JasonR
10-10-2004, 12:47 PM
Originally posted by 92tsiawd84+Oct 10 2004, 10:07 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (92tsiawd84 @ Oct 10 2004, 10:07 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-JasonR@Oct 10 2004, 04:17 AM
The biggest act of terror is not war, it is causing intense demoralization and intimidation through any means necessary, hence 9/11. We are not terrorists!
I dont believe Korea is more of a threat to are national security then Saddam was.
Knowing that Korea has WMD does not make them a bigger threat than Iraq?
* I would vote for Bush if your so concerned about Korea because he is the only one that will take action.*
Well, four year in office, we have gone to war twice. Under Bush, I am afraid that he is going to take on Iran and N. Korea at the same time. Ofcourse we will not have Ossama yet and will be waging four wars at the same time (Ossama, Iraq, Iran, and N. Korea). How do you expect to accomplish this without a draft? It seems as if Bush and Cheney would not have a problem implimenting a draft. At the same time, with everyone at war, who would be here to protect us against acts of terrorism? Out of the three countries in the middle east that "had" WMDs we attacked the one that didn't. How do you think it would be fighting a war with WMDs being used against us?
Terrorism has been growing.* Americans are not hated more than ever, they are hated by terrorists.*
If we are waging the "war against terror" would it be safe to say that we are losing then? If terrorism is growing and we are hated more by terrorists, doesn't that mean that we are at a larger risk of being attacked that we were before?
Most of the terrorists doing this stuff aren't even Iraqis, so how are they defending their county? Besides, How is blowing up your fellow citizens defending your country anyway?
Facts/sources/links please. I haven't seen anything that supports that Iraqis are blowing them selves up. Like I said, I would like to believe that we are not doing more harm than good but I cannot yet. [/b][/quote]
Bush said no draft. Did you even watch the debate. Technology prevents us from needing more troops to fight the war on terror. Why do you believe we need more troops. Your not listening or thinking. Has n. korea invaded anyone, killed their own people, no. Ofcourse we are struggling with the war against terror. Do you think this is going to end soon. Try a very long time. We are at war against terrorism and that means iran, n korea, ossama and anyone else who threatons us in the future. You may be surprised what Iran, korea, ossama do now because they know we are not going to be pushed around. Republicans will not allow terrorism on are front yard in are own country. With kerry as president you can expect are efforts to protect us to implode because Bush takes action. kerry is simply using the war as a way to get in office, but it makes him look dumb because all he does is point fingers. You want facts/sources/links. I would listen closer during the debate, read the paper, news. I have givin my opinion. War on iraq is worth fighting. Even your buddy kerry (assuming you like him or something) agrees if you actually listened to the debate.
The biggest act of terror is not war, it is causing intense demoralization and intimidation through any means necessary, hence 9/11. We are not terrorists!
I dont believe Korea is more of a threat to are national security then Saddam was.
Knowing that Korea has WMD does not make them a bigger threat than Iraq?
* I would vote for Bush if your so concerned about Korea because he is the only one that will take action.*
Well, four year in office, we have gone to war twice. Under Bush, I am afraid that he is going to take on Iran and N. Korea at the same time. Ofcourse we will not have Ossama yet and will be waging four wars at the same time (Ossama, Iraq, Iran, and N. Korea). How do you expect to accomplish this without a draft? It seems as if Bush and Cheney would not have a problem implimenting a draft. At the same time, with everyone at war, who would be here to protect us against acts of terrorism? Out of the three countries in the middle east that "had" WMDs we attacked the one that didn't. How do you think it would be fighting a war with WMDs being used against us?
Terrorism has been growing.* Americans are not hated more than ever, they are hated by terrorists.*
If we are waging the "war against terror" would it be safe to say that we are losing then? If terrorism is growing and we are hated more by terrorists, doesn't that mean that we are at a larger risk of being attacked that we were before?
Most of the terrorists doing this stuff aren't even Iraqis, so how are they defending their county? Besides, How is blowing up your fellow citizens defending your country anyway?
Facts/sources/links please. I haven't seen anything that supports that Iraqis are blowing them selves up. Like I said, I would like to believe that we are not doing more harm than good but I cannot yet. [/b][/quote]
Bush said no draft. Did you even watch the debate. Technology prevents us from needing more troops to fight the war on terror. Why do you believe we need more troops. Your not listening or thinking. Has n. korea invaded anyone, killed their own people, no. Ofcourse we are struggling with the war against terror. Do you think this is going to end soon. Try a very long time. We are at war against terrorism and that means iran, n korea, ossama and anyone else who threatons us in the future. You may be surprised what Iran, korea, ossama do now because they know we are not going to be pushed around. Republicans will not allow terrorism on are front yard in are own country. With kerry as president you can expect are efforts to protect us to implode because Bush takes action. kerry is simply using the war as a way to get in office, but it makes him look dumb because all he does is point fingers. You want facts/sources/links. I would listen closer during the debate, read the paper, news. I have givin my opinion. War on iraq is worth fighting. Even your buddy kerry (assuming you like him or something) agrees if you actually listened to the debate.