eagleftw wrote:

Oh shit! You're right! I'm voting for Obama now so that we can watch him gather all of the leaders of our enemies and talk out our problems like good little children.

We should never negotiate out of fear, but also never fear to negotiate.

eagleftw wrote:

Oh shit! You're right! I'm voting for Obama now so that we can watch him gather all of the leaders of our enemies and talk out our problems like good little children.

Better that than another interminable schoolyard brawl.

Quote:

Oh shit! You're right! I'm voting for Obama now so that we can watch him gather all of the leaders of our enemies and talk out our problems like good little children.

It's what Jesus would've done. Why do you hate Jesus?

DavidDeacon wrote:

Quote: Oh shit! You're right! I'm voting for Obama now so that we can watch him gather all of the leaders of our enemies and talk out our problems like good little children. It's what Jesus would've done. Why do you hate Jesus?

Don't start with religion. God already flooded the Earth once because of us.

Batistachamp wrote:

eagleftw wrote: Oh shit! You're right! I'm voting for Obama now so that we can watch him gather all of the leaders of our enemies and talk out our problems like good little children. hey if you like the alternative so damn much then march your ass down to the recruitment office and enlist. fodder.

Yes sir!

I have a better idea... We should just go back to minding out own business and selling weapons to our allies instead of policing the world. That way everyone is happy and we make money. It could very well be the answer to our financial troubles because we all know that bail out plan didn't do jack shit.

Remember, either way you vote they're going to be taking your hard earned money and using it on a 12 million dollar plunger.

eagleftw wrote:

DavidDeacon wrote: Quote: Oh shit! You're right! I'm voting for Obama now so that we can watch him gather all of the leaders of our enemies and talk out our problems like good little children. It's what Jesus would've done. Why do you hate Jesus? Don't start with religion. God already flooded the Earth once because of us.

Don't evade the question, Mrs. Palin. Why do you hate Jesus?

eagleftw wrote:

Don't start with religion. God already flooded the Earth once because of us.

Don't get me started on this line of absolute bullshit.

enforcer wrote:

eagleftw wrote: Don't start with religion. God already flooded the Earth once because of us. Don't get me started on this line of absolute bullshit.

God is Republican.

DON'T GET ME STARTED ON GETTING STARTED!

yeah sell weapons to our "allies" who three years later are our enemies and are using the weapons against us. glad that never happens. idiot.

eagleftw wrote:

DavidDeacon wrote: eagleftw wrote: Who would have thought that the balance of powers would make it so the President is just another desk job with different duties. He's the fall guy. He'll automatically be blamed for someone else's mishaps unless the media is all over it first. In turn he gets to have his finger on that "nucular" button. So... you're saying that being given the power to nuke is a consolation prize for being under intense scrutiny? Anyway, let me put my political scientist hat on and take away the veil of your gross generalizations on the powers of the executive branch. Certainly, the Constitution outlines the checks and balances of power, but you're putting forth an incredibly weak argument. The President has a lot of implicit power: as a diplomat and a face of the nation. The President is supposed to represent our strengths to the world and to the people at home and this last one has been holding the country hostage to the inadequacies of his regime and showing nearly all of our negative traits: unchecked aggression, stupidity and ignorance, blind faith, rampant nationalism, gross dishonesty, incomparable clumsiness, and a pinch of fascist tendencies. The President has the power to make appointments to very powerful offices: The Supreme Court and his own cabinet. Even though Congress must approve the appointments, RARELY do they keep rejecting the choices because it ties up too much of the legislature's time (which is sometimes valuable). Do not gloss over the powers of the office by saying that they're kept in check by the other branches of government. Oh shit! You're right! I'm voting for Obama now so that we can watch him gather all of the leaders of our enemies and talk out our problems like good little children.

If at all reasonable, possible and plausible...why wouldn't you try to talk your way out of violent conflict? If such a plan can work, then storming the enemy's gate is going to be a needless sacrifice of American life.

It is the President's responsibility to risk the lives of soldiers- all of which are either/or/and mommies, daddies, sons, daughters, sisters and brothers to somebody-only when there is a clear danger to the health and security of this nation. If a situation exists that we can negotiate our way out of rather than send thousands of our greatest citizens-our defenders-to their deaths, then the responsibility of those deaths should hang directly around the neck (along with a noose) of the President who put them in harm's way to begin with.

I am not a lawyer, but I believe when you set a violent situation up that didn't have to be and it results in people other than yourself being hurt by it, it's called criminal neglegence.

As self satisfying as the old jack booted Rambo/macho/ red, white and blue boot in the ass of our enemy mantra may be, war has real life and death consequences. No amount of jargon, cliché’s or songs dedications by well meaning country singers will EVER take away the pain of a mother and father weeping over a flag draped coffin-nor will it EVER remove the justified sense of righteous anger those parents feel toward their government if it was avoidable by simple negotiations.

That transcends grotesque labels like “Conservative” or “Liberal” or “Republican” or "Democrat". That’s common sense.

eagleftw wrote:

DavidDeacon wrote: Quote: Oh shit! You're right! I'm voting for Obama now so that we can watch him gather all of the leaders of our enemies and talk out our problems like good little children. It's what Jesus would've done. Why do you hate Jesus? Don't start with religion. God already flooded the Earth once because of us.

There is no proof of such flood.. and this is no place to throw religious views at one another so Im gonna stop it there.

By the way I hated the fact that Palin constantly kept saying "EVIL",when in reality there's no such thing as evil! Evil is a man made thing and it isn't justified. Who is to say Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is "evil", just because they say it. Majority of the world see's us as evil if anything,are last president is no better than Iranian president. Sure Osama Bin Ladin did a terrible un forgiving act, but he did it with purpose, he isn't doing it to just anybody and everybody, his act was horrifying, but even our military in Afganastan has killed innocents to get to the enemies!

Quote:

There is no proof of such flood.. and this is no place to throw religious views at one another so Im gonna stop it there.

Caesarian wrote:

By the way I hated the fact that Palin constantly kept saying "EVIL",when in reality there's no such thing as evil! Evil is a man made thing and it isn't justified.

Isn't this a little bit of a contradiction here buddy? First you say there is no place for religious discussion then drop a huge religious statement that there is no Evil?

Caesarian wrote:

By the way I hated the fact that Palin constantly kept saying "EVIL",when in reality there's no such thing as evil! Evil is a man made thing and it isn't justified. Who is to say Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is "evil", just because they say it. Majority of the world see's us as evil if anything,are last president is no better than Iranian president. Sure Osama Bin Ladin did a terrible un forgiving act, but he did it with purpose, he isn't doing it to just anybody and everybody, his act was horrifying, but even our military in Afganastan has killed innocents to get to the enemies!

???????????

A) The majority of the world does not see us as evil. Much of it sees us as self righteous, arrogant, pretentious jerks. We're more like the Alpha Beta fraternity from the movie Revenge of the Nerds, with much of the remaining world being Lambda Lambda Lambda Adams College chapter.

B) If there is no such thing as "evil" than there is no such thing as right and/or wrong...thereby making anything anyone does from the US government to Bing Crosby to Osama Bin Laden perfectly acceptable or at least justifiable. By your theory, that makes the Holocaust, Serbian genocide and the entire "Family Matters' run on ABC just among "one of those things". In your odd version of Xanadu, men could marry penguins, small children could be made into explosive devices, hot women could ignore broke yet well intentioned nice guys (wait...that already happens), the Bush Administration could move forward with their "Hand Grenades for the Hungry" initiative and the Chevy Chase show could still be on the air.

No thanks. I prefer a world that recognizes evil...that way you have better odds of seeing it coming.

So, who is Ogre?

pizza king wrote:

yeah sell weapons to our "allies" who three years later are our enemies and are using the weapons against us. glad that never happens. idiot.

England is our enemy?

There is a reason Osama and Al Queda turned on us dingle berry. Same reason the WTC towers came tumbling down.

I was actually speaking of becoming an isolationist country again.

Caesarian wrote:

eagleftw wrote: DavidDeacon wrote: Quote: Oh shit! You're right! I'm voting for Obama now so that we can watch him gather all of the leaders of our enemies and talk out our problems like good little children. It's what Jesus would've done. Why do you hate Jesus? Don't start with religion. God already flooded the Earth once because of us. There is no proof of such flood.. and this is no place to throw religious views at one another so Im gonna stop it there.

You aren't a man of science are you? There have been findings of pieces of a giant boat that date back to the estimated time of the flood. I think it was during the mid 1990's. Is it proof? Who knows, that's open to debate.

Explain how, not just in the bible, but writings from other cultures across the globe write about a great flood? Mind you, these writings come from a time when there was no contact between the different cultures across the continents.

MAV wrote:

eagleftw wrote: DavidDeacon wrote: eagleftw wrote: Who would have thought that the balance of powers would make it so the President is just another desk job with different duties. He's the fall guy. He'll automatically be blamed for someone else's mishaps unless the media is all over it first. In turn he gets to have his finger on that "nucular" button. So... you're saying that being given the power to nuke is a consolation prize for being under intense scrutiny? Anyway, let me put my political scientist hat on and take away the veil of your gross generalizations on the powers of the executive branch. Certainly, the Constitution outlines the checks and balances of power, but you're putting forth an incredibly weak argument. The President has a lot of implicit power: as a diplomat and a face of the nation. The President is supposed to represent our strengths to the world and to the people at home and this last one has been holding the country hostage to the inadequacies of his regime and showing nearly all of our negative traits: unchecked aggression, stupidity and ignorance, blind faith, rampant nationalism, gross dishonesty, incomparable clumsiness, and a pinch of fascist tendencies. The President has the power to make appointments to very powerful offices: The Supreme Court and his own cabinet. Even though Congress must approve the appointments, RARELY do they keep rejecting the choices because it ties up too much of the legislature's time (which is sometimes valuable). Do not gloss over the powers of the office by saying that they're kept in check by the other branches of government. Oh shit! You're right! I'm voting for Obama now so that we can watch him gather all of the leaders of our enemies and talk out our problems like good little children. If at all reasonable, possible and plausible...why wouldn't you try to talk your way out of violent conflict? If such a plan can work, then storming the enemy's gate is going to be a needless sacrifice of American life. It is the President's responsibility to risk the lives of soldiers- all of which are either/or/and mommies, daddies, sons, daughters, sisters and brothers to somebody-only when there is a clear danger to the health and security of this nation. If a situation exists that we can negotiate our way out of rather than send thousands of our greatest citizens-our defenders-to their deaths, then the responsibility of those deaths should hang directly around the neck (along with a noose) of the President who put them in harm's way to begin with. I am not a lawyer, but I believe when you set a violent situation up that didn't have to be and it results in people other than yourself being hurt by it, it's called criminal neglegence. As self satisfying as the old jack booted Rambo/macho/ red, white and blue boot in the ass of our enemy mantra may be, war has real life and death consequences. No amount of jargon, cliché’s or songs dedications by well meaning country singers will EVER take away the pain of a mother and father weeping over a flag draped coffin-nor will it EVER remove the justified sense of righteous anger those parents feel toward their government if it was avoidable by simple negotiations. That transcends grotesque labels like “Conservative” or “Liberal” or “Republican” or "Democrat". That’s common sense.

Try talking a fat kid who loves cake out of eating the cake. Sure you can try, but in the end it won't do you any good.

War is in our blood. It's cultural and religious. Peace is only momentary as there is always something to piss someone else off.

It'd be nice if we could sit down with our enemies and work things out. I'm really not a violent person, but I do see that those we are talking about come from a culture that lives life based around war. If we had never stuck out nose into the Middle East back in the 80's and trained Osama and Al Queda then the WTC towers would still be standing. For us to sit down with our enemies would be risky. It'd make those involved in the talks targets.

It's possible the leaders of all these countries could come to terms of peace, but that doesn't mean the people in those countries who dislike the United States and everything about us will be open to peace. Some people will still hate us...which leads to terrorism. There can be no peace without war and that's because peace is something we are far from achieving at this point in time.

We should be working on achieving peace in our own country. As long as we have people committing crimes and murders how can we ask our enemies for peace? Until our country is put into check it will never be possible to have such talks. They see our flaws. Where we put someone in jail for theft, those in the Middle East will take a person's hand. How do you negotiate? We slap someone on the wrist and they'll whip a person until they are a bloody mess.

I wish things could be different, but they're not.

eagleftw wrote:

MAV wrote: eagleftw wrote: DavidDeacon wrote: eagleftw wrote: Who would have thought that the balance of powers would make it so the President is just another desk job with different duties. He's the fall guy. He'll automatically be blamed for someone else's mishaps unless the media is all over it first. In turn he gets to have his finger on that "nucular" button. So... you're saying that being given the power to nuke is a consolation prize for being under intense scrutiny? Anyway, let me put my political scientist hat on and take away the veil of your gross generalizations on the powers of the executive branch. Certainly, the Constitution outlines the checks and balances of power, but you're putting forth an incredibly weak argument. The President has a lot of implicit power: as a diplomat and a face of the nation. The President is supposed to represent our strengths to the world and to the people at home and this last one has been holding the country hostage to the inadequacies of his regime and showing nearly all of our negative traits: unchecked aggression, stupidity and ignorance, blind faith, rampant nationalism, gross dishonesty, incomparable clumsiness, and a pinch of fascist tendencies. The President has the power to make appointments to very powerful offices: The Supreme Court and his own cabinet. Even though Congress must approve the appointments, RARELY do they keep rejecting the choices because it ties up too much of the legislature's time (which is sometimes valuable). Do not gloss over the powers of the office by saying that they're kept in check by the other branches of government. Oh shit! You're right! I'm voting for Obama now so that we can watch him gather all of the leaders of our enemies and talk out our problems like good little children. If at all reasonable, possible and plausible...why wouldn't you try to talk your way out of violent conflict? If such a plan can work, then storming the enemy's gate is going to be a needless sacrifice of American life. It is the President's responsibility to risk the lives of soldiers- all of which are either/or/and mommies, daddies, sons, daughters, sisters and brothers to somebody-only when there is a clear danger to the health and security of this nation. If a situation exists that we can negotiate our way out of rather than send thousands of our greatest citizens-our defenders-to their deaths, then the responsibility of those deaths should hang directly around the neck (along with a noose) of the President who put them in harm's way to begin with. I am not a lawyer, but I believe when you set a violent situation up that didn't have to be and it results in people other than yourself being hurt by it, it's called criminal neglegence. As self satisfying as the old jack booted Rambo/macho/ red, white and blue boot in the ass of our enemy mantra may be, war has real life and death consequences. No amount of jargon, cliché’s or songs dedications by well meaning country singers will EVER take away the pain of a mother and father weeping over a flag draped coffin-nor will it EVER remove the justified sense of righteous anger those parents feel toward their government if it was avoidable by simple negotiations. That transcends grotesque labels like “Conservative” or “Liberal” or “Republican” or "Democrat". That’s common sense. Try talking a fat kid who loves cake out of eating the cake. Sure you can try, but in the end it won't do you any good. War is in our blood. It's cultural and religious. Peace is only momentary as there is always something to piss someone else off. It'd be nice if we could sit down with our enemies and work things out. I'm really not a violent person, but I do see that those we are talking about come from a culture that lives life based around war. If we had never stuck out nose into the Middle East back in the 80's and trained Osama and Al Queda then the WTC towers would still be standing. For us to sit down with our enemies would be risky. It'd make those involved in the talks targets. It's possible the leaders of all these countries could come to terms of peace, but that doesn't mean the people in those countries who dislike the United States and everything about us will be open to peace. Some people will still hate us...which leads to terrorism. There can be no peace without war and that's because peace is something we are far from achieving at this point in time. We should be working on achieving peace in our own country. As long as we have people committing crimes and murders how can we ask our enemies for peace? Until our country is put into check it will never be possible to have such talks. They see our flaws. Where we put someone in jail for theft, those in the Middle East will take a person's hand. How do you negotiate? We slap someone on the wrist and they'll whip a person until they are a bloody mess. I wish things could be different, but they're not.

Working in reverse order...

Not every country with Muslim ideals lops off a hand in cases of theft. There are some that are more progressive than others-just like there are more progressive and regressive countrys who's populace is more based in Christianity.

There are a plethora of knuckleheads in the world. Some of them won't respond to negotiations. Theoretically, as more civilizations/countries advance and are willing to discuss and negotiate, the ones that won't become more and more islands unto themselves. What place do most of them have, besides oil, in the world economy? Absolutely none. The more we steer clear of our dependence on petrochemicals, the less influence they have and the more they have to start working with the rest of the world or be closed out to it.

So yes...keep the sword handy for when needed, but don't shove it in the face of everyone we encounter who might not initially see things our way.

As for war being in our blood...not mine. I have cholesterol, white and red blood cells and traces of certain substances we needn't talk about here-but no war. We all have violence in our natures, but those natures are best left to rear themselves in times of self defense. The whole "in our blood" argument for violence is a cop out. Intelligence and compassion can overcome that part of our nature; used in proper context, violence can also be used as PART of that intelligence and compassion. Using it to develop a xenophobic state would be reverting to our baser natures.

And in closing the reverse review of your comments...as a former fat kid, I learned to say no to the cupcakes-and cocaine, weed and a lot of other things I should have said no to in the first place. We can overcome!

Well no wonder you're a former fat kid you former druggie. The drugs thinned you out.

War may not be in your blood, but it is in the blood of your ancestors and therefor it is in yours. It comes out more in others.

In all truth, I'm really not a violent person. I avoid fights and I would make a terrible soldier. I feel bad when I hit a squirrel while driving down the road.

I do believe that the world is a dirty and corrupt place without the politics of things. Throw in the politics and it gets dirtier.

In a hundred years or so as more countries progress and evolve to the status of that of the modern world then yeah maybe more and more countries will be willing to settle things with words and not fists. Not now. I don't see that happening in the next 20 or so years.

It's wishful thinking.

eagleftw wrote:

Well no wonder you're a former fat kid you former druggie. The drugs thinned you out. War may not be in your blood, but it is in the blood of your ancestors and therefor it is in yours. It comes out more in others. In all truth, I'm really not a violent person. I avoid fights and I would make a terrible soldier. I feel bad when I hit a squirrel while driving down the road. I do believe that the world is a dirty and corrupt place without the politics of things. Throw in the politics and it gets dirtier. In a hundred years or so as more countries progress and evolve to the status of that of the modern world then yeah maybe more and more countries will be willing to settle things with words and not fists. Not now. I don't see that happening in the next 20 or so years. It's wishful thinking.

300 years ago, an country independent of the imperialist yoke of British rule governed by it's colonial citizens was wishful thinking.

Wishful thinking is HIGHLY underrated.