Log in

View Full Version : What is...


edb1821
10-06-2004, 02:21 PM
John Kerry's position on Iraq? :confused:

adam_f
10-06-2004, 02:26 PM
Can't tell if you're sarcastic or not.

I don't care though. I'm gonna vote for Bush.

ms.peachy
10-06-2004, 02:38 PM
What's to be confused about? His position is:

- We should not have invaded, but

- we did, so now we have to get our troops out as quickly and safely as possible, but

- we cannot simply up our sticks and run, because we have a responsibility to not leave the country to plunge into complete chaos, so

- we need to restore infrastructure for the benefit of the Iraqi public, not for the benefit of American corporate interests.

What part is giving you trouble, sonny boy?

Ace42
10-06-2004, 02:49 PM
What part is giving you trouble, sonny boy?

The bit that doesn't make Kerry's stance 'inconsistant' like Bush said so?

ASsman
10-06-2004, 02:52 PM
Hey, atleast Bush is consistant. He might be wrong, but hes consistant. I don't know about you but I would rather have a consistant President over a right President any day. Also, adam F we know who you are voting for, yet we don't give a fuck.

synch
10-06-2004, 03:23 PM
Surely you would want a president that adapts to the current situation and information in his posession instead of following his initial stance even if it turns out it was incorrect?

Wouldn't you...? :/

edb1821
10-06-2004, 04:26 PM
Hey, atleast Bush is consistant. He might be wrong, but hes consistant. I don't know about you but I would rather have a consistant President over a right President any day. Also, adam F we know who you are voting for, yet we don't give a fuck.


What the hell is Kerry "right" about?

Ace42
10-06-2004, 04:29 PM
Are you implying that Kerry is never right? If that is the case, then surely that means that on the occasions he agrees with Bush (you presumably maintaining the feeble misrepresentation that Kerry is a flip-flopper) they are both wrong?

Echewta
10-06-2004, 04:47 PM
Bush is right until about a month or so later when the truth comes out.

deita
10-06-2004, 06:18 PM
very good statement and true

D_Raay
10-06-2004, 11:55 PM
It is proven no lies were told by Bush. Kerry, Edwards, Clinton, Blair, and Bush all said there were WMD's in Iraq. Saddam also used WMD's on his own people. You liberals can't even tell the truth.
You've got to be shitting me. The level of this statement's stupidity would make Captain Caveman drop his club and run. THERE ARE NO WMD"S IN IRAQ.THERE ARE NO WMD"S IN IRAQ. How many times did this administration trumpet that very fact at us for you to recognize that they lied? Are we to believe that you, Mr. Thanks for playing, knows something the rest of the world doesn't? Go away Sisko seriously you have no point to make and no choir to receive it. Hannity.com would be much more to your liking.

synch
10-07-2004, 01:27 AM
It is proven no lies were told by Bush. Kerry, Edwards, Clinton, Blair, and Bush all said there were WMD's in Iraq. Saddam also used WMD's on his own people. You liberals can't even tell the truth.
Indeed, around the time Bush Senior was best pals with him if I'm not mistaking. Either way they were weapons that were sold to him by the US to be used on Iran.

So what's your point?

Ace42
10-07-2004, 02:05 AM
Halabja is believed to be Iran, not Iraq.

http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/GaseousLies.htm

And also, the Kurds are no more "Saddam's People" than the Palestinian's are Sharon's people.

Also, don't quote the troll. There is a handy ignore function built into the forum, please use it on Shitco, he has nothing to say and never listens.

synch
10-07-2004, 02:30 AM
Ok, I won't quote him, but ignoring him... dunno... he's quite amusing :)

I'll ignore him when the novelty wears off (which is probably quite soon).

SobaViolence
10-07-2004, 03:08 AM
What's to be confused about? His position is:

- We should not have invaded, but

- we did, so now we have to get our troops out as quickly and safely as possible, but

- we cannot simply up our sticks and run, because we have a responsibility to not leave the country to plunge into complete chaos, so

- we need to restore infrastructure for the benefit of the Iraqi public, not for the benefit of American corporate interests.

What part is giving you trouble, sonny boy?

that is the most clear and concise answer i have ever heard. i think i love you.

Ali
10-07-2004, 03:14 AM
Indeed, around the time Bush Senior was best pals with him if I'm not mistaking. Either way they were weapons that were sold to him by the US to be used on Iran.

So what's your point?

The point is that Bush and Don knew for sure that Saddam had chemical weapons, because they sold them to him (http://nerve.fugacious.net/drf/archives/wmd-receipt1.jpg).

synch
10-07-2004, 03:36 AM
The point is that Bush and Don knew for sure that Saddam had chemical weapons, because they sold them to him (http://nerve.fugacious.net/drf/archives/wmd-receipt1.jpg).
Which is the point I was making ;)

Ah, Reagan, makes sense.

Ali
10-07-2004, 04:08 AM
An excellent point.

ASsman
10-07-2004, 06:41 AM
Hmmm, still voting for the wrong person (more wrong) Adam F. ? Will the F stand for Failure, or Forward. Fucked or Fancy. Im running out of F words.

adam_f
10-07-2004, 02:33 PM
Originally posted by ASsman
Hmmm, still voting for the wrong person (more wrong) Adam F. ? Will the F stand for Failure, or Forward. Fucked or Fancy. Im running out of F words.

Wow. That joke has been played out big time. If you're going to make fun of me, do it with some originality.

ASsman
10-07-2004, 03:18 PM
Hmmm, you are a simpleton.
How about that?

ASsman
10-07-2004, 03:44 PM
Server Latency---- Double Post

jegtar
10-08-2004, 08:04 AM
You people realize you are not going to convince the "other side" to vote your way, right? Seems like every topic in this forum starts out serious but when someone mentions who they are voting for the 3rd grade name calling and insults start (just read this topic from first post to last)
These are two total opposites going against each other: one is your typical draft dodger and the other is your stero typical V-nam baby killer and they both have silver spoons in their asses. You are not going to talk anyone else into voting your way!

infidel
10-08-2004, 08:43 AM
These are two total opposites going against each other: one is your typical draft dodger and the other is your stero typical V-nam baby killer and they both have silver spoons in their asses. You are not going to talk anyone else into voting your way!
Generalizations like this just prove that you have serious problems and can't think for yourself.
And that you probably support bush.

jegtar
10-08-2004, 09:13 AM
Generalizations like this just prove that you have serious problems and can't think for yourself.
And that you probably support bush.
I'm afraid I don't. I'm just in the middle and can see the stupidity of both sides of the spectrum.

ASsman
10-08-2004, 09:47 AM
The middle. Best place to be if you never want to be wrong.

jegtar
10-08-2004, 09:49 AM
The middle. Best place to be if you never want to be wrong.
Amen

ms.peachy
10-08-2004, 10:43 AM
Amen

I don't think you were meant to be proud of that.

jegtar
10-08-2004, 01:06 PM
So he is saying that it is better to have a position and be wrong rather than not to have a position at all? hmmmm...He's the one that sounds like he supports Bush!

ASsman
10-08-2004, 03:47 PM
No, Im saying that going along with the flavor of the week.. is week. Nothing gets accomplished. Kind of like Kerry, indecivesive cunt.

adam_f
10-08-2004, 04:52 PM
I think 'cunt' may be the most overused, insipid insult ever.

infidel
10-08-2004, 06:02 PM
cunt (kunt)n. Vulgar Slang
The female genital, used as a disparaging term for a person one dislikes or finds extremely disagreeable.

Ace42
10-08-2004, 06:13 PM
Also, widely considered to be "the most offensive swear word" which is odd, considering the long standing tradition of it being used in all manner of literature (usually variations of Quaint / Quaynt / Quanyt) including Chaucer, Marvell and Shakespeare.