Yes, I am tired of this war, but I realize its necessary. No, I am not tired of the protestors; endless fuel for ridicule is what some of them are, hours of fun.
Terry
Posts by jelly
-
34Are you tired of War
by JH insince months they are talking about war, and now it is happening.
ever since 9/11, we are flooded with news of war.
are you sick and tired of hearing about war?
-
-
-
45
Is America going to allow another Turkish atrocity? ... escalation?
by Simon inin their rush to bomb iraq, it seem that america has cut a deal with turkey to allow overflights, thus allowing b52's from the uk to launch cruise missiles etc ... .
the turkish army is moving into northern iraq !!.
10,000 troops.
-
-
jelly
What do you want us to do Simon? Blow them up?
Terry
-
10
U.S. Exaggerates Relative Size of Iraq Alliance
by Trauma_Hound inu.s. exaggerates relative size of iraq alliance
reuters.
thursday, march 20, 2003; 4:10 pm .
-
-
jelly
Careful DJ Simon will come along and delete your post.
Terry
-
-
-
jelly
Fair enough Joann, sorry to sound so rude you seem like a nice person.
Terry
-
-
-
jelly
import javax.swing.JApplet;
import java.awt.Graphics;public class DakotaIsADumbass extends JApplet
{
public void paint (Graphics g)
{
g.drawString("Go away Bush robot!!", 20, 90);
}an imbecile like terry
-
-
-
jelly
Hey Simon,
Why delete my attack but leave all the rest?
Terry
-
6
Bush Agrees To Send More Inspectors To Iraq
by DakotaRed inpresident bush agrees to more inspectors in iraq
(ap) washington dc saturday, march 18, 2003 8:45 pm .
president george bush has announced that the us will not attack iraq.
-
-
jelly
Excellent post DakotaRed, keep them coming. Dont let the freaks get you down.
Terry
-
5
Is the US only an exploiting thief?
by ThiChi insome claim that we are only in iraq for oil.
has this really been the pattern?
what has the us given the world since wwii?
-
-
jelly
We fucked the American Indians. So what is your point? That the US is not a perfect county? I don’t believe anyone is making that statement. In the past, especially over 100 years ago, the US did make huge and terrible mistakes. Of course, the world was different then and you are judging a nation of 100 years ago with today’s standard. So once again, what’s your point?
if your point is America is evil because of its past and no matter what it does currently or in the future it will always be evil then by the same logic would the:- Japanese still be considered militaristic because they were 60 years ago?
- Germans still be considered Nazis?
Terry -
88
Bush just wants the oil!!!
by dubla ini posted this on another thread, but i thought a new thread might help get the ball rolling: .
i have a simple question for all those that believe this war is solely about oil: .
what exactly do you believe bush is going to do with the oil fields after the war?.
-
-
jelly
The two arguments can be boiled down to this: feel free to corect me if you think I am wrong
Simon- For Aid to be counted it can only be of a certain category
- Aid for military non-civilian uses does not count
- Lets just look at the last 12 years
- The US does not give the most amount based on GDP/GNP
- Therefore America is (Simon you have to fill this part in, what exactly does this say about Americans?)
- Military aid counts
- Lets adjust the time frame to the last 50 years
- The Fact that America provides the defense for many of these countries allows them more disposable income to donate (you might not agree but this is a strong argument)
- Private donations (which the American Tax law encourages) are ignored in Simons data
- what the hell does it matter if another country gives more of a percentage of their GNP than us, we still give alot so I am not sure what the point of the whole argument is
- ThiChi is correct about the private donations
- Simon's figures are a bit suspect I have to check again but I do not think they jive with the USAID website
- California is 20 billion in dept maybe the fed should stop sending money to Africa and send some to California
-
20
Bush Demonized, No Matter What
by DakotaRed inhow many times has the left stated there is no need to have war, but saddam should be just taken out?
i've lost count how many times i have read that it all could be avoided if only saddam were taken out.
tonight, bush tried to do just that:u.s. launches cruise missiles at saddamsaddam denounces attack as 'criminal'.
-
-
jelly
Dakota is correct about a sizable percentage of the ‘anti-war’ crowd, Bush will be vilified no matter what course of action just because he is republican. I am for this war but I do realize that there are some plausible arguments to be made against it, to bad the majority on the left can not articulate them.
Please do not assume I was ok with that was happening when Clinton was in office. I was not. I thought he was very wrong.
alot of 'anti-war' people tell me this now, I never realized how unpopular Clinton was with the 'anti-war' crowd:- 2 quick questions about you opposition to Clintons war
- Did you speak out against the war? if no why not?
- Do you have another solution besides what Clinton did? if yes what?
- Have you ever been for any war or are you opposed to all wars?