Congrats to Bush. Over 11, 000 dead

Sir GH wrote:

Music Man wrote:

I would like to hereby dismiss and divert any argument aimed at the amount of people who have died in Iraq. Such information is irrelevant to debate. The argument is whether or not it was the right decision to make war on Iraq, if the decision is justified, so are the deaths; if the decision is proved fallacious, then the deaths are strikes against the Bush administration (but only then are they so). Until such a conclusion is established, the death toll in Iraq should not be used to promote any anti-war argument.

Ah yeah, the ever-present compassion of a conservative: as long as the reason for death agrees with me, the deaths are therefore acceptable, no matter how many.

Are you implying that there is no cause worthy of anyone's death? And are you implying that I am conservative?

Music Man wrote:

Are you implying that there is no cause worthy of anyone's death?

Yes. There is absolutely no worthy cause of death, besides death by natural causes. Nobody deserves to die prematurely.

And are you implying that I am conservative?

Judging by many things you've said in topics surrounding politics, yes. But if not, then you can prove otherwise if you wish.

Death is less of a 'deserves it' and more of 'that's how life works on this planet' thing.

Music Man wrote:

Kuku wrote:

Check out this website -
http://home.earthlink.net/~robx/Bush/Bush.html

I like articles like in the site above only if they are purely for the intentions of silly, non-serious jokes, as you would find on satiric news columns as The Onion. But when you are trying to seriously persuade people and "inform" them for an upcoming election, I can only look down upon you.

Good point, Music Man. It was a mere pointer to arouse interest, but yes, the author (or the reader) needs to back it up with details. Yet I still think the list is a good summary of Bush's negative actions over his period of power. Now only if someone could come up with a similar list for Kerry, we could compare...

... or the US could acquire some other party than the two. Every election is so same old game with same old people.

You forgot to mention Oil for Food ...

you bush lovers can say what you want to justify Iraq...but this war is bullshit. Absolute bullshit...Bush has made america sink to a new low and has killed thousands of people in the process.

Simply put, this could have all be avoided if Al Gore had been voted in.

Is this thread still going on?!!??? Isn't there a notice board on the internet anywhere that is designed for political bashing??

Sir GH wrote:

Music Man wrote:

Are you implying that there is no cause worthy of anyone's death?

Yes. There is absolutely no worthy cause of death, besides death by natural causes. Nobody deserves to die prematurely.

And are you implying that I am conservative?

Judging by many things you've said in topics surrounding politics, yes. But if not, then you can prove otherwise if you wish.

A) Well, I see that you are very idealistic (which I personally do not have a major problem with, but for the hell of it...). You run with a very ineffective way of promoting anything good in this world. Many times you have to go through war to attain peace. Without the good guys fighting the good fight, this world would be in shambles. To anyone who would deny this point, I would LOVE to see your rebuttal. You need to counteract evil with good, that is how things reach more or less of an equilibrium.

B) I have argued why a test should be required for permission to breed. I am a person who highly believes in civil liberties and for me to say something like that would not promote my beliefs. That is only one example.

Do you think I would have to do much arguing to say "Bush sucks (oh what a worthless statement that is!)"? I would get twelve "Amens" and maybe two dissenting posts!

I am very moderate, so I do not have a heavy or extreme opinion in the matter. On this board I have argued both sides many times, and you would do well to read ALL of my posts. It just appears to be that I argue on the conservative side more (particularly on this thread) because, lo and behold, there are many more liberals here on this board. When a group of people agree upon a topic, ignorance (ahem...jasen101) inevitably presents itself. Such is something I resent and will battle with full contempt. Arguing with a person shows me almost instantly whether he or she is an ignorant person making blind statements, or if he or she is a person with properly working mental facilities and a logical reason for their argument.

I resent being tagged to a particular political standard (with no offense to you, of course; you are a good person and I hope that you will always fight for what you believe is the right thing).

jasen101 wrote:

you bush lovers can say what you want to justify Iraq...but this war is bullshit. Absolute bullshit...Bush has made america sink to a new low and has killed thousands of people in the process.

Simply put, this could have all be avoided if Al Gore had been voted in.

Hence why the vote was rigged.

Is it making sense yet, people?

Sir GH<br><font size=1>ah yeah</font> wrote:

jasen101 wrote:

you bush lovers can say what you want to justify Iraq...but this war is bullshit. Absolute bullshit...Bush has made america sink to a new low and has killed thousands of people in the process.

Simply put, this could have all be avoided if Al Gore had been voted in.

Hence why the vote was rigged.

Is it making sense yet, people?

Actually, quite honestly, what you just said did not really make any sense to me.

Excellent post, MM.

With that, I therefore take back what I said about your supposed conservatism. That one comment above did make you look like a conservative, though! Glad you affirmed otherwise.

Thanks for the kind words towards me. But we have to keep in mind, fighting for what one believes sometimes isn't enough. Some terrorists fight because they believe their God told them to fight in that manner. So I think your philosophy needs to be updated a bit. :)

I'm kind of similar to you, in terms of political stance. If forced to choose one side, I would choose the left, but I feel it's safer and much more of an open-minded choice to stand somewhere in the middle. Same goes for religion. I don't believe, but I don't "not believe". I stand in the middle, listening to both sides. The middle is a place in itself.

You seem to be a great guy yourself! :)

Actually, quite honestly, what you just said did not really make any sense to me.

I attempted to do it QZ Bill O'Reilly style... I should have added the "will everybody shut up!!!". The previous comment was in reference to Florida and the last election.

Sir GH<br><font size=1>ah yeah</font> wrote:

Excellent post, MM.

With that, I therefore take back what I said about your supposed conservatism. That one comment above did make you look like a conservative, though! Glad you affirmed otherwise.

Thanks for the kind words towards me. But we have to keep in mind, fighting for what one believes sometimes isn't enough. Some terrorists fight because they believe their God told them to fight in that manner. So I think your philosophy needs to be updated a bit. :)

I'm kind of similar to you, in terms of political stance. If forced to choose one side, I would choose the left, but I feel it's safer and much more of an open-minded choice to stand somewhere in the middle. Same goes for religion. I don't believe, but I don't "not believe". I stand in the middle, listening to both sides. The middle is a place in itself.

Actually, quite honestly, what you just said did not really make any sense to me.

I attempted to do it QZ Bill O'Reilly style... I should have added the "will everybody shut up!!!". The previous comment was in reference to Florida and the last election.

I think that the 'fighting for what you believe in' idea gets a little sketchy at times. Nothing ever progresses if you don't fight for what is 'right'. However, you may be fighting for what is really 'wrong'. Right and wrong are very open to interpretation; it gets really difficult to explain sometimes. It's actually making me think a lot right now, balancing things in my head, you know? But I think that if you always fight for what is really in your heart, then things will manage to balance themselves in the end. Oh well, this is a whole lot of philosophy; we must cultivate our garden.

Also, I am very with you on your stance on religion. People think you have to adamantly stand by things which you have nothing but faith to support. I have trouble believing anything without sufficient reasoning or evidence. I am not bashing anyone who can do that, but it's really a personal thing.

By the way, I'd rather have someone disagree with me on solid grounds than have another agree with me without due logic.

Anyway, that whole Florida mess is something that I have simply passed over. We can't undo the past, so let's look to the future. Look to the past to change the future, not to recalculate hypothetical alternatives. "What if-?" is not progress. Given: George W. Bush is the president. Now what will you do about it?

"I attempted to do it QZ Bill O'Reilly style"

CUT HIS MIC!

Very good points Music Man. Good stuff.

:)

Bush is quite popular in the States. For a European that’s hard to understand.