New Warheads: America the hypocrites

New Warheads: America the hypocrites (Full Version)

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

Message

Gauge -> New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 12:13:30 PM)
Just in case anyone missed the headline: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070302/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/new_warheads We don't want North Korea to have nukes and we are on the brink of expanding our war into Iran but the good old USA once again shows how inept it's leadership is and decide that now is a good time to replace our nuclear warheads. Pray tell where is this money to replace them coming from? What kind of message does this send around the world? Obviously the USA is not interested in dismantling it's arsenal. I am terribly confused by all of this. I think that it is hypocritical to say one thing and do another but this isn't really a shock coming from George W and his cronies. Bush may well go down in history as the worst president that this country has ever had. I am not really into politics but this headline disturbed me.

popeye1250 -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 12:29:45 PM)
Bush? He's got a ways to go yet to catch up with Clinton. But, they're BOTH terrible. Clinton was there to "party" Bush is there as a schill for big business. The American People haven't had anyone in the White House representing (our) interests since Reagan. I couldn't care less what N.Korea does I just don't want my govt. giving them any of my money like Clinton did and I certainly don't want any "refugees" comming here from N Korea!

Gauge -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 12:32:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Bush? He's got a ways to go yet to catch up with Clinton. But, they're BOTH terrible. Clinton was there to "party" Bush is there as a schill for big business. The American People haven't had anyone in the White House representing (our) interests since Reagan. I couldn't care less what N.Korea does I just don't want my govt. giving them any of my money like Clinton did and I certainly don't want any "refugees" comming here from N Korea! As a bumper sticker I saw said: When Clinton lied no one died.

slaveluci -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 12:38:03 PM)
Yes, i know Reagan certainly represented the interests of the poor, those with HIV, etc. Such a humanitarian [image]http://www.collarchat.com/micons/m20.gif[/image]...... slave luci

pahunkboy -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 12:43:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Gauge Bush may well go down in history as the worst president that this country has ever had. I am not really into politics but this headline disturbed me. Yup. the 08 election cycle is already in gear. it is very early historically speaking. We went from a sound budget- to practically banrupstsy- in just a few short years. ---curious. this is the "best" guy the party could come up with? gag me

popeye1250 -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 12:49:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Gauge quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Bush? He's got a ways to go yet to catch up with Clinton. But, they're BOTH terrible. Clinton was there to "party" Bush is there as a schill for big business. The American People haven't had anyone in the White House representing (our) interests since Reagan. I couldn't care less what N.Korea does I just don't want my govt. giving them any of my money like Clinton did and I certainly don't want any "refugees" comming here from N Korea! As a bumper sticker I saw said: When Clinton lied no one died. Tell that to Vince Foster's widow.

popeye1250 -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 12:55:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveluci Yes, i know Reagan certainly represented the interests of the poor, those with HIV, etc. Such a humanitarian [image]http://www.collarchat.com/micons/m20.gif[/image]...... slave luci Slaveluci, when Reagan was President there were a LOT less poor people in this country! Everyone was working then and the jobs paid good money and had something called "Benefits." You got full medical, 12 holidays paid, 2-4 weeks vacation, dental, life insurance, disability insurance, free turkeys on thanksgiving, profit sharing. No-one thought of "globalising" those jobs or "outsourcing" them. What does "HIV" have to do with Reagan?

BlkTallFullfig -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 12:59:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Bush? He's got a ways to go yet to catch up with Clinton. But, they're BOTH terrible. Oh puhleez! You've got issues (rhetorical) if you think the two men are comparable in any way except having the same title. Clinton's basically imprisoning Palestinian and Israeli heads of state to try and come to a peaceful conclusion to their issues was the biggest contribution anyone has ever made to world peace in my opinion... Unfortunately, their cuts were too deep. To the OP, I believe our stupidity and arrogance is what will do us in in the end though. Thinking that we are the ones with the biggest cocks, and no one can tell us what to do, while we preach to everyone else. M

popeye1250 -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 1:03:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BlkTallFullfig quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Bush? He's got a ways to go yet to catch up with Clinton. But, they're BOTH terrible. Oh puhleez! You've got issues (rhetorical) if you think the two men are comparable in any way except having the same title. M BlkTall, I think they're both scumbag lowlifes. What could more "fair" than that? Are you trying to say that Clinton is "less" of a scumbag lowlife than Bush?

Zensee -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 1:06:24 PM)
Let's see... Clinton - one semen stained dress. Bush - thousands of blood stained uniforms and tens of thousands of blood stained articles of civillian clothing. Nope. I can't tell the difference. Z.

slaveluci -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 1:07:11 PM)
popeye, About the Vince Foster comment, i hate to admit that that was the first thought that ran through my mind too...LOL....slave luci

Sternhand4 -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 1:12:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Gauge Just in case anyone missed the headline: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070302/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/new_warheads We don't want North Korea to have nukes and we are on the brink of expanding our war into Iran but the good old USA once again shows how inept it's leadership is and decide that now is a good time to replace our nuclear warheads. Pray tell where is this money to replace them coming from? What kind of message does this send around the world? Obviously the USA is not interested in dismantling it's arsenal. I am terribly confused by all of this. I think that it is hypocritical to say one thing and do another but this isn't really a shock coming from George W and his cronies. Bush may well go down in history as the worst president that this country has ever had. I am not really into politics but this headline disturbed me. Did you take the time to read the article ? Or did you just read the headline? The USA is a nuclear power. You may resent this but its a fact. Its always good to try and make a safer weapon. All mechanical systems fail in time. Its only prudent to replace older systems with newer ones. We will, according to the article be able to reduce the number of weapons with the newer model. So it will reduce the stockpile. Preventing nuclear proliferation is not just an american policy its an international policy ( BTW N Korea signed and broke this treaty ) Iran's pursuit of this technology is scary as to their primary religious fervor for strapping bombs to themselves. If they have no qualms using conventional explosives to attack civilians while blowing themselves up, what makes you think they'd resist using nukes?

slaveluci -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 1:13:47 PM)
Just that he and his administration did everything in their power to fight treatment research, having the attitude that only gays and other promiscuous individuals got it so they must deserve it. He didn't have anything to do with it really....other than that........ and as far as the economy, i don't think we even want to get into how things compare between Clinton and "W"'s administrations..... respectfully disagreeing, slave luci

slaveluci -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 1:16:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zensee Let's see... Clinton - one semen stained dress. Bush - thousands of blood stained uniforms and tens of thousands of blood stained articles of civillian clothing. Nope. I can't tell the difference. Z. AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!

defiantbadgirl -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 1:18:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: slaveluci Yes, i know Reagan certainly represented the interests of the poor, those with HIV, etc. Such a humanitarian [image]http://www.collarchat.com/micons/m20.gif[/image]...... slave luci Slaveluci, when Reagan was President there were a LOT less poor people in this country! Everyone was working then and the jobs paid good money and had something called "Benefits." You got full medical, 12 holidays paid, 2-4 weeks vacation, dental, life insurance, disability insurance, free turkeys on thanksgiving, profit sharing. No-one thought of "globalising" those jobs or "outsourcing" them. What does "HIV" have to do with Reagan? That's why I don't understand why so many argue that outsourcing benefits America. As for nukes, nobody should have them, including the US. The use of nuclear weapons would cause pollution, radiation, acid rain, etc. The world is made up of many countries, but Earth shares the same atmosphere. Building something that can't be used is stupid and dangerous. Even if we don't use them, who's to say some other country we outsource computer work to won't hack into our system and set them off? Nuclear weapons are a disaster waiting to happen and unsafe to have anywhere.

HydroMaster -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 1:20:48 PM)
I think my issue with our administration in this country is that we can't get anyone who is in the middle anymore, especially on national defense. It's either one exteme or the other. We have Clinton that sat on his ass while the terrorist attacks started hitting the US and we have Bush who's immediate answer to even the possibiliy of a terrorist threat is to drag us into invasion after invasion. I'm cringing over my choices for the next election. It seems like it's going to be another case of extremes to me. I don't much care about the US's nuclear arsenal...it seems like a waste of money seeing as how we haven't used them , other than testing, since the 40's. I don't feel any more or less safe having them. I think most of the fear about other countries having them is that they might actually use them in war.

slaveluci -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 1:23:53 PM)
[To the OP, I believe our stupidity and arrogance is what will do us in in the end though. Thinking that we are the ones with the biggest cocks, and no one can tell us what to do, while we preach to everyone else. M [/quote] Absolutely. This reminds me of something Master has said to me. He says it has always amazed Him that the U.S. sits itself up as the ultimate authority on which countries should do what concerning nuclear weapons when we are the only country who has ever actually employed nuclear bombs in war against an enemy. Kind of like letting the foxes guard the henhouse, huh? i know Iran's leader is practically insane on some issues (denying the Holocaust, etc.) but i have to admire the fact that he is willing to tell Bush that the U.S. has no right to dictate to Iran about their nuclear technology. People say, "Yeah, but wait. Aren't you afraid that Iran will actually USE their nuclear weapons?" Oh, you mean like WE did? Yeah, suppose i am.........slave luci

Sternhand4 -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 1:32:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zensee Let's see... Clinton - one semen stained dress. Bush - thousands of blood stained uniforms and tens of thousands of blood stained articles of civillian clothing. Nope. I can't tell the difference. Z. Try Bosnia and Somalia.. Both places servicemen died. I didnt like Clinton policy's. But as CIC would you hold the blood of the military losses as his? I wouldn't He made a decision to put men in harms way. Thats the job of the military to execute those orders. We know that there will be risks. As for Clintons pusuit of head from younger women, I have no problem with that. Its an issue for him and his wife. I didn't like that he fished off the company pier. Its always bad form to hit on interns. I have never understood how liberal women could be so supportive of this man. His conduct is the antithesis of what they publicly stand for. He was impeached for perjury, not the blowjob. It was interesting that the deposition was for a sexual harassment lawsuit ( a womens issue ) which he fought all the way to the supreme court not to take. Then as a lawyer ( which he was later disbarred for )and chief law enforcement officer, he lied in sworn testimoney during that deposition. Thats why he was subject to impeachment. Not for lying to hillary, not for looking the US in the eye and lying. Now can you see the difference?

cadenas -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 1:39:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Slaveluci, when Reagan was President there were a LOT less poor people in this country! Everyone was working then and the jobs paid good money and had something called "Benefits." You got full medical, 12 holidays paid, 2-4 weeks vacation, dental, life insurance, disability insurance, free turkeys on thanksgiving, profit sharing. No-one thought of "globalising" those jobs or "outsourcing" them. Yes, when Reagan took office. By the time he left office, much of that had already been dismantled. Remember the Air Traffic Controller strike, and how Reagan turned ATC from well-paying jobs with benefits into low-benefit low-paying jobs with ridiculous work rules? Remember the deregulation that led to the S&L crisis? Remember the growth of homelessness and poverty, in particular in inner cities, during the Reagan years? True, by the time Reagan left, there was still a lot left to do. It is a testament to the quality of our system from the 1970s that it took nearly 30 years of Republican rule to destroy it as thoroughly as Reagan, Bush, Gingrich, DeLay and Bush did. Oh, and "full medical?" We have never had "full medical" in the history of the USA. We have had union-negotiated and employer-provided health benefits. Employer-paid health care was simply an ideological masterpiece from the 1950s. Back then, individual health coverage had become difficult to get (same as today). Employer-provided health benefits was simply the price big business paid for avoiding universal health care, which was ideologically unacceptable.

defiantbadgirl -> RE: New Warheads: America the hypocrites (3/4/2007 1:41:39 PM)
Before the deposition Clinton asked what their definition of sexual relations was. They said sexual intercourse. Clinton went according to the definition they gave him and was blackballed for it. Everyone is entitled to a private life......even the president. What does his sex life have to do with how he ran the country? Absolutely nothing!!

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125