Democrats call for invasion of Pakistan

B

ByronB

New member
Resources is a more accurate term. It not only includes money and oil but is broad enough to include other incentives like political influence and on occasion raw political power.
 
A

AlexisInfectious®

Active member
El Tejon...
here goes your beloved Republicans... ever being the peacemakers.
I guess this comes at a inconvenient time for you eh... after having jumped in and painted the Democrats as war mongers.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/


Good to see you have the best and brightest hard at work.
What a total and complete idiot... this makes Obama's call for the invasion of Pakistan a fricken trifle by comparison.

Look at this morons background:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/candidates/tom.tancredo.html

Is it any wonder that the US public education system is so piss poor?!?!
Yet he want's to start bombing other holy sites?!

We don't even have a smiley to express what I need to say...
 
F

FriedGreenApples

New member
I have no chance of expressing my views as is. If I vote for a candidate I don't agree with (read: all of them) then I not only compromise my views, but I also perpetuate a regime that I would not be happy with. In fact, if more people were like me and refused to vote for a candidate they did not support, then perhaps we would see (surprise!) more candidates.

The United States buried itself under a two party system when they allowed for the separate election of a Vice President instead of using the runner-up. That means that the see-saw will last forever unless we as voters indicate that we are unhappy with it. Voting for the "lesser of two evils" simply gives credence to the system and will provoke no change.
 
F

FredA

New member
At least he is reacting, not initiating like B. Hussein Obomba.

Hmmm, wonder if the Congressman thought that one all the way through?
 
S

SheItIdo

Member
And they wonder why they get bombed?

If they so much as touch te Holy cities, they would have millions of fighters pouring in against them; daily. People thought 9/11 shook the world, this would turn the world upside down.

[/RANT]

On a calmer note, the scary thing is that this guy can't tell the difference between radical Islam and Islam. He would make the majority suffer for the minority.
 
S

sidhants

New member
Hate to break up the fear fest, but "considering" is not the same as "invading"- which the Repubs have indicated that they are more then willing to do. In fact, many of their speaches have been much more committed to invasion then anything coming out of the Dems.
 
R

rinfrance

New member
Sorry but either you guys missed this quoute:


source: Tancredo (read article above)

or you simply don't understand what sort of reaction that bombing Mecca or Medina would cause. It'd the threat of terrorism that we have now look like kiddies play. On top of that... every westerners life would change very quickly... oil prices would rise through the roof.

I don't really see how you could get a much more provocative quote.

Tancredo's other quotes just show he has a profound lack of understanding of the global situation - and of terrorism and economics in particular.
 
W

WalterD

Member
i dont nessecarily agree with this guy, but you seem to take every chance you get to bitch and moan about the US government, what would YOU suppose we do?
 
L

LadyD

New member
For starters... not run around proposing we should be bombing what are essentially allies. In case you hadn't figure it out... both Mecca and Medina are are in Saudi Arabia.
Someone who we have diplomatic relations among others with. One of the few relatively stable and prosperous countries in the Middle East that have a significant influence world wide in terms of distribution and price of oil... which Americans can't really function without. I mean how would they fuel all those SUV's?

So that's a start bright boy.

Secondly, last I checked it was free world - so I can damn well bitch and moan about whatever I want and there really is SFA you can do about it.
Try again.

Or actually try contributing something to a thread that is on topic instead of trying to bait. Because your chance of baiting me is about as much as a snowflakes in hell. Which is, in all reality, probably similar to you chances of posting anything that even remotely makes sense in this thread.

But hey surprise us.
 
G

gill

Member
So far, I like Joe Biden. I don't think he's crazy. He's definitely smart and he's got a lot of experience. I'm not all that comfortable with Obama or Clinton.

I'll participate in the primaries, even though they aren't binding in the state of Washington, and I'll do what I can for the candidate I think will do the best job. In the end, however, I'm very likely to vote for the Democrat who gets the nomination. I've had enough of the GOP.
 
P

puppielover407

Member
I just told you i dont agree with him, i asked you what you would do, you told me what you wouldnt do.

you complain, and offer no alternative, THAT is called contributing nothing. give it a try, instead of coming after me like a spider monkey on crack, just answer my questions. even aikimac manages to do that on ocassion.
 
P

puzzleboyb

Member
Reading this thread has made me realise that while our UK politicians are generally a pretty sleazy bunch, at least they are (mostly) reasonably sane.

Some of these US politicians are as crazy as Osama Bin-Laden.

It's scary to think that madmen like this could have any influence on the foreign policies of a superpower with a nuclear arsenal.
 
D

dodge_ken1025

New member
Sigh... ok... Tekkengod... try to follow along.



1) err... no one was claiming that you were.
Why bother fighting arguments that no one is making?



1) Given how you've jumped into the thread no one is really obligated to actually respond to your silly accusations. You're accusing me when you yourself haven't offered any viable solutions. Brilliant... but typical.

2) By choosing not to tow the line that the Republican Tom Tancredo is trying to sell... that is doing something. By vocally disagreeing with it and bringing it to peoples attention is doing something. Especially given that the whole context of this thread is what a big, bad warmonger the Democratic presidential candidate Obama. Therefore it is contributing to the thread - whether you can grasp that or not.



3) I'm not somehow required by law provide an alternative. You yourself haven't even done that... those that live in glass houses... well you get it... so put the rock down bright boy.

Given that you're having trouble understanding the gist of this so far... I'm not even entirely sure you even have a clear cut question that needs to be answered. If you do then present it in clear terms - because to this point you haven't presented a question/problem and you certainly haven't presented and answer or a solution.

I'm not sure what Aikimac even has to do with this thread... other than it's you working our your personal grudges/agendas from other threads. Which needless to say... is lame... but not unexpected.

4) The whole concept that the US bomb random Muslim holy sites that are situated in sovereign countries that we have diplomatic relations with as a retaliatory response to acts of terrorism is thick headed in the extreme. Not only does it show a frightening lack of understanding of the issues at hand - both economically and strategically... it's designed for one sole purpose... election year politiking. That both Mecca and Medina are of strategic importance for Americas fuel based economy and global trade makes the idea all the more patently absurd.

Politically it shows just how out of touch with reality Republican Tom Tancredo is given that the US is just about to send billions of dollars worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia.


So seriously... if you have something to contribute to this thread... then do so. If you have a concise question that you want be to present what I think a viable answer for is then ask it... but your lame and hypocritical accusations only make you look like the resident champion for idiocy.
 
A

Abbi

Member
Only that the reality for the the forseeable future is that the Western superpowers aren't going to leave the Middle East alone. That they're just about to dump billions into Saudi Arabia is a good indicator of that. They can't even agree on any sort of plan for a pull out of Iraq let alone the Middle East as whole... or even South Asia for that matter.

The best I think that can be hoped for is a different methodology to be used by the probably incoming democrats. Bush and his republican cronies have done more damage than good in the region frankly. It only comes back to bite America and other western countries in the ass. But it's not Bush that has to go to war and fight... it's not his children or the children of the vast majority of the policy makers that end up coming home in bodybags or with debilitating injuries.

They're more worried about covering their asses than anything else. The recent fiasco regarding the death of US Army Ranger Pat Tillman killed by 'friendly fire' is only one example of this. Rumsfeld et al had a response that by now has become standard Republican faire... 'I can't remember'.

If he'd been some garden variety soldier then it'd almost be expected that his death was simply a byproduct of this cozy little 'war on terror'... but that he was an NFL player should have given us some hope that at least they'd own up to all the BS... but no not even that was enough.

It makes you wonder how much longer the Americans will put up with this sort of crap.
 
L

letschat

New member
Besides that, pulling out now is, quite possibly, going to throw the entire area into a very large and very devistating political upheval. By invading Iraq, we removed the stabilizing force against Iran. There is a huge political hole that Iraq as it is will never be able to fill.

I forsee us pulling out because of political pressure and expediency. I also forsee the entire area going up in smoke and everyone having to go back in. Possibly with the same people screaming at the US to withdraw now yelling at the US for withdrawing too early.
 
F

faizaan

New member
I was refering to the original story posted about obama.. if you actually read what he said it was not anywhere as bad as it was being made out to be by the media or the OP.
 
Top