed thousands upon thousands of innocent Kurds. Besides the obvious threat to the other countries in the Middle East, he was a threat to his own innocent people. If you can't wrap your noodle around the good we are doing there I feel very sorry for you.

Were there innocent people killed in the fighting? I don't pretend to think there weren't. But as any American should know, there is a price to peace and freedom, and as the polls show the innocent Iraqis believe that their lives are better after our intervention, and will continue to get even better in the future. They are beggining to understand that price.

dnuggett, the problem with that kind of logic is that you assume that you and the current US administration are right, and that this way of solving things (us against everyone, black and white, evil and good) is the only way to solve the problems facing the world today. Most of the rest of the world agrees with the fact that there are many problems (most of the world would like to get rid of terrorists), they just don't think this is the only way to solve it (invading countries that were no threat => angering more people => creating more terrorist).
Your attitude and that of this administrations (we are right and our way is the only right way) is plain dumb. That is what is breeding the hatred for america more than just about anything else.

 

[Todd33]

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Originally posted by: Todd33

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Originally posted by: Todd33

That shows your complete lack of understanding of what freedom and democracy entail.

Is that when a foreign power invades, occupies and bombs your countrymen, then install a new government? Just like 1776!

You need to learn history. Who was asking for freedom in 1776? Who was oppressed and held back?


Who did we get rid of, the guy asking for freedom or a murderer? Once again another weak analogy.

The American colonist were oppressed, hence the Revolutionary war. Maybe you need a coloring book to connect the mental dots? You come off as a know it all ass, you need to learn some civility and respect.

You mean the colonies were oppresed? Hold on... let me get my history book. Wow, you are right. So then that must mean fighting for freedom was the right thing to do. Fighting oppression was the right thing to do..... c'mon say it with me now. I'm sorry if I ruffled your feathers a bit being an uncivilized ass and all....
I'm really trying to see all these anologies and all, but I just can't figure them out, thats all.

The point was we made our own democracy, we revolted, no one forced it on us by gun point. Don't play ignorant, you are embarrassing yourself.

 

[SirStev0]

Originally posted by: Todd33

The point of what I said should be blatantly obvious. It won't happen overnight. That's all I said.

That's like saying I can't run 500 mph, duh. I don't want to hear about what can't be done, what can be done and what will this $120B and 1050+ dead soldiers buy us?

simple, the bush family got their revenge and the cheney-bush corportations made millions, ohhh and the world is safer because a country that had no weapons/weapon building facilities was destroyed and taken over... YEH GO AMERICA

 

[dnuggett]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Pay attention to what I said.

I've paid attention to everyone responding to you and it appears you've been pwn3d in every possible orifice... :laugh:

Cute, I like your sense of style. Let me guess wich orifice you like the best....

What I had was a few people with half assed ideas all coming at me at once. It was fun.... kinda like shooting fish in a barrel.

 

[dnuggett]

The point was we made our own democracy, we revolted, no one forced it on us by gun point. Don't play ignorant, you are embarrassing yourself.

Right cause we all know they can do it by themselves. So basically if you can't fight for freedom on your own you don't deserve it?

 

[JHoNNy1OoO]

Originally posted by: dnuggett

The point was we made our own democracy, we revolted, no one forced it on us by gun point. Don't play ignorant, you are embarrassing yourself.

Right cause we all know they can do it by themselves. So basically if you can't fight for freedom on your own you don't deserve it?

You won't appreciate it. Not deserve it.

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: dnuggett

The point was we made our own democracy, we revolted, no one forced it on us by gun point. Don't play ignorant, you are embarrassing yourself.

Right cause we all know they can do it by themselves. So basically if you can't fight for freedom on your own you don't deserve it?

"can't"?

The point is that if you are not willing to fight to your death for your freedom and democracy you will not have it.

 

[dnuggett]

Originally posted by: InfectedMushroom

Originally posted by: dnuggett

You obviously don't read any posts beyond the first one in any particular thread or you would notice I don't ONLY respond to you. And Saddam burned plenty of Karma. But I was talking about the innocent Iraqis. Are you going to hold them responsible for Saddam's actions? Unlike Americans, they didn't get to choose their insane leader.

I am not saying you respond only to me. Please show me where I said that. I am saying you like to quote me and reply with nonsensical remarks. I alos said that you are responding to a question I asked someone else, followed by a comment about stupidity.

Ohhh... you were talking about the innocent Iraqis. I get it. So the Kurds weren't innocent? Once again nonsensical thinking. I am not holding anyone resposible for Saddam's actions but Saddam and his followers. Saddam attacked, maimed and killed thousands upon thousands of innocent Kurds. Besides the obvious threat to the other countries in the Middle East, he was a threat to his own innocent people. If you can't wrap your noodle around the good we are doing there I feel very sorry for you.

Were there innocent people killed in the fighting? I don't pretend to think there weren't. But as any American should know, there is a price to peace and freedom, and as the polls show the innocent Iraqis believe that their lives are better after our intervention, and will continue to get even better in the future. They are beggining to understand that price.

dnuggett, the problem with that kind of logic is that you assume that you and the current US administration are right, and that this way of solving things (us against everyone, black and white, evil and good) is the only way to solve the problems facing the world today. Most of the rest of the world agrees with the fact that there are many problems (most of the world would like to get rid of terrorists), they just don't think this is the only way to solve it (invading countries that were no threat => angering more people => creating more terrorist).
Your attitude and that of this administrations (we are right and our way is the only right way) is plain dumb. That is what is breeding the hatred for america more than just about anything else.

I agree completely there is more than one way to handle any given situation. A world approach would always be the easiest way to solve these complex issues. Unfortuneately it doesn't appear that it is happening. Hopefully in the future it will.....

 

[Todd33]

Originally posted by: dnuggett

The point was we made our own democracy, we revolted, no one forced it on us by gun point. Don't play ignorant, you are embarrassing yourself.

Right cause we all know they can do it by themselves. So basically if you can't fight for freedom on your own you don't deserve it?

Not at all, but are you saying the Bush way is the only way? We told the Iraqis to revolt in 1991, then we left them to die. Supporting a self made revolution sure beats lying about WMDs, bombing and occupation. We have just set them up for civil war, which may be fine in 20 years, but is it our job to fck with everything? I guess if they have oil...

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Then please explain what your version of freedom and democracy entail, an invasion of a foreign power, occupation and constant killings of civilians, rape and torture, a government that will not be truly democratic, is that your version?

No, that was Saddam's. Except for the truly democratic part, there was no truly about it. Look, 5-10 years down the road, we will not have a democracy in Iraq. It won't happen anytime soon, if it ever does. The point of what I said should be blatantly obvious. It won't happen overnight. That's all I said.

Ok, so can we scrap the "bringing freedom and democracy" argument entirely then as it will probably not happen in the forseeable future?

dnuggett?

 

[TheVrolok]

Originally posted by: dnuggett

The point was we made our own democracy, we revolted, no one forced it on us by gun point. Don't play ignorant, you are embarrassing yourself.

Right cause we all know they can do it by themselves. So basically if you can't fight for freedom on your own you don't deserve it?

How many people in the world thought the American colonies COULD topple the British Empire's control? I'll give you a hint .. not too many. The Americans ended up getting help, yes, but not by an invading army.

 

[dnuggett]

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Then please explain what your version of freedom and democracy entail, an invasion of a foreign power, occupation and constant killings of civilians, rape and torture, a government that will not be truly democratic, is that your version?

No, that was Saddam's. Except for the truly democratic part, there was no truly about it. Look, 5-10 years down the road, we will not have a democracy in Iraq. It won't happen anytime soon, if it ever does. The point of what I said should be blatantly obvious. It won't happen overnight. That's all I said.

Ok, so can we scrap the "bringing freedom and democracy" argument entirely then as it will probably not happen in the forseeable future?

dnuggett?

What is the context of the argument so I can be clear on what you are saying..... sorry very busy here. 🙂

 

[dnuggett]

Originally posted by: TheVrolok

Originally posted by: dnuggett

The point was we made our own democracy, we revolted, no one forced it on us by gun point. Don't play ignorant, you are embarrassing yourself.

Right cause we all know they can do it by themselves. So basically if you can't fight for freedom on your own you don't deserve it?

How many people in the world thought the American colonies COULD topple the British Empire's control? I'll give you a hint .. not too many. The Americans ended up getting help, yes, but not by an invading army.

We toppled their control because they gave a half assed effort in fighting us. A lot of their own military believed we should be free. Ironically France/Canada was one of our biggest helpers. Saddam does/did not hold a half assed effort to control his country.

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Then please explain what your version of freedom and democracy entail, an invasion of a foreign power, occupation and constant killings of civilians, rape and torture, a government that will not be truly democratic, is that your version?

No, that was Saddam's. Except for the truly democratic part, there was no truly about it. Look, 5-10 years down the road, we will not have a democracy in Iraq. It won't happen anytime soon, if it ever does. The point of what I said should be blatantly obvious. It won't happen overnight. That's all I said.

Ok, so can we scrap the "bringing freedom and democracy" argument entirely then as it will probably not happen in the forseeable future?

dnuggett?

What is the context of the argument so I can be clear on what you are saying..... sorry very busy here. 🙂

I quoted our discussion, it is a simple question really as either the argument is valid and we can expect freedom and democracy in Iraq in the forseeable future or it is not valid as there won't be freedom and democracy in Iraq in the forseeable future.

If the argument isn't valid then there is no point in discussing that argument.

No hurry, just thought you missed it. 🙂

 

[Todd33]

Saddam does/did not hold a half assed effort to control his country.

How much effort of the 25 million Iraqis put in to topple Saddam? If they wanted freedom and democracy, they needed to spill some blood before we did.

 

[dnuggett]

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: dnuggett

The point was we made our own democracy, we revolted, no one forced it on us by gun point. Don't play ignorant, you are embarrassing yourself.

Right cause we all know they can do it by themselves. So basically if you can't fight for freedom on your own you don't deserve it?

"can't"?

The point is that if you are not willing to fight to your death for your freedom and democracy you will not have it.

Agreed. Let's see what happens.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: dnuggett
sorry very busy here. 🙂

That's shocking seeing as you said this was like shooting fish in a barrel... :roll: Here is a tip: don't waste so much time with quipping and insulting people and you might have more time for substantive typing. Your welcome. 😉

 

[dnuggett]

Originally posted by: Todd33

Saddam does/did not hold a half assed effort to control his country.

How much effort of the 25 million Iraqis put in to topple Saddam? If they wanted freedom and democracy, they needed to spill some blood before we did.

Where have you been? Did you not see the blood spilling in Northern Iraq? I agree they did not put much effort in, they were to busy trying to save their ass from attack most of the time.

 

[dnuggett]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: dnuggett
sorry very busy here. 🙂

That's shocking seeing as you said this was like shooting fish in a barrel... :roll: Here is a tip: don't waste so much time with quipping and insulting people and you might have more time for substantive typing. Your welcome. 😉

Lot of fish.... 😉

 

[SirStev0]

heres a quick replay for everyone who missed it


world- bush should stop being an asshole, its gunna get people killed
everyone- yeh the us gov should stop being assholes
dnuggett- no, your all wrong, iraq deserves to be attacked
everyone- aaaaaaaaa ... no
dnuggett- yes, im american, im right, f*ck you all
everyone- aaaaaaaaa ... no, stop being a d()uche
dnuggett- im not a d()uche, im right, we are giving them freedom and stoping the terrorist that just want to kill
everyone- ?, do you even know how to read or have any grasp of history
dnugget- yes, im american, im right, f*ck you all

 

[dnuggett]

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Then please explain what your version of freedom and democracy entail, an invasion of a foreign power, occupation and constant killings of civilians, rape and torture, a government that will not be truly democratic, is that your version?

No, that was Saddam's. Except for the truly democratic part, there was no truly about it. Look, 5-10 years down the road, we will not have a democracy in Iraq. It won't happen anytime soon, if it ever does. The point of what I said should be blatantly obvious. It won't happen overnight. That's all I said.

Ok, so can we scrap the "bringing freedom and democracy" argument entirely then as it will probably not happen in the forseeable future?

dnuggett?

What is the context of the argument so I can be clear on what you are saying..... sorry very busy here. 🙂

I quoted our discussion, it is a simple question really as either the argument is valid and we can expect freedom and democracy in Iraq in the forseeable future or it is not valid as there won't be freedom and democracy in Iraq in the forseeable future.

If the argument isn't valid then there is no point in discussing that argument.

No hurry, just thought you missed it. 🙂

There is no question in my mind that freedom and democracy will not happen any time soon if it ever does. That is sadly a part of the reason why the only plan of exit under Bush is to leave when they can defend themselves, and hold a "stable" political structure. The argument isn't valid if you need an immediate fix and are looking for results immediately.

 

[dnuggett]

Originally posted by: SirStev0
heres a quick replay for everyone who missed it


world- bush should stop being an asshole, its gunna get people killed
everyone- yeh the us gov should stop being assholes
dnuggett- no, your all wrong, iraq deserves to be attacked
everyone- aaaaaaaaa ... no
dnuggett- yes, im american, im right, f*ck you all
everyone- aaaaaaaaa ... no, stop being a d()uche
dnuggett- im not a d()uche, im right, we are giving them freedom and stoping the terrorist that just want to kill
everyone- ?, do you even know how to read or have any grasp of history
dnugget- yes, im american, im right, f*ck you all

Nice contribution to our conversation(s). Now try reading them, asshat.

 

[SirStev0]

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Originally posted by: SirStev0
heres a quick replay for everyone who missed it


world- bush should stop being an asshole, its gunna get people killed
everyone- yeh the us gov should stop being assholes
dnuggett- no, your all wrong, iraq deserves to be attacked
everyone- aaaaaaaaa ... no
dnuggett- yes, im american, im right, f*ck you all
everyone- aaaaaaaaa ... no, stop being a d()uche
dnuggett- im not a d()uche, im right, we are giving them freedom and stoping the terrorist that just want to kill
everyone- ?, do you even know how to read or have any grasp of history
dnugget- yes, im american, im right, f*ck you all

Nice contribution to our conversation(s). Now try reading them, asshat.

i did read them, its not my fault that you dont have a real arguement, penisflicker

 

[dnuggett]

Originally posted by: SirStev0

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Originally posted by: SirStev0
heres a quick replay for everyone who missed it


world- bush should stop being an asshole, its gunna get people killed
everyone- yeh the us gov should stop being assholes
dnuggett- no, your all wrong, iraq deserves to be attacked
everyone- aaaaaaaaa ... no
dnuggett- yes, im american, im right, f*ck you all
everyone- aaaaaaaaa ... no, stop being a d()uche
dnuggett- im not a d()uche, im right, we are giving them freedom and stoping the terrorist that just want to kill
everyone- ?, do you even know how to read or have any grasp of history
dnugget- yes, im american, im right, f*ck you all

Nice contribution to our conversation(s). Now try reading them, asshat.

i did read them, its not my fault that you dont have a real arguement, penisflicker

If you read them, then you are lost. Let me throw a previous quote of mine out there for you so you can read it again.

I agree completely there is more than one way to handle any given situation. A world approach would always be the easiest way to solve these complex issues. Unfortuneately it doesn't appear that it is happening. Hopefully in the future it will.....

No real argument...? lol. I have stated that Saddam was terrorizing his people, that the Iraqi's feel their lives are better after our intervention, and that freedom and democracy will not happen anytime soon in Iraq. Oh yes and Forsythe's comment was ridiculous. Only the latter has been disputed. The bulk of my other comments have been trying to figure out what some of this drivel I'm reading is about.

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: dnuggett

Then please explain what your version of freedom and democracy entail, an invasion of a foreign power, occupation and constant killings of civilians, rape and torture, a government that will not be truly democratic, is that your version?

No, that was Saddam's. Except for the truly democratic part, there was no truly about it. Look, 5-10 years down the road, we will not have a democracy in Iraq. It won't happen anytime soon, if it ever does. The point of what I said should be blatantly obvious. It won't happen overnight. That's all I said.

Ok, so can we scrap the "bringing freedom and democracy" argument entirely then as it will probably not happen in the forseeable future?

dnuggett?

What is the context of the argument so I can be clear on what you are saying..... sorry very busy here. 🙂

I quoted our discussion, it is a simple question really as either the argument is valid and we can expect freedom and democracy in Iraq in the forseeable future or it is not valid as there won't be freedom and democracy in Iraq in the forseeable future.

If the argument isn't valid then there is no point in discussing that argument.

No hurry, just thought you missed it. 🙂

There is no question in my mind that freedom and democracy will not happen any time soon if it ever does. That is sadly a part of the reason why the only plan of exit under Bush is to leave when they can defend themselves, and hold a "stable" political structure. The argument isn't valid if you need an immediate fix and are looking for results immediately.

And considering the history of Iraq, the Sunnis, Shias and Kurds, how long will it take before an exit can be made that will not result in civil war with possible genocide as a result?

I am saying that in the forseeable future (let's say at least 20 years) the US will have to run Iraq or it will crumble and become more like the Taliban Afghanistan.

Since the US people will not wait 20 years for the troops to be brought home this effort is hopeless.

A bit pessimistic but definently the most realistic outcome.