Why do conservatives...

[przero]

n0cmonkey - So why are you against a war with Iraq? Against any war or just this one? And NK against any action militarily on that front?

 

[SlowSS]

The division of two parties has alway existed, I remember how much republicans loathed Klintons. And now, democrats love bashing Bush.
It's just a way it is, and it will continue. Both parties are guilty of toeing the party line.

 

[rudeguy]

I still refer back to the day that the whole Congress stood on the steps singing together....why does it take such a tragic event to make us realize that we are all American, and we all have the same basic principles?? And why do we fight over the small things when if we banded together we could make this country much stronger

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: przero
n0cmonkey - So why are you against a war with Iraq? Against any war or just this one? And NK against any action militarily on that front?

I think there are bigger and better things we can be doing with our money than spending more on idiots like Saddam. I think N. Korea is a bigger threat right now. Saddam is *maybe* third on my list. But of course, Im not privvy to the information the government is. Maybe if they treated us like we mattered I would be 100% behind this action. But, I dont matter so its a moot point.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: przero
n0cmonkey - So why are you against a war with Iraq? Against any war or just this one? And NK against any action militarily on that front?

I think there are bigger and better things we can be doing with our money than spending more on idiots like Saddam. I think N. Korea is a bigger threat right now. Saddam is *maybe* third on my list. But of course, Im not privvy to the information the government is. Maybe if they treated us like we mattered I would be 100% behind this action. But, I dont matter so its a moot point.

good, reveal our information and end up getting our assets tortured and killed, theres a good idea

plus, we were on the saddam thing well before the NKs popped up, and who is to say nothing is happening just because its not out in the public?

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: przero
n0cmonkey - So why are you against a war with Iraq? Against any war or just this one? And NK against any action militarily on that front?

I think there are bigger and better things we can be doing with our money than spending more on idiots like Saddam. I think N. Korea is a bigger threat right now. Saddam is *maybe* third on my list. But of course, Im not privvy to the information the government is. Maybe if they treated us like we mattered I would be 100% behind this action. But, I dont matter so its a moot point.

good, reveal our information and end up getting our assets tortured and killed, theres a good idea

I do not want information on what we are doing militarily. I think there are some things the government needs to keep from the public. Its common sense.

plus, we were on the saddam thing well before the NKs popped up, and who is to say nothing is happening just because its not out in the public?

That is the point. I want more information. Something could be happening. Our government could be acting in our best interrests, for once. But I dont have enough information to make an informed decision.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
think that their way is the only way? Some people do not agree with the government. Its not new. You dont on occassion. Does that mean we are less "patriotic?" No. By expressing our opinions on the government's decisions and by protesting in the streets it means we are just as, if not more, patriotic than everyone blindly following the government's decrees. This is not a country built on conformatism. If it was we would be drinking tea and eating god awful buscuits every day talking about some old broad as "her majesty."

Do your duty and think. I dont want to tell you that if you cant think for yourself that you should get out, like you do about the "communist, hippy, liberal, traitorous, trash" you all like to rant and rave about. Because I think you have the right to your opinion, and you should respect that right for others, even if you cannot understand their reasoning. If you do not want to listen to the reasoning of others (and I mean really listen), then dont ask, dont mention it around people you know have opinions of their own and who will let you know that they disagree.

In other words, we Americans are all on the same side, even if we cant agree what is best. If you cant be civil or intelligent once in a while, please dont post in this thread.

EDIT: For the people that actually read the entire first post, but might not understand my rambling: Just because I may not agree with your anti-Iraq statements and actions, DO NOT TELL ME TO LEAVE THE COUNTRY!

Thats it.

You hit the problem right on the head with your wording. You seem to imply that people who agree with the government are blind drones and people who disagree and protest are intelligent patriots. I have found that the vast majority of people on both sides wouldn't know how to recognize an independent thought if they had one (which they don't). Instead, they simply repeat, often word for word, the opinions of a few. Yet all those people believe they are thinking for themselves.

However, I will agree that people don't often realize that people have the right to their own opinions. I think that we'd be better off if we all actually examined our preconceptions about the world around us instead of simply forming an opinion and refusing to move off of it.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

plus, we were on the saddam thing well before the NKs popped up, and who is to say nothing is happening just because its not out in the public?

That is the point. I want more information. Something could be happening. Our government could be acting in our best interrests, for once. But I dont have enough information to make an informed decision.

if it was between souring negotiations because it might look like we were pushing around certain asian countries or having them go on and actually doing something, what would you pick? i'm pretty damn certain bush and crew aren't just sitting on their asses, colin powell and condi rice are extrememly knowledgable people, and i, for one, trust powell to do the right thing. if powell says its go time, then its go time.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

plus, we were on the saddam thing well before the NKs popped up, and who is to say nothing is happening just because its not out in the public?

That is the point. I want more information. Something could be happening. Our government could be acting in our best interrests, for once. But I dont have enough information to make an informed decision.

if it was between souring negotiations because it might look like we were pushing around certain asian countries or having them go on and actually doing something, what would you pick? i'm pretty damn certain bush and crew aren't just sitting on their asses, colin powell and condi rice are extrememly knowledgable people, and i, for one, trust powell to do the right thing. if powell says its go time, then its go time.

Putting faith in politicians is like trusting a known pedophile to babysit your children.

 

[jahawkin]

Originally posted by: SlowSS
The division of two parties has alway existed, I remember how much republicans loathed Klintons. And now, democrats love bashing Bush.
It's just a way it is, and it will continue. Both parties are guilty of toeing the party line.

But bashing Clinton for what he did is alot different than bashing Bush. One has to do with covering up a sex life, another has to do with screwing over the world.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Putting faith in politicians is like trusting a known pedophile to babysit your children.

powell isn't a politician.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Putting faith in politicians is like trusting a known pedophile to babysit your children.

powell isn't a politician.

You are only as good as the company you keep.

 

[Siddhartha]

I am not sure if this is a conservative behavior but I have read posts written by some of the forum war supporters where they:

1. Write about killing: shooting, bombing, imprisoning, etc anti-war protesters. (Am I the only one disturbed about people wanting to kill people because they disagree with them?)
2. Stated that people who are against the are communists, anti-american, traitors, etc.
3. Written generalizations that all anti-war protestors are drugged up hippies, malcontents who are protesting the upcoming war just to protest, etc.
4. Are hostile towards "HOLLYWOOD" because some actors dare to have different opinions than they do.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
I am not sure if this is a conservative behavior but I have read posts written by some of the forum war supporters where they:

1. Write about killing: shooting, bombing, imprisoning, etc anti-war protesters. (Am I the only one disturbed about people wanting to kill people because they disagree with them?)
2. Stated that people who are against the are communists, anti-american, traitors, etc.
3. Written generalizations that all anti-war protestors are drugged up hippies, malcontents who are protesting the upcoming war just to protest, etc.
4. Are hostile towards "HOLLYWOOD" because some actors dare to have different opinions than they do.

right, because all of those were written with the gravest of earnestness

 

[Konigin]

I don't what liberals to leave the country, we're all entitled to our own opinions. Besides, who whould I laugh at?

 

[Buffdaddy34]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
I am not sure if this is a conservative behavior but I have read posts written by some of the forum war supporters where they:

1. Write about killing: shooting, bombing, imprisoning, etc anti-war protesters. (Am I the only one disturbed about people wanting to kill people because they disagree with them?)
2. Stated that people who are against the are communists, anti-american, traitors, etc.
3. Written generalizations that all anti-war protestors are drugged up hippies, malcontents who are protesting the upcoming war just to protest, etc.
4. Are hostile towards "HOLLYWOOD" because some actors dare to have different opinions than they do.

right, because all of those were written with the gravest of earnestness

If you saw the riots here in San Francisco, the people who strayed off from the regular war protest, they were all the drugged up hippies, the malcontents, and most of them were there just to protest. do you see that if we had a pro war march, how everyone would get shatted upon. But these people, these people who are drugged up have a bigger say than I do.

anyways, I don't want to piss anyone off. I just want to say that if you disagree with the war, and you are ANTI-WAR be freaking consistent. The "Hollywood" people you see, they NEVER once spoke up against Clinton going into Bosnia or Somalia. They never said anything. But when Bush says to go to War, they are against it. They sing to it. They have everyone go against it. Give me a break. not anti-war, anti-bush. Tahts' what pisses me off about the Hollywood people.

on a side note. The only reason I disagree with war, is because I don't like the thought of people dying, innocent or not. I just don't like the thought of it. But to be able to put someone like Saddam out of power, that I agree with. The man has brainwashed his people, they think he is a great man, but he continues to kill his people with chemicals, starving them, blah blah blah. You see how strong the support is for a man who doesn't care for his country, and then you come to the United States, and you see how discontent people are with our president who looks out for his country. It's actually quite annoying. And when you turn on the TV you see all the people who are pissed off with Bush, how often do you see the BUSH Supporters on TV. rare.

No war because I don't like people dying. But if the leader of our country says we are, then I'm for it. If it was clinton, who I despised as a president said let's go, I would back him, because he is the chosen leader of this country. I highly doubt we would have threadso n this if clinton was doing this. of course clinton would have no other issues with Iraq, except he might trade with, sell them arms, and go to iraq and sleep in one of saddam's palaces, and get some ehhh.. ergh, sorry, off track. and I don' tknow how to end this so I will end it here.

 

[Red Dawn]

But if the leader of our country says we are, then I'm for it.

Buffoondaddy34, you would have thrived in Nazi Germany under Hitler. Hell you probably would have been a perfect Candidate for a Guard at Aushwitz with your attitude.

 

[SlowSS]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

But if the leader of our country says we are, then I'm for it.

Buffoondaddy34, you would have thrived in Nazi Germany under Hitler. Hell you probably would have been a perfect Candidate for a Guard at Aushwitz with your attitude.

I don't agree with your assessment of Buffoondaddy34.

Why is that when a person agree with government/president on certain issues, you automatically become a sheep.

Are you saying that you just don't agree with anything that government/president does? Isn't there anything that government does you would agree with?

I don't think it's fair for you to state that Buffondaddy34 would make a perfect candidate for a guard at Aushwitz just because he agreed with Bush on this issue. It is totally uncalled for, imo.

 

[przero]

"But of course, Im not privvy to the information the government is. Maybe if they treated us like we mattered I would be 100% behind this action. But, I dont matter so its a moot point. "

What does that mean? You want the gov't to tell all it knows?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: SlowSS

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

But if the leader of our country says we are, then I'm for it.

Buffoondaddy34, you would have thrived in Nazi Germany under Hitler. Hell you probably would have been a perfect Candidate for a Guard at Aushwitz with your attitude.

I don't agree with your assessment of Buffoondaddy34.

Why is that when a person agree with government/president on certain issues, you automatically become a sheep.

Are you saying that you just don't agree with anything that government/president does? Isn't there anything that government does you would agree with?

I don't think it's fair for you to state that Buffondaddy34 would make a perfect candidate for a guard at Aushwitz just because he agreed with Bush on this issue. It is totally uncalled for, imo.

Buffoondaddy stated that as long as the leader (Der Furher) says it's right then he agrees with it. He also stated that it didn't matter if it was Clinton or Bush.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: przero
"But of course, Im not privvy to the information the government is. Maybe if they treated us like we mattered I would be 100% behind this action. But, I dont matter so its a moot point. "

What does that mean? You want the gov't to tell all it knows?

As much as they can without putting more lives at risk.

 

[SlowSS]

Originally posted by: jahawkin

Originally posted by: SlowSS
The division of two parties has alway existed, I remember how much republicans loathed Klintons. And now, democrats love bashing Bush.
It's just a way it is, and it will continue. Both parties are guilty of toeing the party line.

But bashing Clinton for what he did is alot different than bashing Bush. One has to do with covering up a sex life, another has to do with screwing over the world.

It really don't matter. Hating will continue regardless of issues at hand, same with the toeing the party line.

 

[XZeroII]

what? Do you want a cookie or something?

 

[xirtam]

I think he's just saying that he doesn't have enough information to justify going to war. He couldn't make the call with the information he's got. He never said that the government owes him more information. He's just saying that if he was going to make the call to go to war, he'd need more information than he's got.

And so would I.

Wouldn't you? Or do you trust the media to feed you enough information to make the decision?

If that's the case, you can't condemn the fundamentalist Iraqis for taking up arms because of their media's propaganda. Their government is the type who will dress their soldiers up in US uniforms and go on a rampant slaughter of their own civilians just to feed misinformation into the minds and hearts of their citizens. We don't stoop to that level, but you'd be rather absurd for thinking you're getting unbiased news.

I'm not against war with Iraq, but I'm not for it either. How can I? I don't have enough information to make the call. If I was the one who needed to make the call, I'm sure I'd have -- or be able to request -- the information I needed. Right now I don't have the "need-to-know," and I'd be surprised if any of you do either. So rather than bash people because they don't buy into all the media hype trying to levy support for what our government is about to do, I just kind of have to sit back and hope the government does what it's being paid to do. 1) Collect the information required to make a reasonable decision, 2) Act on that information in the way that best protects America's interests.

Other than that, I've just been reading a bunch of biased hype lately, both on this board, and on cnn.com.

 

[BDawg]

Bill Maher tore one of his guests a new one this week when he suggested that people who are against war in Iraq are anti-American and pro-terrorism.