Think before you vote...

[Hector]

http://www.authenticgop.com/images/tenback.gif

[troymarkus]

Finally....we agree once again!!

[TrojanHoarse]

"How do you ask a soldier to be the last man to die for a mistake?" John Kerry

How do you ask a soldier to fight for a cause that his Commander-in-Chief says is a mistake? Can John Kerry win the war on terrorism? Let's hold a summitt to find out how.

[TUEngineer]

I will be taking the 45 min drive from Troy to Dothan(hometown) to vote to keep this country from going down the toilet! W'04! :D

[Hector]

Our brothers and sisters in uniform have a long memory, my friends. They remember a radical peacenik John Kerry, who, having hastened his departure from Vietnam by "manufacturing" some doubtful purple hearts, turned the knife in the back of his fellow fighting men by calling them rapists and murderers. Now, is that the kind of man the is fit to be commander-in-chief? Our veterans will remember this affront.

[Lord-Mustang]

My take on this is one primary concern. People keep saying over and over again....Bush Lied to us. Well hell people...Clinton lied about "Sexual Relations" with Monica...to the Senate and the to American people. What was done? Not one damn thing. A lie is a lie is a lie. I'm still voting for Bush. Let's remember one very important thing here about the economy. Bush didn't make the recession....The recession was a product of the years upon years that the Clinton Administration let the economy spin out of control, unmonitored with all the Dot Com crap. If Steve Forbes were running, I'd vote for him. You can't find to many problems with a National Flat Tax and Nationally Provided Health Care.

[yoji]

Clinton lied about "Sexual Relations" with Monica...to the Senate and the to American people.

Clinton's sexual relations lie didn't cause one American to die.

[littlebittyschool]

I don't want the goverment to provide any kind of healthcare for me. Ask folks in Canada and Europe how well their healthcare system works. It's real fun to pay 50% of your income and then die while you're waiting in line for your "free" healthcare.
If their healthcare is so great, why do they all come to the states to get procedures done even though the healthcare in their own countries is "paid for"?

Our government provides flu vaccicne and there is a shortage of it. Botox is provided by private industry and you can get all of that you want. Nothing that the govermnent is in charge of works like it should and you have a hard time if you ever want to change it. Competetion and free market work wonders when the goverment leaves them alone.

[Lord-Mustang]

A Lie is a Lie even if NOBODY dies. And as for the Healthcare issue. Have any of you tried to buy cancer medication lately...that medication that INSURANCE here does NOT pay for...you know that one...it cost $108 per pill and you take 1 a day for 45 days? No...then READ UP ON IT! I believe that, as a nation, we can achieve a great many things. One of them being...getting people off of welfare and into a job. Although a lot of those people say it's easier to stay at home and live off the government then it is to get paid minimum wage at McDonald's and such. I'll go back on my original opinion and make this comment. I think the BEST person who SHOULD serve as president, is a person with NO political ties. I know, I know...easier said than done.

[Sarahbelle]

I'm pretty moderate but because I work in an industry that has been seeing a lot of outsourcing and increase of H1B Visas to non-US citizens during the Bush administration, that makes me lean more left. However, I have very little faith in the abilities of John Kerry. I'll probably draw a name out of a hat on election day. :?

[Troy91]

The most important thing to remember for this election is the terror issue. Who do you think Osama would vote for - Kerry or Bush? I don't agree with everything Bush has done, but, for god's sake, Kerry is certainly not the answer.

[yoji]

A Lie is a Lie even if NOBODY dies.

Our armed forces went into a foreign country to start a war based on false information. Now there is no plan to get them out. These are people 18 years old and not much older. These are college-aged people. Many of the ones who are coming back are mangled for life. Some have lost arms, legs, eyes, etc. Then there are the ones who never come back. They died on foreign soil because our president sent them to die. He said they would protect the U.S. from an imminent threat from WMD's which, as we all know, did not exist. Add to that the administration has barred photos of caskets coming back to the U.S., so it won't remind the good people of America that real people are really dying in a real war.

Meanwhile, Clinton got a blowjob. Does anyone honestly think that's on the same level?

I also worked in an industry that is worse off than it was 4 years ago because of Bush policies. For me, Kerry is the alternative, not the solution. It may be a vote against Bush, but it's how I have to vote. If you are happy with our troops being sent to die, then vote for Bush.

[Sarahbelle]

The only problem I have with the troops sent to die argument is that the troops that are in Iraq signed up and agreed to take that risk to defend our country. Yes, I believe the decision to invade Iraq was made a little too hastily and under false pretense, but I have very little regret at the decision. The world is better with Saddam taken out of power. It's a known fact that Saddam aided abetted terrorist organizations, for this reason alone I feel better about our troops being in Iraq.
So my point is, the people killed on 9/11 weren't given the choice of whether they wanted to die for our country or not, the soldiers in Iraq were.

[yoji]

The world would be better without Iran and North Korea having nukes too. I'm not making excuses for Saddam, but the people that died, did not die defending the U.S. Iraq was of no immediate threat to the U.S. Even Bush's people, including Colin Powell, know this now.

[TUTrojan]

Yoji, perhaps you need to leave the U.S. and go to a country where Big D enjoys David Hasselhoff-type cult status.

The world will be much better off if Iraq is successfully turned into a democracy. The world needed a staging ground for changing the misguided ways of the middle eastern nations that have led to rich dictators keeping uneducated peasants held down with extremist religious beliefs (that they fail to follow themselves). This world will be much better off when the people of the middle east are better off. Remember the old days in our wild west? Desperate native americans were couped up in reservations and facing deplorable conditions. Two things could have prevented them from lashing out at settlers- either killing them all off or improving their standard of living. Unfortunately, more died in battle than were necesary, but the attacks finally stopped. This bout of terrorism will eventually end as well. The quality of life in the middle east will improve, and eventually people will value themselves more and hate us less. The people we lost in Iraq did not die in vain. Check back in 20 years and see for yourself if you can get away from the bong for a while.

How can the United States operate with any measure of diplomacy against an emerging dictator in this world if we have not actually taken any action against people that have constantly conducted violent acts against their own people and neighboring peoples and broken agreements made with us? We can't.

But we should go into North Korea and Iran, even though they have not infringed upon anyone else? We are taking the predetermined courses of action with dealing with them using diplomacy, the UN (what a joke) and nuclear regulatory commissions.

WMD should have never been an issue. Taking out Saddam was the right thing. Your buddy slick Willy could have taken him out instead of just bombing them every time he got caught screwing around.

Any of you understand the concept of public companies, shared ownership, stock prices, taxation rates, labor costs, maximizing shareholder value, etc.? How can our companies survive in a global economy when better, more efficient labor can be obtained in China for 1/10th of the price? Yet Kerry will bring jobs back to America by penalizing these companies with high taxes? Yeah right! They will either leave for good or go under (taking our 401-K's with them)!

[yoji]

First of all TUTrojan, you don't know me, so the bong reference made me lose any respect I might have had for you. Secondly, I don't buy into this "like it or leave it" theory of yours. I happen to like free speech.

Bush Sr. didn't take Saddam out when he had the chance because he knew what the alternative was. Chaos. And for all you history majors out there, Bush Sr. was president before Clinton should have taken Saddam out.

I still cannot be convinced that rushing our troops off to die was the right decision. But I am not here to change anyone's minds either. Seems they have already been made up. I hope none of your ever have to bury a friend or family member because of Bush's decisions to get us into a war with no exit strategy.

That's all I have to say on this subject. If my opinions are going to be met with insults, I'll step aside and you can welcome Big D and the fantasy land in here. He's probably a Bush supporter too.

[TrojanHoarse]

I hope none of your ever have to bury a friend or family member because of Bush's decisions to get us into a war with no exit strategy.

There is an exit strategy in Iraq: hold elections to create a legitimate local government that can write an Iraqi constitution, repair the economic infrastructure destroyed by decades of abuse under a dictator, and train Iraqi soldiers to secure their own country. We are making strides on each of these three pillars every day. An "exit strategy" is not an arbitrary date for withdrawal of troops, an exit strategy is a clear agenda for securing the peace and turning over control to a legitimate local authority. Saying we will begin withdrawal in six months is an invitation to real chaos in Iraq that undermines the steps our soldiers have made in Iraq.

You can have all the free speech in the world yoji, but it doesn't make what you are saying right. We have a clear choice in 18 days. We can elect a leader that our soldiers are proud to serve or one who has called the American Soldier a war criminal reminiscent of Ghengis Khan.

[TrojanHoarse]

THIS IS IRREPREHENSIBLE!!!!!

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/demhate.jpg (alt+p)[/img]

This is not politics, it is childish, tasteless, innappropriate, and disturbing. Bush-Hating is not a reason to support any candidate, and this certainly doesn't inspire me to vote for any Democrat.

[Lord-Mustang]

I'm so tired of the Liberal Bullcrap with the "Freedom of Speech" line. Everyone may have speech freedoms, which might I add, are 90% opinions...but then again...Who asked for them. Bush has done a good job with the hand he was dealt. Should we have just sat around and done nothing when terrorist killed all those people in the World Trade Center? Or do we strike back and show them we aren't going to take it laying down? I say kill those b@st@rds. They are gutless cowards. You may have the right to speak your mind, but don't sit and try to BS me into thinking Kerry is a "BETTER" candidate. He's a turn-coat coward who couldn't face the fact that WE, the United States, being the SuperPower we are...have to be the Worlds Police. Everytime some country has a problem, they expect us to clean up thier mess and move on so they can rebuild it like THEY want, and we aren't suppose to have any say in what happens after the mess is cleaned. What need to happen is the US worry about the US and NOBODY else. No more imports from Japan, no more outsourcing or jobs, no more sending food to Iraq, NO MORE. Let's see how long it would be before they blame us for thier food shortages, or finantial difficulties etc. We may have to but back on things like Petroleum products...but that's fine. We can adjust a heck of alot better than most they can. You say we had no justification to invade Iraq, I say we had EVERY right to. They did not meet the UN's deadline for disarmament and if the UN hadn't been such Pansies...it would have gone much more smoothly. I commend Bush and Blair for the courage to stand up the so called United Nations...Ha...more like "United We Can't Do Squat" and forcing Saddams hand as the resolution stated. If you want to talk fiascos...let's talk about Somalia...which happened under Clinton. Nobody seems to talk about that now do they? You say "Freedom of Speech", ha, I say "Freedom of Facts". Until people set ALL the facts on the table, then it's useless garb.

[yoji]

The freedom of speech comment was in response to the comment that I should like it or leave it.

Also, Iraq didn't have anything to do with 9/11.

[TrojanHoarse]

Iraq didn't have anything to do with 9/11.

Not to bore you with the details, but 9/11 was about more than the hijackers flying planes into three buildings and a pasture, it was a paradigm shifting event in international relations. Since 1989, international relations has been marked by a lack of consensus on the threats which shape global politics. The collapse of the Cold War led to a "post Cold War" period of walking in the wilderness. There were terrorist attacks: U.S. embassies bombed in Africa (by al quaeda), USS Cole bombed in a port in the middle east (by al quaeda), the World Trade Center car bombed (by al quaeda), but in the darkness these seemed like isolated events and we treated them as such, using law enforcement to arrest and try the "criminals".

9/11 turned the lights on and the world realized the scourge of terrorism was a global phenomenon whose appettite for destruction could not be satisfied and we begamn to see the links and the connections. It became clear that a state which supported terrorist activities (like Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, or Syria) could not be contained. Terrorists used these safe havens to strike out against global targets. Saddam was a supporter of terrorist. The 9/11 Commission report noted that Saddam and his government had numerous contacts with Al Quaeda prior to 9/11. They stated, probably correctly, that there no "operational" connection, but that does not mean that there was no support. In addition, Saddam provided funding for terrorist bombings in Israel and allowed several terrorist groups safe have in Iraq. WMD aside, Saddam was a terrorist supporter and could not be allowed to continue with our new understanding of the threats posed by terrorism to the fabric of our lives and the stability of the global architecture.

Iraq may have had little to do with the attacks that occured on 9/11, but they had everything to do with the threat which had been allowed to gather in the post-cold-war world. This threat is the focus of the Global War on Terrorism. GWOT is not just about catching the perpetrators of 9/11, it is about removing terrorist networks as a threat to our way of life. John Kerry does not recognize the severity of this threat. That is why after the first bombing of the WTC, he wrote a bill to slash the funding for the U.S. intelligience community, and it is why in this election he has argued that Iraq was a diversion from fighting UBL. Tommy Franks was right when the President asked him to be sure that Afghanistan was not neglected by the invasion of Iraq, and General Franks responded that Iraq would be the left-flank of the war in Afghanistan and is now a critical battlefield (among many others) int he military-side of GWOT.

[yoji]

I am so happy the smartest minds in the world post here. The 9/11 commission and Bush's own people could find no links, but you can. Other than that good point. :roll:

That's really enough for me. Enjoy.

[TrojanHoarse]

Yoji - before you cite a source....know it. The 9/11 Commission found that there had been links between Al Quaeda and Iraqi government officals going back a decade. The Commission said there were no "operational ties" between Al Quaeda and Iraq in regards to the hijackings on 9/11 only.

As to the "smartest minds" comment you made: Don't underestimate the knowledge of this issue with some people on this board. There have been some other people I have noticed on this board that were on the front line in fighting terrorism and there may even be some people who research/study/advise on foreign policy for a living......................

[TUTrojan]

Yoji, I usually find your posts to be very funny. I enjoy your humor. You being a person who has cracked the psyche of Troy's own rising superpopstar, Big D, I thought you would like the little part about relocating to a bizzaro universe where Big D reigns supreme.

I don't agree with your views on politics, but I do have the same type of disputes with family, friends, etc. One of the benefits of living in this great country is that we can discuss or criticize the government's actions. Frankly, I am worried that not many citizens (on both sides) are objectively studying the facts over time. Many get their political knowledge from the latest media soundbites instead of understanding the broad view of our policies and actions over time...

I hope that we can put all of this politics garbage behind us and concentrate on something more important like figuring out how to get the Trojans playing better football (or at least trying to get the bootleg version of D's upcoming album).

[TrojanFan2]

It's a shame all these debates about the war in Iraq weren't held before we sent the troops in. Now we all sit back and either defend the decision or condemn it. Problem is that we have very little say in major decisions. Congress gives the President special powers so they don't have to do their job which is to discuss/debate and declare war if warranted. President loves the decision because he doesn't have to ask congress for anything. Congress can then sit back and pick at the decisions the President made after the fact.

As a former soldier I never cared where I was sent or whether the cause was just or not. I'd invade Mexico or Canada if that was the mission and destroy everyting in front of me. You fight for your unit and your comrades. However, as a citizen I think our decision process to go to war(s) (Vietnam, Grenada, Honduras, Haiti, Kosovo, Iraq 1&2, etc) is not what was intended in the constitution. If the President is given too much power in waging war it is very easy to have the army go to war but the nation doesn't (aka Vietnam). I'd prefer a full debate in congress that defines our strategic objectives and garners the support of the nation. Then if the decision is made to go to war ---- you unleash HELL! None of this BS that we are now invloved in Iraq. Kill the opposition, occupy the country, turn it back when we are ready. Get Haliburton and and the other contractors that are making millions under control and change the geo-political situation in that part of the world to our favor.

Elections in Iraq??? What happens if they elect some radical that is not friendly to us? Why give them the option? Put in the government we want and after a few years allow them to elect their own officials (aka Marshall plan following WWII)