NationStates Jolt Archive

If you are against Pre-emptive Wars....VOTE FOR BUSH !!!
If You do not want Imperial bases all over the ME...VOTE FOR BUSH !!!

"pre-emptive" wars my ass, if that happened to our allies its called an "act of war" and we blow some ones ass up. the only thing pre-emptive about pre-emptive strikes is preventing them from getting to drop teh first bomb in the war we start


lets fix the one one

If you don't want FOREIGN imperial basses in the middle east, but want AMERICAN imperial bases, vote for bush

If you don't want FOREIGN imperial basses in the middle east, but want AMERICAN imperial bases, vote for bush
What the hell is a FOREIGN imperial base ?

What the hell is a FOREIGN imperial base ?
im not quite sure what i meant, i think iw as leaning torwards if you dont want the middle east controlling the mniddle east, but want the americans controlling the middle east, vote for bush

If you are against Pre-emptive Wars....VOTE FOR BUSH !!!
If You do not want Imperial bases all over the ME...VOTE FOR BUSH !!!
You are joking? Aren't you?

... want AMERICAN imperial bases, vote for bushMy point is...If you want the AMERICAN imperial bases to stay...Vote for Kerry...

If you want them to leave sooner Vote for Bush !

I want as much Peace as possible...I dont want an American Evil Empire...the fastest way to end the nonsense IS TO VOTE FOR BUSH !

im not quite sure what i meant, i think iw as leaning torwards if you dont want the middle east controlling the mniddle east, but want the americans controlling the middle east, vote for bush

ok...
Sounds clearer now.
Cause , you know, in the first case they WOULDN't be "foreign" . they would in the second .

My point is...If you want the AMERICAN imperial bases to stay...Vote for Kerry...

If you want them to leave sooner Vote for Bush !

I want as much Peace as possible...I dont want an American Evil Empire...the fastest way to end the nonsense IS TO VOTE FOR BUSH !
your kidding arnt you, man thats funny

Or if you cannot stomach voting for the Monkey...vote for Nader...do not Elect Kerry...

your kidding arnt you,
I am very serious...
Bush is hated around the World...he is headed to major Defeat in Irak..

Kerry wants...and HE can salvage his (imperial) Iraq operation...And Edwards has swore do defent Isreal..at all costs.

You are joking? Aren't you?
Nope Im not kidding you...

for me...It is a Major sacrifice to vote for the Monkey...But i wil do it for the Greater good of Humanity.

My point is...If you want the AMERICAN imperial bases to stay...Vote for Kerry...

If you want them to leave sooner Vote for Bush !

I want as much Peace as possible...I dont want an American Evil Empire...the fastest way to end the nonsense IS TO VOTE FOR BUSH !



um, some would say its too late about the evil empire......


i said some would say.... i didnt necesarily say i would say :rolleyes:

um, some would say its too late about the evil empire......
We dont have a candidate who would get us out of the shit...

Maybe the only valid candidate that had the ball to do that...was Dean...but now electing Kerry would just make the Iraq war longer...and bloodier...

this is stupid. it seems like none of you have any idea about politics. you cannot base an election on solely one thing, such as the war. there are other issues at hand, such as gay rights, abortion, taxes, and many many other things. the war will never end, ever, no matter who is in office. you have to understand that their systems of government as well as the ethics and religions of the people could not, and will not support a democracy, republic, or any form of stable government. there are too many fundamentalists, too many radicals, and too many different political parties. it has been more than 200 years in the US, and ours is still not completely stable. It would last far less in the middle east. im actually surprised that isreal has lasted as long as it has, but then agian we backed up their system with a few nukes, an amazing airforce, and a well trained army. that isnt helping as much as we thought it would, because from experience we should know that you CANNOT fight a conventional war against gorilla tactics. the french couldnt do it in the french-indian war, the british could not do it in the american revolution, we could not do it in vietnam, we will not be able to do it in iraq. some people would say, nuke the hell out of them... but that is highly unethical. punish an entire collection of peace loving people for a few radicals? the "terrorists" would just use that against us to rally more people to their flag. if anything, it would make it far worse.

on the issue of abortion... it is a touchy subject.... i would rather not discuss it.

gay rights. now this one hits home. i know a few homosexuals, and i find it very offensive for (i refuse to call him 'my president') that idiot to try to ban gay marriages. set up in the bill of rights, you cannot discriminate someone based on political views, gender, age, race, and all that good stuff. so why does he think that he can create a bill to ban rights to someone because of their sexual preference? they should be able to have the same rights as anyone else, but i guess that is just to hard for someone like him to see. gay marriage should be an issue raised at the state level, within the family, and within the church. i say it should be raised at the state level, because, low and behold, the right to govern the licensing of marriages was directed to the states. you also have to understand that it was set up so that licenses earned in one state would also have to be recognized by every other state. that is why when you are driving from ohio to indiana, to illinois, to wherever the hell you are going, you dont have to get a new drivers license every time you cross a border. same thing with marriage, teaching, fishing, boating, law, and any other license you can think of. well, i have a docs appointment, so i gotta go. im out

The whole reason Bush is trying to ban gay marriages is because big corporations are paying him to. If they have to start paying gay couples the same benefits as regular couples, they are going to lose a lot of money.

the war will never end, ever, no matter who is in office.
The Iraq War Will end...it will end way sooner if we elect Bush...Or Nader(not gonna happen)....

Kerry shall drag us deeper into the ME Quagmire.....But even with this moron...the war will end...one day

this is stupid. it seems like none of you have any idea about politics. you cannot base an election on solely one thing..
Gay rights. now this one hits home. i know a few homosexuals, and i find it very offensive for (i refuse to call him 'my president') that idiot to try to ban gay marriages.


First you say I cannot Focus on the War ...
then...you turn around and do focus on the Gay marriage thing.

For you The most important issue is...to allow 2 male adults...to sign a piece of paper that says "We love each other"...

For me the most important issue is.....an Unjust pre-emtive war...
a war that kills thousands of inocent women and children...
a war that tortures hundreds of random Iraquis...with dogs, rape and mutilation...
a war that Beheads random hostages...

What the hell is a FOREIGN imperial base ?
A modern day excuse for imperialism.

The Iraq War Will end...it will end way sooner if we elect Bush...Or Nader(not gonna happen)....

Kerry shall drag us deeper into the ME Quagmire.....But even with this moron...the war will end...one day
Uhm...not sure if you know the definition of the word "quagmire," but I'm pretty sure it is a swamp (don't quote me...but I am pretty sure).

Secondly, I don't see how you get off saying that Nader would do a better job in Iraq than Kerry would. None of the candidates want to be there any longer than we need too, obviously, and it isn't on them to get our troops out, its on their military advisor.

this is stupid. it seems like none of you have any idea about politics. you cannot base an election on solely one thing, such as the war. there are other issues at hand, such as gay rights, abortion, taxes, and many many other things. the war will never end, ever, no matter who is in office. you have to understand that their systems of government as well as the ethics and religions of the people could not, and will not support a democracy, republic, or any form of stable government. there are too many fundamentalists, too many radicals, and too many different political parties. it has been more than 200 years in the US, and ours is still not completely stable. It would last far less in the middle east. im actually surprised that isreal has lasted as long as it has, but then agian we backed up their system with a few nukes, an amazing airforce, and a well trained army. that isnt helping as much as we thought it would, because from experience we should know that you CANNOT fight a conventional war against gorilla tactics. the french couldnt do it in the french-indian war, the british could not do it in the american revolution, we could not do it in vietnam, we will not be able to do it in iraq. some people would say, nuke the hell out of them... but that is highly unethical. punish an entire collection of peace loving people for a few radicals? the "terrorists" would just use that against us to rally more people to their flag. if anything, it would make it far worse.

on the issue of abortion... it is a touchy subject.... i would rather not discuss it.

gay rights. now this one hits home. i know a few homosexuals, and i find it very offensive for (i refuse to call him 'my president') that idiot to try to ban gay marriages. set up in the bill of rights, you cannot discriminate someone based on political views, gender, age, race, and all that good stuff. so why does he think that he can create a bill to ban rights to someone because of their sexual preference? they should be able to have the same rights as anyone else, but i guess that is just to hard for someone like him to see. gay marriage should be an issue raised at the state level, within the family, and within the church. i say it should be raised at the state level, because, low and behold, the right to govern the licensing of marriages was directed to the states. you also have to understand that it was set up so that licenses earned in one state would also have to be recognized by every other state. that is why when you are driving from ohio to indiana, to illinois, to wherever the hell you are going, you dont have to get a new drivers license every time you cross a border. same thing with marriage, teaching, fishing, boating, law, and any other license you can think of. well, i have a docs appointment, so i gotta go. im out

Aside from the fact that you are the one who knows nothing about politics (you can choose a candidate based on one issue and people do it all the time), you are wrong about gay marriage. The corporations aren't paying Bush to be against it. Bush is just trying to get more people on his side because his political advisor knows that a lot of people are so blindly hateful toward gays.

The whole reason Bush is trying to ban gay marriages is because big corporations are paying him to. If they have to start paying gay couples the same benefits as regular couples, they are going to lose a lot of money.
If Big corporations get to pay more Benefits...they are simply going to pass the Bill to the consumers...
It has always been that way...more operational costs....more the consumer pays at the end.
Do not expect the Big Corporations lo lose.

No matter your personal views, the fact that Bush is stupid enough to think that a constitutional ammendment banning gay marriage is fitting should be reason enough to vote Kerry (because voting Nader won't get Bush out of office)