Kerry or Bush??

Kerry or Bush for US President??

  • Kerry

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Bush

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No interest to Vote

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Status
Not open for further replies.

carna

-member-
-member-
Joined
Aug 8, 2004
Messages
208
Location
Paris
No interest to vote. I can not see the link with the website and the forum, sorry ^^... I think it is totally OT
 

CookieMoses

-member-
-member-
Joined
Aug 12, 2004
Messages
847
Location
La Ville de la Nouvelle-Orléans
I don't agree with voting anywho, !BUT! IF I were to choose, I'd pick Mickey Mouse.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. ;)
 

navate

-member-
-member-
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
3,716
Location
nj : usa
I'll quote my teacher on this one in regards to the intelligence department: "Vote for English. Vote for Kerry."

I myself am a moderate, and dispise both of them (and politicians in general)--but I'd rather give Kerry a chance than let Bush continue to be a royal screwup. So, there's my vote. Besides, on the moral issue, Kerry is heading in a better direction for my tastes--gay marriage, abortion, etc. Bush is a good guy and all, but he SUCKS as a leader. He is way too religion-imposing and self-righteous. That's where things like power tend to get dangerous.

Plus, you know, the fact that he refuses to back out the the Iraqi war, which should never have happened in the first place because no idiot in their right mind would try to impose democracy on a country completel bereft of it, while all this time he should have concentrated on the REAL problem in the ME--Israel vs. Palestine-- but instead has ignored it,.... kinda makes me angry.


PS--if you are of legal age to vote, and don't--please don't ever let me hear you complain about anything political. Ever.
 

flowersofnight

-moderator-
-moderator-
Joined
Aug 4, 2004
Messages
13,919
Location
Vintage Live House, 1994
navate wrote:
Besides, on the moral issue, Kerry is heading in a better direction for my tastes--gay marriage, abortion, etc. Bush is a good guy and all, but he SUCKS as a leader. He is way too religion-imposing and self-righteous. That's where things like power tend to get dangerous.

Those are the issues that I disagree with Bush on too. But religion-imposing doesn't really hold up under the Constitution, so we're safeguarded from Bush's bad "moral policy" choices. We don't have any such protection from Kerry's bad foreign policy choices...

Plus, you know, the fact that he refuses to back out the the Iraqi war, which should never have happened in the first place

What do you propose we do? We can't just pack up and leave overnight... that's the one thing we could do to 100% guarantee more instability in the region.
 

navate

-member-
-member-
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
3,716
Location
nj : usa
flowersofnight wrote:
What do you propose we do? We can't just pack up and leave overnight... that's the one thing we could do to 100% guarantee more instability in the region.
Problem is, we're going to have to leave sometime, and it's most likely going to be with our tails between our legs. We can NOT win this. We'll have to occupy Iraqi for about a decade before there's even a chance we can leave them to themselves and not risk the immediate rising of a new dictator. That region has been ruled by chaos for hundreds and thousands of years. Big bad USA stepping in and telling the children to calm down and behave isn't going to change anything. Since we got involved in the ME, terrorism has increased along with animosity towards America throughout the entire world. We've perpetuated the problem by scattering the terrorists--they're not united under anyone, and each group works on its own. No Hussein being toppled or Bin Laden being killed is going to lessen the threat. In case you haven't noticed, the violence is increasing--in Iraqi, in US military casualties, in civilian casualties, in terrorist-victims around the world--every month. And the people we're trying to liberate only resent us for it. Would you look kindly on a nation that stepped in the middle of your fight and took over and won for you, unasked, simply because they believe you were too incompetent to do so yourself? What is freedom worth if you can't win it yourself? Democracy has to be achieved, not imposed--and that's another thing. Who says democracy is right? The Middle East is the Middle East, not North America. Just because we have the power to barge in on their affairs and control the future of their country doesn't mean we have a right to do so... or that what we're are doing is right. We're so caught up in our own superiority that we forget we're not the only culture living in this world.

Sooner or later, a dictator is STILL going to surface and overturn--or worse, bastardize--what feeble foundations of "western civility" we've lain down. The next dictator will most likely be a religious leader. I prefer Saddam. A non-religious tyrant can never hope to hold as much sway as the speaker of their god.

We will leave sooner or later... a year from now, five years from now. It makes no difference--only in how many more lives will be lost, how many more billons spent, how many more terrorists egged on. It won't end, and it won’t solve anything worthwhile. If you think an outside nation can step in and solve an entire region's unbroken history of strife and hatred towards one another... you need to think a little harder.

Which goes back to what I said before. If anything, we should be spending all this time and effort of the real problem--Israel and Palestine. Iraq is meaningless. There was no legitimate reason for us to go there...and countless reasons to pay attention to Israel. But we didn't. Bush cries wolf with nonexistent WMDs, and we're off. And we're not getting out without getting hurt. It's just a question, now of how much we want to be limping when we come home.

Wow, I talked a lot. Sorry. Off to bed now. Politics make me sleepy.
 

LejuN

-member-
-member-
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
1,616
Ehh... this topic is getting scary.

Anyway, Navate, you bring up many good points about that region. I have to wonder why you would mention Isreal under the same breath, though. I would imagine it is not our duty to meddle in that affair as well. I mean, the UN definitely needs to find a time and place to step within some of the more viscious acts that may be taking place (human and moral rights always getting in the way ><//), but as far as most of that region goes, it is all taking places behind extreme religious loyalties, for thousands of years, and there is nothing we are really going to accomplish in the end by swaying the outcome for one or another. The middle east, as much as I hate to say it, should be under a very watchful eye, possibly some aid, but ultimately left alone :/

+LejuN+
 

Anonymous

Guest
I'm really sorry people but I think it would be best to lock this topic because it really isn't what we should be dealing with here too. I understand that it's of a lot of interest to some of you but this is not the place for it.

(although I was pleasantly surprised by the nice level of discussion - thanks for that)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top