BF2S Forums Thank Fuck Kerry Didn't Get Elected

CameronPoe wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

What would have happened if the US had not intervened in the least in the Middle East? What would your strategy have been, seeing as you know all the answers.

I've printed my tactics many times on this forum.

1. Bomb the shit out of Afghan Al Qaeda camps to teach them a lesson for 9/11.

2. Do nothing with Iraq. Saddam was completely impotent and irrelevant in the context of the overhyped so-called 'war' on 'terror' (whatever a 'war on terror' means lol).

3. Seal western borders watertight. Spend billions on border security, airport security, international rail-link security and seaport security. Employ Israeli standards of airport/seaport/border security (I've been subjected to it myself and can declare without reservation that it IS the best in the world) - they live in the midst millions of people who hate their guts and these days suicide bombings, etc. are very very few and far between.

4. Spend billions on domestic and international intelligence gathering and domestic policing/surveillance (within reasonable boundaries).

5. Create domestic cross-community organisations to promote better moderate Islam-Western relations. Reach out to Islam without compromising ones own principles.

6. Never cede the moral high ground or abandon your principles. Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay are draconian and unjust stains on the free world and they do not promote trust or goodwill.

7. Face up to the fact that the west overlooks Israeli human rights violations and contravention of international law and address these issues. Boycott Israel and let them fend for themselves.

8. End economic imperialism and underhanded and opportunistic foreign policy. Adopt isolationism.

9. Spend billions on alternative fuel sources.

1. Have fun finding those camps with only air surveillance. Good plan.

2. The "War on Terror" (what a retarded name) was a front for a war to enforce America's dominance in the Middle East. Afghanistan wasn't enough, entry into Iraq was pretty much required if there was a chance of meeting our goals, but it obviously didn't turn out well. There are a lot more people to blame before Bush for the failure in Iraq.

3. Good to know we're talking about a fantasy land. Even if that kind of security could be implemented, do you think the American public would stand for it?

4."Spend billions on...(within reasonable boundaries)"
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

5. First, you can't do that without compromising principles. That would be the whole point.
Second what exactly would this organization do, bake cookies for Muslim's abroad? The appeasement would lower Muslim's standards of the U.S. even lower.
Third, the "let's kiss and make up" policy is really going back to fantasy land, because of the people on both sides.

6. The U.S. government choose to abandon the principle of our national safety over our principle of freedom for all. No, you generally don't trust your enemy, and when that enemy hides among flocks of innocent bystanders, there will be innocent casualties. It is not a conventional enemy, and until they become one they cannot be dealt with in a conventional manner.

7. Dropping Isreal like that would be genocide and you know it. What they are doing may be wrong, but your way of dealing with it is despicable.

8. But we need trade to support the fat American pigs!

If the opportunistic foreign policy you're talking about has anything to do with oil, that is complete malarkey.

Isolation only works when everyone else leaves us alone.

9. Or pass federal regulations to force companies to look into alternative fuel sources. Money doesn't grow on trees.

Ugh, I feel like a conservative. Quick, someone post something on abortion.

Havok wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

I was just thinking to myself: what a 'godsend' that John Kerry wasn't elected president of the United States of America. 'Why?', you might ask. Well it's simple. It was necessary to allow Bush to completely and utterly destroy himself, the credibility of the neo-conservative movement and be seen to be in charge when the inevitable failure of his foreign dalliances came to pass. If Kerry had got into power Republicans would be able to palm off a portion of the blame on the Democrat party with their predictable 'Defeatist' bullshit with the Democrats no doubt changing tack on what had gone previously. The way things turned out we got to see Bush and his cronies implode and allow the American public to 'see the light' as regards their errant foreign policy and who should carry the blame.

Thank you for electing President GW Bush America. You did yourselves a favour by allowing yourselves to be taught a valuable lesson.

So you're saying that it's a good thing we picked a loser president?  I fail to see how this favor's our nation as a whole.  We learned not to trust an entire political movement (neo-conservatism) based on the actions of one man.  I'm not the brightest crayon in the box when it comes to politics, but I'm sure not all neo-conservatives are as bad as Bush.  He just dealt with Iraq the wrong way, which in turn ruined the view of the entire party that shared his political beliefs.

Hes saying that we should learn from our "mistakes". Personally, yes bush has sucked but kerry is a whole nother ball park of massive bullshit. I say we elect Tancredo. TANCREDO 2008 BITCHES!

CameronPoe wrote:

You did yourselves a favour by allowing yourselves to be taught a valuable lesson in the realities of the 'outside world' and baseless pre-emptive war.

It isn't pre-emptive war it is preventive war. Pre-emptive war is when attack is imminant, the war on terror is to prevent what could occur, thus it is preventive war. Other than that, (and not wanting to delve any deeper into the particular debate,) I agree.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Just to know, how specifically did Bush fail in his second term?

GG in Iraq & Afghanistan lol. Bang-up job.

Thanks for the help Ireland!

qfe
are you ready for "a valuable lesson"? wait for 'that bitch' to get elected.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Yea... Viva Saddam! /idiocy

To coin a phrase, the US government was for Saddam before it was against him. I guess supporting a murderous thug as he brutalizes and kills his own people for over a decade until he turns into an enemy isn't idiocy, right?

Last edited by HunterOfSkulls (2007-05-14 23:24:37)

theelviscerator wrote:

Cameron is a scofflaw.

Nuff said.

Why would a criminal care about politics anyway.

Unless its to keep track of the penal code he is bound to live under one day.

What in heaven's name is a scofflaw?

If you're going to insult someone, at least make it relevant...

EDIT:

scoff·law (skŏf'lô', skôf'-)
n.
One who habitually violates the law or fails to answer court summonses.

Ah well. At least he's consistent in his insults - though what that has to do with the topic at hand is beyond me.

Last edited by Spark (2007-05-15 00:45:09)

usmarine2005 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Just to know, how specifically did Bush fail in his second term?

GG in Iraq & Afghanistan lol. Bang-up job.

You need to work more.  You Euros have way too much free time to worry about shit that does not concern you.

Madrid, London 7/7...

usmarine2005 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Just to know, how specifically did Bush fail in his second term?

GG in Iraq & Afghanistan lol. Bang-up job.

You need to work more.  You Euros have way too much free time to worry about shit that does not concern you.

I used to think you were just opinionated, now I see you're just an idiot. Does not concern us? Does not concern us????

Not heard about Madrid or London 7/7?

Not noticed that you're part of a COALITION and it's not only US troops over there fighting and dying in Bush's pointless 'war on terrorism'?

How dare you say that it doesn't fucking concern us! Get some fucking perspective or shut the fuck up!

CameronPoe wrote:

1. Bombing Al Qaeda camps was basically all the US did at the start of the war, relying primarily on the Northern Alliance to defeat the Taliban. Boots on the ground haven't found Osama. Seems like a futile grab in the dark to me. The pitifully small numbers thrown at the mission were ridiculous anyway - if you're gonna do something, do it properly.

2. True. And I never said Bush was solely to blame. This is a rant against the failed PNAC neo-conservative agenda which has been exposed for all to see.

3. Well are you serious about fighting/preventing terror or not? Israelis can put up with it. If it saves lives then what's your problem? It's better than losing more than 3000 US soldiers over 4 years for little progress in rebuilding Iraq and for actually increasing global terrorism. It seems people just aren't ready to make the difficult, NECESSARY choices, eh?

4. Again are you serious about fighting terrorism or not?

5. Cross-community relationship building != appeasement. Republicans turn everything into some defeatist slant. I'm not talking about banning crucifixes and allowing headscarves in school - as an atheist the whole concept is abhorrent to me. Imams have influence over people. If you influence the Imams - you influence the people.

6. I will never be able to agree with someone who is happy with the US stance of declaring someone 'guilty until proven innocent' and of engaging in torture. It is a sad day for America that there are people out there who can defend that. Lincoln must be rolling in his grave. Don't complain when do the enemy do likewise or worse with their 'enemy combatants'.

7. The conservative way, the pure capitalism way is to deregulate - to expose what is viable and what isn't. Is Israel viable? They have nuclear weapons - a pretty damn good deterrent. Until the west starts playing fair on Israel you can forget 'ending terrorism' or whatever ridiculous goal the neo-cons pretend to have.

8. I'm not talking about no trade, I'm not talking about free trade, I'm talking about fair trade and countries being left to adopt protectionist economic policy and to have full sovereignty over their natural resources.

9. Well do something to eliminate dependence on fossil fuels. I won't pretend to know the best approach, all I know is that it is necessary.

1. Bombing camps with the help of special forces teams brought in before the war officially started. And yes, a major part of the strategy for fighting a war halfway across the world was to recruit a sizable local army to do the fighting for us, with lots of American dollars. These small numbers weren't meant to fight the war on their own.

2. What the US administration did was the only logical course of action. It was executed very poorly, but it was the only thing to attempt.

3. Again, the U.S. and Israel are in completely different worlds. If you don't think there would be a public outrage, you're wrong. That, and Israel probably doesn't even have 1/50th the amount of borders the U.S. does. It is an impractical move, and naive to think we could prevent future terrorism by protecting every inch of border and every airport.

4. First, I'm pretty sure we are spending billions on intelligence. Second, the amount of information we gather is enough, if not excessive, the problem lies in not having either the method or the manpower to process it all. You can't solve that problem by throwing money at it.

5. As a minor point head scarves are allowed in school, I don't know what made you think otherwise. I personally know a girl in my school who wears one daily.

To the main point, I suppose I just don't understand what this organization is supposed to do. From what you just said, it sounds a lot like a bribing Imams.

6. I never said I condoned torture. As far as I know we never condemned anyone in those camps to death or otherwise after being found guilty, I don't think they ever had a trial. Their personal freedoms were taken away under suspicion, as authorities attempt to work out who is in the wrong. This is not nearly the same as taking someone for guilty before a trial, people aren't wandering into homes and blowing people's heads off because they had a Q'uran.

The torture of the enemy isn't the problem, it's their methods. They hide with the innocent, so you either try to get at them and there are civilian casualties, or you leave them alone to inflict their own damage.

7. Please, of course "playing fair" with Israel would mean dropping it, and that would be genocide. That's like saying the dog peed on the carpet, so kick it outside and let it deal with the lion. The situation needs to be negotiated to the point where the region is at peace, probably by erasing Israel as a whole, but until that happens, the Israeli people have a right to live.

8. What specific countries are you talking about here?

9. Well of course it needs to be done, but finding the approach is the problem right now. I think this point can be dropped on the fact that we (and probably about 90% of the population) can agree something needs to be done, but no knows what to do and no major governments or businesses are stepping up.

CameronPoe wrote:

I was just thinking to myself: what a 'godsend' that John Kerry wasn't elected president of the United States of America. 'Why?', you might ask. Well it's simple. It wsa necessary to allow Bush to completely and utterly destroy himself, the credibility of the neo-conservative movement and be seen to be in charge when the inevitable failure of his foreign dalliances came to pass. If Kerry had got into power Republicans would be able to palm off a portion of the blame on the Democrat party with their predictable 'Defeatist' bullshit with the Democrats no doubt changing tack on what had gone previously. The way things turned out we got to see Bush and his cronies implode and allow the American public to 'see the light' as regards their errant foreign policy and who should carry the blame.

Thank you for electing President GW Bush America. You did yourselves a favour by allowing yourselves to be taught a valuable lesson in the realities of the 'outside world' and baseless pre-emptive war.

Yes, we did learn a lot from Vietnam...ummm....I meant Iraq.


Sorry to point out the flaw about "lessons learned" and the future.  And the flaw that a neo-con is required.

Nice choice of adjectives though (I'm not talking about the Thank Fuck part)

fadedsteve wrote:

jesus christ. . . . .

One man doesn't sum up an entire political party (Republican)!!! I am a Republican and take offense to your bullshit assessment!

Why dont you go get some sun!!! Maybe you'll lighten up!

Dude, he's not bashing real republicanism, he's bashing the "Neo Con" movement, including the likes of the American Enterprise Institute, The Project for the New American Century, etc.



Most everything in this video, the key words if you will, can be searched on Google to show further info.

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

GG in Iraq & Afghanistan lol. Bang-up job.

You need to work more.  You Euros have way too much free time to worry about shit that does not concern you.

I used to think you were just opinionated, now I see you're just an idiot. Does not concern us? Does not concern us????

Not heard about Madrid or London 7/7?

Not noticed that you're part of a COALITION and it's not only US troops over there fighting and dying in Bush's pointless 'war on terrorism'?

How dare you say that it doesn't fucking concern us! Get some fucking perspective or shut the fuck up!

Last time I checked I was talking to CAM, who is from Ireland,  and people form other countries who are not in the coalition, so shut the fuck up.