9/11 Reality Check

[BTs_Lee.Harvey]

I feel there will be anouther terrorist attack if kerry is eleceted.. I have felt this way from a while now.

[BFG]

Yes, i do too.

Then again probably for a different reason than others. I think there will be another attack on the US because the state of the world is so fucked up now, and because of the amount of damage that Bush has done, that simply changing presidents will not change anything in the short term.

However in the long term a change of stance of forign policy and i expect things will over time change.

Bush helped fuck things up in matter of weeks and months... It will probably take decades if ever that some of this can be repaired. And there will almost certainly be more attacks before then

[c| Spetsnaz.]

The President is a total figure head, it does not matter who is Commander in Chief, fundamentalists will strike again in a catastrophic way within our life times, and we will all consequently lose our civil liberties and become chattle for the government's war machine. The least we can do now is vote this puppet out of office.

Ps. This icon is taken straight from georgewbush.com, in case u wanted one.

[BTs_Lee.Harvey]

yes that is true spets.. That also why I hate the eiruopens blaming bush from everything.. Its not just him.. He is a figure head.. the senate has most of the power.. they can override anthing that bush desides to do. Thats part of the reason that I think that thing WILL NOT change with kerry in office.. but the terroerst will think of him as a pussy and will think its open season at first to do another attack.

[Mr. Lothario]

     Heh. I actually wouldn't be surprised if there was a terrorist attack immediately following Kerry's victory. It'd be like the terrorists saying, "Hey, don't vote our guy out of office!" I'm not saying Bush is a tool of the terrorists (hey, that may be the only group he's not a tool of, somebody write this down!), but he has done more than any man in memory to advance the cause of militant radical Islam.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

You people have no idea what it takes to defend a nation.  You all sit back at your comfy desks and write whatever comes to mind on your precious macs while brave men and women are out defending your very right to disagree with the actions of the government that sends them out to die for you.  Well guess what, last time I checked NONE of you are in government, and hardly any of you have ever so much as served in the military, so I don't see how YOU seem to have all the answers to how to fix things.  Look, I don't agree with EVERYTHING that George Bush does, but he is doing everything in his power to fight terrorism and protect the United States from more attacks.  I have friends, many of whom were former Rangers with me, in the CIA, FBI, NSA, Secret Service, and other parts of the Dept of Homeland Security, as well as still currently in the military, and THEY think Bush is doing a good job.  So until one of you NOBODIES is in one of those positions, then I am not going to take ANY stock in what YOU have to say.  I get my information from people who are in the KNOW, you guys take your information from the internet and the news media.  Give me a break!  I am getting by far better information than your twisted liberal media is filling your heads with.  I just hope that someday some of you figure that out.

Peace.

-GhostSniper Out.

[Mr. Lothario]

     Dude, seriously, fighting a war of aggression to make money for a handful of plutocrats is not at all the same as fighting a war to defend our rights. Painting Bush as a noble leader making the hard choices to keep America from, I don't know, spontaneously combusting (or whatever it is you think would happen if there were a Democrat in office) is unconvincing as hell. Regardless of your faith-based trust in the Great Leader, he's personally responsible for a whole mess of shit, shit that's going to take anywhere from years (his slash-and-burn-and-turn-a-profit strategy towards environmental law) to decades (the extreme right-wing Supreme Court justices he will most likely appoint if he spends four more years in office, his decision to fan the flames of radical Islam, his decision to piss every nuclear-packing nation in the world off, his decision to wipe his ass with the Bill of Rights) to fix.

     I understand that you are extremely (I would even say blindly) patriotic. However, I respect the emotion if not the excess. Given your patriotism and avowed willingness to do anything it takes to preserve and defend America, how can you reconcile your support for an administration that seems to be doing everything in their power to line their own pockets at the expense (in every sense of the word -- the monetary cost is the least part of it) of America? The only reasonable conclusion I can come to is that when you speak of your love for America, you actually mean love for the Administration. And no, they are not the same thing.

[spike]

To be fair to GS he did serve his country under a different administration, so he does has a legit to loving his country and not merely the figure head leader

[*DAMN Bondo]

I've served in the military every bit as much as Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Condi Rice, John Ashcroft, etc on the Bush Administration.

And guess what, I AM in the government...every one of us (well, US citizens) are. That is what a democracy is about...it is a government of the people.

There are a lot of people involved with military and intelligence that think Bush is doing a shit job. Gen. Wesley Clark, Richard Clark, and Joe Wilson among them.

[The Golden Shark]

God....if Kerry becomes president...when we get ass raped by terrorism...im comin STRAIGHT on here to post about how shitty Kerry is!

 lol tool, how much more safer is our country now, then it was before 9/11........ hmm, none. if there were another 9/1 tomorow, they wouldn;t know about it, and it would happen. i feels safe! meanwhile, back at the white house, bush and cheney are raking it in becuase of the war, and the "rebuilding" process, were haliburton can get no-bid contracts. This video makes, and wonderful point, and although kerry might no be the best canidate ( to conservitive) he is at the very least, smarter, and more capable of helpping our terrorist problem. Bombing makes more terrorists. NOT less, thing about that one.

[BFG]

Like Bondo I've served in the military every bit as much as Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Condi Rice, John Ashcroft, etc on the Bush Administration, and aloso of the British Government etc etc...

? I have friends, many of whom were former Rangers with me, in the CIA, FBI, NSA, Secret Service, and other parts of the Dept of Homeland Security, as well as still currently in the military, and THEY think Bush is doing a good job.

lol sorry but after seeing the quality of your intelligence serices im not surprised they love bush. Bush is giving them more money, securing their jobs, and making them very happy! THEY don't really mean jack shit. and just what exactly are they "in the know" off?


Oh and i should congratulate those great US Soldiers in Iraq who yesterday fired a misile into a croud of civilians who were onlooking a burning car that had exploded - the US missile was fired from an attack helicopter that went to investigate and fired into the crowd apparently to "prevent looting"... their were shocking images from the camera of a news reporter showing the explosion... u see the camera drop, the lense covered with blood.
Im sure the 70 odd civilians killed in in Iraq yesterday really appreicate what your doing for them ghostsniper....

And still u and others belive that this approach is helping prevent terrorist attacks?

like Golden shark said:

Although kerry might no be the best canidate he is at the very least, smarter, and more capable of helping America. Bush's actions are making more terrorists. NOT less.

I give up... you just can't argue with narrow minded conservative christian fundamentalists, it simply dosn't work.


lol sorry harvey left a damn ] off the end

[BTs_Lee.Harvey]

BGF.. you realy need to learn how to close your qoutes up

["Sixhits"]

I feel there will be anouther terrorist attack if kerry is eleceted.. I have felt this way from a while now.

This is frightening.  

People honestly believe this.  Why do you believe it?  Any rationale at all?  What fact can you point to that demonstraits that the terrorists will attack us if Kerry is elected?

If you can't point to fact, then shut the fuck up -- what you are saying is disgusting. It smacks of the flith dictator's use to control their populace.




And Ghost, you know I respect your military service and faith in this country.  But maybe your soical circle is rather limited, politically. If Bush is doing a good job of fighting terrorism why is world wide terrorism at an all time high? If he's doing a good job where is Bin Laden? where is the Anthrax Killer?  If Bush is fighting terrorism why did he allow know terrorists -- American passport holders -- back into the country yesterday? If Bush is winning the war in Iraq why are the attacks on our troops increasing? Why are more troops being killed and wounded month by month?  If we are succeeding in Iraq why do we continue to lose control of the cities? why are whole swaths of the nation places we do not control? If we are safer then why does Cheney say that if his oppenents are elected we will be attacked? If we are safer then why does this administration constantlly use fear of terrorism in it's discussions? If we are safer why are you and the Republicans so afraid?  And if Bush is such a good leader, why hasn't he tried to unite the nation rather than use terrorism, 9/11, and the Iraq war to divide us? Why does he allow questions of a soldier's patriotism when he himself failed to service in combat?

Why does he do all these things and more, if he is such a great man?  and why do you persist in believing in him when there are so many reasonable questions to ask of him?

[BTs_GhostSniper]

And Ghost, you know I respect your military service and faith in this country.  But maybe your soical circle is rather limited, politically. If Bush is doing a good job of fighting terrorism why is world wide terrorism at an all time high? If he's doing a good job where is Bin Laden? where is the Anthrax Killer?  If Bush is fighting terrorism why did he allow know terrorists -- American passport holders -- back into the country yesterday? If Bush is winning the war in Iraq why are the attacks on our troops increasing? Why are more troops being killed and wounded month by month?  If we are succeeding in Iraq why do we continue to lose control of the cities? why are whole swaths of the nation places we do not control? If we are safer then why does Cheney say that if his oppenents are elected we will be attacked? If we are safer then why does this administration constantlly use fear of terrorism in it's discussions? If we are safer why are you and the Republicans so afraid?  And if Bush is such a good leader, why hasn't he tried to unite the nation rather than use terrorism, 9/11, and the Iraq war to divide us? Why does he allow questions of a soldier's patriotism when he himself failed to service in combat?

Why does he do all these things and more, if he is such a great man?  and why do you persist in believing in him when there are so many reasonable questions to ask of him?

Hey Six,

I don't have time right now to go down the list of questions one by one, but I will say this:

I do NOT, contrary to popular opinion, agree with everything that George W. Bush does.  I do NOT agree with all of his positions, and I do NOT agree with all of his policies.  I DO, however, believe that he will protect this country better than a man that has proven, in 19 years of Senate votes, that he knows little about how to defend this nation.  And that is what is important to me.  I will NEVER vote for a man who has sworn that he will wait on France, Germany, and the United Nations to decide when and if we are allowed to protect our country.  For that very reason alone, my vote goes to George W. Bush.

P.S.  If Colin Powell, who as you know is much more moderate, were running for election, I would vote for him in a heartbeat.  But unfortunately, he is not.

Also, I don't wanna sound like such a hard-line nut on here, but I am very passionate about what I believe, and I do sometimes get a little over-zealous in putting some of those beliefs and ideas to text.  Please remember that I am just about the most charitable person on this forum and would bend over backward to help anyone in need...that's anyone, not just someone who agrees with my political views.  Likewise, I do tend to hold a grudge when I feel that I am being unfairly critisized for those very beliefs and ideas....but don't worry....I'm not coming to shoot any of you.  

Peace.

-GhostSniper Out.

[spike]

Well, except typhy.

["Sixhits"]

Hey Six,
I DO, however, believe that he will protect this country better than a man that has proven, in 19 years of Senate votes, that he knows little about how to defend this nation.  And that is what is important to me.  I will NEVER vote for a man who has sworn that he will wait on France, Germany, and the United Nations to decide when and if we are allowed to protect our country.  For that very reason alone, my vote goes to George W. Bush.

Peace.

-GhostSniper Out.

Sorry to cut down the quote, but this is what I'd like to ask you.  And really, I just want to know.

What did Kerry do to prove he know's little about protecting America?
     What jumps to mind is the massive defense bill he voted against in '91, the one with all the funding for the various weapons systems.  The same one Cheney was against.

And when did he say he'd wait for France, Germany, or the UN to give us the go ahead to defend ourselves?
     He's never said this.  Republican pundits say he will do this but he's never said it, and in fact has directly refuted it.  Quoted directly from his acceptance speech:

"I defended this country as a young man and I will defend it as President.? Let there be no mistake:? I will never hesitate to use force when it is required.? Any attack will be met with a swift and certain response. I will never give any nation or international institution a veto over our national security.? And I will build a stronger American military."

Pretty plain-Jane there.

[*DAMN Bondo]

Ghost...the war in Iraq isn't about protecting our country. The claims that Iraq was a danger have been refuted.

I think the point that is important is that Kerry would unilaterally protect our country if the UN wouldn't agree to it, he just wouldn't unilaterally invade a soverign nation that was not threatening the safety of our nation. You need to be able to make a distinction between the "war" on terrorism and the Iraq war...they are not actually related (well, they weren't...they may be now because we've made it a terrorism problem.)

[BTs_GhostSniper]

Pretty plain-Jane there.

Only if you believe him.  I for one, think he is telling a great big lie.  I've heard him say too many times how we need to wait on the United Nations, or that we should wait for more countries to join in before doing anything.  Well guess what?  We gave the United Nations what, 17 tries to get it right?  And we did go into our most recent engagements with a coalition of countries supporting us (over 20 if memory serves me....without looking it up).  But Kerry still claims we did not go in with the support of the UN or countries like France, Germany, and Russia.  Well, too bad those countries weren't with us....cause the Republican Party is like an Elephant, we don't forget ANYTHING.

lol....that was a great pun....elephant....Rupublican Party....get it?  w00t!

["Sixhits"]

Pretty plain-Jane there.

Only if you believe him.  I for one, think he is telling a great big lie.  I've heard him say too many times how we need to wait on the United Nations, or that we should wait for more countries to join in before doing anything.  Well guess what?  We gave the United Nations what, 17 tries to get it right?  And we did go into our most recent engagements with a coalition of countries supporting us (over 20 if memory serves me....without looking it up).  But Kerry still claims we did not go in with the support of the UN or countries like France, Germany, and Russia.  Well, too bad those countries weren't with us....cause the Republican Party is like an Elephant, we don't forget ANYTHING.

lol....that was a great pun....elephant....Rupublican Party....get it?  w00t!

Follow ups.  

Why does world opinion not matter to you when it comes to invading sovreign nations?   Until Bush the US did not look kindly on those countries that invaded others at whims.

Should the US be a nation that invades other countried because we want to?

What threat was Iraq? And why was Iraq a greater threat than Bin Laden and the Anthrax Killer?



As for believing John Kerry... you know what I think of blind faith. But frankly no president has ever let foreign nations tell us what to do, and I don't see Kerry as any different. And when he talks about listening to the UN and respecting the views fo countries like France and Gremany he's right -- we should listen to them.  They inhabit the world too.  But, he's also not gonna let them tell us what to do. Bush says that he's not going to let them tell us what to do and uses that as the rationale for not listening to them. This is woefully misguided.  

This is what worries me about you Ghost. Obviously you're well informed and well educated.  You could be no less having served as a Ranger.  But why can't you understand the nuance -- woh! the nuance -- of listening to allies but retaining the freedom act at our own discretion? This is Kerry's position.  You can agree with it or not, but really, doubt it's sincerity? Why would a man who wants to be president of the most powerful country in the world want to hand over the cornerstone of our potence to other countries? It's just a silly suposition.

In addition, almost all of Kerry's remarks in regards to the UN, etc, have to do with Bush's invasion of Iraq.  Many Americans find it distasteful at best how we rushed to war, and not only how we rushed to war but that we rushed to war in the face of international terrorism.  We pull units from fighting Al Queda in Afganistan and deployed them to Iraq. But what is more important? Getting the guys who killed Americans or getting a secular, yet brutal dictator? Kerry is more of a hawl on fighting terrorism that Bush will ever be, because Bush does not care about fighting terrorism -- he is a political oppurtunist (now this is what I believe).  He wanted victories and Saddam looked like an easy target. Trouble was, Saddam was an easy target, but pacifing the country has turned out to be hard. Bush has no idea how to fix Iraq. And honestly, he doens't care. Bush goes from disaster ro disaster, propping himself up on the backs of the dead but bringing no successes. Tell me! where is the great victory? Where is the steady leadership? Show me why I am wrong and that Bush has accomplished something worth trumpeting?

Really there is nothing. Which is why all he does is attack Kerry; which is why all the Republicans do is attack Kerry. They cannot point to successes as reasons to impower them.


And what good leader rejects the opinions of his peers out of hand?  Did your officers in the Rangers talk to each other? Was there an officer who always thought he was right, despite the opinions of others? Was he a good officer or a fool?

I'm not saying that by listening to others you give up your rights to make up your own mind but rather that by listening you might learn something.

[BFG]

We gave the United Nations what, 17 tries to get it right??

OK cool, so you will be invading Israel and capturing Sharon now so we can put him up for War crimes as well?

And perhaps as your so worried about Iran and North Korea you could maybe go invade south Korea as well since they have only just "announced" a Nuclear programme that they really shouldnt have been doing....

And we did go into our most recent engagements with a coalition of countries supporting us (over 20 if memory serves me....without looking it up).

Um if my memory serves me it was actually predominatly US and British troops that carried out the invasion - others yes but token. It wasn't untill people saw how badly they fucked up in Bagdad etc that they had to go help out.