2004 Elections

[Gabriel Fox]

NO BUSTING OUT INTO FULL OUT POLITICAL WAR HERE! I just wanted to ignite some intelligent conversation. You can share points but please, for the love of God, no name calling!

[Leo Cana]

I don't give two shits either way which one wins. I know you said no name calling but their both idoits so I'm not voting. And yes just in case none of you could tell I'm in a very BAD mood.

[Enoch]

i dont really give a crap about the election issues since i will never have to worry about abortion (ill leave that to the females) or social security, but i am pro war, and the democrats have shown a lousy history of foreign policy and they continually screw the military over by shrinking it since they nai've-ly ( i dont know how to spell french) think the world is peaceful.

clinton slashed the military budget because he favored spending the money on issues closer to home, like for city kids and stuff, and i dont blame him for that, but for a political move hillary went over to iraq earlier this year, and that was cheap. its obvious that no one in the military like the democrats (maybe this is a stereotype, or maybe im just generalizing based of their actions and the many opinions ive heard)

kerry's war crap is a fake pile of shit. he bragged about being a war hero and all that for the longest time, since that was the only thing he could go on, since his senate record sucks, since he never showed up for work, and since he never voted for anything worth talking about.

he stayed in vietnam for 4 months, with 1 being basic training. the very people in his boat say bad things about him, mainly how he was a communist/anti-war sympasizer (look up communist salute on google images) and wrote a book about how the government sucked. (he says that it doesnt matter because he was mad at the time, which shows how much of a flip flop he is) its still diputed whether he even got those medals since he "threw them away" and that the commanders deny giving them to him and that he wont make his record public to prove it.

the democratic parties campaign effort is based around making bush'es record look bad and making kerry the "lesser of two evils" (which backfired on them in the last election) by lying and hiding the truth about kerry's past.

their arguments about bushes mistakes are exagerated crap too.

1. (there was no WMD in iraq, the war was unjustified) yeah, say that to the thousands of kurds who were poisoned by anthrax in the northern regions of iraq. they were probably sent over to syria since they are buddies and syria would love to have them, or they buried them in the sand, which wont be found for a thousand years.

2. the time when we had osama cornered in the mountains and we used local troops to fight him instead of US troops certainly looked like a mistake, but for people who dont know-that is standard procedure. whenever we are in any foreign country we do the dirty work and let the nationals do the final blow, its good for foreign relations. call it stupid, but we couldn't have a double standard on osama.


if anything in this is incorrect or you feel like debating, just reply, remember dont take this personally, im not against the democrats, but damn, kennedy was cool, what the hell are the democrats doing nowadays? seriously, i want to hear the oppositions arguments too.

[Altron]

hehe. I just don't see how anyone could vote for Bush.

He's given us a three trillion dollar deficit. When Clinton left office, we had a SURPLUS. And somehow he spent it all. And he dropped taxes. So how do you fund the war? Let the economy suffer. That's what's happening.

The war effort itself isn't THAT stupid, for example, the fight in Afganistan was good, but ever since we couldn't find bin Laden, Bush belitted his short coming, and moved on to hot topics to shun Laden out of the news, such as Gay Marriage, and Iraq. Where did Iraq come from? What happened to Afganistan?

So, why are we there in Iraq? To be finding weapons of mass destruction. Where are they? Wasn't that his whole argument of going over there. Go ahead, watch a news archive. Watch his Ultamatum that he addressed the country with when he declared war on Iraq. What was he talking about? Not taking Sadam out of power, but to take away weapons of mass destruction. I'm sure that Sadam was at number two on his grocery list.

We could be in Saudi Arabia, a country who treats their women just as nasty, who is just as bad as Sadam and his regime, but as long as they keep pumping that oil to America, we won't lift a finger or speak a word to them.

And North Korea? Boy oh boy. They are probably three times as dangerous as Iraq was. They have plenty of nukes to set us nice and crispy, but if we would lose too many soliders, then we'll keep the discussion open. The leader of N.Korea is a mentally unstable guy, but we won't attack them.

What happened to our allies? Ever since we decided we would shun out the weapons inspectors because they didn't find weapons of mass destruction (wasn't this an indicator?), we took the task into our own hands, pushed away allies, and left the inspections in the UN. What the hell were we thinking? Now look at the situation there. How are we going to pull out of there completely in the next 2, 3, or heck, even 4 years? Kerry couldn't do it either, but Bush got us into this.

And Bush will leave the education, the economy, the medicare, all to rot until we've completed his Crusade, this 'war on terror,' which will be another lifetime. And you wanna talk about combat records? Where was Bush? Probably didn't even serve, with all those bogus records. Kerry got several purple hearts and a Medal of Valor.

Flip flops? You should change your stance on something if new intel is brought up in the middle of a mission or what have you. If you don't you could be making the wrong choice. It's being stupid if you don't even at least take in your new information to account, let alone shun it completely. Bush is just a regular guy, who paid his way into Yale, who stares into cameras like deer caught in head lights, and leaves verbs out of sentences. And you want this guy to lead us?

My lord, what is America coming to?

[Gabriel Fox]

Our allies? They left us hanging, all but Britain, because Saddam was their source of money from oil. With him in power they were becoming richer and richer, so why depose someone that pays well?

I go back to what Enoch was talking about concerning the military. Take a look at this horrifying statistic:

It took FOUR terrorist attacks during the Clinton administration, and even then the democrats did nothing. It only took Bush one, and we leaped into action and took care of it. And we have not had one attack since.

Yeah, we didn't find WMDs, but it is completely idiotic to say that there never were some there; we gave WMDs to them, remember? Like Enoch was talking about Saddam had some friends in Syria, Saudi Arabia, even possibly Iran. Plenty of places to hide weapons, if you werent going to bury them already.

I'd rather have Bush lead us then some conniving lunatic like Kerry lower our defense and give us another 9/11.

I know I said no political war, but I just felt like sharing my opinion. ;D

EDIT: By the way, just in case you guys didn't know, both candidates are against gay marriage. So there is no opposition there. Just thought I'd share.

[Enoch]

ok, the deficit thingy is a load of crap that the democrats keep complaining about. listen, there are 3 things that can give a country a deficit: war, national emergency, and a recesion, and bush got all of that. the national emergency was unavoidable (according to the 911 commitee, but they couldn't put blame on anybody, so they just dropped the matter.)

the war was our responce. that had to happen. if it was a democratic admisnistration there would be another somalia all over again. yeah, drop a small group of people into a city full of drugged up idiots who are willing to kill you for more drugs. that is bound to work, isnt it? the democrats are too worried about their public opinion that they could do anythign about. bush sent troops over to iraq, kicked ass and took names, something the clinton administration never did. they figured they should have done it diplomatically, even though it failed 18 times.

the recesion was inhereited at the end of clintons time (want proof: look at the nations gdp at that time) but if you take economics youll understand that smallups and downs are normal.

ok, he never shuned topics from the news. if you havent noticed the overiding majority of the news is liberal, and are influenced by the democrattic party (like CNN) far more than the republicans, so dont be blaming them for "controlling" the news. the gay marriage thing is a democratic thing anyway. the republicans said NO and that was it. they are against gay marriage.

where did iraq come from? dont you know shit about history? iraq is our little puppet that was left over from the cold war, and since it learned to think on its own we decided to kill it.

it wasnt long until saddam would die, and his sons didnt know how to run a country, all they could do is use his name to scare people, and thats if saddams former generals didnt fight each other for the country. in other words, it was going to hell, and we took it over to make a stable democratic country in a place where voting is non existant. the other middle east countries are unstable too, saudi arabia has a about 500 princes, and any of them would love to kill the heir to the throne and take over. besides, its the oil. moores make us look bad for it, but is a wolf evil for eating a sheep? no. the fact is we need oil and you can romantisize it as an evil thing, but its what this country needs. plus we took kinda kicked OPEC in the nuts at the same time.


you know how we know that iraq has wmd? we gave them to him. thats the god honest truth. we gave him anthrax to fight the iranians, and that was his one trump card. thats why the UN made the war stop with a peace conference. 10 years of fighting and the war was stopped by one instance of anthrax. to this day iraq is the only country to use anthrax in both a wartime situation and non wartime. he was looking for nukes ever since the soviets collapsed and he even bought 2 nuclear reactors and a calutron from france, thats why they didnt help us.

your right about saudi arabia. look, do you really think any country will do anything for the civil rights of another country? thats a joke. we went to iraq to open up the oil business since it was sanctioned after saddam invaded kuwait. it was just sitting there, a big juicy peice of steak for us to take. sounds evil doesnt it? but thats how it works.

what happened to afghanistan? nothing. its a matter of resourses. we dont need 10k troops over in a desert wasteland to hunt a former regime hiding in the mountains. we need 10k troops to take over an actual country with actual cities.

north korea isnt dangerous at all. korea was a puppet country of china and they know it. they are both communinsts afterall. they wont move a finger because if they do then that means that china gets to kick their ass, and thats what they are afraid of. all they do is threaten nuclear launches for money. theyve dont it several times under clintons rule and he let it happen. bush said NO and they stopped.

[Enoch]

we dont attack n korea because we know they have nukes. runnig into a country with nukes is a bad idea, especially since the leader wont care to deploy them over his own soil.

no the weapons in spectors werent an indicator because they werent allowed to go in the damn buildings. people seem to "forget" all the troubles the inspectors went through before the war started. all the history channel tv shows about how the inspectors came over to a site, werent allowed in, and a couple of days later they were. who are they trying to fool? they said no, moved the stuff somewhere else, and then said yes, just to make the official documents LOOK as if they had nothing. tell me, if wmd was the only reason saddam was still in power, why would he throw them away?

the democrats even seem to "forget" that we spent 3 months before the war asking other nations to side with us in the coalition. no one took us seriously because the clinton administration was famous for not doing SHIT in other countries. we didnt throw them away; they didnt side with us because of our previous history. then when we actually went there and kicked saddams ass nations like japan and germany sent troops. of course they didnt send much, since those nations are small and germany still has a double digit unemployment rate.


we might not ever fully deploy out of there. if you dont know we are still in cuba since the spanish american war, which was like the 1800's or something. we are still in germany, we are still in japan, hell, we have almost as many troops in britain as they have troops at all.

iraq may become another one of our staging grounds and i say its a perfect way to help develop the country, like how germany and japan are today. yes, that is nation building, but hey, its a good thing. if our economy was so bad then it would be a priority, but i references to the "dust bowl" are rediculous.

research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GDP/106/5yrs

go to that site and tell me that the line on the chart is going down.


bush made the no child left behind act, which depending on who you talk to you will get answers like (it doesnt work) or (its the best thing since sliced bread)

you wanna read about medicare? and how its a lie from kerry, and how it was clinton's mistake that kerry is blaming on bush?

forum.hunting.net/asppg/tm.asp?m=795026&mpage=1󂨑

wait a minute. let me get this straight. you are beleiving the democratic parties "facts" about bush. did you say he "probably" didnt serve? oh...youmean that bogus document that was faxed in from a 7-11 in like ohio or something. the same bogus document that they put on the news and later ACKNOWLEDGED was FAKE, but still said that what was in it was true. listen to that again:

They said the document was fake, but what was in it was true. WHAT THE HELL WAS THAT?

and no, kerry didnt get purple hearts and medals of valor. his commander denies giving it to him, his swift boat verterans that were with him deny it. if you read the book: Treason, youll see that kerry was bad at aiming with his m16, so he decided to use an rpg at close range. a peice of shrapnel hit his arm and the medical doctor gave him a bandaid.

oh, and your listening to a guy who says a load of stuff but absolutely will not prove it. he wont let out his records. Bush did. its a FACT that he served. its a little hard to pilot a jet without knowing what your doing. kerry sat in a boat and whined.

new intel? what the hell are you talking about? kerry isnt even in the inteligence commity. he read the shit before hand, and said YES. then when he realized that it wasnt in the majority opinion, he said NO, just to be popular.

and yeah, he is a flop. he said in the debate that the soldiers are not properly equiped. but kerry voted against given them teh new body armor. thankfully that didnt happen. he voted against the patriot missiles because he didnt know jack shit about scuds. he is a politician and dfidnt listen to the military people. you saw how good the patriots were when they stopped the scuds from bombing isreal.

[Enoch]

oh, and in teh debat he also complained that teh humvee's werent armored. they arent armored! when the hell were jeeps armored? hell, accoridng to him you might as well armor the dune buggies and motorcycles. the APC's are the armored vehicles. he didnt even know what the hell he was talking about. humvees are personnel transports.

yeah, about the terrorists, where the hell were the democrats after the bombing of that USS cole? they were at the diplomatic table, ready to "talk" to the terrorists, who are trying to kill you. you dont talk to them! you shoot them! because that ius what they are trying to do to you. talking wont solve anything if the enemy wont listen. the democrats were just ignorant of that fact and wanted to hide all the troubles of the world from teh americans. like rhodesia. exactly like rhodesia.


Absence of proof is not proof of absence -William Cowper


We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender -Winston Churchill

[Gabriel Fox]

Big news of the day-Kerry concedes to defeat. Bush is reelected.

On election day I was so surprised to see most of the country in red, with a couple blue states here and there. But of course it came down to Ohio.

Bush got both the electoral vote (at like 284 or something when 270 is needed) AND the popular vote.

I honestly feel safer knowing that Bush won. The evidence can be found within this thread. (And I'm probably going to share some of this with a couple of democrats I know just to piss them off.)

Now I think we should focus on getting activity up in the RPG, and getting new and more members, because right now its basically Enoch, me, Altron, and Leo. And we're all staff!

Let's make sure that DE doesn't fall into oblivion, guys.

[Altron]

Yeah. Nuff said on the topic. Bush won, Kerry, lost, and although I'm not over it yet, I'm not gonna cry over spilled milk.

Besides, our opinion didn't even matter, because we couldn't vote. Next time... next time...