Text 576, 145 rader
Skriven 2009-10-15 13:04:12 av Roy Witt (1:387/22)
    Kommentar till text 548 av Lee Lofaso (3:800/432.0)
Ärende: Now it's Iraq (was W
============================
14 Oct 09 13:50, Lee Lofaso wrote to Roy Witt:

 >> LL>President Obama wants our troops out of there before the next
 >> LL>presidential election (he wants to win a second term).

 >> WD>All presidents want a second term, I guess.

 RW>> This one may want a second term, but he's not going to get it.

 LL> Who do the Republicans have who can beat him?

Who says the O'bama beater will be a Republican?

 LL> Sarah Palin is a joke.

She's much pleasanter to look at and a much better qualified person
for the job than the O'bama. At least she has governing experience, while
the O'bama had none before you idiots elected him.

 LL> Bobby Jindal is a nobody.  Mitt Romney is a Mormon and not popular
 LL> among Christians.

Mitt Romney may be a mormon, but he won't be the first president who isn't
popular with the whacko christians (who're a minority, btw). JFK was a
catholic, but his daddy's money bought him the presidency. Sigh, if only
Nixon would have been elected in his place, we wouldn't have had the
disaster perpetrated by the Democrats in Viet Nam.

 LL>  Mike Huckabee is an evangelical nut.

That's for sure.

 >> WD>A second term doesn't burden them with the issues of re-election
 >> and
 >> WD>they can work on their heritage.

 RW>> Some of them, like GWB, don't have time for that.

 LL> GWB has all the time in the world - to write his memoirs.

His memoirs<>heritage and vice versa. All of the whacko left, including
the BCs and NNs, NY Times, LA Times, etc. until you're blue in the face,
have written their worthless opinions. Most of which are lies, but you
believe in them. So sad.

 >> WD>GWB's heritage was thousands of innocent Americans killed and

 RW>> So far, there have been more 'innocent' Americans killed on US
 RW>> highways than have been killed in both Iraq and Afghanistan. If
 RW>> those who were killed in those places were home, they would just as
 RW>> likely be killed on the highway. In any case, it's no burden on the
 RW>> person who ordered them off the highways and on to the battle field.

 LL> That is a very feeble argument,

If you think that, you havn't been paying attention to the news.

 LL>  as folks need transportation in order to get to and from they want
 LL> or need to go.

Regardless, young people (military age 18 to 25 or so) are statistically
at the top of the auto accident death toll list. More of this age group
die in automobile accidents in the US on a yearly basis than have been
killed in Iraq AND Afghanistan since both of those wars began.

So why waste a young life on an automobile accident(?) when they can do at
least some good by deploying them to a war zone. O'bama will do just that
to the tune of 40,000 youngsters this year.

 LL>   Accidents happen, as in all countries in the world.

But none like the plethora of accidents in the USA.

 LL> In the case of war, that is a delibarate choice of sending young men
 LL> to their deaths.  And that is no accident.

Frankly, I believe you're arguing against your god now. O'bama will do
exactly that.

 >> WD>a US$ today at 1.46 versus the Euro.

 RW>> We can't spend Euros here, so no big deal.

 LL> Yes you can.  But you'll have to exchange them for US dollars
 LL> at the bank before you can spend them.  :)

That's not spending Euros, that's exchanging them for legal tender that
can be spent. No US merchant or citizen has to except Euros in eschange
for goods or services, but they do have to except dollars, because the
dollar is legal tender in the US.

 RW>> Y'all can deal with the inflation of your own currency.

 LL> Inflation is a sign of a growing economy.

If the currency is inflated, it buys less. That isn't growing the economy,
that's inflating it. i.e. the inflated value of a currency doesn't mean
that what you buy with it is worth what you paid for it.

 LL>   As long as it does not
 LL> get out of control.



 >> WD>In Reagan's days it was the equivalent of 0.45.

 RW>> No one noticed the Euro then.

 LL> The Euro did not exist then.  But as a whole, European currencies
 LL> were weaker then than they are today (in relation to the US dollar).

You can argue and lose that one with the Euros, who say that the Euro was
in existance then. Since they're more familiar with their own situation,
I'd believe them before I'd give your whacko statement any credence.

 >> WD>Euh .... Belgium was instrumental in blocking certain NATO-
 >> WD>decisions through its veto-power.

 >> LL>Yeah.  That's right.  It's all Belgium's fault.

 >> WD>Do not forget the waffles.

 RW>> Belgium didn't sit on the Security Council at the time, so it had no
 RW>> veto power that meant anything in the UN. BTW, the UN vote to pass
 RW>> resolution 1441 was a 15-0 vote.

 LL> UN resolution 1441 was not an authorization for GWB to invade Iraq.

Who said that it was? Re-read the text above and perhaps you can comment
on that without making some outragious bullshit statement that has no
business in the discussion at hand.

 LL> But it did give GWB an excuse to do what he wanted.  Not a reason,
 LL> but an excuse.

He didn't need an excuse, he had very good reasons given to him by
Saddam. He was backed by a majority of the congress and a majority of
American citizens. Take a look at the polls on the Iraq invasion during
that era and you may eventually figure it out.

                R\%/itt

    You can put lipstick on a pig, but the pig still stinks!
--- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000
 * Origin: SATX Alamo Area Net * South * Texas, USA * (1:387/22)