That quote got a bitter laugh from me this morning...If it were like "Grease" though...sign me up for a Pink Lady--at least I know that Rizzo would put-out!
it will be 1954 with the Orwellian 1984 big brother thrown in religion will again guide policy as opposed to reason and logic if you are 'different' in America, you better be prepared for a long 4 years
Well, what do you define as a threat? Iraq: 1) A sworn enemy of the United States 2) Refused to comply with UN inspections for 12 years, violating over 17 resolutions 3) Harbored terrorists with Al-Qaeda links, such as Zarqawi, for years 4) Allowed terrorist training camps such as Salman Pak, where soldiers uncovered instructions for how to ram planes into buildings and fool weapons inspectors If you don't define that as a threat in a post 9/11 world, then you need help my friend.
hy·per·bo·le ( P ) Pronunciation Key (h-pûrb-l) n. A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in I could sleep for a year or This book weighs a ton.
Any terrorists with Al-Qaeda links were in the northern part of the country, that was controlled by U.S. allies, and not Saddam. The salmon pak thing was bogus, and has already been discussed on this board. A nation that has 2/3 of its airspace controlled by allied planes, doesn't have control over the northern part of it's country, is hemmed in watched by the UN, and other nations, has an army less than half the size it's army was during the first Gulf War, and was currently complying with inspectors from the UN, plus proposed allowing thousands of U.S. CIA and FBI intel officers on the ground inside its borders was not a threat, or a minimal one at that. There were other nations that were real and legitimate threats that were ignored, or where the focus lessened. If you havfe some information about Salmon Pak, or other terrorists ties that our own intel agencies don't have please share it with them.
I don't know why people are acting as if this electon isn't over. Incidentally, I heard that some woman in Ohio (I think) ended up waiting in line for over eight hours to vote. She ended up voting at around 4 AM. That is crazy. Republicans are obviously going to be very happy for a while, the two most important Democratic candidates (Kerry and Daschle) lost.
An unstable Afghanistan which still has both the Taliban and Al-Qaeda running free in it, and is mostly in the control of warlords, and producing opiates for a drug trade as we speak. Any one of the 60 nations the Bush administration listed as having ties to Al-Qaeda would be more of a threat than Iraq. Again please notice that in the 60 nations listed by the Bush administration as having Al-Qaeda ties, Iraq was not on the list. An increasing violent situation without justice, or strong efforts to halt suicide bombing in the Israeli/Palestinian situation is a huge threat to our peace. N. Korea is a threat to world peace. Not standing up to countries in Africa like Liberia, or Suddan would be a threat. Iran is more of a threat than Iraq was. Al-Qaeda passes through their borders and did so before 9/11. The list goes on. In addition there are threats that can be handled diplomatically, and threats that need military action. Anytime you use military action as something other than a last resort, the nation that does so loses honor.
I disagree with that and I'm not the only one, but obviously neither of us can produce concrete proof on either side. Regarding Salman Pak, I never heard any stories to discredit it, but I will take your word for it. The bottom line still spells that this was a sworn enemy of the U.S. who didn't comply with UN inspections for over 12 years. How much longer would you have given him? The Bush policy has kept us safe since 9/11 (when we were vulnerable to attack due to 8 years of Clinton security fallacies), what more do you want? I'd rather our soldiers take the fight overseas than our citizens deal with it in our own streets. But maybe you have a different opinion. The end result is that with one less rogue state out there sponsoring terrorism, we are all safer.
Don't forget the environment, a highly overlooked issue this year. I already hear talks last night about the new Republican democracy trying to push bills that open up the north Alaska artic drilling, just as an example.
What makes you think terrorists can't fight us over seas and still attack us in the U.S. as well? What Clinton Fallacies are you talking about? Clinton clearly should have done more, but he did issue authorization to assassinate Bin Laden, increase terror funding, tell Bush that the number one terrorist threat was Al-Qaeda etc. Saddam was a tyrant who was cruel and brutal to his people. Anyone living under that deserves better. But he was scarcely a strong supporter of terrorism.
The whole Iraq thing has been discussed round and round. There are plenty of threads. Lets keep this one about ohio, lawyers and concession speeches.
Let's see, passing up on 3 opportunities to capture or kill Bin Laden after he declared war on the U.S. Don't believe me? Read the 9/11 Commission Report. Let's also not forget Gorelick's stupid policy that prevented our intelligence agencies from getting as much information as they were used to in the past. I have to get back to business, but what I stated above is all true and is well-documented. Congratulations George W Bush! 4 MORE YEARS! Goodbye.
If it came down to that, of course. They got craploads of it over there and, until recent events driven by America to unstabilize the region, energy prices haven't been so volatile and were actually fairly low for quite a while. The real answer, obviously, is that we should be way ahead of where we are in terms of alternative energy sources, and if the ExxonMobiles of the world didn't have soo soo soo much money floating around Washington, we would be. Which is the very reason why artic drilling would be opened up - more profits.
Trust me it was right up there on my list of reasons not to vote for Bush. I realize the hot button topics of war, healthcare, education, and the economy was probably most people's impetus for pulling the lever in one way or another. For me I can see merit in both candidates views on these issues and thus it wasn't the difference maker. However the proposed constitutional amendment for a gay marriage ban, Patriot Act, and Bush's zeal to open up previously protected areas for logging, drilling, etc. was more than enough to persuade me. Couple this with Bush's religion based views on stem cell research and abortion and it's a no brainer. However I guess these issues were not important enough for most people.
