Your Ad Here Your Ad Here
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 24

Thread: Why I am frustrated on the lack of KO's...

  1. #1
    spinningfreemanny's Avatar I'm everything you want
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    355
    Fellow conservatives on this board, if they think like me, would and should be frustrated on the KO waiting to be dropped concerning the U.N... here's my reasoning on why it will never come...

    The whole talking point that there was no active recruitment of allies in Enduring Freedom that the Kerry campaign is yammering about.It is easily seen now in the Oil; for Food program, as well as the simple idea of passing on 16 resolutions, and the 11 month plea by the Bush Administration (which boggles the mind that someone can state that their was no effort for ally making) shows why other countries did not join the coalition. I think that President Bush will not say anything demeaning about the U.N., and the countries under suspect because He knows that when he wins he will have to work with those same bodies.

    Kerry, on the other hand will demean and insult the world leaders supporting the Bush Administration; all in order to grasp at any point to get him in office. I think this shows a major flaw in his though process: his whole goal is to get in the oval office, thinking nothing on what he will do when he gets there...

    This means that we and conservative leaders will have to make this point for him...
    Do you know everything? do you know 3% of everything? Could it be that what you don't believe in is in the other 97%?

  2. The Drawing Room   -   #2
    BigBank_Hank's Avatar Move It On Over
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Louisiana
    Age
    36
    Posts
    1,626
    What’s even more alarming is that he continues to downplay the losses by other nations and Iraqi’s in the fight in Iraq.

    How does he plan to build a bigger coalition when all he ever does is disrespect and disregard the nations that are bravely and proudly serving there now?

  3. The Drawing Room   -   #3
    Busyman's Avatar Use Logic Or STFU!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington D.C.
    Posts
    13,839
    Quote Originally Posted by BigBank_Hank
    What’s even more alarming is that he continues to downplay the losses by other nations and Iraqi’s in the fight in Iraq.

    How does he plan to build a bigger coalition when all he ever does is disrespect and disregard the nations that are bravely and proudly serving there now?
    I agree somewhat. Sometimes he acts as if there is no coalition .

    He is correct however in that the coalition doesn't involve many big contributions of soldiers from other countries even close to being on par with us. Nevertheless it is a contribution and should not downplayed.
    Last edited by Busyman; 10-09-2004 at 04:21 AM.
    Silly bitch, your weapons cannot harm me. Don't you know who I am? I'm the Juggernaut, Bitchhhh!

    Flies Like An Arrow, Flies Like An Apple
    ---12323---4552-----
    2133--STRENGTH--8310
    344---5--5301---3232

  4. The Drawing Room   -   #4
    My question here is what is the populations of these countries that are involved in the coalition? If they are sending the same percentage of the population to Iraq as the US I would say they are just as involved.


    It's more prudent to spend time figuring out what's right than who's right

  5. The Drawing Room   -   #5
    Busyman's Avatar Use Logic Or STFU!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington D.C.
    Posts
    13,839
    Quote Originally Posted by CloudSeeder
    My question here is what is the populations of these countries that are involved in the coalition? If they are sending the same percentage of the population to Iraq as the US I would say they are just as involved.
    Again I must agree but that's that country's sacrifice.

    In sheer number, it helps but not that much.

    Example..

    Let's say Italy sends 20 troops, Togo sends 5, France 10, America 1000.

    It helps but we would also like the UK with 1000. If we have them involved (a much more powerful ally than the others, the burden is less on us.

    I don't know if it's true but Kerry said our soldiers have 90% of the casualties.

    I can't accept that at face value but I can't ignore it either. Must research.

    Here's my logic. Kerry sounds like an idiot saying he would get other countries involved and also say that we get 90% of the casualties.

    It's like saying, "Come on down and lose some of your troops so our troops can go home."

    Unless there is something in it for that country then I can see a big

    STFU!!! and GTFO!!!

    of my face headed to whoever is Prez.

    If this was Iran, which is known for harboring terrorists, then this would be more unlikely.....but damn, Iraq was picked.
    Silly bitch, your weapons cannot harm me. Don't you know who I am? I'm the Juggernaut, Bitchhhh!

    Flies Like An Arrow, Flies Like An Apple
    ---12323---4552-----
    2133--STRENGTH--8310
    344---5--5301---3232

  6. The Drawing Room   -   #6
    Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    1,172
    It seems to me that Kerry's tactics have changed quite a bit.

    Busyman, on the one hand he says/said we need to get out of Iraq. But now he is saying we need to send more support for our troops there, actually increase our troops. And not only that, he is criticizing Bush for not doing more about Iran and North Korea. While at the same time, he is trashing Bush for spreading our troops too thin as it is.

    I can't get a handle on what he really wants to do here.

  7. The Drawing Room   -   #7
    Busyman's Avatar Use Logic Or STFU!!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington D.C.
    Posts
    13,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Everose
    It seems to me that Kerry's tactics have changed quite a bit.

    Busyman, on the one hand he says/said we need to get out of Iraq. But now he is saying we need to send more support for our troops there, actually increase our troops. And not only that, he is criticizing Bush for not doing more about Iran and North Korea. While at the same time, he is trashing Bush for spreading our troops too thin as it is.

    I can't get a handle on what he really wants to do here.
    That's pretty easy.

    He never said we should send more troops.
    His point was that if we are going to invade Iraq we should have sent more troops to secure the peace and have a post war plan. Bush did not have a post war plan.
    Kerry wants to bring more troops home which is why he throws up the lofty idea of getting more allies.

    Regarding North Korea and Iran, his point is Bush picked Iraq which was not an iminent threat while the NK and Iran were becoming iminent threats.
    All Bush can up with now is, "Well Saddam wanted to revive his WMD program."
    Well Mr. Bush that's called bullshit.
    Silly bitch, your weapons cannot harm me. Don't you know who I am? I'm the Juggernaut, Bitchhhh!

    Flies Like An Arrow, Flies Like An Apple
    ---12323---4552-----
    2133--STRENGTH--8310
    344---5--5301---3232

  8. The Drawing Room   -   #8
    Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    1,172
    I must have misheard, I guess. I sure thought he said we need about forty thousand more troops in Iraq both the first debate and this one. But yet he said he would not use the national guard or enforce the draft. He will pay soldiers more, benefits, etc., and get them this way. Did I just imagine all that?

    No, I remember it clearly now. Because when he said that, Bush remarked about his voting down the bill for more money for our troops.



    Edited to add second paragraph
    Last edited by Everose; 10-09-2004 at 05:16 AM.

  9. The Drawing Room   -   #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Everose
    I must have misheard, I guess. I sure thought he said we need about forty thousand more troops in Iraq both the first debate and this one. But yet he said he would not use the national guard or enforce the draft. He will pay soldiers more, benefits, etc., and get them this way. Did I just imagine all that?

    No, I remember it clearly now. Because when he said that, Bush remarked about his voting down the bill for more money for our troops.



    Edited to add second paragraph
    You didn't hear wrong rose, that is exactly what was said. More troops in Iraq, no National Guard, and no draft.
    Last edited by CloudSeeder; 10-09-2004 at 05:23 AM. Reason: typos


    It's more prudent to spend time figuring out what's right than who's right

  10. The Drawing Room   -   #10
    Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    1,172
    Okay, Mr. Cloud. But I really have a problem with your signature. I can't help it. I don't mean to criticize. But I be listening to my sig these days.

    Not all Liberals dislike guns.

    Not all Republicans like them. They scare me. Bring on the rust.


    Damn that felt good.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •