NationStates Jolt Archive

Do you support our President, and his honorable war?

How many more Bush threads are there going to be?

And we already have a "War on Terror" thread going, and it's a lot more sensible than this one. And it's made by me. :p

Do you support our President, and his honorable war?

The honourable part better be sarcasm. If not, I'm totally going to glare at you.

Do you support our President, and his honorable war?

Honorable war? I though this was about the war on terror?

Do you support our President, and his honorable war?

Not that that's a leading question or anything...

My god.

My god.

What s/he said.

Who wants to bet that Bush would be too chicken to say yes if I challenged him to pistols at dawn?

Who and What are you talking about? Neither the nitwit sitting in the oval office or the current conflict(s) overseas can be called "honorable" with any seriousness...

Honorable war? I though this was about the war on terror?

It is the War on Terror, I was calling President Bush honorable.

It is the War on Terror, I was calling President Bush honorable.

Please, don't provoke a flame war on your FIRST POST!

You know you've lost the debate when you have to link the war on a tactic with the guy supposedly in charge of said war.

Do you support our President, and his honorable war?
SPAM!

It is the War on Terror, I was calling President Bush honorable.

Then you need to either

A. Learn more english before posting in an english-language forum.
B. Order Hooked on Phonics.
C. Actually go to school.
or, preferable:
D. STOP SPAMMING THE DAMN FORUM.

Then you need to either

A. Learn more english before posting in an english-language forum.
B. Order Hooked on Phonics.
C. Actually go to school.
or, preferable:
D. STOP SPAMMING THE DAMN FORUM.

haha, oh burn. :p

Yes, I support the general idea of a War on Terror, though not everything Bush does in it.

Honorable?

Where has our society gone where we can call war honorable?

The act of war can never be honorable. It must be a thing that is entered into with a heavy heart, with the full weight of the the loss of human life weighing squarely, and always heavily, on the leaders who enter into a proposition.

To call a war, ANY war "honorable" makes light of lives, and deaths, of those who fell. To call the deaths, on either side


War can be at times justifiable. It may be, in extreem circumstances, even necessary. But honorable? Never.

Do you support our President, and his honorable war?

Um. Which war? The war on terror? The war in Afghanistan? The war in Iraq? At least one of those isn't like the others.

Yes, I support the general idea of a War on Terror, though not everything Bush does in it.

Pratically everyone supports the general idea of a war on terrorism. The devil is in the details.

Were I give a proper answer to this, in a sense it would make me another surrogate mother/father for another net attention seeker/weirdo/loveless child. I prefer the role of surrogate sugar-daddy to women who take their clothes off and post the pictures on the net, in that amount of spare time I allot for the needy.

I support Harry Belafonte and his smooth island rythms.

It is the War on Terror, I was calling President Bush honorable.Not in Iraq, it wasn't.

How many more Bush threads are there going to be?

You've been here since October. You should know by now that the answer to that question is 'infinite'. And no, not a single one of them will accomplish anything!

Where has our society gone where we can call war honorable?

And the answer to this question is 'nowhere'. War and honour have always been closely tied in some way or another throughout history. Of course, whether an old knight of yesteryear would call this particular war 'honourable' is another question.

You've been here since October. You should know by now that the answer to that question is 'infinite'. And no, not a single one of them will accomplish anything!
Oh, actually I've been here since April or something...there was an...incident.

Anyways, it just seems like there were an awful lot of Bush-threads on for a single day. Thought I'd make the OP aware of that. :p

I would support efforts to put terrorists to justice and to prevent further terrorist attacks, if there were any going on at the moment. I don't see any, though.
I see no reason why I should support Bush.

Honorable?

Where has our society gone where we can call war honorable?

The act of war can never be honorable. It must be a thing that is entered into with a heavy heart, with the full weight of the the loss of human life weighing squarely, and always heavily, on the leaders who enter into a proposition.

To call a war, ANY war "honorable" makes light of lives, and deaths, of those who fell. To call the deaths, on either side


War can be at times justifiable. It may be, in extreem circumstances, even necessary. But honorable? Never.

Thank you, sir or madam, for making my post for me. :)

Well considering he has gone about fighting terrorism in the totally the wrong way, i have to say no.

Well considering he has gone about fighting terrorism in the totally the wrong way, i have to say no.

I had the impression that hat never was the objective, really. The objective was to play the big strong man, thereby hopefully intimidating the rest of the world...

Worked for Tony, I think.

I had the impression that hat never was the objective, really. The objective was to play the big strong man, thereby hopefully intimidating the rest of the world...

Worked for Tony, I think.

oh I'm totally sure that the US governmnt looked at the situation and saw how they could scare the world into their way of thinking.

But they still needed to do something about OBL and all this minions.

But as I said they went about it the wrong way. Typical American foreign policy, force first diplomacy and cooperation with other countires the last things on their minds.

But as I said they went about it the wrong way. Typical American foreign policy, force first diplomacy and cooperation with other countires the last things on their minds.

True... it hasn't occured to them yet...

True... it hasn't occured to them yet...


It cost them a few dollars as well. Only enough to wipe out several major diseases and provide clean drinking water for the entire world and still have a shitload left over. Ho hum.

I support Harry Belafonte and his smooth island rythms.


Daylight come and me wan' go home.

Hey Mr Tally-man, come tally me banana!

Daylight come and me wan' go home.

Hey Mr Tally-man, come tally me banana!

Angelina Angelina
Please bring down your concertina
And play a welcome for me
Cuz I'll be comin' home from sea

woo!

Do you support our President, and his honorable war?

He's not my President, and there's nothing honourable about him or his war.

Don't they teach you anything in the way of critical thinking in American schools?

Don't they teach you anything in the way of critical thinking in American schools?

Yes.

Lindlira hasn't gotten there yet.

Yes.

Lindlira hasn't gotten there yet.

I go to a military academy in the United States, I think I have exceeded you in this area of Politics and Critical Thinking.

I go to a military academy in the United States, I think I have exceeded you in this area of Politics and Critical Thinking.

I'm surprised they haven't banned this site yet.

Do you support our President, and his honorable war?
No, I do not support President Bush on everything. Yes, I support both the war and those fighting it.

I go to a military academy in the United States, I think I have exceeded you in this area of Politics and Critical Thinking.

Why?

That seems like a fairly silly (and trollish) claim to me.

I don't support stupid people or wars on adjetives, so I suppose the answer would be no.

Ohh well. I suppose its just another bad thing in life. Can't wait to start my own country in africa.

I don't support stupid people or wars on adjectives, so I suppose the answer would be no.

Ohh well. I suppose its just another bad thing in life. Can't wait to start my own country in Africa.

Adjectives are subwords, and control the media and the banks and the money, and are the fault of all that is wrong with Grammar.

DOWN WITH THE ADJECTIVE OLIGARCHY!

I go to a military academy in the United States, I think I have exceeded you in this area of Politics and Critical Thinking.
http://schildersmilies.de/noschild/laughoutloud.gif

I don't support stupid people or wars on adjetives, so I suppose the answer would be no.

Such luck that terror is a noun, then.

Such luck that terror is a noun, then.

In context, wouldn't it really be a verb, because we are against the action of terrorism, more than the terrorists themselves?

Ehh, whatever. I'm used to replying to the war on terrorism. How about "I don't support wars on abstract idea's"? That work?

In context, wouldn't it really be a verb, because we are against the action of terrorism, more than the terrorists themselves?

Onde doesn't "terror" someone - one terrorises them. Terror is a noun.

I go to a military academy in the United States, I think I have exceeded you in this area of Politics and Critical Thinking.

Well, don't you think it's about time you started using arguments that display critical thinking?

Do you support our President, and his honorable war?

Yes, I do support Bush and all wars.

But it is a dumb question to ask here, in this liberal paradise. Anyone who's been here for ten minutes will know what the outcome of these polls will be everytime.

~Satanic Reverend Medivh~

Yes, I do support Bush and all wars.

But it is a dumb question to ask here. Anyone who's been here for ten minutes will know what the outcome of these polls will be everytime.

~Satanic Reverend Medivh~

Wait, you support all wars?

That, sir, makes you evil.

Wait, you support all wars?

That, sir, makes you evil.

In a good way. Mahahahaha...

"The natural world is a world of war; the natural man is a warrior; the natural law is tooth and claw. All else is error. A condition of combat everywhere exists."

~Satanic Reverend Medivh~

Who wants to bet that Bush would be too chicken to say yes if I challenged him to pistols at dawn?
Ah don't be so old-fashioned.
Just challenge him to a Segway race to a pretzel-eating contest.
Make sure you have an Italian police escort to navigate, and make sure that the pretzel-eating contest is held indoors.
After that, perhaps a no-cue/notecard debate/oratory.
That oughtta settle that. You know he'd parachute in on that one, and declare it Mission Accomplished without EVEN participating!!
...and make sure your sleeves are rolled up for the photo op.

Hmm.
No and no.

I had the impression that hat never was the objective, really. The objective was to play the big strong man, thereby hopefully intimidating the rest of the world...

Worked for Tony, I think.
Tony Randall from The Odd Couple,
Tony "Frosted Flakes" the Tiger (could be),
Tony "Who's The Boss?" Danza (another strong contender),
or
Tony "Bush's Bitch" Blair?

It cost them a few dollars as well. Only enough to wipe out several major diseases and provide clean drinking water for the entire world and still have a shitload left over. Ho hum.
You sure know how to depress a feller. :(

Adjectives are subwords, and control the media and the banks and the money, and are the fault of all that is wrong with Grammar.

DOWN WITH THE ADJECTIVE OLIGARCHY!
That sounds like an extremist's point of view. I think you're just an adjective-o-phobe, and you're afraid that once you start using them, you'll find that YOU LIKE USING THEM and you'll use them a lot more, even at inappropriate times, and pretty soon you'll be wandering around LOOKING FOR AN EXCUSE to interject your "adjectives" into OTHER PEOPLE'S LIVES, RIGHT UP IN THEIR FACES-LIKE!!!
Whoops, got carried away. Seriously, i'm slightly more open-minded then that post might have implied. I guess adjectives are just a hot topic for me.

In a good way. Mahahahaha...

"The natural world is a world of war; the natural man is a warrior; the natural law is tooth and claw. All else is error. A condition of combat everywhere exists."

~Satanic Reverend Medivh~

Man is the animal that exceeds the natural in both ferocity and the capacity to care for others.

It is our choice as to which path we as humans take. That itself, the eternal struggle between the innate desire to destroy and the yearning to create, is the true condition of combat we carry, each one of us, in our souls.

I go to a military academy in the United States, I think I have exceeded you in this area of Politics and Critical Thinking.You are the saddest person I've ever met.

Tony Randall from The Odd Couple,
Tony "Frosted Flakes" the Tiger (could be),
Tony "Who's The Boss?" Danza (another strong contender),
or
Tony "Bush's Bitch" Blair?

Why, Tony Curtis of course! Intimidating eyebrows....

Man is the animal that exceeds the natural in both ferocity and the capacity to care for others.

It is our choice as to which path we as humans take. That itself, the eternal struggle between the innate desire to destroy and the yearning to create, is the true condition of combat we carry, each one of us, in our souls.

"Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who, because of his “divine spiritual and intellectual development,” has become the most vicious animal of all!"

~Satanic Reverend Medivh~

Why, Tony Curtis of course! Intimidating eyebrows....
Like two vicious caterpillars waiting to gnaw their way through the face of anyone that gets up in his business! Grrr!
;)

Do you support our President, and his honorable war?
No. Not My president.
No. He is Not honorable. ...or
No. the Bushite War is Not honorable.
No. I do not support Bush.
No I do not support his War.

there.

If this was a genuine War on Terror, no one on Earth would be as fervid a supporter of it as I would be.

This caught my eye and i thought it might be pertinent. I have a few other pertinents on the other similar threads, 'round the last page.

*ahem*

Agency watchdog to probe eavesdropping

Items compiled from Tribune news services
Published January 11, 2006


WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The National Security Agency's inspector general has opened an investigation into the agency's warrantless domestic eavesdropping authorized by President Bush after the Sept. 11 attacks, according to a letter released late Tuesday.

The Pentagon's acting inspector general, Thomas Gimble, wrote that his counterpart at the NSA "is already actively reviewing aspects of that program," according to the letter sent to House Democrats who requested official investigations of the NSA program.

The Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation into the leak of the highly classified program's existence.
--
Washington -- The National Security Agency's inspector general has opened an investigation into eavesdropping without warrants in the United States by the agency authorized by President Bush after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to a letter released late Tuesday.

The Pentagon's acting inspector general, Thomas Gimble, wrote that his counterpart at the National Security Agency "is already actively reviewing aspects of that program" and has "considerable expertise in the oversight of electronic surveillance," according to the letter sent to House Democrats who have requested official investigations of the agency's program.

Gimble's letter appears to confirm that an internal investigation into the National Security Agency's domestic eavesdropping program, authorized by Bush in a secret order revealed in recent weeks, is underway. The Justice Department has opened a separate criminal investigation into the leak of the highly classified program's existence.

Officials in National Security Agency Inspector General Joel Brenner's office could not be reached for comment Tuesday night.

A group of 39 House Democrats wrote Gimble and other officials last month requesting investigations into the legality of the agency's program. Gimble responded that his office would decline to start its own investigation because of the National Security Agency probe.

Another inspector general, Glenn Fine of the Justice Department, told the same group of lawmakers in a recent letter that his office does not have jurisdiction. The Democrats responded with a letter to Fine on Monday, arguing that both the inspector general statute and the Patriot Act require Fine's office to get involved.

Bush, who has joined his aides in an unusually public defense of the secret program, said last month that the agency's "activities under this authorization are thoroughly reviewed by the Justice Department and NSA's top legal officials, including NSA's general counsel and inspector general."

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, said the National Security Agency's inspector general should not be conducting an investigation if the office has played a role in approving the program.

"War is only evil to you if you suffer from its consequences. At times, even people on the losing side have benefited from its aftermath, particularly when the "conqueror" pumps in all manner of aid to rebuild the conquered nation."

~Satanic Reverend Medivh~

Although I'm not an American, my own country does have troops there (Australia), so I think I have grounds to comment here.

I do not support Bushist warmongering.
I believe this war is the worst idea in the history of bad ideas. Getting rid of Hussein was a good idea. Going about it the way they have was an extremely BAD idea.

I do, however support the troops involved in the war, however - it wasn't their choice to start this war - and they're simply doing their job, and putting their lives on the line in doing so.