Post #172,911
9/7/04 12:59:53 AM
|
Re: Bush gets small convention bounch, still pulls slighly a
Bush is up 11 points over Kerry! What have you been reading.
Dems are pointing fingers already.
Bush will win on the war on terror. Bush is way ahead in polling on this issue.
The disaster in Russia where these inhuman hethens shot kids in the back, unfortunately, may help the GOP in the fact voters will realize that these people cannot be negotiated with.
Reports to date indicate these terrorists were Arab - not Chechyns. It is a global issue.
The Dems are saying they can negotiate and be gentler than the GOP, the GOP is saying let's hunt them down and deliver justice.
I'll go with the GOP on this one.
War is not the way, but, unfortunately when inhuman hethens shoot kids in the back trying to escaoe from a hostage situation, these people need to be hunted down. This type of attack will not be limited to Russia.
A firm response is required - not negotiation.
Kerry and the Dems don't cut it.
--Bob
|
Post #172,912
9/7/04 2:00:33 AM
|
He'll win the wah on terrah?
How will you KNOW?
"We have obtained an unconditional surrender from The Terrorists."
"We have exterminated all the terrorists."
"We have solved the drug problem." Oops, wrong "war".
Peter
[link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #172,915
9/7/04 2:07:58 AM
|
He's admitted he can't win the war on terror.
|
Post #172,914
9/7/04 2:07:25 AM
|
I agree with you on the polls
there were 2 polls (Times and Newsweek)that gave Bush a double digit lead. Not that I'm particularly worried about it. The election is still a long way off. The Dems are saying they can negotiate and be gentler than the GOP, the GOP is saying let's hunt them down and deliver justice.
I'll go with the GOP on this one.
War is not the way, but, unfortunately when inhuman hethens shoot kids in the back trying to escaoe from a hostage situation, these people need to be hunted down. This type of attack will not be limited to Russia.
A firm response is required - not negotiation.
Kerry and the Dems don't cut it.
I do disagree with you on this. I have yet to see anywhere that Kerry (or anyone else on the Democratic side) has said that negotiation is required. In fact, the Democratic response to Terrorism has been consistently one of treating as a legal issue - with capital punishment as sentencing (McVeigh is dead). It can also be argued that Republicans have been extremely soft on Terrorism, both with the trading status of Iraq and Iran. As for Kerry - remember that Kerry has personally killed to protect this country. Bush hasn't.
|
Post #173,030
9/7/04 10:21:30 PM
|
Re: I agree with you on the polls
>In fact, the Democratic response to Terrorism
>has been consistently one of treating as a
>legal issue - with capital punishment as
>sentencing (McVeigh is dead).
Treating terrorism as a legal issue is negotiation.
--Bob
|
Post #173,036
9/7/04 11:48:59 PM
|
Bob, take a valium.
How many more countries do we need to invade here Bob? How many more quagmires do we really need? Just who do we fucking bomb next? The ones we bombed last don't seem to have had anything to do with 9/11 and now we got more terrorism happening all over the world. Who do we fucking bomb? Pick a target. Tell me why that works.
-----------------------------------------
It is much harder to be a liberal than a conservative. Why?
Because it is easier to give someone the finger than it is to give them a helping hand.
Mike Royko
|
Post #173,097
9/8/04 12:45:13 PM
|
That's probably the dumbest thing I've read here...
...for several years, at least.
jb4
shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf. BULLSHIT
|
Post #173,098
9/8/04 12:46:37 PM
|
Outright war is negotiation.
You're just being tougher on the terms.
|
Post #173,101
9/8/04 12:49:33 PM
|
Right - some people need to read Gett A. Cluesiwitz
-drl
|
Post #173,100
9/8/04 12:47:53 PM
|
in this context legal = criminal
And yes, it's a criminal matter, mass murder. By calling this "war" you implicitly raise the opponent's status from miserable scum criminal to state combatant. I can't believe anyone is so stupid as to not see this immediately.
-drl
|
Post #173,210
9/8/04 9:25:00 PM
|
I'm curious...
Treating terrorism as a legal issue is negotiation. What isn't negotiation then?
|
Post #173,221
9/8/04 11:21:53 PM
|
A Non-negotiation Position,
Pre-emptive strikes, not taking prisoners (per Geneva Convention, except for key people for information), blocking finances and bringing the war to them instead of dealing with them on US soil.
It's brutal, but maybe it would get them to raise the white flag sooner. They may be more willing to talk then, as they aren't willing to talk now.
There will always be some form of local terrorism around the world, that's criminal - it's the global network that the US is at war with and that's what I'm talking about. We can't let them have the power to destroy the Western economies and treating them as common criminals will let them do just that. A prison full of Al Qeada members serving life sentences or spending years on death row will only encourage hostage taking situations that will result in the swapping of these people with hostages to end a situation that could also end someone's political career i.e. a future president.
Check this link - Russia is talking pre-emptive strikes.
[link|http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040908/D84VLCLO0.html|http://apnews.myway....08/D84VLCLO0.html]
|
Post #173,224
9/8/04 11:50:31 PM
|
What happens
What happens if it turns out the training camps the Russians want to bomb are in the US? Rememeber the 9/11 hijackers got training in the US, it's possible the people that hijacked that plane in Russia got training here.
Or do you think the pre-emptive strike thing only applies to hethen nations?
Jay
|
Post #173,229
9/9/04 1:47:10 AM
|
That doesn't work.
You misunderstand al-Qaeda; they're not afraid of dying. The WTC attacks should have taught us that much.
There will never be a white flag from AQ, and we will never be able to kill them all.
Peter
[link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #173,232
9/9/04 3:08:28 AM
|
Re: A Non-negotiation Position,
Let's take them one at a time...
- Pre-emptive strikes
Such as Clinton's cruise-missile strikes.
- not taking prisoners (per Geneva Convention, except for key people for information)
Okay...but last I checked, we had a lot of prisoners in Guantanamo. That wasn't done by the left.
- blocking finances
Excellent idea. Been done lots of times.
- bringing the war to them instead of dealing with them on US soil.
Such as Clinton's cruise-missile strikes.
It's brutal, but maybe it would get them to raise the white flag sooner. They may be more willing to talk then, as they aren't willing to talk now.
It is unlikely to get them to talk at all; however it is brutal and it is necessary. There will always be some form of local terrorism around the world, that's criminal - it's the global network that the US is at war with and that's what I'm talking about. We can't let them have the power to destroy the Western economies and treating them as common criminals will let them do just that. A prison full of Al Qeada members serving life sentences or spending years on death row will only encourage hostage taking situations Why do you want them on life sentences and in prison. I want them dead. McVeigh is dead. Aren't you willing to use capital punishment on Al Qeada members? Don't get me wrong, most of the members end up killing themselves before we catch them. The Cole bombers, the 9/11 bombers, etc. tend to kill themselves as they attack. (Not much to kill in those situations). Even when some of the higher-ups are caught, they are often executed before we can get all the information we want out of them. Saudia Arabia killed several of the higher-ups from the barracks bombing before we could question them. Makes it difficult to get to the others. that will result in the swapping of these people with hostages to end a situation that could also end someone's political career i.e. a future president.
Unlikely given that the last President who negotiated with people who took hostages was considered a great man by a large group of the population. (Reagan and Iran/Contra) Hell, consider our Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld who personally shook hands with Saddam Hussein (and who was working deals with him). Alas, some groups have a real difficulty identifying who the enemy is. One day they're our greatest ally, the next they're the next Hitler.
- You do realize that Saddam Hussein was not involved in the attack on the World Trade Center?
- You do realize that we haven't caught bin Ladin?
- You do realize that we've ignored the Saudia Arabia / Al Qeada link?
|
Post #172,959
9/7/04 2:08:38 PM
|
Re: Bush gets small convention bounch, still pulls slighly a
The polls that showed Bush way ahead where all taken during the convention, which lowers their value. The Gallup poll was the first one taken entirly after the convention. It will be interesting to see how the polls read next week, when Bush's bounce can be expceted to begin fading. Bush will win on the war on terror. Bush is way ahead in polling on this issue. Bush may convince the American public otherwise, but he will lose against terror. Bush and his ilk do not understand that killing one terrorist in a way that creates 2 more is a losing venture. Jay
|
Post #172,972
9/7/04 3:12:45 PM
|
What makes you think that he wants to win?
The leaders of great powers usually find it convenient to have one (or rarely two) great enemies. Ideally the enemies should be powerful enough to focus the attention of the people, but weak enough that the great power is unlikely to actually be destroyed at the hands of this enemy. This situation allows one to unify the nation with relatively low risk.
Clearly that is what the Republicans wish to make of the terrorists. They are the enemy in the dark that the USA can rally against indefinitely. Actually creating more terrorists is good for the current regime - eventually those new terrorists will do something spectacular enough to cement their role as "viable enemy" even further. Without those occasional reminders people might forget about them, and they wouldn't serve their purpose.
Cheers,
Ben
To deny the indirect purchaser, who in this case is the ultimate purchaser, the right to seek relief from unlawful conduct, would essentially remove the word consumer from the Consumer Protection Act
- [link|http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1246&Page=1&pagePos=20|Nebraska Supreme Court]
|
Post #172,978
9/7/04 4:00:06 PM
|
For some that is the case
For some in the current administration, those from the military-industrial complex, having an enemy is key. They want the country on the brink of war, ready to spend big money to protect itself against foes that may not even exist.
But that doesn't strike me as being the neocons way. The neocons actually believe in wars, not just preparing for them. Behind the scenes they are already talking about who will be invaded in the next 4 years, and they hope to head in that direction no matter who wins. They think they can actually achive peace by crushing their foes, that they can spread benevolance through force of arms.
Jay
|
Post #172,987
9/7/04 4:29:39 PM
|
Be nice to each other or you'll get spanked.
Sounds like my mom's logic.
A good friend will come and bail you out of jail ... but, a true friend will be sitting next to you saying, "Damn...that was fun!"
|
Post #172,988
9/7/04 4:32:57 PM
|
Reminds me of Glasnost.
Back in the 1980's when Gorbachev was trying to work out Perestroika, a couple physician friends and I were discussing the next great threat to the U.S. now that the Cold War was essentially over.
Both of them suggested "Fundamentalist Islam". I said, "World Peace".
bcnu,
Mikem
"I declare war to the death on dominant nation chauvinism. I shall eat it with all my healthy teeth as soon as I get rid of this accursed bad tooth."
V.I. Lenin
|
Post #173,002
9/7/04 5:38:10 PM
|
In your own opinion,
knowing what you know now: who do you think was right?
--
... a reference to Presidente Arbusto.
-- [link|http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001417.html|Geoffrey K. Pullum]
|
Post #173,005
9/7/04 6:02:49 PM
|
How about a meld?
Fundamentalist American Christian Imposed Peace Through War With Fundamentalist Islam
(or maybe that could be shortened to, Ours Is Bigger, when the nukes come out. Next.)
Nuke numerous ragheads to demonstrate Christ's Love for All Except..
[see lengthy list, currently in 3 Volumes]
|
Post #173,006
9/7/04 6:24:41 PM
|
Both wrong
Chinese conformalism.
Russia and US should be allies, the closest friends.
-drl
|
Post #173,070
9/8/04 10:32:10 AM
|
I think I was.
Else why did the pResident decide he needed to invent a need for war?
And yes, the irony of the current cabal agreeing with something I said over 20 years ago is not lost on me. <sigh>
bcnu,
Mikem
"I declare war to the death on dominant nation chauvinism. I shall eat it with all my healthy teeth as soon as I get rid of this accursed bad tooth."
V.I. Lenin
|
Post #173,021
9/7/04 9:34:43 PM
|
Rasmussen has them even.
[link|http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Presidential_Tracking_Poll.htm|Presidential Tracking Poll]. Tuesday September 07, 2004--The Rasmussen Reports Presidential Tracking Poll shows President George W. Bush with 47% of the vote and Senator John Kerry with 47%. The Tracking Poll is updated daily by noon Eastern. I think the Time and Newsweek polls were a fluke. I think they're going to stay roughly tied (+/- 5%) until the debate(s). Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #173,049
9/8/04 7:10:41 AM
|
Don't worry - Diebold will decide us...
Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #173,156
9/8/04 4:12:49 PM
|
Thou sayest et moi. But Calif has a few non-wimps re Diebold (new thread)
Created as new thread #173155 titled [link|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=173155|Thou sayest et moi. But Calif has a few non-wimps re Diebold]
|
