Slippery Slope to tyranny

[timesjoke]

 

 

And a "moderator" should moderate. The guy drops his bundle more times than Sixes used to.

 

Just like your refusal to admit a answer was given and accept it, you spend more time making excuses and putting people down than actually paying attention to the debate at hand.

 

 

You demand action, and when you get it, you criticise. Which part of that is insulting? It's insulting to anyone with intelligence. You still don't get it, do you? Didn't think you would.

 

Wrong, you equate the "wrong" and political action as being the same as the "right" action.

 

We demand logical and constitutional action while Obama sets aside our rights and freedoms and does what he pleases even when most of the Country says they don't want his actions like the healthcare bill.

 

Your insult calling people stupid for not accepting Obama's "wrong" actions as "right" proves you really are not interested in honest debate and your instead only wanting to sing like an uninformed canary in support of a socialist.

 

So make a suggestion. What should he do? Lick the oil off the sand, perhaps? Holding a 20 billion dollar downpayment on what is likely to be a clean-up bill of half a trillion is wise business practise. British Petroleum is likely to be sending themselves broke by funnelling cash resources to anywhere they can hide it. Obama would have advisers telling him just what I'm telling you right about now.

 

We are a Nation of laws, how about using the legal system to punnish the guilty and hold responsible the careless as is set forth in existing laws of the land?

 

Breaking the law to extort money from a company just because "you think" they may run out, or hide their money is not supported by the laws of the land. That is a loss of freedoms when someone like Obama sets himself above our system of laws.

 

Meaning whom? The brits? Or your own regulatory bodies?

 

I am using english, meaning anyone who is responsible, it seems logical that the regulatory was way, way too comfy with the industry, several should go to jail in my opinion. They are more responsible then BP, BP was leesing the rig, they did not own it, but the regulatory people were always in charge of making sure the rig was safe.

 

 

Crap analogy. Read that back to yourself. Makes no sense to me.

 

Not crap, dead on, Obama is wasting time building up this slush fund and trying to make political points and none of that directly addresses the problem. Obama even completely ignored the experts that said shutting down oil production was a bad idea, why ask the experts their advise if Obama is just going to ignore them and do whatever he wants anyway?

 

 

Name these "middle of the road democrats" please.

 

So do you admit Obama has more than your example? You ask questions then when your given the answers you seem to do everything you can to dodge the negative results your scared to admit to.

 

Anyway before I answer your question I have to say you seem horribly uninformed about the political points your attempting to make, how can you talk down your nose about this czar issue when you don't even know that even fellow Democrats are concerned about how far Obama has reached? Try reading this and educate yourself a little if you want to toss stones at our system.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/02/25/25greenwire-byrd-questions-obamas-use-of-policy-czars-9865.html

 

He's certainly not illegally invading other countries, if that's what you meant.

 

According to who? Does your tiny and insignificant Country dictate laws and policies of America? Last time I checked we made our own decisions and America even saved your Country in The Battle of the Coral Sea where we stopped Japan from taking destroying Australia, so how about showing a tad bit of respect for the only Nation to save your asses?

 

 

How is demanding money from a complete fukk-up foriegn national oil company eroding your personal freedom as an American citizen, Times?

 

For starters it artifically drives up the cost of oil products but I am an American and I don't have to be personally damaged to have the right to say something done by Obama is wrong. As I already pointed out, we are a Nation of laws, if BP did something wrong then there is a system of laws to follow, Obama went outside of those laws because he feels himself above those laws. And if someone like that is being abusive in one way, he will do it in other ways as well.

 

 

What is your point Buildre? That is a guy kills your neighbor it does not bother you because you are alive?

 

 

 

Not at all. I'm citing the past to put the present into perspective for you.

 

No, your trying to divert attention away from what is happening in the here and now.

 

What Bush did or did not do is irrelivent to what is right or wrong now. Obama is his own man and took the job, now he is responsible for what he does, it is lame to the extreme to try and claim Obama doing wrong now is okay just because you think Bush did something wrong in the past.

 

Ever hear two wrongs don't make a right?

 

20 freedoms??? You mentioned three, of which, none are directly affecting you, except for taxation. Were you one of those that benefited from Bush's tax breaks for the wealthy?

 

Nice dodge attempt but I don't fall for that kind of childish tactic.

 

Why are you completely ignoring the points made of real harms and broken rights by trying to divert attention to a previous President? Either Obama is doing this or he is not, you have not offered one defense to the actions not being wrong so obviously you admit that Obama has taken away rights and now your trying to justify that by saying it is okay because in your opinion, Bush did something similar.

 

Again, I go back to the promises of "change". Even if you were right in your comparison (but your not) Obama said himself he would not do what other Presidents did, he promised "change" and "hope" as well as a completely new Washington where people worked together.

 

Stop being a blind supporter of anything Obama does and be strong enough to admit the point that has been made, otherwise you prove your not interested in honest debate.

 

And my point has been made. Don't buy the health insurance. Eat well, and excercise. If you are obese and unhealthy, blame Obama. It's all his fault.

 

Again, your uninformed about what your trying to talk about and it makes you seem foolish.

 

The purchase of health insurance is mandatory, if you don't buy it, your hit with a heavy fine, the same is true for emplouyers, Obama made it mandatory and if the employers do not do it, they also pay the fines.

 

 

 

The thin edge of the wedge? Oldest argument in the book. You just don't like change, do you?

 

Suggest a fairer system.

 

The system we had before the socialists started turning it on it's ear.

 

I don't mind change, but I detest change for the sake of change. Some people like you seem to love change even if it makes everything worse, I tend to be more logical and only embrace the change that brings improvements.

 

 

I get it. You're not so good at maths. When was the last time you had to actually labour for money?

 

Insults?

 

And what exactly does "you had to actually labour for money" mean?

 

I don't understand what you were trying to say but I have my MBA and I run a couple companies to include being a general contractor and I also own a HVAC business so I understand math very well, especially the taxes I pay part.

 

 

A vague example without any detail or factual evidence. Just more random generalisations. Not acceptable in a debate scenario, and you admitted that yourself a few posts ago. Try again.

 

Vague?

 

It was a very specific example of Obama taking $20 billion and creating a slush fund giving him full discretionary spending out of that fund without oversight, how much more specific can someone get?

 

You are not being truthful Builder, you just done have a good answer for the points so your trying to dodge them.

 

 

 

That's funny, because Howard is from your side of the fence. A ratbag conservative willing to place landmines on the border.

 

 

Not funny, he never represented America in any way, shape, or form. This story is a prime example of how you guys try to put down America for trying to stop millions of illegals from invading America but you guys cry over a couple hundred. You don't have an illegal problem, we get more illegals in an hour than your Country gets in a year so stop pointing your finger at us when by comparison, your a lot less accepting of illegals than America is.

 

While the flow of drugs over your Mexican border puts money in the coffers of your so-called intelligence agency, don't expect the traffic to stop, people or otherwise. Face facts buddy, money speaks louder than words.

 

Again, nice attempt at deflection but as much as you like to claim some things do not belong in a honest debate, deflection and avoiding the point is also not an honest debate style. Australia turned away 443 people who needed help, you clearly defend your coast against illegals, but you point your finger at America?

 

Easy answer. Stop wasting trillions trying to play world cop, and focus on your own backyard. Or is that to hard a pill to swallow?

 

More deflection I see.

 

You again refuse to admit the point and try to divert attention away from being proven wrong. But I will not dodge your comment as you dodge mine, sure we sometimes play world cop, but playing world cop saved aven Australia so without someone like America being willing to get involved, you would not now have the cooshy life you live. You own America your life, and all you can do is insult us and put down the same policies that saved your Country from distruction.

 

You wouldn't know, buddy. We get your news, but you don't get ours.

 

Did I not just post the story about you guys turning away over 300?

 

The wonderful thing about the internet is I can look directly at even your own sources:

http://australia.gov.au/topics/immigration

 

No, you do not have an illegal problem, in fact you guys have such a small issue with illegals you stopped calling them illegals, lol. Information like this is very easy to get:

http://www.immi.gov.au/managing-australias-borders/detention/_pdf/immigration-detention-statistics-20100528.pdf

 

So when I speak about Australis having no illegal problems to speak of, I know what I am talking about because I take the time to educate myself on the facts while your stuck not knowing anything about the things your trying to address about America.

 

 

 

 

Resistance is useless. Wall to wall democrats, as RaE pointed out. Get used to it.

 

So these liberals/socialists are really the Borg?

 

 

 

Now, back to my question concerning a claim you made talking to eddo.

 

 

Again, the NG is on duty elsewhere. This came to light after Katrina.

 

You took IWS to task for refusing to offer proof to his claims so now I ask you to do the same thing. You claim that there are no National Guard to work the border because they are all on duty "elsewhere". Please provide proof of that claim, don't just vomit up something so foul and run away from it, either what you said is true or a lie, now stand up to what you said Builder.

[builder]

Too long. Didn't read.

 

But I can understand why you end up talking to yourself, TJ.

 

To paraphrase all I've uttered here,

• 
  [ ]I did not enter this thread until the soopa mod mentioned my name
  [ ]Your negativity towards your prez means whatever he does, he's done the wrong thing in your book.
  [ ]Border breaches have been a major problem since your forebears established the US. Obama inherited the issue from all previous administrations. I've asked you what you would do, but you have no answers.
  [ ]While the drug trade is worth billions of dollars, and your own secret service is party to that trade, you don't have a hope in hell of stopping the "invasion".
  [ ]The most popular US president in decades happens to be from the other team, so you and your ilk are hellbent on belittling his efforts to change what was a supremely corrupt system. And you have the gall to say he's stealing your freedom? Pathetic is what you are.
  [ ]George W Bush dragged your collective reputation into the gutter as a nation. Obama is well liked internationally. Let him get on with the job he was voted in to do. Your repubs don't have a viable alternative, and the elections aren't far away now. Get used to bitching about it.
  [ ]Check the news. No mention of the rants you and IWS are fixated on. You're on your own dudesses.
  

[builder]

Oh, and what exactly did you learn from this link of your?

 

 

Immigration

Applications and forms - Visas, Immigration and Refugees

 

Department of Immigration and Citizenship index page linking to online and printable applications, information forms and booklets. Includes information on fees and charges, and health and character requirements for visa applications.

 

http://www.immi.gov.au/allforms/index.htm

Australia needs skills recruitment expos

 

Department of Immigration and Citizenship Index page for information on the Australia Needs Skills expo program. Includes links to information on previous expos & Exhibitors.

 

http://www.immi.gov.au/skillexpos/index.htm

Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC)

 

The Department of Immigration and Citizenship provides information and application forms for migration to Australia, and information about settling in Australia, Australian citizenship, and multicultural affairs.

 

http://www.immi.gov.au/

Face the facts : some questions and answers about Indigenous peoples, migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers

 

Face the Facts education resource is designed to complement the material in the Face the Facts publication and forms a part of the Australian Human Rights Commission's human rights education program. The activities are suitable for use in a range of key learning areas for secondary students across Australia. Teaching notes, student activities and worksheets are provided, plus a range of recommended online resources and further reading.

 

http://www.humanrights.gov.au/education/face_facts/index.html

Information booklets

 

Department of Immigration and Citizenship booklets designed to help you understand who qualifies to migrate to Australia, and how to make an application. Information booklets are far more detailed than information forms and describe the procedures to follow for migration or some temporary entry visas.

 

http://www.immi.gov.au/allforms/booklets/booklets.htm

Information for Australian employers

 

Help for Australian employers in their dealings with people in Australia who are in the country temporarily and who wish to work. Includes links to the Visa Entitlement Verification Online (VEVO) for organisations, employer obligations and an easy guide on how to check whether prospective employees are entitled to work in Australia.

 

http://www.immi.gov.au/managing-australias-borders/compliance/info-employers/index.htm

Managing Australia's borders

 

The Managing Australia's Borders section will help you find information about securing Australia's borders, entry requirements for travelling to Australia and how the department prevents illegal entry into Australia.

 

http://www.immi.gov.au/managing-australias-borders/

Migration agents

 

You do not need to use a migration agent to lodge any kind of visa application or asylum claim. However, if you do not feel confident in lodging an application, or if your case is complex, you may want to use a migration agent to help you.

 

http://www.immi.gov.au/visas/migration-agents/index.htm

New Zealanders in Australia

 

New Zealanders in Australia is a fact sheet produced by the Australian Department of Immigration and Citizenship detailing visa, access to benefits and citizenship issues relating to New Zealanders in Australia, and some relevant statistics.

 

http://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/17nz.htm

Settlement grants programme

 

Department of Immigration and Citizenship information about the Settlement Grants Programme (SGP), a Federal Government grant programme which provides funding to organisations to help new arrivals settle in Australia.

 

http://www.immi.gov.au/living-in-australia/delivering-assistance/settlement-grants/

Statistics [immigration]

 

Index page for statistical information from the Department of Immigration and Citizenship. It links to statistical publications, detention statistics and a glossary of statistical terms. It also has links to community information summaries and other statistical information.

 

http://www.immi.gov.au/media/statistics/

[timesjoke]

Too long. Didn't read.

 

But I can understand why you end up talking to yourself, TJ.

 

Funny as hell Builder, your post was just as long and I answered every point from you line by line but your "too good" to do the same thing? Answering line by line is beneath you but you can do it to someone else? You took IWS to task for refusing to answer direct questions but you DODGE the same number of questions you ask of me? You sir seem to be a chickensh!t, you want to toss insults and ask what you think are brilliant questions but once I shoot down your every attempt and prove you are not even informed about the American politics your trying to look down your nose at, you run away and talk trash?

 

 

Now, if you want to turn tail and dodge the many points as you called IWS out on then fine, you can be a hypocrite as most socialists do tend to be, but don't think your impressing me or anyone else with your garbage.

 

 

 

How about this, why not address this one question if the rest are just too difficult for you, I have asked this question to you three times now, let's see if your man enough to stand up to your own words:

 

 

 

 

Again, the NG is on duty elsewhere. This came to light after Katrina.

 

You took IWS to task for refusing to offer proof to his claims so now I ask you to do the same thing. You claim that there are no National Guard to work the border because they are all on duty "elsewhere". Please provide proof of that claim, don't just vomit up something so foul and run away from it, either what you said is true or a lie, now stand up to what you said Builder.

[builder]

Arizona ranchers site

 

The Arizona Cattlemen’s Association, (ACA) — hit hard by the brutally shocking death of one of their own after Arizona rancher Robert Krentz was killed on his property on March 27 — is demanding a militarized response to the porous southern border.

 

“It’s time for people to awaken and see the foreign invasion,” said association member Basilio Aja. “We feel like we have been abandoned. We’ve been crying out for 10 years and no one has listened. We have the laws we need. They just need to be enforced.”

 

“If we had 2,500 National Guard troops on the border to protect the boundary and provided them with the equipment and technology that equals what the cartels have, there would be a difference,” Aja said. “We want a military response. We want our border protected. And really, another result of shutting down the border will be of benefit to our fellow Mexican ranchers on the other side. They have to submit to the aggression of these criminals, too, who use their land for bases of operations.”

 

The group is crafting an 18-point plan which will be called Restore Our Border (ROB) as a tribute to Krentz.

 

This past Sunday morning, there was another home invasion near the Arizona-Mexico border. According to the ACA, border patrol agents were able to catch the suspected illegal aliens believed to be responsible.

 

Syndicated columnist Michelle Malkin reports that today, April 13, Arizona ranching families will gather at the state Capitol to demand action to secure our border. For 18 months southern Arizona ranchers have been meeting with local officials to improve conditions.

 

We’ve heard the rhetoric. It’s long past time for action. Our hearts and prayers are with Arizona’s ranching community. Perhaps these dedicated people can accomplish what Sens. John McCain and Jon Kyl have so glibly only given lip service to.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

No mention of your dodgy Australian "immigration" link, TJ?

 

Why am I not surprised. :lol:

[timesjoke]

Oh no you don't there big mouth.

 

You said there was no National Guard to send because "the NG is on duty elsewhere".

 

 

Your words, not mine, now back that claim up.

 

 

 

Yes, many people have been asking for the Federal Government to help with the border issues but the program and fences Bush signed into law were defunded by Obama. If Obama would just stop blocking the funds we could make huge improvements to the border issues. No, nothign will ever be a 100% solution, but I believe doing nothing has already been proven to not help.

 

 

 

 

And what the heck are you talking about on "dodgy" link? I assume dodgy is australian for not working right but I clicked on both links in my post and they work fine for me, maybe there is something "dodgy" about your internet looking at local links?

[builder]

 

 

And what the heck are you talking about on "dodgy" link? I assume dodgy is australian for not working right but I clicked on both links in my post and they work fine for me, maybe there is something "dodgy" about your internet looking at local links?

 

I listed every word of your link you weirdo.

 

Nothing to back up your bullshit there.

 

________________________________________________________

 

[attach=full]2832[/attach]

 

Heheheheheh

 

The President doesn't formally deploy National Guard troops himself, what he can agree to do is pay their costs under Title 32 if requested by the state.

 

“The White House is doing the right thing,” said U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) who called for the Guard’s deployment “Arizonans know that more boots on the ground means a safer and more secure border. Washington heard our message.”

 

“The fulfillment of my request is a clear sign that this administration is beginning to take border security seriously,” said Giffords.

 

Within moments of the announcement by the White House, Arizona Senator John McCain said that “it’s simply not enough,” and stressed that 6,000 troops were needed. Part of the problem, McCain argued, is that it will take time to train the National Guard troops once they get to the border.

---------------------------------------------------------

 

Six thousand troops is what Bush sent. But they weren't to use their weapons under his command. Heheheheheh

[timesjoke]

Again, you dodged the question.

 

 

"YOU" said "the NG is on duty elsewhere".

 

 

Now back that statement up, or did you just tell a lie?

 

 

 

I am an informed american, I know what the President has the power to do and what he does not have the power to do, he issued a command to send 1,200 troops, that means he can send 20,000 troops "IF HE WANTS TO".

 

 

Of course a fellow Democrat kissed Obama's azz and praised the tiny number that Obama agreed to send, but that is not enough. There are warnings on American soil warning Americans not to travel in certain American owned areas because it is too dangerious for Americans, now is that not a shame that Americans have to be scared of being on American soil because of invading Mexicans?

 

 

 

You cry because we are putting down Obama for not doing enough, and you can't refute the "FACT" that Obama is not in fact doing enough, all you try to do is try and justify why Obama refuses to take action, and there is no justification under logic why an American President would intentionally ignore this massive problem. Those of us who care about America complain because as Americans that is our right to be vocal about the things we do not agree with. That is one of the rights that make being an American great.

 

 

 

So get off your high horse and stop being a blind supporter of everything socialist, the least you can do is educate yourself on the things your commenting on, you look pretty stupid when you coment on things like "don't buy the insurance" when under the law, you "must" buy the insurance or the IRS will go after you and take the money it would have cost anyway.....There is no choice, that was my point that choices are taken away by force.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lastly, what does any of this have to do with Bush? The problem is here now, Bush signed a bill that was defunded by Obama, Obama has all the power now, everything that is done, and everything that is blocked is the responsibility of the Obama administration. Each time you try to blame Bush you prove that your not interested in debating actual events but instead your just trying to play blocker and defender of the socialist mindset.

[hugo]

Six thousand troops is what Bush sent. But they weren't to use their weapons under his command. Heheheheheh

Even Barney Fife got one bullet.

[builder]

Again, you dodged the question.

 

 

"YOU" said "the NG is on duty elsewhere".

 

 

Now back that statement up, or did you just tell a lie,

 

Check your own history, weirdo.

 

 

NG and shrub

 

 

 

President George W Bush last night sent thousands of troops to the Mexican-US frontier in an eye-catching gesture to tighten border security and raise the morale of his mutinous conservative supporters.

 

In a sign of the passions raging over immigration, Mr Bush told the nation of his initiative in a prime-time address from the Oval Office, his first on domestic policy in his five and a half years in the White House

 

Senior Republicans and Democrats have expressed concern that the deployment will place fresh strains on the National Guard, given its commitments in Iraq and responsibilities for combating natural disasters on US soil.

 

"We've got National Guard members on their second, third and fourth tours in Iraq," said Chuck Hagel, a senior Republican senator. "We have stretched our military as thin as we have ever seen it in modern times."

 

 

Lastly, what does any of this have to do with Bush? The problem is here now, Bush signed a bill that was defunded by Obama, Obama has all the power now, everything that is done, and everything that is blocked is the responsibility of the Obama administration. Each time you try to blame Bush you prove that your not interested in debating actual events but instead your just trying to play blocker and defender of the socialist mindset.

 

It has everything to do with the shrub because he did jack shite about this immigration issue for five and a half years of his time in power (for lack of a better descriptor).

 

What was the bill he signed, and how late in his fading insignificant time in office did he sign it?

 

Oh, and while we are on the issue of answering for what we type here, go back to my first post in this thread, and get your left-hand man IWS to answer my questions, or at least apologize for the only question he answered with a wrong link disproving his claim.

 

Just like your lazy answers with crap links that proved absolutely nothing.

 

Ya weirdo. B)

[builder]

And here's the real slippery slope to tyranny;

 

Illegal wiretapping.

 

The no-fly-list.

 

The illegal invasion of Iraq, a soveriegn nation, killing and maiming how many American people?

Not to be forgetting erasing a country's infrastructure and polluting the whole country with depleted uranium, while killing tenfold more Iraqis, and sending hundreds of thousands of them to hide in other countries.

 

The declaring of the War on Terror, meaning a war without end, resulting in perpetual government, because you can't call an election when the nation is at "war".

 

Nice try, Dick.

 

Spending over a trillion dollars, mostly through Cheney's Halliburton, supposedly "rebuilding" Iraq. and through private "security" firms. For christ's sake, you have how many hundreds of thousands of soldiers and national guard stationed in Iraq, and you have to employ "security". Just how untrained are the military, if you have to employ "security" to watch over them?????

 

But wait, there's more.......

[Anna Perenna]

And here's the real slippery slope to tyranny;

 

Illegal wiretapping.

 

The no-fly-list.

 

The illegal invasion of Iraq, a soveriegn nation, killing and maiming how many American people?

Not to be forgetting erasing a country's infrastructure and polluting the whole country with depleted uranium, while killing tenfold more Iraqis, and sending hundreds of thousands of them to hide in other countries.

 

The declaring of the War on Terror, meaning a war without end, resulting in perpetual government, because you can't call an election when the nation is at "war".

 

Nice try, Dick.

 

Spending over a trillion dollars, mostly through Cheney's Halliburton, supposedly "rebuilding" Iraq. and through private "security" firms. For christ's sake, you have how many hundreds of thousands of soldiers and national guard stationed in Iraq, and you have to employ "security". Just how untrained are the military, if you have to employ "security" to watch over them?????

 

But wait, there's more.......

 

Another thing of more concern to me than the Constitution (sorry Hugo, you know I'm not a fan) is the fact that the World Cup is distracting a lot of people from the real news, ie the rapidly escalating tensions between North and South Korea, and between Iran and the USA / Israel.

 

There are rumours, apparently leaked by the US, of Saudi Arabia allowing Israel an "air corridor" through which to potentially fast-track an attack on Iran.

 

And right now US warships, including the aircraft carrier Harry S. Truman, escorted by one or more nuclear submarines and other warships carrying missiles and cannons, are moving towards the Iranian coast via the Suez Canal. This movement is accompanied by Israeli military ships, carrying equally sophisticated weaponry, intended to supervise any vessel involved in the import or export of commercial products required by the Iranian economy for its operations.

 

The Navy Commander of the elite Corps of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution, General Ali Fadavi, has issued a warning: "if the United States and its allies inspect Iranian ships in international waters ‘they will have their response in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz'". The General has also stated "the Navy of the Revolutionary Guardians currently has hundreds of vessels equipped with missile launchers".

 

But much like the sophisticated mine planted on the Korean flagship Chenoan, designed to provoke conflict between North and South Korea, I foresee a provocation from the US / Israel, trying to instigate a "first strike" from Iran.

[Anna Perenna]

The point is the abuse of power, your right that there are other great discussions that can be had but answer me a question........why do you think you should try and "STOP" this discussion?

 

I don't feel I should try and stop it - why do you ASSUME that?

 

I simply asked WHY this ASPECT was so IMPORTANT to the people debating the topic. I then pointed out the things I thought were more important about the issue at hand.

 

Because I wanted to DISCUSS it on a DEBATE forum.

 

 

Why not take those other topics you mentioned and start some new threads to discuss those things also?

 

Well, considering this topic is about the BP oil spill, I thought I'd mention it here. It makes perfect sense for me to discuss other aspects of the BP oil spill in the BP oil spill thread - doesn't it?

 

Why don't you take your own point - why don't you make a whole different topic about me supposedly wanting to stop this discussion in another thread?

 

Because your not really interested in those other things, your just trying to create an excuse to take shots at people.

 

No, I'm pretty sure that's what YOU are doing right now. Not me.

 

This is a great discussion to an America because freedoms are the thing we are founded in, there are still a few people who live here who see these freedoms as important and when someone like Obama comes along and tears down those freedoms that small number of us who feel they are important become vocal about it.

 

And that's all anyone needed to say in reply to my very first question.

 

It's pretty much what Hugo explained previously, without needing to get into a petty 'fight' with me about it.

 

Which pretty much sums up why I love and respect Hugo, and I still struggle to get along with you and IWS.

[hugo]

[but much like the sophisticated mine planted on the Korean flagship Chenoan, designed to provoke conflict between North and South Korea, I foresee a provocation from the US / Israel, trying to instigate a "first strike" from Iran.

 

 

Pat Buchanan:

 

Unlike 1950, when we faced a Soviet empire storming down the Korean peninsula, there is no vital U.S. interest in Korea today to justify sending another army of 350,000 men to fight a second Korean War. And as the new South Korean regime has undercut U.S. policy and is pandering to anti-Americanism, we should tell Seoul all U.S. troops will be out of Korea within two years. If Seoul wishes to play the hand with Pyongyang, let Seoul take the risks.

 

For if a war, conventional or even nuclear, broke out, no vital U.S. interest would be imperiled, so long as no U.S. troops are in South Korea. And no U.S. army should be sent to fight it. South Korea has 30 times the economy and twice the manpower of the North. It is past time Seoul took responsibility for her own defense.

 

Moreover, withdrawal of U.S. forces from the peninsula would moot America's quarrel with the Communist North. An agonizing reappraisal of an Asian policy that dates to John Foster Dulles is overdue.

 

As for Beijing, the Chinese should be told that if they will not assist us in keeping Pyongyang out of the Nuclear Club, the United States will no longer seek to restrain South Korea, Japan or Taiwan from joining that club. Let us withdraw our troops from Asia and let Asia's democracies acquire the same weapons as Asia's communist dictators. Nuclear weapons have raised the price of empire too high.

 

Of course we never had the Korean War, just a conflict, wars have to be declared by Congress.

[hugo]

[but much like the sophisticated mine planted on the Korean flagship Chenoan, designed to provoke conflict between North and South Korea, I foresee a provocation from the US / Israel, trying to instigate a "first strike" from Iran.

 

 

Pat Buchanan:

 

Unlike 1950, when we faced a Soviet empire storming down the Korean peninsula, there is no vital U.S. interest in Korea today to justify sending another army of 350,000 men to fight a second Korean War. And as the new South Korean regime has undercut U.S. policy and is pandering to anti-Americanism, we should tell Seoul all U.S. troops will be out of Korea within two years. If Seoul wishes to play the hand with Pyongyang, let Seoul take the risks.

 

For if a war, conventional or even nuclear, broke out, no vital U.S. interest would be imperiled, so long as no U.S. troops are in South Korea. And no U.S. army should be sent to fight it. South Korea has 30 times the economy and twice the manpower of the North. It is past time Seoul took responsibility for her own defense.

 

Moreover, withdrawal of U.S. forces from the peninsula would moot America's quarrel with the Communist North. An agonizing reappraisal of an Asian policy that dates to John Foster Dulles is overdue.

 

As for Beijing, the Chinese should be told that if they will not assist us in keeping Pyongyang out of the Nuclear Club, the United States will no longer seek to restrain South Korea, Japan or Taiwan from joining that club. Let us withdraw our troops from Asia and let Asia's democracies acquire the same weapons as Asia's communist dictators. Nuclear weapons have raised the price of empire too high.

 

Of course we never had the Korean War, just a conflict, wars have to be declared by Congress.

 

Great post, Hugo. Let me add this.

 

War is just one more big government program. – Joseph Sobran

[timesjoke]

 

Check your own history, weirdo.........

 

Weirdo?

 

History has nothing to do with my question, stop dodging Buildre. You accused IWS of not answering the questions asked and yet here you are doing exactly that.

 

 

Your comment had nothing to do with ancient history, you said we could not respond to our current issues because our National Guard were all deployed eleswhere, now back that up with some facts.....or did you intentionally tell a lie?

 

 

 

 

 

Anna, my point was that we could discuss all sides of the situation if you wanted to without you trying to squash 'this' side of it. You belittled this aspect and went on and on about other things "your felt" were more important. If they were important, why not make a new thread and we could address it? Why do you think it was okay to try and kill this aspect?

[builder]

Read the thread weirdo

 

Stop wasting people's time.

[timesjoke]

 

 

Stop wasting people's time.

 

Your wasting time dodging a direct question, why not just answer the question and be done with it? All this energy and name calling just to avoid taking responsibility for what you said?

 

 

 

Again, the NG is on duty elsewhere. This came to light after Katrina.

 

You took IWS to task for refusing to offer proof to his claims so now I ask you to do the same thing. You claim that there are no National Guard to work the border because they are all on duty "elsewhere". Please provide proof of that claim, don't just vomit up something so foul and run away from it, either what you said is true or a lie, now stand up to what you said Builder.

[builder]

Which part of Read the Thread is giving you so much trouble, weirdo?

[timesjoke]

Which part of Read the Thread is giving you so much trouble, weirdo?

What part of the question is giving you so much trouble Builder?

 

Your words, not mine, you said all the National Guard were deployed and not capable of responding to the border, now stand behind your own words and either back them up or admit you told a lie.

 

 

 

Remember this comment?

 

 

 

Well, Times, we can't get IWS to answer any straight questions, so here's one question for you.

 

So if you ask IWS a direct question, he should respond or you will talk sh!t about him, but if your asked a direct question you see nothing wrong with dancing around and refusing to answer?

 

 

You already proved your hypocrisy by creating a huge line-by-line set of questions for me but when I gave the same thing back to you, you ran away too scared to answer every question the way I answer every question you asked me. I dodge nothing, but clearly you dodge direct questions all the time and have no business trying to point your finger at IWS or anyone else for refusing to answer a question asked you.