Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 40

Thread: Why Bush should be re-elected

  1. #1


    Default Why Bush should be re-elected

    I just wanted to post this because my evil twin started posting politics and im
    going to speak the truth compared to what the other side of me would say.

    We are at war here in America and as you vote on Tuesday , you should be
    thinking about the candidate your voting for , is he strong enough to lead a
    war on terror , I haven't seen any more attacks on American soil after 9/11
    since Bush has been in office , I could care less about small stuff , I care
    about the safety of America , the other stupid issues can wait.

    Note: I am not here to offend any of you and your beliefs of which candidate
    your willing to vote for , I just don't want a fucking Nuclear war where I am.
    Last edited by TRUSTpunk; 10-31-2004 at 03:05 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    13,832


    Default

    I'm also asking myself, "Do I trust the leadership of the candidate who started the war in the first place?"

    Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with the 9/11 attack. This has been proven by the Dept. of Homeland Security as well as the 9-11 Commission, and admitted (though quickly and quietly) by President Bush himself.

    So why are we in Iraq? Because all of a sudden we decide there's something we should do there, after decades of pleading from Amnesty International about the atrocities being committed by Saddam (and the Taliban)? Iraq has nothing to do with 9-11, but many of the young soldiers who enlisted to go there think that Saddam was directly involved. Saddam and Osama Bin Laden were mortal enemies before we invaded--now, the two men's followers may be working together against a common enemy...us. Because of the Bush administration's purposeful confusion of the issues to acheive its own agenda, the safety of the American people is more compromised than ever before.

    Most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis. But no, Bush barely even investigates the Saudis because of the jaw-dropping financial ties the Bush family has to the very people that may have financed the biggest terrorist attack on American soil.

    We've gotten ourselves into a huge mess, and I don't trust Bush's ability to follow through and stabilize Iraq.

  3. #3


    Default

    But how do you know that Bush started the war , please explain.

    The main thing that I believe Bush is focusing on is the Weapons Of Mass
    Destruction which in the debate each candidate said that their where no
    Weapons Of Mass destruction which in reality , their could be but Mr. Ass
    AKA Bin Laden is hiding them from the Americans , what do you think John
    Kerry would do to prove that their are no Weapons Of Mass Destruction
    and how do you think he will end this war on terror.

    I think about the issues before voting on a candidate , I want to make sure
    im making the right choice , Saddam is a terrorists , this is a war on terror.

    Looking at three years with no attack on our homeland is just awesome
    and to know that Kerry left war haves me believing he's a bad candidate

    Edit: Either way , I hope that who ever wins this election , I hope their good.
    Last edited by TRUSTpunk; 10-31-2004 at 03:22 PM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cascadian Exile
    Posts
    19,591


    Default

    Your theory that Bush has prevented attacks on America's homeland is fraudulent. I, to steal a gem from the Simpsons, could say that this rock in my hand prevents terrorist attacks on our country as well. I picked it up after 9/11 and there hasn't been an attack since. Do you see any terrorists? Or furthermore I could say, there hadn't been a terrorist attack for 10 years, until Bush came to office.

    Second. Your knowledge of the middle East embarrasses the death out of me. Osama Bin Laden would never hide Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destructions. Let me give you a little lesson. Saddam Hussein and Ba'athists are a secular group of politicians. They base their platform on Arab Nationalism and an Arab form of Socialism. They reject that any religion should play a part in the running of a nation.

    Bin Laden on the other hand, I believe is a Wahhabist. Here's some history, the founder of the Islamic interpretation known as Wahhabism was a person who believed that, because Islam had been reformed and revised throughout the centuries, that these reformations were the cause to the decline of the Arab and Persian Islamic empires. Therefore, what needed to happen was a back to the roots of Islam migration. Really fundamentalist stuff this was back then. And Wahhabi lived back in the late 1700's I believe. Now the great thing is, this is also the period of time that the Royal House of Saud became the ruling house, and they were completely reliant on the support of the Wahhabi's. So what we have here is, today, the Wahhabi's supporting the Royal House of Saud and ensuring they stay in power. The Royal House of Saud rules in accordance to Wahhabi teachings. Which is why Saudi Arabia has to be one of the worst places to live on. But the thing is, Wahhabi's believe that Clerics have the right to run government. And Ba'athists believe the exact opposite.

    So when Ba'athism really became popular, back in the late 60's. The fundamentalist Islamic Clerics were quivering in their robes. This was a rebellious movement that had completely denied the need for religion, this was the Arab people fightin' back and kickin' some ass. This was really not a pretty thing for the Clerics. The Clerics and the Ba'athists will never be united. I mean, immediately after the Islamic Revolution in Iran, Saddam decided to get rid of that enemy. They were practically (and almost were) mutually exclusive. Now the Ayatollah system (Shi'ite) should not be confused with Wahhabism, these are two different sections of Islam. Which funnily enough, I believe also oppose each other.

    So what we've basically had for the past 40 years is a fight between Islamic Clerics and Ba'athists. And yet we've all ignored that, because we're stupid Americans who can't fuckin' do a little research.

    Oh and there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction. People who still believe in them must be delusional. I mean, Powell and Rumsfield claimed to know exactly where they were. They've obviously been caught in the lie.

    Now boy, please do some research before you make yourself sound stupid.
    Quote Originally Posted by T-6005 View Post
    I do no be following, fortune prick me if I do no.

  5. #5


    Default

    You don't see me trying to bash you , I asked nicely , why people think Bush
    started the war , I want my answer before you see me unleash my Rage.

    I don't believe anything John Kerry says , he's always changing his mind on
    certain issues and you must be stupid thinking that a person who changes
    his mind all the time on certain issues would be a good president. Ha!

    By the way , you seem to know alot about history , answer my question.
    Last edited by TRUSTpunk; 10-31-2004 at 03:58 PM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    272


    Default

    Ow these big paragraphs are hurting my brain.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cascadian Exile
    Posts
    19,591


    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TRUSTpunk
    why people think Bush
    started the war ,
    Impossible to tell. I would guess for oil/easier support for Israel/to flex the military muscle of the US in the eyes of the world/if it succeeded it would prove that Neo-Liberal economic policies actually work. But they don't.
    Quote Originally Posted by T-6005 View Post
    I do no be following, fortune prick me if I do no.

  8. #8


    Default

    Good point , either way , I hope that America doesn't get fucked.

    No hard feelings man , I wasn't saying that everything I said was true when
    I told you about Weapons Mass Destruction , thats just a guess. Later!
    Last edited by TRUSTpunk; 10-31-2004 at 04:29 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    shitville
    Posts
    768


    Default

    Kerry sucks, but bush is more of an asshole. Vote for who's kerry, he's less of a jerk off asshole motherfucker killer liar, because bush and hitler are the same shit different diaper. I'm am anarchist but I insist people get bush out of office, because we don't need an excuse for revenge on what happened when his dad was in office. Bush HAS a bush.
    I hate myself....Irony is fucked

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    132


    Default

    I think I mentioned this before yesterday........................

    Think of it this way
    Bin Laden is still alive and still healthy
    Bush said we'd get Bin Laden within 2 or 3 years on September 11th
    Bush didn't do his job.
    Last edited by jimmyjimjimz; 11-01-2004 at 09:33 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •