RE: Would Terror attack change your vote?

RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

hizgeorgiapeach -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 6:56:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol Hmmmm... the premise is that a McCain president would give terrorists the opportunity to rip America a new one, because his international policies would be that much more belligerent than Obama's: these people don't want to leave America alone, their intention is to hurt this country. McCain would justify terrorist actions even more - and that's what they want. See? Wait wait wait.... aren't you the one, kitten, who said just a few posts earlier, that the terrorists that the US is fighting (al-Quaida) aren't real - they're figments of the government's imagination, and bogeymen created to scare people? Oh... yes... yes you are! quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol Can I just say... al-Qaeda, this highly organised terror group, is a bogeyman made-up by Western officials. Now you're saying that these made up bogeymen ....... want McCain.... because his possible (even probable) policies will justify the actions of folks who don't really even exist....

kittinSol -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 6:57:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hizgeorgiapeach Now you're saying that these made up bogeymen ....... want McCain.... because his possible (even probable) policies will justify the actions of folks who don't really even exist.... Huh, no. This is why I wrote: "The premise is that a McCain president would give terrorists the opportunity to rip America a new one, because his international policies would be that much more belligerent than Obama's: these people don't want to leave America alone, their intention is to hurt this country. McCain would justify terrorist actions even more - and that's what they want. See?" Explaining a theory does not mean one believes in it. See?

pahunkboy -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 6:58:27 AM)
there you go again. as Reagan would say. both candidates are FOR EMPIRE. shall I pour ya a coke or a pepsi? coke pepsi, pepsi coke. PEPSI freaking PEPSI vs COKE! Got it?

thetammyjo -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 7:02:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterS quote: ORIGINAL: slaveboyforyou No, it wouldn't change my vote. Obama would waste time trying to "talk" to people that attacked us. Please correct me if I am wrong but wern't the folks who drove those airplanes into the WTC from Saudi Arabia (our ally). Bush & co. though did not waste much time in attacking two countries that had nothing to do with it. Osama is also from Saudi Arabia. So the question is, if the "terrorist" try to burn down the Rieshtag again who do we attack next? Venezuela or Mexico would be my guess....much shorter supply line and they have lots of oil. H. Sssshhh... didn't you get the memo that the American people don't want to think about facts? Plus who cares whose family is connected with whose other family. The next thing you know you'll be bringing up a history of supporting fascist political groups in American families as a means to question their patriotism.

thetammyjo -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 7:05:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Obama and Biden are already talking about invading Pakistan (if they're elected) even without another terrorist attack - so maybe you should consider switching your vote. Cause we'd much rather go into another country and ignore those where Al-queda actually has cells that seem 100% linked to the 9/11 attacks. Or perhaps we can worry about a country that might have the ability to make nuclear weapons in the future than one that all ready has them and is facing political instability and an influx of the terrorist groups that attacked us all ready.

thetammyjo -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 7:08:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity President Bush hasn't invaded Pakistan or threatened to invade, like Biden / Obama said they might. But you miss the point... it's a given that the Left considers the President to be a "warmonger" or whatever the latest catch phrase is. Barack Obama is supposed to be a pacifist, isn't he? Or is it okay with you all that he's rattling sabres at places like Iran and Pakistan. If that's just peachy why "change"? Why not just change the Constitution, and give Bush / Cheney four more years? Pacifist? No, he supports the military in Afganistan not in Iraq -- there is big difference between being a pacifist and being selective about the military actions you want to take.

thetammyjo -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 7:09:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mc1234 It doesn't change my vote, but it does make me wonder who both candidates will have in their cabinets upon election. Who are their advisors now? Who will they lean on in times of crisis? All important questions. These are indeed important question as, I believe, are knowing the party platforms. Which means that no one will go out of their way to help the voter learn about these things because people with power and authority do not want you to think, they merely want your support.

slaveboyforyou -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 7:10:22 AM)
quote: As a historian I am so saddened when folks just ignore the facts of events even within their lifetimes. I can forgive not knowing what happened in 1900 or 1500 or 500 or 500bce but I can't forgive folks "forgetting" what has happened in just the past few decades. That's being unpatriotic and unamerican and downright dangerous to democracy of any type. What has happened in the past few decades, Tammy? I remember 8 years under a Democrat administration, part of which he shared power with a Democratic Congress. In that short period of time; Al Qaeda tried to blow up the World Trade Center, blew up American embassies in Africa, participated in killing American soldiers in Somalia, attacked the USS Cole and killed several American sailors, repeatedly threatened to kill Americans anywhere in the world, and on and on. President Clinton did NOTHING. We had a chance to get Bin Laden from Sudan under Clinton's watch, and he bungled it. We had a chance to kill the son of a bitch several times, and Clinton bungled that. So I am saddened when I see sheep worshipping a man, who wants to "sit down" and chat with representatives of theocratic governments who deny the Holocaust, hang homosexuals, stone rape victims, and call for the destruction of Israel. I am saddened to see people actually believe that Obama will wave a magic wand and pull our troops out of Iraq without starting a civil war that would destabilize an entire region necessary for the world's energy needs. Of course those same people don't worry, because they actually believe this magical man will pull the same magic to supply all of our energy with windmills and solar farms. Obama supporters are dreamers and idealists. It's sad to see adults that are actually that naive.

thetammyjo -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 7:14:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveboyforyou quote: As a historian I am so saddened when folks just ignore the facts of events even within their lifetimes. I can forgive not knowing what happened in 1900 or 1500 or 500 or 500bce but I can't forgive folks "forgetting" what has happened in just the past few decades. That's being unpatriotic and unamerican and downright dangerous to democracy of any type. What has happened in the past few decades, Tammy? I remember 8 years under a Democrat administration, part of which he shared power with a Democratic Congress. In that short period of time; Al Qaeda tried to blow up the World Trade Center, blew up American embassies in Africa, participated in killing American soldiers in Somalia, attacked the USS Cole and killed several American sailors, repeatedly threatened to kill Americans anywhere in the world, and on and on. President Clinton did NOTHING. We had a chance to get Bin Laden from Sudan under Clinton's watch, and he bungled it. We had a chance to kill the son of a bitch several times, and Clinton bungled that. So I am saddened when I see sheep worshipping a man, who wants to "sit down" and chat with representatives of theocratic governments who deny the Holocaust, hang homosexuals, stone rape victims, and call for the destruction of Israel. I am saddened to see people actually believe that Obama will wave a magic wand and pull our troops out of Iraq without starting a civil war that would destabilize an entire region necessary for the world's energy needs. Of course those same people don't worry, because they actually believe this magical man will pull the same magic to supply all of our energy with windmills and solar farms. Obama supporters are dreamers and idealists. It's sad to see adults that are actually that naive. You have to go back much further than one presidency to understand what is happening today. I'd say you need to go back to at least WWII to fully comprehend American policies in the Middle East that have encouraged (not caused) radical Islam as we know it today. Stopping at one president you don't like isn't knowing the full history and only demonstrate what I was saying about how sad it is that people do not know their own nation's history.

rexrgisformidoni -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 7:14:19 AM)
I am blaming the Soviets and then the CIA arming the mujaheddin, then us leaving them their to rot after the war was over. Lots of basically freedom fighters/proto-terrorists who are pissed we left them, and then some crazy Saudis form a little group whose name translates to "the base". They remained under US radar for quite a few years, then randomly attack our interests like a hornet...growing bolder and in their nice camps in Afganistan training and plotting a huge attack (under Clintons watch, but his team actually gave Bushes team a ton of intel they didn't have time to act on, and bush didn't act on in pure partisan lines). Alqueda was never made up as a bogeyman, they were and are still a deadly enemy, but an enemy I think we will never get rid of. Its one thing to burn all the books, but somewhere, someone remebers most of the book and keeps the idea alive. Plus how do you fight an enemy that can splinter and hide in plain sight so well? So in the end, I don't think either canidate can truly be ready for a major attack. Obama I am sad to say would try to reason with them or talk them into the looney bin, and McCain would want to randomly bomb Morroco or Tunisia or something.

thetammyjo -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 7:16:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rexrgisformidoni I am blaming the Soviets and then the CIA arming the mujaheddin, then us leaving them their to rot after the war was over. Lots of basically freedom fighters/proto-terrorists who are pissed we left them, and then some crazy Saudis form a little group whose name translates to "the base". They remained under US radar for quite a few years, then randomly attack our interests like a hornet...growing bolder and in their nice camps in Afganistan training and plotting a huge attack (under Clintons watch, but his team actually gave Bushes team a ton of intel they didn't have time to act on, and bush didn't act on in pure partisan lines). Alqueda was never made up as a bogeyman, they were and are still a deadly enemy, but an enemy I think we will never get rid of. Its one thing to burn all the books, but somewhere, someone remebers most of the book and keeps the idea alive. Plus how do you fight an enemy that can splinter and hide in plain sight so well? So in the end, I don't think either canidate can truly be ready for a major attack. Obama I am sad to say would try to reason with them or talk them into the looney bin, and McCain would want to randomly bomb Morroco or Tunisia or something. This is a good solid part of the problem in the Middle East today, I agree, rexrgisformidoni. International politics is complex, always has been always will be, but most Americans don't want to deal with complexity, they want simple answers, they want clear cut choices and easy solutions.

kdsub -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 7:17:41 AM)
I would make no difference in my vote. You just can’t stop a determined attack in a free society. It’s hard to stop one in a closed society so we may as well get used to the idea that it will happen again. With the right leadership on the world scene we can make it harder for terrorists to get the support needed to carry these attacks out and reduce their severity. Eventually we can change the minds and hearts of those who feel injured by our policies and the threat will decrease drastically. When the attack comes I will only judge two things. Was it aided by the incompetence of those in charge and how was the aftermath handled. Butch

rexrgisformidoni -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 7:18:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thetammyjo quote: ORIGINAL: rexrgisformidoni I am blaming the Soviets and then the CIA arming the mujaheddin, then us leaving them their to rot after the war was over. Lots of basically freedom fighters/proto-terrorists who are pissed we left them, and then some crazy Saudis form a little group whose name translates to "the base". They remained under US radar for quite a few years, then randomly attack our interests like a hornet...growing bolder and in their nice camps in Afganistan training and plotting a huge attack (under Clintons watch, but his team actually gave Bushes team a ton of intel they didn't have time to act on, and bush didn't act on in pure partisan lines). Alqueda was never made up as a bogeyman, they were and are still a deadly enemy, but an enemy I think we will never get rid of. Its one thing to burn all the books, but somewhere, someone remebers most of the book and keeps the idea alive. Plus how do you fight an enemy that can splinter and hide in plain sight so well? So in the end, I don't think either canidate can truly be ready for a major attack. Obama I am sad to say would try to reason with them or talk them into the looney bin, and McCain would want to randomly bomb Morroco or Tunisia or something. This is a good solid part of the problem in the Middle East today, I agree, rexrgisformidoni. International politics is complex, always has been always will be, but most Americans don't want to deal with complexity, they want simple answers, they want clear cut choices and easy solutions. I've taken god knows how many international relations classes. [;)]

LaTigresse -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 7:19:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble ~FR~ I would not change my vote either. I, too, feel more confident with Obama than McCain especially as his judgement seems more thoughtful and grounded than McCains. I would worry that with two wars already going on, McCain would get us into a third and Al-queda would get exactly what they want. My thoughts exactly.......and since I already voted I can't change my mind. Even though there is no way I would at this point anyway. I am very comfortable with my vote for Obama.

Irishknight -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 7:19:54 AM)
Outside events would not sway my vote. Only a candidate's actions could do that. If there was an attack and one candidateshowed himself better able to respond, *that* would influence my vote. Currently, I am planning to vote differently than I had planned for most of this campaign. One of the thigs we need in a president is class. Both candidates started off acting as men of class and character. One of them has recently devolved into a man who uses fearmongering tactics and stirs up hate. That is one of the tactics that will piss me off faster than anything in an election. It failed last election and will hopefully fail this time.

kittinSol -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 7:21:23 AM)
IrishKnight, I could kiss you [8D] .

Irishknight -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 7:23:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol IrishKnight, I could kiss you [8D] . Name the time and place.[;)]

LaTigresse -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 7:25:02 AM)
Me too, and I hate kissing boys.

PlayfulOne -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 7:25:09 AM)
slave boy, If you think there is not going to be some kind of civil was in Iraq then you obviously have never paid much attention to the Middle East. It is not a matter of if, only when. You have a group of people who do not like one another and take every chance they can to fight amongst themselves. The only thing that held any of them in check for so long was Sadam and his iron fist. K

slaveboyforyou -> RE: Would Terror attack change your vote? (10/22/2008 7:30:11 AM)
quote: You have to go back much further than one presidency to understand what is happening today. I'd say you need to go back to at least WWII to fully comprehend American policies in the Middle East that have encouraged (not caused) radical Islam as we know it today. Stopping at one president you don't like isn't knowing the full history and only demonstrate what I was saying about how sad it is that people do not know their own nation's history. Well, I'd say you'd have to blame the Ottoman Empire for the particular strand of radical Islam (Wahabism) that Bin Laden follows. You can blame allied Europe for their actions after World War I, especially not keeping their promises to Arab allies that helped defeat the Ottomans. We can even blame Woodrow Wilson for being so naive when dealing with Europe after that war. You can try and blame Reagan for arming the partisans in Afghanistan, but you'd be wrong. The Soviets were a much larger threat at the time, and Reagan acted accordingly. We can blame Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton for ignoring Afghanistan after the Soviet withdrawal. Unfortunately we don't have a time machine, or we could go back and change these things. I don't know what your point is. It has nothing to do with the current election. You can make pompous declarations about the ignorance of American voters all you want, but you're not going to get me with that nonsense. I was a history major, I know what happened in the Muslim world for the last 1000 years. It doesn't change my opinion of Obama. He is the wrong choice; he is Jimmy Carter II.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625