NFB: Kerry's speech -- thoughts?

[Dave M]

Right on Jeff! Just goes to show you who's posting valid info and who's not.

FastTA, if you read my original post, nowhere will you see that I claimed we were the only country to use WMD. Jeff is now altering quotes (not hard to do with this software) to suit his arguments. I only claimed we were the only country to use NUCLEAR WEAPONS, and now we try to tell others they can not have them. I am surprised that people on thi board would resort to changing quotations to suit there needs.

[hotwhip9]

Well to add to page 10 and go with what a lot of people have said. It is very hard to change some one's views on any thing. As the abortion issue that has come up, I agree with texanmutt on that one 100%. As religion I think it should be taught in everyschool. It is good to stuff to know, what the beliefs are, where it originated, how it has changed, as long as it is not preached. That gives the students a general knowledge base as to what is out their and what they can choose to believe in, if anything.

[Jeff_in_Atl]

That's because everyone has supported Bush. There's nothing to argue about. If you guys remember a while back I posted a poll about political party affiliation and about 85% responded they were republican. At the risk of being the one lone dissenter that's going to get piled on, I'll speak out:

I don't want to resort to personal attacks, but you guys have had at it with Kerry so:

Bush is an idiot. If he had a brain cell in his head it'd be awful lonely.

Bush didn't decide to go to war with Iraq because that's where the intelligence led him, he had already made the decision to go to war with Iraq on 9/12. Did you notice that before the war we were supposedly going to attack to keep WMD out of Hussein's hands, then after we got there and couldn't find them it suddenly became a campaign to free the people of Iraq from their oppressor?

News flash: we are not the world's police force. We have no right to tell other countries how they ought to run their government or how leaders should be put into office. If they are a direct threat to us, we have a rigth to defend ourselves, as do they. I am one of the most patriotic people around, but we have no reason to be in Iraq (given the stated intelligence). If there was evidence that Iraq was preparing an attack against us, then of course we defend ourselves. I have seen no such intelligence. The USA throws it's weight around far too much. Who are we to tell Iran and North Korea, or anyone else for that matter, not build nuclear wepons?

Do I want those countries to have them? Of course not, but we have no right to restrict their development when we were the first country to develop them, the ONLY country to use them, and the one with the most. Saddam's stockpile of chemical weapons and nerve agents pales in comparison to our own.

What if one day Canada decided that the country to its south was making it nervous by having those large stockpiles. What if they don't like Bush as a president or feel he was illegally given the presidency after the 2000 election. Do they have a right to come in here and set up a Canad-friendly goverment of their choice, and to destroy our weapons and our ability to defend ourselves? No one would answer in the affirmative yet the US does this all around the world; destroying goverments we don't agree with and dismantling armies in the name of democracy.

How secure could our borders be if the 150,000 troops currently in Iraq and Afganistan were redepolyed at home at the ports, airports, and borders.

You blame Kerry for being a politician but people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Let me say.......

I am not the biggest Kerry fan in the world. I don't think you can ever have an ideal politician, because for any politician to be elected he has to make too many promises to too many people to be able to keep them all. Running for president takes money, and to get that money you have to pander to people to give it to you and your core views and ideals get diluted.

As I said, I don't agree with the war in Iraq, I don't think the threat was imminent enough to warrant an invasion but if there was intelligence that the president was privy to that we are not then of course my view could change. I pride myself in having an open mind and taking in all sides of an argument before making decisions. I dispise people who are blindly for or against something for no other reason than it's color, shape, or political affiliation, and unfortunately I see a lot of that going on here.

Let the flaming begin!

I did NOT say WMD in my post, you inserted that. I was referring to nuclear weapons in that statement. Please do not alter my posts to suit your needs.

FastTA, if you read my original post, nowhere will you see that I claimed we were the only country to use WMD. Jeff is now altering quotes (not hard to do with this software) to suit his arguments. I only claimed we were the only country to use NUCLEAR WEAPONS, and now we try to tell others they can not have them. I am surprised that people on thi board would resort to changing quotations to suit there needs.

Here is your original post in it's entirety. Look back if you don't believe it. Here is the link http://www.f-body.com/forum/showpost...4&postcount=46 . You used the Phrase WMD's 2 paragraphs above the paragraph in question. You used nuclear weapons on the paragraph above the paragraph in question. You however used the pronoun "them" in the paragraph in question. If you meant nuclear weapons, you did not say it. I have heard many times people say we are the only country in the world to use WMDs. Your statement was unclear. I assumed you meant WMDs when you said "them". You obviously assumed that you meant nuclear weapons.

Like I have said before, I don't appreciate the personal attack.

[hotwhip9]

This has been a fairly civil thread, don't let it get un-civil, is that a word?!

[Jeff_in_Atl]

This has been a fairly civil thread, don't let it get un-civil, is that a word?!

I totally agree. I don't know but it works here.

[Kevin - Blown 95 TA]

This has been a fairly civil thread, don't let it get un-civil, is that a word?!

Well, there's civilized & there's uncivilized.

Example:

Civilized - "Whatever is the matter with those silly Iraquis? Don't they know were killing them for their own good?"

Uncivilized - "Damn, I sure wish they would send me over there to kill some of those $%#&@ Iraquis! I'm bored S%#tless!"

[Nightrage]

Why are decisions based on religion at all? If you want to do something that pleases your god than that's grand and splendid but some of us don't worship or acknowledge your god. I don't care if cloning is playing "god". I've sinned many many times and i'm yet to have a divine being smite me. As long as women aren't using abortions as birth control then in my opinion, it doesn't matter what some religious figure thinks of it, they should be able to have an abortion (again, this is just my opinion, i'm not trying to offend anyone.) My friend Maggie literally cries every time this topic is even brought up. The government shouldn't be making decisions based on their religious beliefs, they should be doing things based on what's best for the country.

[fastTa]

Well, there's civilized & there's uncivilized.

Example:

Civilized - "Whatever is the matter with those silly Iraquis? Don't they know were killing them for their own good?"

Uncivilized - "Damn, I sure wish they would send me over there to kill some of those $%#&@ Iraquis! I'm bored S%#tless!"

You kill me Kev!!

I could completely see Horatio Sanz from SNL saying those lines!

[Dave M]

I hesitate to bring this topic back to the top of the board, I'd like to let it die a peaceful death, but I'd just like t say:

When I said "them", I was refferring to the last thing I was talking about, nuclear weapons. I apologize if there was any confusion, but I don't appreciate my quotes being modified even if you think you're making it more "clear."

[Jeff_in_Atl]

I hesitate to bring this topic back to the top of the board, I'd like to let it die a peaceful death, but I'd just like t say:

When I said "them", I was refferring to the last thing I was talking about, nuclear weapons. I apologize if there was any confusion, but I don't appreciate my quotes being modified even if you think you're making it more "clear."

translation, I'd like for this to stop after I get the last word in.

Well I don't appreciate the personal attack after you made an unclear statement. The modification was put in parenthesis to make it known it was not in the context of your quote. Yes that is unclear too but if your statement had been more clear, it would not have happened. You could have made your point without making a personal attack. That tells a lot.

[Dave M]

Tell me exactly how I made a personal attack? I said I didn't appreciate my quote being altered for your purposes, and you've admitted you did just that. Whether it was to make it clear or not shouldn't matter, if you're quoting someone you don't alter the quotes.... I think that says a lot.

[Jeff_in_Atl]

Tell me exactly how I made a personal attack? I said I didn't appreciate my quote being altered for your purposes, and you've admitted you did just that. Whether it was to make it clear or not shouldn't matter, if you're quoting someone you don't alter the quotes.... I think that says a lot.

I am surprised that people on thi board would resort to changing quotations to suit there needs.

Sounds pretty personal to me.

[Dave M]

Jeff, is that or is that not what you did? You just said a few posts ago that's what you did. I see nothing personal in claiming that people are misquoting me when that is in fact what happened.

[Jeff_in_Atl]

Jeff, is that or is that not what you did? You just said a few posts ago that's what you did. I see nothing personal in claiming that people are misquoting me when that is in fact what happened.

You know what, this is ridiculous. If you want to fight about this take it to private messages. No, actually don't bother. You're not worth my time.

[Dave M]

You know what, this is ridiculous. If you want to fight about this take it to private messages. No, actually don't bother. You're not worth my time.

This is exactly what I was talking about when I said driving a wedge between members. There's no reason anyone here needs to fight over this kind of topic. Everyone has an opinion about all kinds of everyday topics. Politics and religion happen to be very personal to most people. It's not something we should be arguing about or even debating on an F-body site.