Command and Conquer: Renegade Official Forums - RDF feed
C&C: Renegade --> Dying since 2003™, resurrected in 2024!
Good site for those of you against mindless slaughter
http://www.axisofjustice.org/ Tom Morello...ex-guitarist of Rage Against the Machine...Yale graduate...I guess he's stupid too though...aren't all people that go to Yale?
Yes, let's start down this path you idiot. There intellectuals on both sides of the argument, and the guitarist for Rage carries no credibilty to speak on anything other than the billboard top 40.
And everyone that was against vietnam...and has ever been against any war
I knew what this would be about but I came anyways...People against mindless slaughter should logiclly be against Saddam. This site seems to fall under the 'Anti-American/Anti-Israel' umbrela. Wanna hear an interesting fact about 'Palestine' ? It doesn't exist. Try and find it on a map, try and find it 'constitution' or 'declaration of independence' online. Do a little research and find that area hasn't been called Palestine since the days of Jesus. Go do a little research on the history of Israel & the natives who refer to themselves as people of Palestine. I know you have a brain, I just wish you'd use it properly. <-- Notices you lean on other people for authoritive backing of your views. If your going to play the 'authority' game I'd suggest a better authority. Did you know....None of the 'anti-war' signs on TV/in the news refer to Saddam disarming. The signs refer to Bush as the ruthless dictator, this defies all logic. Try addressing the CAUSE instead of the EFFECT. cause:Saddam will not do what the UN told him to do & the UN cant get its tail from between its legs effect:the U.S.A. has to play 'daddy', again. Fact : Bill Clinton bombed Serbia for around 80 straight days w/o UN approval... When the bombs say 'Democrat' tis ok.... I suspect this thread will be locked or become part of the Silo soon so there are my two cents.
Duke of Nukes And everyone that was against vietnam...and has ever been against any war What makes his voice in the darkness any louder than mine? The fact that he's "cool"? Typical highschool kid mindset.
what makes his voice louder than yours is that: 1) he has a brain...which is something you have proved in almost every post of yours that you DO NOT HAVE 2) he is a Yale graduate that got in by his own merits. He got in and out before he became a musician...he didn't get his daddy to get him in. 3) you lack the ability to see this in any other view than black and white. There are alternatives to war.
Duke of Nukes what makes his voice louder than yours is that: 1) he has a brain...which is something you have proved in almost every post of yours that you DO NOT HAVE 2) he is a Yale graduate that got in by his own merits. He got in and out before he became a musician...he didn't get his daddy to get him in. 3) you lack the ability to see this in any other view than black and white. There are alternatives to war. You seem to be full of opinions but a touch lacking in the 'FACT' department. You see facts exists in black & white. Facts are not subject to opinion because they are FACTS. To cure continued confusion consult the dictionary for 'fact' & 'opinion'. It's not like the rest of the world has been blindfolded for the past 20years and dont know the kind of things Saddam has been doing.
facts? what facts? the facts that Iraq hasn't done anything? Your "facts" are merely assumptions. assumptions are opinions. the FACT is that we dont have to go to war. the FACT is that Bush is a known liar about such issues. a little off topic here...but it's a FACT that Bush has waved to the worlds most famous blind person. That means he's either a moron...or he has a sick and twisted sense of humor. But seriously...tell me what FACT's you have that say we HAVE to go to war? That there aren't other ways of avoiding killing thousands of innocents?
Duke of Nukes what makes his voice louder than yours is that: 1) he has a brain...which is something you have proved in almost every post of yours that you DO NOT HAVE 2) he is a Yale graduate that got in by his own merits. He got in and out before he became a musician...he didn't get his daddy to get him in. 3) you lack the ability to see this in any other view than black and white. There are alternatives to war. 1. Maybee, but I can find Vietnam on a map, unlike yourself. 2. Is he the only one to ever make it in the world? Whoopee.....he's a Yale graduate. So are about 2,000,000 other people. Do all of them not support the war? Idiot. 3. Black and white gets things done, and keeps us alive as a nation. Grey puts you right in Vichy France in 1940.
KIRBY098 1. Maybee, but I can find Vietnam on a map, unlike yourself. 2. Is he the only one to ever make it in the world? Whoopee.....he's a Yale graduate. So are about 2,000,000 other people. Do all of them not support the war? Idiot. 3. Black and white gets things done, and keeps us alive as a nation. Grey puts you right in Vichy France in 1940. 1. Yes...it's really mature to keep pointing out a mistake that I made in 1 post. 2. No he isn't the only one to graduate from Yale and I'm sure plenty of them are for the war. Introduce me to one and I'd love to hear their opinions. 3. Black and white puts us in Korea and Vietnam. It puts us saying "Fuck Iraq" and nuking the country...as president Bush has threatened Saddam with. Grey puts us in the liberation of India, ending the opression of an entire nation
Duke of Nukes what makes his voice louder than yours is that: 1) he has a brain...which is something you have proved in almost every post of yours that you DO NOT HAVE 2) he is a Yale graduate that got in by his own merits. He got in and out before he became a musician...he didn't get his daddy to get him in. 3) you lack the ability to see this in any other view than black and white. There are alternatives to war. This is what happens when you let the Teachers Union get too powerful. Our children loose the ability to make their own decisions. Don't argue it either Duke. I fought the school system on this when I was a senior in high school The Teachers Union tells young adults how they should vote. I actually got kicked out of a class once for speaking my mind against Democrats. I was labled as disruptive. Duke learn to make your own choices. Your argument sounds so programed that you don't even understand what the heck your talking about.
Duke of Nukes facts? what facts? the facts that Iraq hasn't done anything? Your "facts" are merely assumptions. assumptions are opinions. the FACT is that we dont have to go to war. the FACT is that Bush is a known liar about such issues. a little off topic here...but it's a FACT that Bush has waved to the worlds most famous blind person. That means he's either a moron...or he has a sick and twisted sense of humor. But seriously...tell me what FACT's you have that say we HAVE to go to war? That there aren't other ways of avoiding killing thousands of innocents? You should quit while you're behind. The sheer ignorance displayed in your posts reminds me of screaming women going "FOR THE LOVE OF GOD SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!" Iraq hasn't done anything, right? That's why they've defied the United Nations for twelve years? Or the fact that Hussien pays the families of suicide bombers each time they blow someone up? Or how he gassed his own citizens with chemical warheads? Hmm, what about where Iraq set fire to the Kuwaiti oil fields and spilled oil into the Persian Gulf as they retreated from Kuwait? Right, they've done nothing... Nothing that the UN has asked of them. Yeah, it's a fact that Bush waved to him. Ever think it was just a lighthearted joke? Ever think that your insertion of an irrevelant fact in your argument showed that you depend on "Bush is a moron without any proof!" to argue? Go back to debate club, mvz... You need to brush up before even thinking about arguing over geopolitical incidents. I laid out the facts to why we need to go to war... So where's your real facts against it?
[quote="Duke of Nukes"] KIRBY098 3. Black and white puts us in Korea and Vietnam. It puts us saying "Fuck Iraq" and nuking the country...as president Bush has threatened Saddam with. Grey puts us in the liberation of India, ending the opression of an entire nation When we drop a nuclear weapon on Iraq, then you can make this case. Anything else is pure guessing, and speculation. Tip for the day: Don't join your highschool debate team.
that stuff was done over 10 years ago. What has he done since. He's restricted UN inspectors 2 times...both times he took off the restrictions within a matter of months. That's like saying I'm a violent person because I got into a few fights when I was younger. Everything else your saying is an assumption. Waving to a blind man as a joke is extremely sick. He's either a moron...or is a sick man. Heck...I'll even let you decide which is the case If this sounds programmed...then good...that makes everyone in this discussion. "I'm an ex military man, FUCK THE PACIFISTS"
Duke of Nukes facts? what facts? the facts that Iraq hasn't done anything? Your "facts" are merely assumptions. assumptions are opinions. the FACT is that we dont have to go to war. the FACT is that Bush is a known liar about such issues. a little off topic here...but it's a FACT that Bush has waved to the worlds most famous blind person. That means he's either a moron...or he has a sick and twisted sense of humor. But seriously...tell me what FACT's you have that say we HAVE to go to war? That there aren't other ways of avoiding killing thousands of innocents? Your seriously fucking retarded. Organize your rebuttles. Why not mention Bush ones ran a red light from a dead stop to 'prove' he is a moron. Saddam holds the reigns on what has to happen in order for him to disarm. Last night Bush told him 'get the fuck out SOON or - toast.' Are you forgetting that if anyone will be inducing civilian casualities here it will be SADDAM ? Perhaps you overlooked that. Fuck it, lets chill for a few more oh dozen years and PERHAPS when SADDAM has TWENTY FOUR years he'll disarm like we TOLD him to. Or he could sell a nuclear weapon to Hammas who could inturn bomb Isreal fucking-homicide-bomber style. But hey fuck the Israelis anyways, right ? Iraq hasn't done anything...are you joking ? The mass media has surpressed video of the things Saddam does. It has been shown on tv (The Michael Savage show) but everyone else keeps it hush hush for unknown reasons. Lets try this one...I'm sure humanitarian(sp?) groups have no issues with the rape of women in front of their husbands. Or the murdering of civilians by 'processing' them through machines designed to destroy plastics. Or the public embarassment of women by hanging them by their hair during their 'special time' of the month. Or the gassing of thousands of civilans. Or the recent plot to dress HIS toops up as BRITIAN and the USA then have them attack his OWN PEOPLE so he can claim things like war crimes (he already has the gear). The list literally goes on and on..and I haven't even touched on weapons of mass descruction or agression... I must of dreamed all that shit huh ?
Duke of Nukes that stuff was done over 10 years ago. What has he done since. He's restricted UN inspectors 2 times...both times he took off the restrictions within a matter of months. That's like saying I'm a violent person because I got into a few fights when I was younger. Everything else your saying is an assumption. Waving to a blind man as a joke is extremely sick. He's either a moron...or is a sick man. Heck...I'll even let you decide which is the case If this sounds programmed...then good...that makes everyone in this discussion. "I'm an ex military man, FUCK THE PACIFISTS" Hmm,. Let me think here... Why would Saddam restrict inspectors on 2 occasions just to lift the restrictions a few months later on each? OH YEAH!! I KNOW WHY!! To hide his weapons of mass destruction. He didn't lift restrictions because he felt bad, or that he did the wrong thing. He lifted the restrictions because he relocated his weapons. Are you that stupid that you couldn't figure that out on your own? :rolleyes:
[sg the0ne] I suspect this thread will be locked or become part of the Silo soon so there are my two cents. You are forgetting the moderators here aren't Nazis like the EA mods were. I see nothing wrong with a debate, or even a heated debate. Just as long as it stays intellectual and doesn't degrade into spam posts and name calling or anything that affects the forums performance. Debate at will
I'm not even bothering with the two of those. There are alternatives to war...whether or not Saddam is evil isn't the issue...it's whether or not we should go to war about it.
Duke of Nukes I'm not even bothering with the two of those. There are alternatives to war...whether or not Saddam is evil isn't the issue...it's whether or not we should go to war about it. No the reason you won't bother with these two are because you can't argue against them.
No...they are IRRELIVANT. They have nothing to do with the discussion at hand, which is whether or not his crimes are worthy of us going to war AGAIN at this time.
Blazer [sg the0ne] I suspect this thread will be locked or become part of the Silo soon so there are my two cents. You are forgetting the moderators here aren't Nazis like the EA mods were. I see nothing wrong with a debate, or even a heated debate. Just as long as it stays intellectual and doesn't degrade into spam posts and name calling or anything that affects the forums performance. Debate at will YEA ! I wasn't saying that because I feel yall are nAZIS but because I could easily see this turning into a flame fest.
Aircraftkiller You got 0wnt, deal with it. Ditto. You aren't even responding to my post nemore...aww I feel so rejected.
if you must know...my computer froze because I was running too many programs at one time...thanks for caring though
Duke of Nukes No...they are IRRELIVANT. They have nothing to do with the discussion at hand, which is whether or not his crimes are worthy of us going to war AGAIN at this time. his crimes are worthy of going to war. if we wait another 12 years, that would mean that my children will be having to fight a war which should have been taken care of 12 years ago. it's bad enough that men and women who were 6 when this started are now having to go fight because we caved to the un and allowed him to stay in power.
Duke of Nukes No...they are IRRELIVANT. They have nothing to do with the discussion at hand, which is whether or not his crimes are worthy of us going to war AGAIN at this time. How can me answering a post, that you made, all of a sudden be IRRELIVANT? :rolleyes: I answered and you got 0wned [sg]the0ne answered and you got 0wned
in your eyes. remember...opinion is not fact. I just lack motivation to fight you anymore because you have been brainwashed to follow the military unconditionally...and it's really pointless arguing that there are alternatives to war with a bunch of war mongers
Duke of Nukes if you must know...my computer froze because I was running too many programs at one time...thanks for caring though I'm sorry to hear that. I thought you had given up cause your taking a lot of 'flak' hits(for those of you who are Red Alert inclined). I know quiet a bit about Windows based computers and in good will could extend my assistance in a PM. It is up to you to accept and reply. Only specific conversation / questions / proposition of premises and *facts* will allow us to make quantified progress in this forum. Ill conceived logic, poor communication skill, propoganda, opinions, hersay & other gray areas wont take us very far.
unfortunately...me and my other computer nerd friends have worked on my computer...it's the best it's gonna get as long as I keep the same mother board...700 Mhz and I dont even have any AGP slots For the record...I did not mean to state that I am necissarily against the war in Iraq. There are alternatives...and I'm sure we are pursuing those as well...Saddam remains a threat...and it's getting to the point where war might be the only option left. I do not, however, agree with Bush's methods. He has threatened to nuke...he seems more like a bully than a president and he hasn't occupied himself much with the problems at home. He also lies about alot of the stuff and needs to give the American people the truth if he wants people to support this war. I merely would like to see ALL of the alternatives to war explored and attempted before we result to that.
why are we considered 'war-mongers' or 'brainwashed' simply because we see the necessity for this war? i have seen many reasons for this war and not one good reason against it. people say it's about oil... this war makes getting oil alot harder than not going to war. it's a pain enough now dealing with arab countries over oil. it will be much worse afterwards people say many innocents will be killed... many more innocents are killed every year while sadaam is in power people say let the inspectors do their job... they have not been able to do the job in 12 years. even though they just got back in, they have already proven to be ineffectual. the inspectors are not supposed to find wmd, sadaam is supposed to bring them to the inspectors so they can watch them be destroyed. or he is supposed to provide proof they were destroyed already. he is not doing these things. he has shown total contempt for the un and has complied in only the least amount necessary to divide the world. the few items that blix did find, he buried in a 173 page report rather than report them verbally to the council. this shows that blix is allowing his personal beliefs and agenda to affect the way he does his job. he knew damn well that his last verbal report to the sec council would have an enormous effect on the way members acted. he gave a rosy picture of inspections and buried the serious breaches in a 173 page report so that the outcome of the meeting would be anti-us. people say sadaam poses us no threat... sadaam can't personally get to the us, true. but he can reach isreal, turkey, kuwait,saudi arabia, iran. 4 out of 5 of these are our allies. 1 is in nato. he can also give weapons to terrorists who can make their way to the us or europe. even if he has no direct ties to alqueda, he does have ties to other groups and they have tiesto alqueda or they can bring the bombs here themselves. if an alqueda operative goes up to sadaam and says"i can get to newyork, but i don't have any anthrax" you can bet your ass sadaam will hook him up. so, these are the main arguments i've heard, got any others?
ACK is the only war-monger. He's at the point where he's debating just because I want to explore alternatives.
Duke of Nukes unfortunately...me and my other computer nerd friends have worked on my computer...it's the best it's gonna get as long as I keep the same mother board...700 Mhz and I dont even have any AGP slots For the record...I did not mean to state that I am necissarily against the war in Iraq. There are alternatives...and I'm sure we are pursuing those as well...Saddam remains a threat...and it's getting to the point where war might be the only option left. I do not, however, agree with Bush's methods. He has threatened to nuke...he seems more like a bully than a president and he hasn't occupied himself much with the problems at home. He also lies about alot of the stuff and needs to give the American people the truth if he wants people to support this war. I merely would like to see ALL of the alternatives to war explored and attempted before we result to that. his threat to nuke was just that... a threat. what he said basically was... do not use chemical,biological, nuclear weapons, we have more of them and are not afraid to use them. this was a necessary statement because now a days, everyone and his brother is trying to develope nukes. all it takes is for one dictator to say"what'll those pussies do if i drop a bomb on their ass' it was necessary to reenforce the fact that we have them and we won't take no shit from the winner in a n.korea weapons auction. as for bush lying, i don't believe he is... i believe he is sometimes misinformed but i don't think he is purposley lying.
Duke of Nukes ACK is the only war-monger. He's at the point where he's debating just because I want to explore alternatives. ok, thanks for clearing that up. btw did the arrow really have to make the trip to the new forums?
Duke of Nukes in your eyes. remember...opinion is not fact. I just lack motivation to fight you anymore because you have been brainwashed to follow the military unconditionally...and it's really pointless arguing that there are alternatives to war with a bunch of war mongers Wow, you start off with "[...]in your eyes. remember...opinion is not fact" and flow right into a string of opinions for the *rest* of the post. Bravo, good showing ! If there was a n00b stories of arguement contructs this screen shot would be there. Why Iraq & not everyone else ? Because everyone else (save Yasa Arrafat(sp?)) still has diplomatic options left. Other people haven't been lying about the same thing under UN resolution for over a decade. We haven't been doing *the same* song and dance with other countries like we have Iraq & like the Israeli's have been doing with Yasa A. How about this, why NOT Iraq ? We've gone to other countries for reasons less than Weps of Mass Dest. But somehow now, Saddam has them & we know this... When you have so many units of Chemical X Y or Z (detailed in Iraq's weapons claims documents post Desert Storm) then can't supply them or prove their desctruction, we know you have them. When we find *new* devices that could be used to deliver biological weapons, we know you have them. When the *world news* reports that defecting Iraqi troops 'say' Saddam has ordered their use under conditions X Y & Z, we know you have them. So like I questioned previously, how long does disarmament of Saddam take ? Twent four years ? Is this like a bottomless bank account of time ? Could he pass this down to his sons ? When do you say STOP, the time is now. And if you do say STOP how do you enforce it ? The UN already said do X Y & Z and DO NOT do 1 2 or 3 or you will be in voilation which gives us the authority to come CRUSH YOUR ASS(WorldCommunity VS You). Even better *another* resolution was passed more recently that told of 'serious consequences' if he did not comply. What consequences are that ? The uncomfortable 'company' of Hanz & the goof troops ? [UN 'weapons inspectors' have been seen on TV handling 'stuff' with no gloves or mask, sniffing 'it' and other unacceptable practices. Not to mention Hanz.'s little speach failed to mention the 'drone'.] If the U.N. wont enforce their resolutions, the willing shall. If anyone would care to address any of these points I'd be pleased cause I enjoy this kinda convo. The One
spotelmo ok, thanks for clearing that up. btw did the arrow really have to make the trip to the new forums? yes...yes it did ok...fine...Bush is misinformed...either way...the people are misinformed and my dad works for an oil company...so I know that's not what the war is about and I know that's not why gas prices went up. Gas prices have gone up due to a faulty oil line...and what's happening in Venezuela...who is our largest oil provider...with almost 20% of our oil coming from there. Iraq is relatively worthless oilwise to America...and if it was about oil...we would have taken all of Kuwaits when we chased Iraq out of there
lol!, he said "Hanz & the goof troops" lol
Duke of Nukes yes...yes it did ok...fine...Bush is misinformed...either way...the people are misinformed Bush gets his info from oh lets ponder...the NSA, FBI, CIA, Armed forces and other misc. sources *cough E-c-h-l-o-n*. But you may be right...perhaps CNN & Larry King live to have it all figured out. :rolleyes:
someone on your side stated that first. Just because Bush is told something...that doesn't mean it's what he hears...plus he could also be hearing from certain individuals that are completely biased (no...nobody in america is biased...I'm sorry I said that)
occasionally, even our inteligence people get it wrong. example is the documents saying sadaam tried to get uranium from nigeria. we got the documents and passed them on to inspectors immediatley. bush in good faith mentioned them to the public and congress it was later learned they were fakes. it happens especially in these days where everything is happening so fast. this is a case where bush was misinformed but he did not intentionally lie. bush has built his reputation on the fact that he is not like clinton and that he tells the truth. to intentionally lie and take us down the path of clinton would be political suicide and he knows it.
Duke of Nukes someone on your side stated that first. Just because Bush is told something...that doesn't mean it's what he hears...plus he could also be hearing from certain individuals that are completely biased (no...nobody in america is biased...I'm sorry I said that) So your not going to address any of the points I made ? Who do you want to enforce U.N. resolutions then, apparantly not the U.N. or the super power of the world, or a group of the willing...Who does this leave ? Is the diplomatic bunny rabbit going to come flying in from Planet X and make it so Saddam isn't a lying murderer anymore ? I'm particulally biased to facts, so if you could stick to them - That would be great. Powered by : 0wnt
I think I have presented my facts very clearly in the other topic about Saddam Hussein being a 'threat' and Saddam Hussein being the only reason for a war on Iraq. That idea is more than rediculous, and your 'facts' are solemly quotes from TV or Newspapers. It has nothing to do with the actual truth.
eggmac I think I have presented my facts very clearly in the other topic about Saddam Hussein being a 'threat' and Saddam Hussein being the only reason for a war on Iraq. That idea is more than rediculous, and your 'facts' are solemly quotes from TV or Newspapers. It has nothing to do with the actual truth. OMFG. Try again. Lets start with this post.... http://www.n00bstories.com/renforums/viewtopic.php?p=7683#7683 I'm taking a lot of time to bang this stuff out at least respond to it before you claim to of responded to it...holy shit. On this 'actual truth' notion. Ya so the news&tv&internet aren't 100% accurate but are you ? What do you have some boys on the ground peeping the international scene contacting you via their transformer walkie-talkies ? I read/hear/soak-up INTERNATIONAL news..its hard to get much broader than that. But anyways sensi do tell us of the magic 100% actual truth station you've been picking up recently...
although I am confused about when Clinton ever really lied? The one time he "lied" was a time where he never should have been on trial in the first place. he "lied" by saying he didn't have sex with Lewinsky...correct? Following the true definition of sex, which is the act of penetration, he didn't have sex with her
Duke of Nukes although I am confused about when Clinton ever really lied? The one time he "lied" was a time where he never should have been on trial in the first place. he "lied" by saying he didn't have sex with Lewinsky...correct? Following the true definition of sex, which is the act of penetration, he didn't have sex with her Oh, and don't forget the O.J. Simpson discussion too. Let's bring up all the off topic, impossible to prove topics that have nothing to do with this discussion, shall we? :rolleyes:
again Kirby...someone on your side brought up the fact that he "lied." Dont try to tag me with something that someone on your side mentioned.
Duke of Nukes again Kirby...someone on your side brought up the fact that he "lied." Dont try to tag me with something that someone on your side mentioned. You went there, I didn't.
Duke of Nukes what makes his voice louder than yours is that: 3) you lack the ability to see this in any other view than black and white. There are alternatives to war. I just have a couple of questions. What alternatives? How many more years would like to wait until something is done? Is it correct that you are a high school student? that would mean you were what...maybe 5 or 6 years old when it all started? What would you like to do? drag it on and on and on as it has been and let your children take care it? Meanwhile this sick bastard keeps brutalizing his people and threating neighboring countries. So we should just let this continue for what? maybe 12 more years...20?..gimmie a time frame you would want to wait before something is done? Anyone should be able to see that this guy IS NOT and WILL NOT listen to anyone or entertain any "alternatives".
Duke of Nukes although I am confused about when Clinton ever really lied? The one time he "lied" was a time where he never should have been on trial in the first place. he "lied" by saying he didn't have sex with Lewinsky...correct? Following the true definition of sex, which is the act of penetration, he didn't have sex with her ok, i'll clarify and slightly retract my statement. first off... the monica deal does count as a lie and the entire situation is the reason why he was impeached and should have been convicted. as for other lies, i will not go into that because many of the "lies" are more opinion by those against him. so i won't go into them as they are not all based in provable fact. but to clarify my statement about clinton lies, what i meant was that bush is being accused by liberals of being a liar(and i believe by you but too tired to find the post) what i was saying is that i don't believe bush intentionally lies about anything because he was elected based on the "moral high ground" people who were tired of the entire clinton "immoral" years in the whitehouse including allegations of whitewater, china, monica, big business bribes etc. elected bush based on bringing morals back to the whitehouse. what i was saying was that if bush were to be perceived as no better than clinton in this respect, he would be committing political suicide and bringing the republican party down with him. that is what i meant by and was the context of my comments about clinton "lies" and bush not lying. i hope this clears it up for you because i'm assuming that you were simply confused by my statements and were not trying to maliciously twist my words in an attempt to make me look bad in a debate. perhaps it is the evil arrow influencing your actions?
Clinton did nothing worthy of being kicked out of office...and people knew that. Clinton was never in any danger. So long as he stays fit to run the office, he could not have been convicted. Was Clinton going off on every little thing threatening to bomb everyone? no...and unless he started doing stuff that showed him as an irresponsible leader, he would not have been kicked out of office Nothing you can say can convince me that Clinton wasn't fit to run the country...notice how there was good economy while he was in office...
Duke of Nukes Clinton did nothing worthy of being kicked out of office...and people knew that. Clinton was never in any danger. So long as he stays fit to run the office, he could not have been convicted. Was Clinton going off on every little thing threatening to bomb everyone? no...and unless he started doing stuff that showed him as an irresponsible leader, he would not have been kicked out of office Nothing you can say can convince me that Clinton wasn't fit to run the country...notice how there was good economy while he was in office... I happen to be VERY EDUCATED on this subject and spent 100's of hours researching the issues and would like to say. SHUT THE FUCK UP. You have LESS OF AN IDEA on this subject than the last. The US congress failed to do their job. Clinton had ver much satisfied the requirements for impeachment. This is a FACT not an opinion. Your last statement sounds exactly like France. "Nothing you can say can convince me that Clinton wasn't fit to run the country". The FIRST FUCKING THING I learned in governemt was.....The current president is not directly responsible for the CURRENT economy, he rides on the wave of the previous president because MOST economic bills dont go into effect for may years. Perhaps you haven't completed this class yet.
Duke of Nukes Clinton did nothing worthy of being kicked out of office...and people knew that. Clinton was never in any danger. So long as he stays fit to run the office, he could not have been convicted. Was Clinton going off on every little thing threatening to bomb everyone? no...and unless he started doing stuff that showed him as an irresponsible leader, he would not have been kicked out of office Nothing you can say can convince me that Clinton wasn't fit to run the country...notice how there was good economy while he was in office... Spoken like a true , NEA spoon fed, democrat wannabee. Think for yourself, don't just spout off what your teachers tell you. You are starting to sound like a broken record.
wow...the irony of you saying that. You cant even come up with your own insults. THERE ARE LAWS against what you idiots are claiming. Teachers are not allowed to talk about politics...and even if they were allowed...it's a republican state...my teachers are mostly republicans. Stop coming up with stupid ass excuses. They allow 18 year olds to vote for a reason...
Duke of Nukes wow...the irony of you saying that. You cant even come up with your own insults. THERE ARE LAWS against what you idiots are claiming. Teachers are not allowed to talk about politics...and even if they were allowed...it's a republican state...my teachers are mostly republicans. Stop coming up with stupid ass excuses. They allow 18 year olds to vote for a reason... ARE YOU FUCKING INSANE ?~?~?~? There have been NUMEROUS accounts of anti-war teachers spouting their propaganda in US schools (ON ALL LEVELS). Kids are going home crying because of this because teachers were telling them anyone who fights for this war is immoral..well that just happens to be mommy & daddy. There were instances were students who wrote poorly but were pro-war got we`ll say got 4 points on that section. Same section different student written MUCH better but pro-war gets same grade. AGAIN, students who turned in extra-credit IN COLLEGE got it rejected because it was pro-war but anti-war stuff breezed right threw..this of course was overturned when brought to the publics attention. I mean seriously, have you JUST been consulting ONE site for all your news ? This stuff is discussed DAILY across the NATION but somehow you seem to be missing out.
that's not how stuff works in my school district...There's a reason why it's one of the top 5 public school districts in the nation...and it's not due to spreading any kind of war propaganda...for or against it.
Duke of Nukes that's not how stuff works in my school district...There's a reason why it's one of the top 5 public school districts in the nation...and it's not due to spreading any kind of war propaganda...for or against it. Judging by how well educated you are, the fact that you think South Vietnam still exists, and the poor debating, and aimless rantings, I won't take your word for it, mmmkk? :rolleyes:
Duke of Nukes wow...the irony of you saying that. You cant even come up with your own insults. THERE ARE LAWS against what you idiots are claiming. Teachers are not allowed to talk about politics...and even if they were allowed...it's a republican state...my teachers are mostly republicans. Stop coming up with stupid ass excuses. They allow 18 year olds to vote for a reason... Teachers do. Did you know that the Teachers Union in Wisconsin publicly said they would conduct an illegal strike if James Doyle wasn't elected governor of Wisconsin? Tell me how is that not telling students and the public how to vote? Where are the laws that you talk about? Schools always try to influence the young minds in how to think. The only law that would have been broken there would have been that teachers from public schools can not strike unless it involves a contract dispute.
the minds of a few do not speak for the rest of the country and the rest of the kind. you might as well say that all Republicans are hicks that cant wait to light up old sparky and lets kill us some darkies.
Duke of Nukes the minds of a few do not speak for the rest of the country and the rest of the kind. you might as well say that all Republicans are hicks that cant wait to light up old sparky and lets kill us some darkies. Read this post before you SPEW any more of IDIOCY YOU GEOPOLITICAL NEOPHYTE. http://www.n00bstories.com/renforums/viewtopic.php?t=683
his attempts to defile people merely because their famous doesn't concern me. What I said holds true. You cannot hold an entire people accountable for the acts of one or a few...otherwise America would have self destructed ages ago.
Duke of Nukes his attempts to defile people merely because their famous doesn't concern me. What I said holds true. You cannot hold an entire people accountable for the acts of one or a few...otherwise America would have self destructed ages ago. Dude..what are you talking about... DID YOU EVEN READ IT.
Duke of Nukes his attempts to defile people merely because their famous doesn't concern me. What I said holds true. You cannot hold an entire people accountable for the acts of one or a few...otherwise America would have self destructed ages ago. You are still under the false impression that we are going with a desire to kill Iraq's generally speaking. The issue has already been covered that we have dropped thousands of leaflets instructing on how to surrender & have now disabled the state run TV propaganda channel AND taken over thier air waves. So now the US Govt. has a *direct* line to the Iraqi people. They are telling them something to the effect that their time of liberation has come. Allow me to quote another post if you will, Ren Sizzlefab "I've only said this after hearing of the experiences of an Iraqi woman who fled Iraq after her husband, who was employed by the Iraqi government, was tortured and killed for reasons unknown. She was there during the last Gulf War, and spoke of the joy and hope experienced by the majority of the Iraqi people, even during the bombings. " Now I have a *very* good friend who was in the Marine corps. in the first war with Saddam and he said they were pleased as *fuck* when the vehics came rolling into town. I can get a direct quote, but it won't be helping your position. Does the word liberation mean anything to you ? Repeat after me.. We are @ war to disarm Saddam because he refuses to disarm himself. We are @ war to disarm Saddam because the UN refuses to disarm him. We are @ war because Saddam has not lived up to his diplomatic responsibilities much like the U.N. We are going to change the regime of a country who actively allows terrorist to seek harbor in their country & pays finances $ to families of homicide-bombers. We are @ war because Saddam is illegelly developing LONG RANGE missles coupled with the capability for chemical, biological & nuclear weapons. This is all very *old* news. The U.N. knew this in by AT LEAST Jan 25h 1999 as reported to the U.N. security council by UNSCOM on that date. The One
Duke of Nukes Clinton did nothing worthy of being kicked out of office...and people knew that. Clinton was never in any danger. So long as he stays fit to run the office, he could not have been convicted. Was Clinton going off on every little thing threatening to bomb everyone? no...and unless he started doing stuff that showed him as an irresponsible leader, he would not have been kicked out of office Nothing you can say can convince me that Clinton wasn't fit to run the country...notice how there was good economy while he was in office... perjury, obstruction of justice are both crimes which the president was guilty of. they are good reasons to be convicted. the circumstances under which he was guilty of those are not important. he cost this country millions of dollars and jeopardized a civilian's legitimate court case against him due to his actions. as for the economy, that was due to reagan tax cuts in the 80's which allowed businesses to invest in new technologies(internet, e commerce etc.) the economy was a direct result of bill gates, not bill clinton. interesting how microsoft was pretty much singlehandedly responsible for the great economy by making the computer and internet such popular world wide items and yet the clinton justice department saw fit to punish microsoft with anti trust lawsuits.
spotelmo perjury, obstruction of justice are both crimes which the president was guilty of. they are good reasons to be convicted. the circumstances under which he was guilty of those are not important. he cost this country millions of dollars and jeopardized a civilian's legitimate court case against him due to his actions. Ditto. His perjury is a federal offense but hey no big deal, right ? The Federalist Papers, some of the founding documents supported impeachment for just a fraction of all the acts he committed. Unfortunately he was very charismatic and had the US population wrapped around his finger while he said - hey I think you guys are totally fucking stupid lemme try this one..."Well that depends on what the definition of 'is' is". Hey, lemme wear this tie Monica gave me @ my speech to say I never had "sexual relations with that woman". Yes lets get some BJ's while chit-chatting with Military Generals. He spit in the face of America but because the #'s against his impeachment weren't so hot our representatives caved like punks. This could go on for pages...I don't make this stuff up Bill Clinton was audacious enough to do it all.
Don't EVEN get started on Clinton. That man was a fucking bastard who is unfit to run a family, let alone a country. Duke of Nukes sounds SO "spoon-fed" it's not even funny. My dad spent over a year compiling facts (yes, facts) on Clinton. If you read what he'd compiled... you'd wonder how he lasted 8 years in office, too.
Aircraftkiller Iraq hasn't done anything, right? That's why they've defied the United Nations for twelve years? Yea, well we never really decided that the UN could rule the world now did we?
Carl Aircraftkiller Iraq hasn't done anything, right? That's why they've defied the United Nations for twelve years? Yea, well we never really decided that the UN could rule the world now did we? No but after the U.N./Allied forces *handed* Saddam his ass in the Gulf War he kinda had to agree to play ball by OUR rules. Or at least that was what was supose to happen.
[sg the0ne] Carl Aircraftkiller Iraq hasn't done anything, right? That's why they've defied the United Nations for twelve years? Yea, well we never really decided that the UN could rule the world now did we? No but after the U.N./Allied forces *handed* Saddam his ass in the Gulf War he kinda had to agree to play ball by OUR rules. Or at least that was what was supose to happen. Correction. 99% of those forces were US. UN troops never wen't in until AFTER. and they never have. Look at the US rangers in 98. UN troops didn't go in until AFTER those guys were already out.
Carl [sg the0ne] Carl Aircraftkiller Iraq hasn't done anything, right? That's why they've defied the United Nations for twelve years? Yea, well we never really decided that the UN could rule the world now did we? No but after the U.N./Allied forces *handed* Saddam his ass in the Gulf War he kinda had to agree to play ball by OUR rules. Or at least that was what was supose to happen. Correction. 99% of those forces were US. UN troops never wen't in until AFTER. and they never have. Look at the US rangers in 98. UN troops didn't go in until AFTER those guys were already out. What ever..I`ll clear up this point with SOMEONE WHO WAS THERE later on today. He's told me accounts of the UN troops/other allies forces there on the ground so Ima have to go with your wrong. Either way it is a minor detail in the larger picture of ... losing a war = YOU comply ... NOT US.
Carl [sg the0ne] Carl Aircraftkiller Iraq hasn't done anything, right? That's why they've defied the United Nations for twelve years? Yea, well we never really decided that the UN could rule the world now did we? No but after the U.N./Allied forces *handed* Saddam his ass in the Gulf War he kinda had to agree to play ball by OUR rules. Or at least that was what was supose to happen. Correction. 99% of those forces were US. UN troops never wen't in until AFTER. and they never have. Look at the US rangers in 98. UN troops didn't go in until AFTER those guys were already out. Ummm. wrong on the 99%. That would mean that there were ony 200 Arabic troops. Get your facts right. The US/British troops were about 65-70%. Notice that I said US/British. Quote: carl: Yea, well we never really decided that the UN could rule the world now did we? Then why do they try to rule what the US can do or not do?