Which is the lesser of two evils?

[ToughOmbre]

Originally Posted by Soundbreaker Welch?

Maybe Hilary will show us a sweeter and softer side of the Presidency it has never known.

"Sweeter" and "softer" are two adjectives that can never be applied to that....................... "woman".

TO

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by ccheese

Hey Matt..... we are at war !! Our young men are dying every day.
and what for ?

Charles

Yeah but she will start a new war every month if you know what I mean.

[Aussie1001]

so if hillary gets in she would be the first female president correct ???
BTW will some one plese tell me the differnce between a republican and a democrat ?????

[renrich]

Aussie, I don't know what the corresponding political parties are in Australia but in the UK the Labor party would equate to the democrat party in the US and the Conservative Party would be roughly the same as the Republican Party. The reason we are in Iraq, regardless of how it has been handled, was, I believe, in the beginning because Tony Blair and George Bush believed that Saddam had WMDs and there was a good chance Islamic terrorists would get their hands on them. Saddam was a destablilising influence in the oil rich middle east and because oil fuels the economies of the modern world that was another reason to take him out. Now that a power vacuum has been created in Iraq, we must stay until the Iraqui government is stable and able to defend itself, most likely, like in Korea, for many years. We are stuck with being the world's policeman, just as Britain was in the18th and 19th centuries. The war with Islamic terrorists will continue to go on for many years, maybe centuries and if we relax, we will pay a terrible price. Just my opinion. Speaking of Britain as the world's policeman as we are today puts me in mind of this verse. While it's Tommy this and Tommy that an Tommy, ow's your soul?" But it's "Please to walk in front, sir when there's trouble in the wind- There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind, O it's "Please to walk in front, sir' when there's trouble in the wind! Our soldiers are the Tommies of the 18th and 19th centuries.

[Soundbreaker Welch?]

Just one thing i assume hillary is bill clintons wife ????

Bill Clinton would be First Gentleman.

[Matt308]

Originally Posted by ccheese

Hey Matt..... we are at war !!
Charles

Thanks for pointing out the bleeding obvious.

Why are we at war ccheese? You want the truth, I'll give it to you. Saddam was a tyrant that introduced instability in a country with the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world, he was willing to kill his own citizens with WMDs, pursued advances in WMDs, flaunted his hatred of the US (and the world), offered terrorist's families rewards for US citizens killed, ignored UN mandates, shot at UN sanctioned troops enforcing UN mandates, convinced the world that his pursuits of destructive ambitions were unabated, his country was a prime location to base further efforts in destroying Al Qaeida, was a logical location to introduce stability in the middle of a den of anti-western philosophy, was a slap in the face for radical islam forcing them to take the fight in their backyard instead of mine, etc. Other than that not a goddamn thing.

Every US service man or woman's death is a tragedy that I will never forget. But their loss is not in vain and is indicative of the sacrifice that some folks are willing to make to ensure that US interests, security and way of life is not interrupted by violent outside influences. I look my kids in the eyes every morning and hope like hell that they don't have to experience war. I also have asked myself if I would be bitter if my own sons chose to defend this current effort. And with heavy heart, I would.

This is a religous war. Not politically correct, but that is my belief. And historically, if you don't get on a side during a religious war, you are either spoils of the victor or fodder for the loser.

[mkloby]

Originally Posted by Aussie1001

so if hillary gets in she would be the first female president correct ???
BTW will some one plese tell me the differnce between a republican and a democrat ?????

Much of the democratic party has been pushing for strong socialist reforms in the US. They might as well acknowledge this and declare themself an outright socialist party.

Republicans, for the most part, favor more of a capitalist system - with less government involvement in the provision of various goods and services.

Another major division is republicans (again by and large) oppose abortion and support more strict legislation - while many democrats support an unfettered right for women to abort their children.

THese are just a couple of examples - and you will find individuals in both parties that are on opposite sides of the fence. These are generalizations.

Originally Posted by Matt308

Thanks for pointing out the bleeding obvious.

Why are we at war ccheese? You want the truth, I'll give it to you. Saddam was a tyrant that introduced instability in a country with the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world, he was willing to kill his own citizens with WMDs, pursued advances in WMDs, flaunted his hatred of the US (and the world), offered terrorist's families rewards for US citizens killed, ignored UN mandates, shot at UN sanctioned troops enforcing UN mandates, convinced the world that his pursuits of destructive ambitions were unabated, his country was a prime location to base further efforts in destroying Al Qaeida, was a logical location to introduce stability in the middle of a den of anti-western philosophy, was a slap in the face for radical islam forcing them to take the fight in their backyard instead of mine, etc. Other than that not a goddamn thing.

Every US service man or woman's death is a tragedy that I will never forget. But their loss is not in vain and is indicative of the sacrifice that some folks are willing to make to ensure that US interests, security and way of life is not interrupted by violent outside influences. I look my kids in the eyes every morning and hope like hell that they don't have to experience war. I also have asked myself if I would be bitter if my own sons chose to defend this current effort. And with heavy heart, I would.

This is a religous war. Not politically correct, but that is my belief. And historically, if you don't get on a side during a religious war, you are either spoils of the victor or fodder for the loser.

That was a good explanation, Matt.

[Matt308]

Wish a conservative candidate would just say it. We are too politically correct, I'm afraid. But to question why we make the sacrifices we make is a slap in the face for almost 4,000 VOLUNTEER servicemen, 3000+ civilian lives, and billions of dollars lost by average US investors hoping for a comfortable retirement, college paid for their kids, or perhaps a reward for long hours. But to question why we are at war is incredulous in my eyes. These people would as soon cut my kids throat as attend prayer. Tactically, I believe that we have made the most strategically important move in taking the fight "over there", as opposed to political two-stepping with a ghost entity whose recruitment base is middle-income families from the middle-east and generic-Krapistan countries.

[renrich]

Mighty well said, Matt308. Unfortunately, there are many people in this country who are not as informed or as engaged as you, especially when it comes to the war against terrorism. I am afraid another terror event even more catastrophic than 9-11 is needed to bring our country to it's senses. Either that or a major diminuation of oil supplies so that everyone must cut back on driving. As for the democrat party, most of them are anti-war in Iraq soley because they want to bring the Republican party to it's knees so they can exercise all the political power and hang the consequences.

[ToughOmbre]

Originally Posted by renrich

As for the democrat party, most of them are anti-war in Iraq soley because they want to bring the Republican party to it's knees so they can exercise all the political power and hang the consequences.

Very true

And remember, back in 1991 the senate vote to authorize military force to push Sadaam's army out of Kuwait was 52 for, 47 against. Every nay vote was cast by a Democrat. It was, and still is, a disgrace that the Dems thought it was more important to vote against a Republican president (Bush 41) than to do the right thing.

TO

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by Matt308

Thanks for pointing out the bleeding obvious.

Why are we at war ccheese? You want the truth, I'll give it to you. Saddam was a tyrant that introduced instability in a country with the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world, he was willing to kill his own citizens with WMDs, pursued advances in WMDs, flaunted his hatred of the US (and the world), offered terrorist's families rewards for US citizens killed, ignored UN mandates, shot at UN sanctioned troops enforcing UN mandates, convinced the world that his pursuits of destructive ambitions were unabated, his country was a prime location to base further efforts in destroying Al Qaeida, was a logical location to introduce stability in the middle of a den of anti-western philosophy, was a slap in the face for radical islam forcing them to take the fight in their backyard instead of mine, etc. Other than that not a goddamn thing.

Every US service man or woman's death is a tragedy that I will never forget. But their loss is not in vain and is indicative of the sacrifice that some folks are willing to make to ensure that US interests, security and way of life is not interrupted by violent outside influences. I look my kids in the eyes every morning and hope like hell that they don't have to experience war. I also have asked myself if I would be bitter if my own sons chose to defend this current effort. And with heavy heart, I would.

This is a religous war. Not politically correct, but that is my belief. And historically, if you don't get on a side during a religious war, you are either spoils of the victor or fodder for the loser.

Very well put Matt.

I had two sons in - both jarheads - and sweated them out in 2003-2004 but never believed they were there for stupid reasons.

I'm afraid we do not have the political will in at least 70% of our population to sustain what I believe is the necessary amount of pressure while struggling to find a political solution.

I am not smart enough to see the 'branch' in our future fortunes if we let those bastards prevail in Iraq, but smart enough to know it won't be over.

[Matt308]

Amen

[Njaco]

To answer Aussie and I may get this wrong but someone said that if you are in your 20s and not a Democrat, you don't have a heart...If you're in your 40s and not a Republican, you don't have a brain.

Doesn't matter between Billiary or Obama, if the Dems get in, we become a socialist state.

And if you think the Dems are above all the mockery and banter, Sir Hillary just the other day called Cheney, Darth Vader. I love their compassion.

[renrich]

I fear we are in for at least 4 years with Hillary as president and at least two of that four years with a democrat controlled congress. My only hope is that there will be a rebirth of an energised and viable Republican party as a backlash against the democrat regime!

[ToughOmbre]

I'm putting my faith in the folks (the American people). Hopefully the majority (at least the majority of the electoral college) will see that bitch for what she is, a power-hungry, ambitious, secular-progressive, socialist piece of crap.

TO