Staredit Network

Staredit Network -> Serious Discussion -> If we could revote for president
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Kp.ZpfW-PanzerIII on 2006-04-26 at 22:39:02
Theres 1 of 2 things a president can do.

1. Balance the budget and serve 4 years of bordem, sweep any minor conflicts under the rug for the next pres.

2. Take action, have every one hate you! :-)
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MillenniumArmy on 2006-04-26 at 22:56:05
Check the date
Report, edit, etc...Posted by TheDaddy0420 on 2006-04-29 at 00:24:24
QUOTE(Arbitrary @ Apr 26 2006, 06:32 PM)
In response to MA's link..
I like how this just assumes that "we are winning the war in Iraq" and then goes off on a six paragraph harangue of "boohoo, liberals stole my lollipop" rhetoric. Meaningless, trite, deceptive, or any other adjectives or perjoratives you may prefer. The "liberal media" angle is played out here once again, with whatever shreds of credibility said angle still has after 40 years of service in the conservative arsenal of accusations.
The article already states that we have "won." If this were true, then yes, perhaps they would be back to the region of a dollar. However, they don't give any evidence of us having "won." If U.S. forces are still there, and car bombs are still going off, and there are Iraqi police putting down civilians with firearms, then we probably have not "won." Here, they're just going through the motions that the average flag-waving idiot gobbles right up.

And is it just me, or did you not just lock the 'Biased Media' thread, and then posted that link?
[right][snapback]473523[/snapback][/right]


Theres no direct evidence of taking oil either.

But I would also think of how are we losing or can we ever lose? We are winning simply becuase the terrorists have not pushed us out of the country, they have not stopped the people of Iraq from voting, they have not stopped the forming of a government and to my knowledge there has been at least 2-3 mass Iraq voting days, which they have not stopped either. I mean the insurgents haven't done anything....
So I geuss we can't "win" and we can't "lose" either.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by n2o-SiMpSoNs on 2006-04-29 at 18:57:35
QUOTE(Kp.ZpfW-PanzerIII @ Apr 26 2006, 09:38 PM)
Theres 1 of 2 things a president can do.

1. Balance the budget and serve 4 years of bordem, sweep any minor conflicts under the rug for the next pres.

2. Take action, have every one hate you! :-)
[right][snapback]473530[/snapback][/right]

No.

QUOTE(TheDaddy0420 @ Apr 28 2006, 11:24 PM)
Theres no direct evidence of taking oil either.

But I would also think of how are we losing or can we ever lose?  We are winning simply becuase the terrorists have not pushed us out of the country, they have not stopped the people of Iraq from voting, they have not stopped the forming of a government and to my knowledge there has been at least 2-3 mass Iraq voting days, which they have not stopped either.  I mean the insurgents haven't done anything....
So I geuss we can't "win" and we can't "lose" either.
[right][snapback]475110[/snapback][/right]

I think we are winning the war but, was it worth all the Soldiers lives and was it worth all the civilian lives?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by EviL on 2006-04-29 at 19:01:47
Anyone beside Bush..
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MillenniumArmy on 2006-04-29 at 20:52:44
True, but for me, not if it's somebody much worse than Bush.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lord_RexJr on 2006-05-06 at 20:55:03
I fear kerry will make america into pu$$ies if he had won the election and became president. Bush is a bad ass but atleast he knows wat hes doing..
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Snake)Ling on 2006-05-06 at 21:01:34
QUOTE(Lord_RexJr @ May 6 2006, 07:54 PM)
I fear kerry will make america into pu$$ies if he had won the election and became president. Bush is a bad ass but atleast he knows wat hes doing..
[right][snapback]481109[/snapback][/right]


No. Bush is a bad ass that doesen't know what he's doing. Kerry is an boring ass that doesen't know what he's doing. When it comes down to it, the choice is hard. Do you want a president who will make a bad decision when something comes up, or a president who will make no decision?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Mp)7-7 on 2006-05-06 at 22:43:07
I would vote for Bush because I want him to finish the war the way it should have been done, but he didnt do that now did he, Maybe Kerry would have done it differently!
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Arbitrary on 2006-05-06 at 23:56:49
QUOTE(7-7 @ May 6 2006, 10:42 PM)
I would vote for Bush because I want him to finish the war the way it should have been done, but he didnt do that now did he, Maybe Kerry would have done it differently!
[right][snapback]481193[/snapback][/right]

If sense could be weighed, the sense in your post would have a negative mass.

You want him to finish the war the way it should..have...been done? You can't just start a war and then hit 'Reset' when things aren't going well. Stuff keeps happening. And what is the way it should have been done?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Lord_RexJr on 2006-05-07 at 08:42:10
didnt u guys hear? during the time bush is president. he will never bring the troops home so then the war will never end. just the big missions and stuff.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Kellodood on 2006-05-07 at 13:18:17
Didn't you hear? QUIT BUMPING TOPICS!

QUOTE(Last reply before you BUMPED)
Apr 29 2006, 05:52 PM


NOCK IT OFF!

QUOTE(Your BUMP reply)
Yesterday, 05:54 PM


NOCK IT THE freak OFF!
Next Page (2)