Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Left the topic name vain on purpose so you'd actually have to read it.. How many presidents have had to deal with as much bullshit as Bush? None..

Despite being bashed all the way to the fifth layer of hell, and there being hardly any silence to hear your own thoughts because of all the liberal jibber-jabber.. Bush has had to endure way more responsibility then any other preisdent.

Terrorism.
Hurricanes.
More vicous press.
Possibly new diseases rising on the threat meter.
Energy disefficentcy.
Higher deubt. (Thanks to the Clinton administration.)

With all this and the normal tedius paperwork involved in being the president. What's up? How can you justify taking your anger out on a man who barely has the time to whipe his own ass? SpellJammer is sure had you, or even George Bush himself knew all this shit was going to happen, he wouldn't even WANT to be president..

It's just stupid and immature really. However the retardation has reached new heights and SpellJammer can't even turn on ceartain news stations without hearing every five seconds about how bad of a president Bush is.. CNN for being a liberal source kindof lays off,but they're so jaded with that whole democratic outlook that they're boring as hell to watch.. That's why FOX is the most powerful name in news..

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Left the topic name vain on purpose so you'd actually have to read it.. How many presidents have had to deal with as much bullshit as Bush? None..

How many have created as much bullshit, how many have been as stupid and how many have been as blind as Bush? None. Retorting with "liberals" every time something is said against Bush, doesn't make it wrong. It makes you stupid.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Despite being bashed all the way to the fifth layer of hell, and there being hardly any silence to hear your own thoughts because of all the liberal jibber-jabber.. Bush has had to endure way more responsibility then any other preisdent.

Terrorism.
Hurricanes.
More vicous press.
Possibly new diseases rising on the threat meter.
Energy disefficentcy.
Higher deubt. (Thanks to the Clinton administration.)

Exactly. He endures it, he doesn't deal with it. There's a big difference so let's recognise this. I can endure a beating from a gang of troublesome youths, it doesn't mean I'm gonna get up and walk away fine does it?

Stupid and immature are people like you with your finger so far away from any kind of political pulse, listening to Bill O' Reilly and actually thinking the man is good.

-AC

Spelljammer don't defend the president, it only makes him look bad.

SpellJammer must be doing something right, he's popular in Canada. He has like twenty some Canadian friends and they all say they'd vote for SpellJammer if they could.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
SpellJammer must be doing something right, he's popular in Canada. He has like twenty some Canadian friends and they all say they'd vote for SpellJammer if they could.

Spelljammer, that's not a good thing.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
How many presidents have had to deal with as much bullshit as Bush?

Terrorism. Yes a situation which he made worse. Excellent work there.

Hurricanes. I guess it's a proven fact that there have been no natural disasters during any other presidency. I was not aware of that fact.

More vicous press. Hello, the press have hardly called Bush on any of the shit he's done! The man went to war based on lies and enacted new laws that go against everything that america was based on yet the press still is afraid to touch him.

Possibly new diseases rising on the threat meter. Please be more vague. I think the possibility of a worldwide pandemic is not Bush's jurisdiction.
Energy disefficentcy. Nice spelling bub, Yes, Bush is handling this problem well, especially well for someone who has such close ties to the oil industry.
Higher deubt. (Thanks to the Clinton administration.) It's DEBT sparky! And Clinton was doing a fine job. I guess the debt from the war in Iraq is all Clinton's fault.


Your ridiculous rambling once again is tiring and full of information that is not only flawed, put poorly presented.

You show again that you have no idea what you are talking about, bravo!

Originally posted by Spelljammer
SpellJammer must be doing something right, he's popular in Canada. He has like twenty some Canadian friends and they all say they'd vote for SpellJammer if they could.

All that comment proved is that there are at least twenty some morons in Canada as big as you.

Well Lincoln had a lot going on if I remember...

SpellJammer knows exactly what he's talking about. Maybe when you get a job and have to live off minimum wage and don't have mommy and daddy to support you, you'll understand it's all bullshit what the left spews from it's fanged mouth..

And SpellJammer may be a moron, but atleast he's not a pompus ass-hole who thinks this country owes him something despite never contributing nor does he put himself above anybody else simply because he doesn't like the way they think.. Atleast SpellJammer tries to make his country a better place to live. Which is more then he can say for you, who'd rather whine and complain someone else isn't doing enough to make it a better place.. lazy-ass..

It's politicians job to do all that, not KharmaDog's. If he wanted to make the difference, I'm sure he would. It doesn't exclude him nor anyone else from being able to discuss it.

The fact that you are one of the more cretinous people here suggests that contributing and trying amounts to nothing if you're just downright stupid.

-AC

The way you go on about "ignorance" and "infirority" liberals should change thier party name to national socialist..

You use the word 'liberals' in every post you make, near enough.

It's not a matter of what party, it's a matter of (un)common sense and intelligence.

-AC

Originally posted by Spelljammer
SpellJammer knows exactly what he's talking about. Maybe when you get a job and have to live off minimum wage and don't have mommy and daddy to support you, you'll understand it's all bullshit what the left spews from it's fanged mouth..

Hey captain assumption let me inform you of something. I am 34, and make a very good living as a writer and artist/illustrator. I am also well educated and can think for myself, infact, before I say something I try to be informed instead of looking like an uninformed waste of breath.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
And SpellJammer may be a moron,

Well at least we agree on something.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
but atleast he's not a pompus ass-hole who thinks this country owes him something despite never contributing nor does he put himself above anybody else simply because he doesn't like the way they think..

How do you know what I have contributed to my country have you asked? No. Sso shut up and quite assuming things. You know not of what you speak.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Atleast SpellJammer tries to make his country a better place to live.

How so, deatails please.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Which is more then he can say for you, who'd rather whine and complain someone else isn't doing enough to make it a better place.. lazy-ass..

Once again, you make assumptions because you are unaware of the facts. I am also you would be more comfortable being unaware of the facts, because finding out said facts would make you realize how misinformed, childish and spastic you really are.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
SpellJammer must be doing something right, he's popular in Canada. He has like twenty some Canadian friends and they all say they'd vote for SpellJammer if they could.


Hearing you refer to yourself in the third person over and over again just to defend a Republican, makes me think you are more of a Bob Dole fan than a Bush one.

Nice way to dodge the question "stop assuming" rather then "I'll list some details on how i've contributed you prick!" SpellJammer sees right through that.. You call yourself a writer, must be a fictional one, because that's all liberals are good for is making up stuff..

This flame war against SpellJammer is so unfair.. really.. Alpha Centauri/Kharmadog versus lil old him..

He demands two others help these guys out. Everyone knows one conservative is equivalent to four liberals. Might want to make it three more allies, these two aren't exactly the pick of the liter..

Originally posted by dragon milly
Hearing you refer to yourself in the third person over and over again just to defend a Republican, makes me think you are more of a Bob Dole fan than a Bush one.
Now you got SpellJammer thinking of Simpsons.

Don't blame SpellJammer, he voted for Kodos!

The topic name is "vague". "Vain" is what you are for thinking anyone cares about how much you love the epitome of incompetency and nepotism that is George W Bush.

Also it went Clinton => Bush, surplus => deficit.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Nice way to dodge the question "stop assuming" rather then "I'll list some details on how i've contributed you prick!"

You did not ask a question, you made an accusation. I did not dodge anything, yet you dodge everything I ask you.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
SpellJammer sees right through that.. You call yourself a writer, must be a fictional one, because that's all liberals are good for is making up stuff..

Your humour is so lame that it just leaves me shaking my head. I do not call myself a writer. I am a writer, that's what I do.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
This flame war against SpellJammer is so unfair.. really.. Alpha Centauri/Kharmadog versus lil old him..

Don't start something that you can't finish. Your debating technics have all the resonance of a flea's fart in a hurricane.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
He demands two others help these guys out. Everyone knows one conservative is equivalent to four liberals. Might want to make it three more allies, these two aren't exactly the pick of the liter..

Asking for help after calling two people out is just pathetic.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
The topic name is "vague". "Vain" is what you are for thinking anyone cares about how much you love the epitome of incompetency and nepotism that is George W Bush.

Also it went Clinton => Bush, surplus => deficit.
http://posters.westbalkanonline.com/speedlist/FP1214%20THE%20HULK%20punch.jpg
SpellJammer smash puny liberal who makes him think naughty things!

I'm not flaming you, Spell.

Just relevantly making you look a bit lacking in the intelligence department.

-AC

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Terrorism. Yes a situation which he made worse. Excellent work there.

Hurricanes. I guess it's a proven fact that there have been no natural disasters during any other presidency. I was not aware of that fact.

Possibly new diseases rising on the threat meter. Please be more vague. I think the possibility of a worldwide pandemic is not Bush's jurisdiction.

Higher deubt. (Thanks to the Clinton administration.) It's DEBT sparky! And Clinton was doing a fine job. I guess the debt from the war in Iraq is all Clinton's fault.


Terrorism...we haven't had a single attack on U.S. soil since 9/11

Hurricanes...I'm pretty sure he's the first president to ever be blamed for a hurricane

New diseases... I think that's a reference to SARS and the bird flu

Higher debt...in my -opinion- the only reason he was doing so well was because he inherited the results of the work done by Reagan and Bush Sr. Then he screwed it up and Bush inherited the resulted of Clinton's blunder....and as of now the economy is doing fairly well other than the gas issue.

He who smealt it, dealt it AC..

Originally posted by Echuu
Terrorism...we haven't had a single attack on U.S. soil since 9/11

You didn't have that many to begin with, and I am sure that one 9/11 ia enough. Bush's war in Iraq has destabilized the entire middle east and has actually united various cells under the Al Queda banner not to mention the fact that this war has increased fundamentalist solidarity.

Originally posted by Echuu
Hurricanes...I'm pretty sure he's the first president to ever be blamed for a hurricane He wasn't blamed for the hurricane, just the way it was dealt with and the fact that if so many troops had not been in Iraq, then the national guard would have been where it is supposed to be doing what it was intended to do.


Originally posted by Echuu
New diseases... I think that's a reference to SARS and the bird flu Which has nothing to do with Bush. There have always been diseases. AIDS for example.

Originally posted by Echuu
Higher debt...in my -opinion- the only reason he was doing so well was because he inherited the results of the work done by Reagan and Bush Sr. Then he screwed it up and Bush inherited the resulted of Clinton's blunder....and as of now the economy is doing fairly well other than the gas issue.

Many economists would disagree with you. And research the cost of the Iraq war, you know who's paying for that?



Originally posted by Spelljammer
He who smealt it, dealt it AC..

Back to your old tactics of avoiding the issues and trying to seem amusing. Soon you will stop posting in this thread and hope that people will forget how you made yourself look stupid. Just like old time eh Big Evil?

Originally posted by Echuu
Terrorism...we haven't had a single attack on U.S. soil since 9/11Specious reasoning. See Simpsons, bear tax and not having bear attacks.
Originally posted by Echuu
Hurricanes...I'm pretty sure he's the first president to ever be blamed for a hurricaneThis is inaccurate and oversimplified. Are you suggesting people are saying Bush caused the weather phenomena?
Originally posted by Echuu
New diseases... I think that's a reference to SARS and the bird fluI have no idea what he's referring to with "New diseases." Nor do I see how that relates to Bush. I do know that ABC in Africa isn't working without the C for an old disease called AIDS.
Originally posted by Echuu
Higher debt...in my -opinion- the only reason he was doing so well was because he inherited the results of the work done by Reagan and Bush Sr. Then he screwed it up and Bush inherited the resulted of Clinton's blunder....and as of now the economy is doing fairly well other than the gas issue.

EDIT: Damn you KharmaDog you stole my thunder lol.

spelljammer, if me, KD, and AC can all agree on one thing, you know its just the gods honest objective truth as plain as the nose on your face.

that truth: you have no frikin idea what the hell you are rambling about

Originally posted by PVS
spelljammer, if me, KD, and AC can all agree on one thing,
http://quicksitebuilder.cnet.com/rob_63/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/giantsofdoom.jpg

Originally posted by KharmaDog
You didn't have that many to begin with, and I am sure that one 9/11 ia enough. Bush's war in Iraq has destabilized the entire middle east and has actually united various cells under the Al Queda banner not to mention the fact that this war has increased fundamentalist solidarity.

He wasn't blamed for the hurricane, just the way it was dealt with and the fact that if so many troops had not been in Iraq, then the national guard would have been where it is supposed to be doing what it was intended to do.


Which has nothing to do with Bush. There have always been diseases. AIDS for example.



Many economists would disagree with you. And research the cost of the Iraq war, you know who's paying for that?

Yes and there have been many changed in the governments in the middle east-for the better I might ad....Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon.

The troops wouldn't have had to if the Democrat run New Orleans would have done their job.

Yeah diseases doesn't really have much to do with anything...I was just wondering if that's what he was talking about.

Taxpayers


xmarksthespot>........

People HAVE said that Bush is the cause of hurricanes.

Diseases... ditto from what I said to KharmaDog

Economy...it does take a while for tax cuts to have their full affect. He can't just wave his hand and make things better. Whens the last time you've heard anything about jobs on the news?

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
EDIT: Damn you KharmaDog you stole my thunder lol.

Bush stole it with his weather machine

And on a side note... I don't necessarily agree with the thoughts and opinions of spelljammer.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Left the topic name vain on purpose so you'd actually have to read it.. How many presidents have had to deal with as much bullshit as Bush? None..

Despite being bashed all the way to the fifth layer of hell, and there being hardly any silence to hear your own thoughts because of all the liberal jibber-jabber.. Bush has had to endure way more responsibility then any other preisdent.

Terrorism.
Hurricanes.
More vicous press.
Possibly new diseases rising on the threat meter.
Energy disefficentcy.
Higher deubt. (Thanks to the Clinton administration.)

With all this and the normal tedius paperwork involved in being the president. What's up? How can you justify taking your anger out on a man who barely has the time to whipe his own ass? SpellJammer is sure had you, or even George Bush himself knew all this shit was going to happen, he wouldn't even WANT to be president..

It's just stupid and immature really. However the retardation has reached new heights and SpellJammer can't even turn on ceartain news stations without hearing every five seconds about how bad of a president Bush is.. CNN for being a liberal source kindof lays off,but they're so jaded with that whole democratic outlook that they're boring as hell to watch.. That's why FOX is the most powerful name in news..

This time I need to disagree with you. I am Liberal and Bush, is only in this for his own profit. Open your eyes. Bush and Chaney are so shady. for one did you ever hear of Haliburton?? an oil company that Chaney use to own. It has done such more shady shit they paid to cover up. Bush tries to make it seem like he has it bad, he has it better then all of us. He knew what being president had in store. If he didn't want to pres he would not have not ran for a second term or he would resign.

Now about terrorism, NO MATTER how much Bush tries he will not stop terrorism, it has always been and will always be. He is only making matters worse by continuing this freaking war.

Hurricanes is nothing to do with it, Thats nature. It has no reason using that saying he has it so hard. No matter who would be office they would need to deal with it. Not just Bush, the governers of those states and the people. EVERYONE is affected by this not just him.

As for press, there is always press out and digging up crap and saying things.If your in the spot light, the press will be there. Even more for a president who is suppose to run a country, Americans want to know what will be going on with our country and how our lives will be affected, as citizens we have that right to know.

New disease come and go with time, This is more for medical researchers and doctors to focus on.

Energy deficiency, now if you would know and bush would know this has been know for a while. for years we knew the oil wouldn't last forever and would someday need to find an alternative. Bush's first alternative will to be destroy the environment and rip up Alaska., then turn toward Nuclear energy. his choices will screw us more then, what we are screwed now.

Higher debt, well if Clinton caused 'higher debt' I feel sorry for the next pres, he will have a hell of a lot more debt from Bush then any other pres.

Originally posted by Echuu
And on a side note... I don't necessarily agree with the thoughts and opinions of spelljammer.
you make SpellJammer sound like a right-wing Michal Moore Echuu..

Spelljammer, your post is as much as I expected, you are pathetic.


Originally posted by Echuu
Yes and there have been many changed in the governments in the middle east-for the better I might ad....Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon.

The troops wouldn't have had to if the Democrat run New Orleans would have done their job.

Yeah diseases doesn't really have much to do with anything...I was just wondering if that's what he was talking about.

Taxpayers


xmarksthespot>........

People HAVE said that Bush is the cause of hurricanes.

Diseases... ditto from what I said to KharmaDog

Economy...it does take a while for tax cuts to have their full affect. He can't just wave his hand and make things better. Whens the last time you've heard anything about jobs on the news?


You do realize that Afghanistan is in dire straights right now and that many U.S. servicemen would rather be stationed in Iraq than Afghanistan right now don't you.

You also realize that Iraq is far from over and to think it will be better in the near future is not realistic?

Also you realize that Al Queda membership is up?

And what job should the Demo's dome in New Orleans? That's a bit of a cop out. T he national guard SHOULD have been there to do their job. They were in Iraq.

I think x put the financial system in perspective and you have yet to comment on the spending on the war that is WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYY over any estimates given to the public at the beginning of all this.

Could you please quit with the third person shit, it's getting really old.

not to mention that this is the first war in american history that is being financed. thats right, its all borrowed money from our allies.

way to go bush!!! now america is like the moocher cousin who keeps dropping by for a handout. way to keep our dignity.

Originally posted by PVS
not to mention that this is the first war in american history that is being financed. thats right, its all borrowed money from our allies.

way to go bush!!! now america is like the moocher cousin who keeps dropping by for a handout. way to keep our dignity.

he also makes all Americans look arrogent. There is so much illegal shit going on with this war its not funny.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
You do realize that Afghanistan is in dire straights right now and that many U.S. servicemen would rather be stationed in Iraq than Afghanistan right now don't you.

You also realize that Iraq is far from over and to think it will be better in the near future is not realistic?

Also you realize that Al Queda membership is up?

And what job should the Demo's dome in New Orleans? That's a bit of a cop out. T he national guard SHOULD have been there to do their job. They were in Iraq.

I think x put the financial system in perspective and you have yet to comment on the spending on the war that is WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYY over any estimates given to the public at the beginning of all this.

No. If it were you would hear about it on the liberal media.

I realize that it's far from over.

Source please?

In cases of natural disasters the local and state government are supposed to take care of the issue unless they absolutely need the federal government help. They wouldn't have needed any help if their state and city wasn't so corrupt.

Yes wars are costly.

It's the National Guard's job to protect the country, part of that is to deal with disasters. It is NOT their job to be fighting a war overseas.

And it's the media's JOB to keep the president in line; this is called being a watchdog and it's to keep the president accountable for his actions. However, the media has been very lighthanded with Bush.

National debt? You do realize that during Clinton's terms the US, for the first time, has a budget surplus and NO deficit? And now look at the budget. Bush keeps cutting money from programs where it's needed, like education, to fund his little war.

Sorry, SpellJammer, but as usual you're wrong and look like a fool.

Originally posted by Echuu

In cases of natural disasters the local and state government are supposed to take care of the issue unless they absolutely need the federal government help. They wouldn't have needed any help if their state and city wasn't so corrupt.


The Louisiana and New Orleans governments asked for help before the hurricane even hit because they knew it was going to be more than they could handle on their own. It took federal help 4 days after the hurricane had hit to show up. Please do some research and find out what you're talking about before making such claims.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
http://quicksitebuilder.cnet.com/rob_63/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/giantsofdoom.jpg

There's four members there. PVS, Kharma and myself would make a trio, if anything. Unless you secretly want to be the fourth member?

Just joshing with you.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
There's four members there. PVS, Kharma and myself would make a trio, if anything. Unless you secretly want to be the fourth member?

Just joshing with you.

-AC

ok, i get to be bizarro

SJ, you can be retardo

Originally posted by Lana
The Louisiana and New Orleans governments asked for help before the hurricane even hit because they knew it was going to be more than they could handle on their own. It took federal help 4 days after the hurricane had hit to show up. Please do some research and find out what you're talking about before making such claims.

Did it look like I was talking about the feds? If so I am sorry. I know their efforts were crap and FEMA is crap.

Please double check my post when reading it before making such claims; I was not trying to defend the federal response.

Originally posted by PVS
ok, i get to be bizarro

SJ, you can be retardo

hes not retarded, everyone is entitled to their opinions. But the popular opinion is BUSH SUCKS! there for the reason so many are disagreeing with SJ.

and I don't see how anyone was so dumb to vote for Bush for a second term. WAKE THE HELL UP AMERICA furious welcome to another four years of hell.

Originally posted by Raven Guardia
and I don't see how anyone was so dumb to vote for Bush for a second term. WAKE THE HELL UP AMERICA furious welcome to another four years of hell.
Actually that's WHY SpellJammer voted for Bush a second term..

He would've voted for Howard Dean, but the liberals in office are just as backstabbing and incompetant as those at this forum. Besides you ofcourse. You're like Howard Dean. ^_^ Exsept female obviously. XP

Originally posted by Raven Guardia
welcome to another four years of hell.

well, lets look at the bright side: 3 years

Originally posted by PVS
well, lets look at the bright side: 3 years

3 years of a lame duck president who doesn't have to worry about what people think because he won't be up for re-election. Yippee.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Actually that's WHY SpellJammer voted for Bush a second term..

He would've voted for Howard Dean, but the liberals in office are just as backstabbing and incompetant as those at this forum. Besides you ofcourse. You're like Howard Dean. ^_^ Exsept female obviously. XP

and Bush isnt back stabbing or a lair or shady?? the list goes on and on




Originally posted by PVS
well, lets look at the bright side: 3 years

Hopefull the next pres, can fix the damage.

Originally posted by Raven Guardia
and Bush isnt back stabbing or a lair or shady?? the list goes on and on






Hopefull the next pres, can fix the damage.

Hopefully.

My political science teacher is predicting that 2008 is going to be a realigning election.

I like this thread. It's humorous. I'm not going to jump in (yet); I would like to see where this is going.

Originally posted by Echuu
No. If it were you would hear about it on the liberal media.

I realize that it's far from over.

Source please?

In cases of natural disasters the local and state government are supposed to take care of the issue unless they absolutely need the federal government help. They wouldn't have needed any help if their state and city wasn't so corrupt.

Yes wars are costly.

Actually a report was done on 60 min (or some other news show) where they followed a day in the life of an american soldier in afghanistan. He was actually in Iraq and said Afghanistan is so much worse (as did many of his companions). Also the Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan have been told that it is much worse gig than Iraq by American counterparts.

As for the membership of Al-Queda increasing, look around. The war in Afghanistan is continuing, the insurgency in Iraq is expanding, terrorist attacks claimed by Al-Queda have increased , Al Qaeda has established new local terror networks in northern Sinai and other locations around the world and Al-Qaeda websites are increasing.

"Type Al Qaeda intellgence" onto google and sort throught the results.



And I see that though you still are posting in this thread Spelljammer you are avoiding me and any or all the issues you raised or questions asked of you.

Originally posted by FeceMan
I like this thread. It's humorous. I'm not going to jump in (yet); I would like to see where this is going.

either your for Bush or your are against him...don't conform to another's views. Just go with the side you are for.

Originally posted by FeceMan
I like this thread. It's humorous. I'm not going to jump in (yet); I would like to see where this is going.

thanks for the update.
im sure everyone gives a shit.
keep us posted

Look....Every President had their little secret agendas...all of them...Holy cow, am I the only one that knows that....secret meetings, propaganda...News reports of stupid interest just to get the heat off what's really going on behind closed doors.....

Originally posted by debbiejo
Look....Every President had their little secret agendas...all of them...Holy cow, am I the only one that knows that....secret meetings, propaganda...News reports of stupid interest just to get the heat off what's really going on behind closed doors.....
Precisely! debbiejo understands SpellJammer! ^_^

You stated that "Bush has had to endure way more responsibility then any other preisdent."

Then your statements were proven to be innacurate at best. Debbie Jo said that all presidents have secrest agendas yadda yadda yadda.

That has very little to do with your original post. Stop changing the subject or your viewpoint unless you are admitting that you were wrong. You have dodged the questions of mine and others regarding things you have stated in this post.

You continue to do this further revealing that you don't have much to say in the first place.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Look....Every President had their little secret agendas...all of them...Holy cow, am I the only one that knows that....secret meetings, propaganda...News reports of stupid interest just to get the heat off what's really going on behind closed doors.....


yes, every president did. But Bush, has done shit thats obvious and we all know it yet since he has the money he and his best mate Dick Chaney pay to cover it up. Bush is arrogant and a bit of an ass. He likes people like himself to be in office, so they can have a committee of shady rich idiots.

SpellJammer wishes HE was rich and could appoint people as shady and as selfish as him into office so they could establish a new world order together and control how things are ran.. ; _ ;

here's what i dont understand about this sudden excusing of all shady dealings on capital hill:

-when clinton was up on charges, the entire right screamed for blood in unison.

-now, when the current administration is on the slab, the right screams for turning a blind eye.

why? why does the mentallity change depending on which party exhibits corruption? why is it unforgivable to screw an intern and lie about it, hurting nobody...yet condonable to screw our entire system, and lie to get us into war, killing 2000 american troops and wounding tens of thousands more?

why the sudden change of heart?

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Left the topic name vain on purpose so you'd actually have to read it.. How many presidents have had to deal with as much bullshit as Bush? None..

Despite being bashed all the way to the fifth layer of hell, and there being hardly any silence to hear your own thoughts because of all the liberal jibber-jabber.. Bush has had to endure way more responsibility then any other preisdent.

Terrorism.
Hurricanes.
More vicous press.
Possibly new diseases rising on the threat meter.
Energy disefficentcy.
Higher deubt. (Thanks to the Clinton administration.)

With all this and the normal tedius paperwork involved in being the president. What's up? How can you justify taking your anger out on a man who barely has the time to whipe his own ass? SpellJammer is sure had you, or even George Bush himself knew all this shit was going to happen, he wouldn't even WANT to be president..

It's just stupid and immature really. However the retardation has reached new heights and SpellJammer can't even turn on ceartain news stations without hearing every five seconds about how bad of a president Bush is.. CNN for being a liberal source kindof lays off,but they're so jaded with that whole democratic outlook that they're boring as hell to watch.. That's why FOX is the most powerful name in news.. Wow. A conservative calling liberals dumb because of their beliefs. Thats a first

Originally posted by PVS
here's what i dont understand about this sudden excusing of all shady dealings on capital hill:

-when clinton was up on charges, the entire right screamed for blood in unison.

-now, when the current administration is on the slab, the right screams for turning a blind eye.

why? why does the mentallity change depending on which party exhibits corruption? why is it unforgivable to screw an intern and lie about it, hurting nobody...yet condonable to screw our entire system, and lie to get us into war, killing 2000 american troops and wounding tens of thousands more?

why the sudden change of heart? Cuz Clinton's black! That's why!

Originally posted by PVS
here's what i dont understand about this sudden excusing of all shady dealings on capital hill:

-when clinton was up on charges, the entire right screamed for blood in unison.

-now, when the current administration is on the slab, the right screams for turning a blind eye.

why? why does the mentallity change depending on which party exhibits corruption? why is it unforgivable to screw an intern and lie about it, hurting nobody...yet condonable to screw our entire system, and lie to get us into war, killing 2000 american troops and wounding tens of thousands more?

why the sudden change of heart?
Hate to break it to you PVS, but what clinton did was rape. He coerced those women using his power as the president to intimidate those women into giving him oral, or be out of a job. And SpellJammer doubts you have the balls to say **** you to the president, much less one who could not only leave you in the poor house, but ruin your life forever if you refuse to comply to his demands. Clinton was just more of a pig, like the old barbaric savages in the darkages who had women slaves and large glasses of ale to bask in thier debautchery. Where as Bush is more of a face, just a diversion away from our future overlord Dick Chenney.

Out of the two, SpellJammer would deffinitly choose Mr. Bush. He's just a man trying to get by and if that means being a pawn so be it. But atleast he doesn't rape women..

Originally posted by PVS
thanks for the update.
im sure everyone gives a shit.
keep us posted
I always do .

Well in my opinion Bush does do jerky things in the name of religions, just as Clinton did things in the name of "I didn't really inhale, and Oh Monika....well that didn't really happen."......OH, well he also staged some plays on other important topics to get the heat off himself also....just as bush does.....life goes on.............Just need to get a little enlightened about how things work in politics.....

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Hate to break it to you PVS, but what clinton did was rape. He coerced those women using his power as the president to intimidate those women into giving him oral, or be out of a job. And SpellJammer doubts you have the balls to say **** you to the president, much less one who could not only leave you in the poor house, but ruin your life forever if you refuse to comply to his demands. Clinton was just more of a pig, like the old barbaric savages in the darkages who had women slaves and large glasses of ale to bask in thier debautchery. Where as Bush is more of a face, just a diversion away from our future overlord Dick Chenney.

Out of the two, SpellJammer would deffinitly choose Mr. Bush. He's just a man trying to get by and if that means being a pawn so be it. But atleast he doesn't rape women..


Oh, No..if Chenny(sp?) is elected into office it will prove that America had become a bunch of hysterical ridden delusional idiots who have become puppets! If people vote Chenny, There is obviously something wrong in their heads. I hope Chenny doesn't win because if he does, I will lead the liberals into a revolt against our governmet.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Left the topic name vain on purpose so you'd actually have to read it.. How many presidents have had to deal with as much bullshit as Bush? None..
And how many presidents have dealt out as much bullshit as W. Bush?

Originally posted by Spelljammer
http://posters.westbalkanonline.com/speedlist/FP1214%20THE%20HULK%20punch.jpg
SpellJammer smash puny liberal who makes him think naughty things!


HAHHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA

Originally posted by dragon milly
Hearing you refer to yourself in the third person over and over again just to defend a Republican, makes me think you are more of a Bob Dole fan than a Bush one.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Actually a report was done on 60 min (or some other news show) where they followed a day in the life of an american soldier in afghanistan. He was actually in Iraq and said Afghanistan is so much worse (as did many of his companions). Also the Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan have been told that it is much worse gig than Iraq by American counterparts.

As for the membership of Al-Queda increasing, look around. The war in Afghanistan is continuing, the insurgency in Iraq is expanding, terrorist attacks claimed by Al-Queda have increased , Al Qaeda has established new local terror networks in northern Sinai and other locations around the world and Al-Qaeda websites are increasing.

"Type Al Qaeda intellgence" onto google and sort throught the results.


I'm assuming there some are anti-Bush soldiers fighting over there in Afghanistan and Iraq. All the journalists have to do is find a few of them and have them whine in front of the camera. I've also seen some documenteries done about the fighting in the middle east which were very positive.

Of course the war is continuing. They are trying to stop our progress. That's what happens in wars. Counter-attacks and so forth. The difference here is that there isn't a central point from which the U.S. can focus their attacks. It makes it a lot more difficult to win a war when things are like that.
I know that you are smart enough to understand that wars aren't won overnight so what's the deal?

Can I put this in perspective?

WWII- 5 years/more than 290,000 U.S. casualties

War in Iraq and Afghanistan- 4 years and counting/more than 1700 U.S. deaths

I think this war has done a whole fricken lot more than people are whining about



I did a search on google for al-queda by the way... didn't find much.

Seriously, do you actually think the war in iraq is as justifiable as the us involvement in WWII?

Did Roosevelt get specific conversational instructions from god to go into WWII?

Originally posted by Echuu

I did a search on google for al-queda by the way... didn't find much.

Did a Search on Al Qaida...got a nice 8 Million .....Google Search
Did a Search on Al Qaeda...got a nice 24 Million .....Googlle Search 2


Spelling is your Internet Search friend

Hey guy's i have an idea . Lets take a noob , make him think he's real big . Feed him some bullshit about politics and how good he is and then tell him to refer to himself in the third person to make him look like a even bigger douchebag* then he already is .



*Note A douchebag = vexatious ******* that most people wish were killed with a Mortal Kombat fatality.

Originally posted by Echuu
I'm assuming there some are anti-Bush soldiers fighting over there in Afghanistan and Iraq. All the journalists have to do is find a few of them and have them whine in front of the camera. I've also seen some documenteries done about the fighting in the middle east which were very positive.

Of course the war is continuing. They are trying to stop our progress. That's what happens in wars. Counter-attacks and so forth. The difference here is that there isn't a central point from which the U.S. can focus their attacks. It makes it a lot more difficult to win a war when things are like that.
I know that you are smart enough to understand that wars aren't won overnight so what's the deal?

Can I put this in perspective?

WWII- 5 years/more than 290,000 U.S. casualties

War in Iraq and Afghanistan- 4 years and counting/more than 1700 U.S. deaths

I think this war has done a whole fricken lot more than people are whining about



I did a search on google for al-queda by the way... didn't find much.
A sort of reverse Potamkin village.

Originally posted by RedAlertv2
Seriously, do you actually think the war in iraq is as justifiable as the us involvement in WWII?

I was putting death tolls in perspective. Actually the wars have some similarities if you think about it. History DOES repeat itself; just slightly different.

Bardock42>......... Yeah I did some different spelling and I got a LOT of stuff. I meant that the stuff I found wasn't very significant to what he was talking about.

xmarksthespot>......... I never said anything even remotely close to suggesting that.

grey fox>.........That's EXACTLY the problem with KMC

Originally posted by Echuu
I was putting death tolls in perspective. Actually the wars have some similarities if you think about it. History DOES repeat itself; just slightly different.

you know actually I thought this war in Iraq reminded me more of Vietnam. I am not good at memorizing war facts or anything so I don't know all the death tolls for WWI and WWII or Vietnam. But just the way things are going. It seems like we will never get out of there. That the cost for this is basically pointless. I dont really think this war is going to change anything.

Originally posted by Raven Guardia
you know actually I thought this war in Iraq reminded me more of Vietnam. I am not good at memorizing war facts or anything so I don't know all the death tolls for WWI and WWII or Vietnam. But just the way things are going. It seems like we will never get out of there. That the cost for this is basically pointless. I dont really think this war is going to change anything.

It is sort of like Vietnam. But our president isn't dumb(odd isn't it?) enough to withdraw the troops right away and create a mass slaughter.

Originally posted by Echuu
It is sort of like Vietnam. But our president isn't dumb(odd isn't it?) enough to withdraw the troops right away and create a mass slaughter.
Contrary to popular belief, Bush has a well-formed brain and average intellect.

Also, another startling revelation is the fact that he speaks in coherent sentences. People seem to think that misspeaking implies that one has the inability to complete a thought.

Originally posted by Echuu
I'm assuming there some are anti-Bush soldiers fighting over there in Afghanistan and Iraq. All the journalists have to do is find a few of them and have them whine in front of the camera. I've also seen some documenteries done about the fighting in the middle east which were very positive.

Are you trying to convince me or yourself? Positive documentaries? I'd love to have a few titles if you please.

Originally posted by Echuu
Of course the war is continuing. They are trying to stop our progress. That's what happens in wars. Counter-attacks and so forth. The difference here is that there isn't a central point from which the U.S. can focus their attacks. It makes it a lot more difficult to win a war when things are like that.
I know that you are smart enough to understand that wars aren't won overnight so what's the deal?

You cannot fight terrorism by declaring war on nations, that ain't gonna work, as has been made glaringly apparent.


Originally posted by Echuu

Can I put this in perspective?

WWII- 5 years/more than 290,000 U.S. casualties

War in Iraq and Afghanistan- 4 years and counting/more than 1700 U.S. deaths


Are you comparing a global conflict such as WW2 with an occupation and invasion of a country that was invaded under false pretences?

Not to mention comparing the deaths of U.S. soldiers is ridiculous considering the vast differences in modern conventional warfare to that of the 1940's.

I am curious if you hae statistics on Iraqi civilian deaths over the last 4 years?

Originally posted by Echuu
I did a search on google for al-queda by the way... didn't find much.

You got 24 million results and couldn't find anything relevant to what I was talking about?

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Are you trying to convince me or yourself? Positive documentaries? I'd love to have a few titles if you please.



You cannot fight terrorism by declaring war on nations, that ain't gonna work, as has been made glaringly apparent.





Are you comparing a global conflict such as WW2 with an occupation and invasion of a country that was invaded under false pretences?

Not to mention comparing the deaths of U.S. soldiers is ridiculous considering the vast differences in modern conventional warfare to that of the 1940's.

I am curious if you hae statistics on Iraqi civilian deaths over the last 4 years?



You got 24 million results and couldn't find anything relevant to what I was talking about?

Okay documentaries... I believe BBC has some that I saw and then my local public television, MPTV, had some. Don't remember the exact names though, sorry. The one I remember most was about a sergeant(I think) and his men doing various door to door searchs and interviewing local civilians to find out information on possible terrorists. He was very positive.

Um; we haven't seen the full results of invading a country to influence the area around it yet. Once again; wars aren't fought over night.

I am comparing the global conflict of WWII with the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq(war on terror). I'm not saying that everything that happened was related, just that there are some interesting similarities if you think about it.

Errrr. Technologically yes, tactics wise; maybe.
Fine then we will look at Vietnam; 47, 369 deaths.
Or Korea...33,651 deaths.
I'm saying that casualties pale in comparison and the huge amounts of whining before we even see the full results of the war are pathetic. (Not that I don't value life. I am sorry for anyone who has lost a loved one in any war)
Like I said before; Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt are some examples of the short term effects of what we have accomplished in the Middle East.

I'm curious as to how many of those civilians were killed by terrorists. I am also curious as to how many civilians were slaughtered and put into mass graves, or how many people were raped while under Saddam's rule. I am also curious if you know how many terrorists(or insurgents) have been killed. I think if I remember correctly it's like one American soldier to ten terrorists in the death ratio. I kinda forgot since the liberal media never reports on how many terrorists die over there .

Most of what I found was just stories on Al-Qaeda. i.e. 'Al-Qaeda training manual found','terrorism Q&A/Al-Qaeda', or Al-Qaeda leaders arrested.

Originally posted by Echuu
The one I remember most was about a sergeant(I think) and his men doing various door to door searchs and interviewing local civilians to find out information on possible terrorists. He was very positive.

One Sargent?
Originally posted by Echuu
Um; we haven't seen the full results of invading a country to influence the area around it yet. Once again; wars aren't fought over night.

Not once have I said that wars ARE fought overnight, so stop saying that. We haven't seen the full results of invading a country to influence the area around it yet because that in not a justifiable cause for war. The results that we have seen so far have not been promising as have been the results of other times in history when the U.S. has used military action to dictate the politics of another country.

Originally posted by Echuu
I am comparing the global conflict of WWII with the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq(war on terror). I'm not saying that everything that happened was related, just that there are some interesting similarities if you think about it.

Please point out these similarities.

Originally posted by Echuu
Fine then we will look at Vietnam; 47, 369 deaths.
Or Korea...33,651 deaths.

Tactics and technology have also changed since these conflicts. Apparently you are only counting (or valuing) American deaths. Is that all that matters?

Originally posted by Echuu
I'm saying that casualties pale in comparison and the huge amounts of whining before we even see the full results of the war are pathetic. (Not that I don't value life. I am sorry for anyone who has lost a loved one in any war)

Read some stats on deaths and casualties of both Iraqi civilians and american military men. Saying that those deaths pale in comparison before we see the results of the war is very ignorant.

Originally posted by Echuu
I'm curious as to how many of those civilians were killed by terrorists

Far more were killed by the bombings from Allied forces planes and most have been women and children. If you are truly curious, look it up, I did a quick search and there is plenty of information.


Originally posted by Echuu
I am also curious as to how many civilians were slaughtered and put into mass graves, or how many people were raped while under Saddam's rule.

As terrible as life under Saddam's rule was, more Iraqis have died directly due to the military actions of George Bush Sr. and Jr. then ever by Saddam Hussein. As for rape and torture, apparently they are not too safe from that anymore as american military soldiers are also participating in that.

Originally posted by Echuu
I am also curious if you know how many terrorists(or insurgents) have been killed. I think if I remember correctly it's like one American soldier to ten terrorists in the death ratio. I kinda forgot since the liberal media never reports on how many terrorists die over there .

Yes because the liberal media supports the terrorists, that must be it. As for the whole discussion on the liberal media, that has been done to death and proven a fallacy, search KMC forums for further info on that.

Originally posted by Echuu
Most of what I found was just stories on Al-Qaeda. i.e. 'Al-Qaeda training manual found','terrorism Q&A/Al-Qaeda', or Al-Qaeda leaders arrested.

If your truly interested, keep searching.

Yes, American deaths are all that matter. They are the enemy. Atleast we know whom to hate, you hate Americans and wish ill on your own people. Just shutup for once in your life kharmahdog, nobody wants to hear your hallow, liberal garbage..

Echuu, there's no point in arguing with a liberal. They don't understand ceartain human functions, they're just cold-blooded machines made from metal, wires, and carbs..

Ah, spelljammer, here's where you spew nonsense, I make you look foolish, and then you stop posting or run because you look stupid.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Yes, American deaths are all that matter. They are the enemy.

All Iraqis are the enemy? Then why are you over there trying to 'help' them?

Originally posted by Spelljammer
you hate Americans and wish ill on your own people. Just shutup for once in your life kharmahdog, nobody wants to hear your hallow, liberal garbage..

I missed where I said I hated americans and where I "wished ill" on my own people, you know why? Because I never said it. You see, you have to fabricate arguements because you can't prove anything you say and you never have a valid point.

I actually am not a liberal either, I'm independant.

SpellJammer is independant too.. You're one of those neo-socialist "anyone but Bush!" independants who aren't REALLY independant, you just don't want to get the vicous attacks from Republicans..

Where as SpellJammer is a real independant and thinks for himself. If it wouldn't have been a waste of vote because the independant party is so scatter-brained because most think like a ceartain someone on here.. He would've voted for Nader..

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Yes, American deaths are all that matter. They are the enemy. Atleast we know whom to hate, you hate Americans and wish ill on your own people. Just shutup for once in your life kharmahdog, nobody wants to hear your hallow, liberal garbage..

Echuu, there's no point in arguing with a liberal. They don't understand ceartain human functions, they're just cold-blooded machines made from metal, wires, and carbs..

at least liberals dont suffer from the delusion that everyone is out to get us and has weapons of mass destruction. Ever read the bush doctrine?? its very pathetic, Bush is tyring to police the world. He is very arrogant.

BTW: Just because the Iraqies are our enimies doesnt mean they are all 'evil' or 'bad' or terroriest. There are innocent people over there.

Originally posted by Raven Guardia
at least liberals dont suffer from the delusion that everyone is out to get BTW: Just because the Iraqies are our enimies doesnt mean they are all 'evil' or 'bad' or terroriest. There are innocent people over there.

No kidding....

Originally posted by debbiejo
No kidding....

Originally posted by Spelljammer
You're one of those neo-socialist "anyone but Bush!" independants who aren't REALLY independant, you just don't want to get the vicous attacks from Republicans..

Once again, blowing smoke because you can't say anything relevant.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Where as SpellJammer is a real independant and thinks for himself.

I find that suprising, because you rally around the "evil liberal" banner like Bill O'rielly disciple.

Once again you don't intelligently respond to an arguemenst or debate. You dodge and run, dodge and run.

Originally posted by KharmaDog

I find that suprising, because you rally around the "evil liberal" banner like Bill O'rielly disciple.

Bill O' Reilly said himself he's an independant. That's where SpellJammer decided he wanted to be one too.

After that, he got several others to become inependants as well.

His jock friends Jason/Jerremy.
His dad who prior to this never bothered to register and vote.

And even his little cousin Amber, who's been brain-washed by the liberal masses, is slowly starting to act like her big cousin whom she idolizes. Surely SpellJammer has to take stabs at Bush so her little impressionable mind becomes entertained, but through policy and crimilizing the left, he's offering Amber something more to life then anarchy and carbs..

For crying out loud, stop saying 'liberal' for EVERYTHING. You'd blame liberals for there being no air in space if you could.

Just stop it, it's not funny, it's not cute.

-AC

Spelljammer needs to understand that a Republican Apprentice of Bill O'Rielly is not independent only because he calls himself that...he's still a ***** ass conservative republican.....real independents are independent and do not quote Bill O'Rielly, The Patriot Act or George W. Bush as if it were the New Testament Reloaded.....

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Bill O' Reilly said himself he's an independant. That's where SpellJammer decided he wanted to be one too.

After that, he got several others to become inependants as well.

His jock friends Jason/Jerremy.
His dad who prior to this never bothered to register and vote.

And even his little cousin Amber, who's been brain-washed by the liberal masses, is slowly starting to act like her big cousin whom she idolizes. Surely SpellJammer has to take stabs at Bush so her little impressionable mind becomes entertained, but through policy and crimilizing the left, he's offering Amber something more to life then anarchy and carbs..

WTF are you talking about?

Spelljammer, you claim to be independent, yet you lap up everything the conservative right says.

Most independents don't completely disparage one political view and blame it for everything, because most independents tend to agree with certain views of both parties.

Learn something about politics, or please just shut the **** up.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
For crying out loud, stop saying 'liberal' for EVERYTHING. You'd blame liberals for there being no air in space if you could.

Just stop it, it's not funny, it's not cute.

-AC

yeah, its starting to upset me too. Liberal is just a view like conservative or independent. Liberals are not the cause for your problems and liberals certainly are not the cause for all the problems in the world.

Let's also not overlook the fact that, not to be rude, Spelljammer is quite lacking in the intelligence dept.

Even if liberals were the cause, he's using it out of context, anywhere he can.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Let's also not overlook the fact that, not to be rude, Spelljammer is quite lacking in the intelligence dept.

Even if liberals were the cause, he's using it out of context, anywhere he can.

-AC


That's because in Florida he's a genious, and hasn't been to school since second grade.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
That's because in Florida he's a genious, and hasn't been to school since second grade.
"sense second grade".......you make him look more stupid than he is.....

Originally posted by Bardock42
"sense second grade".......you make him look more stupid than he is.....

LOL...that's right.

Originally posted by Bardock42
"sense second grade".......you make him look more stupid than he is.....

Well SJ can be kinda ..amusing...and I think he's been doing some studing from his mom... Wicca and all....And I've read much about that....

Originally posted by KharmaDog
One Sargent?


Not once have I said that wars ARE fought overnight, so stop saying that. We haven't seen the full results of invading a country to influence the area around it yet because that in not a justifiable cause for war. The results that we have seen so far have not been promising as have been the results of other times in history when the U.S. has used military action to dictate the politics of another country.



Please point out these similarities.



Tactics and technology have also changed since these conflicts. Apparently you are only counting (or valuing) American deaths. Is that all that matters?



Read some stats on deaths and casualties of both Iraqi civilians and american military men. Saying that those deaths pale in comparison before we see the results of the war is very ignorant.



Far more were killed by the bombings from Allied forces planes and most have been women and children. If you are truly curious, look it up, I did a quick search and there is plenty of information.




As terrible as life under Saddam's rule was, more Iraqis have died directly due to the military actions of George Bush Sr. and Jr. then ever by Saddam Hussein. As for rape and torture, apparently they are not too safe from that anymore as american military soldiers are also participating in that.



Yes because the liberal media supports the terrorists, that must be it. As for the whole discussion on the liberal media, that has been done to death and proven a fallacy, search KMC forums for further info on that.



If your truly interested, keep searching.

One Sergeant and the soldiers under his command and working with him. Like I said, there were other documentaries I saw but I don't have a brilliant memory.

You may not have said it but you seem to be expecting it from your posting.

Similarities; think of Japan as Afghanistan and Germany as Iraq. I may be stretching a tad but it makes some sense.

I think the amount of deaths is on par with what has happened so far in the Middle East.(New governments in Iraq, Afghanistan; changes in Egypt, Lebanon, and Syria) Also; tactics have changed drastically only in the last hundred years. Yet, much tactics used today is covered in The Art of War.

I highly doubt more civilians have been killed by the allies than terrorists. Why aren't you posting that info with your reply?

How is what I said ignorant? Read my post again.....I said the deaths in the war on terror and in Iraq pale in comparison to the deaths in KOREA, WWII, and VIETNAM. I said the WHINING is pathetic because we have not seen the full results.

First off; are you saying that the first gulf war was a sham too?
And second; where is your proof?!! You keep saying that all these civilians have died from the allies instead of the terrorists yet you fail to give any sort of reliable resource to back you up.

No, you THINK it has been proven a fallacy. You still haven't given any credible excuse to the Dan Rather incident and the media's inability to report anything positive that has happened in this war.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Let's also not overlook the fact that, not to be rude, Spelljammer is quite lacking in the intelligence dept.

Even if liberals were the cause, he's using it out of context, anywhere he can.

-AC

yeah, SJ if you read this. I am not trying to be mean but it is a bit overboard

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Bill O' Reilly said himself he's an independant. That's where SpellJammer decided he wanted to be one too.



This category is Most Ironic Post.

And the nominees are...

Originally posted by Echuu
You may not have said it but you seem to be expecting it from your posting.

Please leave the mind reading to the amazing Kreskin.

Originally posted by Echuu
Similarities; think of Japan as Afghanistan and Germany as Iraq. I may be stretching a tad but it makes some sense.

How are they at all similar?

Originally posted by Echuu
I think the amount of deaths is on par with what has happened so far in the Middle East.(New governments in Iraq, Afghanistan; changes in Egypt, Lebanon, and Syria) Also; tactics have changed drastically only in the last hundred years. Yet, much tactics used today is covered in The Art of War.

Tactics have changed drastically in the last thirty years, and you thinking that the amount of deaths are acceptable is far from validation that they are acceptable.


Originally posted by Echuu
I highly doubt more civilians have been killed by the allies than terrorists. Why aren't you posting that info with your reply?

Do you honestly believe that the thousands of bombs that the U.S. has dropped on Iraqi cities since the early nineties have only killed terrorists? Of course there were no terrorists in Iraq before you invaded, you do know that don't you?


The Herald (Scotland) May 23, 2003

Civilian deaths in Iraq could be as high as 10,000 Final body count could be biggest since Vietnam war, writes IAN BRUCE

American guns, bombs and missiles killed more civilians in the recent war in Iraq than in any conflict since Vietnam, according to preliminary assessments carried out by the UN, international aid agencies and independent study groups.

Despite US boasts this was the fastest, most clinical campaign in military history, a first snapshot of "collateral damage" indicates that between 5000 and 10,000 Iraqi non-combatants died in the course of the hi-tech blitzkrieg.

Organisations such as the Red Cross, the Muslim Red Crescent, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the UN are all still carrying out surveys and are reluctant to commit themselves to a final figure.

All agree, however, the toll will exceed the 3500 civilians killed in the 1991 Gulf war and the 1800 to 2000 innocent Afghans known to have perished during the 2001 invasion to oust the Taliban and wipe out al Qaeda's training camps. US government figures for Vietnam claimed that 300,000 died in the south and 65,000 in the north of that divided country.

Haidar Taie, who runs the Red Crescent's tracing department in Baghdad, said: "We just don't know for certain. But thousands are dead, thousands more injured or missing. It will take time to reach a definitive count. It was certainly a disaster for civilians caught in the fighting."

A spokesman for the Red Cross said: "We are piecing things together slowly. Hospitals and doctors were overwhelmed by the numbers arriving for treatment, so records are patchy. The indicators from those records which were kept is a high civilian bodycount and many, many more injured."

The independent US-based Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict (Civic) has sent out 150 volunteers to interview victims' families and record injuries and damage to property. The group is also cross-checking stories with grave sites.

Marla Ruzicka, Civic co-ordinator, said: "Our people have already found more than 1000 graves in the town of Nasariyah in the south, where fedayeen resistance meant days of heavy street fighting and air strikes, and at least another 1000 fresh graves in the Baghdad area."

The Red Crescent says there are many more civilian graves between Nasariyah and Najaf along the Euphrates River. Pro-Saddam militia made a number of stands and ambushes in built-up areas to slow the US advance on the capital and tanks, bombers and artillery were all used to dislodge them from populated areas.

Professor Mark Herold of New Hampshire University, who is also a spokesman for Iraqbodycount, a website dedicated to revealing the civilian cost of the war, says the running tally is "in excess of 5000 and still climbing".

The site draws on media and witness accounts for its figures. Reporters for news agencies based in Baghdad during the invasion are fairly consistent in claiming between 2300 and 2600 civilian victims of the US-led air attacks on the city.

There are no official figures for Iraqi military deaths, estimated at anywhere between 4000 and 7000.

A Pentagon source said: "It was inevitable there would be regrettable civilian losses. Our forces made every effort to minimise innocent casualties, often to the point of putting their own lives at risk.

"We have no hard facts and figures for such losses. Any non-governmental tally will include a lot of guesswork."


Originally posted by Echuu
you THINK it has been proven a fallacy. You still haven't given any credible excuse to the Dan Rather incident and the media's inability to report anything positive that has happened in this war.

Becausethere is nothing positive about this war.

This war was originally declared to obtain Saddam's wepons of mass destruction, of which there were none and the reaason turned out to be a fabrication. Then it was about freeing the Iraqi people, as noble as that is, there are many countries in the world waiting to be freed, I doubt that's going to happpen. Finally Bush made this war about 9/11 and terrorism, of course there has been no link to either, but people buy it anyhow.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Please leave the mind reading to the amazing Kreskin.



How are they at all similar?



Tactics have changed drastically in the last thirty years, and you thinking that the amount of deaths are acceptable is far from validation that they are acceptable.




Do you honestly believe that the thousands of bombs that the U.S. has dropped on Iraqi cities since the early nineties have only killed terrorists? Of course there were no terrorists in Iraq before you invaded, you do know that don't you?






Becausethere is nothing positive about this war.

This war was originally declared to obtain Saddam's wepons of mass destruction, of which there were none and the reaason turned out to be a fabrication. Then it was about freeing the Iraqi people, as noble as that is, there are many countries in the world waiting to be freed, I doubt that's going to happpen. Finally Bush made this war about 9/11 and terrorism, of course there has been no link to either, but people buy it anyhow.

Okay I will.

Think about it. I want you to consider for yourself first.

Just because tactics have changed doesn't give you a right to excuse the low amount of casualties and say they are 'high.' You also realize those 'early ninties' were Clinton right?

I never said that...I believe terrorists have killed more civilians than U.S. troops.

We are just going to have to agree to disagree. I don't wanna seem like I'm backing out but this just isn't getting anywhere. If you want PM me.

Interesting info on the casualties by the way.

the way Spelljammer refers to himself in third person reminds me of Doby from Harry Potter, can you imagine Bush having a house elf and the elf is on the net defending everything to the death...i can, look at his name, makes sense. well as much sense as his bush defences

Originally posted by tabby999
the way Spelljammer refers to himself in third person reminds me of Doby from Harry Potter, can you imagine Bush having a house elf and the elf is on the net defending everything to the death...i can, look at his name, makes sense. well as much sense as his bush defences

so true. Everything is the liberals fault. You know I do believe this is projection. A form of a defense mechanism. When one knows they are the cause of the problem yet projects the problem upon someone else.

SJ ----> (projects problems) -----> Liberals.

Originally posted by Raven Guardia
so true. Everything is the liberals fault. You know I do believe this is projection. A form of a defense mechanism. When one knows they are the cause of the problem yet projects the problem upon someone else.

SJ ----> (projects problems) -----> Liberals.
Uh, that's NOT projection.

Originally posted by FeceMan
Uh, that's NOT projection.

uh, yes it is. when one projects problems onto another saying they are the blame its called projection.

let me give you the term from my Psych book

Projection- a defense mechanism in which an individual attributes to others his own unethical motives or thoughts, or places blame for his difficulties upon others.

SJ is placing blames about all the difficulties on the liberals, that is projection.

Originally posted by Raven Guardia
uh, yes it is. when one projects problems onto another saying they are the blame its called projection.

let me give you the term from my Psych book

Projection- a defense mechanism in which an individual attributes to others his own unethical motives or thoughts, or places blame for his difficulties upon others.

SJ is placing blames about all the difficulties on the liberals, that is projection.
Projection is not saying, "Oh, you did it," because the speaker is actually at fault. Projection is, "Oh, you just want to bang me so badly," when the speaker wants sex.

To use a random (and crude) example.

and a very relevant one at that

Originally posted by FeceMan
Projection is not saying, "Oh, you did it," because the speaker is actually at fault. Projection is, "Oh, you just want to bang me so badly," when the speaker wants sex.

To use a random (and crude) example.

ex: a student thinks about cheating on a test, when he decides not too he relieves his guilt by saying "Everybody else in the class cheats. I even saw chuck cheating and he is on the honor roll"

another ex: an irritable person may blame another person for being irritable.

if you look at the definition (Projection- a defense mechanism in which an individual attributes to others his own unethical motives or thoughts, or places blame for his difficulties upon others) you will see projection is also placing blame upon someone else for his difficulties.

Originally posted by Raven Guardia
ex: a student thinks about cheating on a test, when he decides not too he relieves his guilt by saying "Everybody else in the class cheats. I even saw chuck cheating and he is on the honor roll"

another ex: an irritable person may blame another person for being irritable.

if you look at the definition (Projection- a defense mechanism in which an individual attributes to others his own unethical motives or thoughts, or places blame for his difficulties upon others) you will see projection is also placing blame upon someone else for his difficulties.
I have never, ever seen a definition of projection involving the blame of difficulties. That's playing the blame game. Projection is all about emotions and motives.

And, unfortunately, we're going to have to agree to disagree. I cannot find a definition for projection at the APA's website.

Originally posted by FeceMan
I have never, ever seen a definition of projection involving the blame of difficulties. That's playing the blame game. Projection is all about emotions and motives.

And, unfortunately, we're going to have to agree to disagree. I cannot find a definition for projection at the APA's website.

well in Projection one can project motives and emotions, but they can also place blame.

and okay lets agree to disagree. Makes it a lot easier anyway

Apparently around 41,000 U.S. soldiers believe they have inadvertantly killed one or more civilians.

Originally posted by Echuu
Okay then nevermind I must have stretched it a little too far if you can't get something out of it.

No, really, you stated that the conflict in Iraq was strikingly similar to WW2 more than once. Explain yourself.

Originally posted by Echuu
Good you finally have shown some of your 'intependent' thought instead of just attacking Bush. I agee with you on that one.

I was more correcting you on the fact that you ssaid that Clinton was president in the early 90's and not Bush, but whatever.


Originally posted by Echuu
What about the suicide bombers like every week? Those aren't in combat with U.S. troops they are just slaughtering civilians. You would think that those casualties would be higher than those killed by U.S. troops.

I wouldn't think that at all, you see, suicide bombers target specific areas, whereas more than one city in Iraq has been bombed by allied aircraft not to mention the thousands of tonnes of ordinance that has been dropped. Suicide bombers make papers because it's shocking. Killing civillians with american/allied bombs usually is kept as quiet as possible, however, organizations such as the red cross are willing to speak up.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
No, really, you stated that the conflict in Iraq was strikingly similar to WW2 more than once. Explain yourself.



I was more correcting you on the fact that you ssaid that Clinton was president in the early 90's and not Bush, but whatever.




I wouldn't think that at all, you see, suicide bombers target specific areas, whereas more than one city in Iraq has been bombed by allied aircraft not to mention the thousands of tonnes of ordinance that has been dropped. Suicide bombers make papers because it's shocking. Killing civillians with american/allied bombs usually is kept as quiet as possible, however, organizations such as the red cross are willing to speak up.

Well you said the casualties were high on both sides. I may have misunderstood you.

The Americans are accidentally killing them, not targeting them. That's the thing. Also remember that Saddam would purposely put civilians near military instilations.

As for the WWII thing... Japan attacks pearl harbor bringing the U.S. out of a period of isolationism. Afghanistan was the front for attacking the U.S. also bringing us out of a similar period brought on by Clinton(debateable). The U.S. then goes out and destroys the enemy... occupies, reforms their government etc etc.

Also I said the war on terror and Iraq are similar to WWII in some aspects.

Can I ask...

What if tomorrow most of the world bar USA joined together to remove Bush from power....
I mean hes got many WMD... hes invaded other countries without reason... half of the country didn't agree with him coming to power... he constantly lies to the country about his decisions... Hes used most of his power to gain more money for himself... Hes constantly using god as one of his cohorts... hes arrested people and tortured them without proof.. hes trying to break up the UN... Hes taken America out of the Geneva convention...

How long must America toil under the evil dictatorship of G. Bush???
I feel that I should take up arms and free the American people....!

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss

How long must America toil under the evil dictatorship of G. Bush???

3 More years you impatient bastard..

It's still better then our last two presidents..

Clinton was incompetant, a pig, a rapist, and an idiot.

Senior Bush was a madman, he could barely make coherant speech. Much less lead a country.

"Senior Bush was a madman, he could barely make coherent speech. Much less lead a country."

YUP! father like son.... Give it 8 years and you might see it then!...

Can I ask spelljammer, how many guns do you own? what do you do for work? and have you been better off financially since bush has been in power?

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
Can I ask spelljammer, how many guns do you own? what do you do for work? and have you been better off financially since bush has been in power?
One, it's a pellet gun. But it looks real.

Currently unemployed. Might have a job soon as a cross-gaurd though. It does have relations to authority despite it not seeming so. And because he'd be working for the state, he could make some friends and soon fine his way doing what he really wants. Police work.

SpellJammer's parents are deffinitly better now then they were under the Clinton administration. SpellJammer wouldn't say Bush directly was involved in that, but it sure helped. If Republicans didn't help the poor, why would so many vote for them?

What other good deads has bush done since hes come to power??

How do Republicans help the poor, exactly?

How does taking money away from welfare, healthcare, and education help the poor? How does cutting taxes for the top brackets, the people who can afford to pay them the most, help the poor?

Oh wait. It doesn't.

Hmmm.

I often wonder about America... how can a country that has soo much, setup not that long ago... has loads of space... Very little threat from neighbour countries... not turn into a perfect country?

But like most things in America, it wasn't implemented for he common good... but as another way to make a profit...

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
Can I ask...

What if tomorrow most of the world bar USA joined together to remove Bush from power....
I mean hes got many WMD... hes invaded other countries without reason... half of the country didn't agree with him coming to power... he constantly lies to the country about his decisions... Hes used most of his power to gain more money for himself... Hes constantly using god as one of his cohorts... hes arrested people and tortured them without proof.. hes trying to break up the UN... Hes taken America out of the Geneva convention...

How long must America toil under the evil dictatorship of G. Bush???
I feel that I should take up arms and free the American people....!

Whatever floats your boat. One thing though... the UN is crap.

Originally posted by Lana
How do Republicans help the poor, exactly?

How does taking money away from welfare, healthcare, and education help the poor? How does cutting taxes for the top brackets, the people who can afford to pay them the most, help the poor?

Oh wait. It doesn't.

Hmmm.

I agree. Republicans help the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

Originally posted by Lana
How do Republicans help the poor, exactly?

How does taking money away from welfare, healthcare, and education help the poor? How does cutting taxes for the top brackets, the people who can afford to pay them the most, help the poor?

Oh wait. It doesn't.

Hmmm.
What does getting your dick sucked and sitting on your ass doing nothing do to help the poor exactly?

How does making false promises and then sitting around scratching your balls help the poor?

Oh wait, it doesn't.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
What does getting your dick sucked and sitting on your ass doing nothing do to help the poor exactly?

How does making false promises and then sitting around scratching your balls help the poor?

Oh wait, it doesn't.

Slightly nutty reply, it must be said.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
What does getting your dick sucked and sitting on your ass doing nothing do to help the poor exactly?

How does making false promises and then sitting around scratching your balls help the poor?

Oh wait, it doesn't.

if your referring to Clinton, how do you Monica didn't willing bang him? Sometimes women are like that (not all) but some women are sick like that, they will consent to having sex with someone then go and say they were rapped. I don't remember much about the case/trail because I was pretty young then and didn't watch the news. But you should not generalize a 'scandel' committed by a certain president on the whole particular party. he made a mistake, unlike bush who makes numerous and continues to do so with out second thought or caring about who is being harmed. As long as he is the gain he doesn't care about anyone else.

Originally posted by Echuu
Whatever floats your boat. One thing though... the UN is crap.

Yup the UN's crap hey??? just hope for your sake there isn't another war... without the Geneva convention in place theres nothing thats considered an atrocity against USA and its civilians...

The UN is crap because it tries to stop bush and his obvious attempts at breaking the law...

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
...The UN is crap because it tries to stop bush and his obvious attempts at breaking the law...




I have a feeling you don't realize just how funny that line is.

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
Yup the UN's crap hey??? just hope for your sake there isn't another war... without the Geneva convention in place theres nothing thats considered an atrocity against USA and its civilians...

The UN is crap because it tries to stop bush and his obvious attempts at breaking the law...

Bush did go to war illegally yet got away with it. Thats bull shit. I don't see how he gets away with this crud. How can he get away with it?? if anyone else did it they be trouble.

Originally posted by Raven Guardia
Bush did go to war illegally yet got away with it. Thats bull shit. I don't see how he gets away with this crud. How can he get away with it?? if anyone else did it they be trouble.
Because the last-time The U.N. didn't listen Hitler rose to power.

So from past fables.
The fact the United Nations is located on American grounds. (So if they don't like it they can take thier happy pappy asses somewhere else..)
And the fact that no-one really takes them seriously anyway.

The U.N. has very little say in what we, or anybody else does. Watch Team America: World Police. That's exactly how the UN acts..

"You better do as we say or the UN will be angery with you!"
"And what will you do about it?!"
"...We'll write a letter telling you about how angery we are!"

I love Americans... they provide me endless hours of comedy... (no offence to the ones whos IQ passes above 100 and realise what an idiot bush is)

My favourite type of American is the uneducated ones who form all they views on what bush tells them and what they see on the TV... Most see "team America, world police" as a factual representation of what world politics are all about...

UN can't force people to obey, thats a dictatorship... they can impose sanctions to cripple a countries economy... like Iraq.. Hitler came about due to the POOR aftermath of the war... Germany was crippled and sort there salvation in taking power back... the same is happening in Iraq now...

Whats the only country in the world to ever use nuclear weapons against another country, and refuses other countries to have the same level of power "because they might use them"???

But hey! aslong as you never have to live in the shabby conditions.. who cares???

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
I love Americans... they provide me endless hours of comedy... (no offence to the ones whos IQ passes above 100 and realise what an idiot bush is)

My favourite type of American is the uneducated ones who form all they views on what bush tells them and what they see on the TV... Most see "team America, world police" as a factual representation of what world politics are all about...

UN can't force people to obey, thats a dictatorship... they can impose sanctions to cripple a countries economy... like Iraq.. Hitler came about due to the POOR aftermath of the war... Germany was crippled and sort there salvation in taking power back... the same is happening in Iraq now...

Whats the only country in the world to ever use nuclear weapons against another country, and refuses other countries to have the same level of power "because they might use them"???

But hey! aslong as you never have to live in the shabby conditions.. who cares???

and we all know what happened after WW1 Germany got the blame, Hitler a solider got pissed off (he also had OCD) decided to get back at the world and try and take power leading to WW2....maybe after this war there where be another. Iraq will rise from the ruins and strike back.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Because the last-time The U.N. didn't listen Hitler rose to power.The United Nations was formed after WWII, fool.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
The United Nations was formed after WWII, fool.
Zoom.

I think he meant League of Nations.

Originally posted by FeceMan
Zoom.

I think he meant League of Nations. I highly doubt he even knows what the League of Nations is.

Originally posted by Raven Guardia
Iraq will rise from the ruins and strike back.
Star Wars: The Sand People Strike Back. XD

and where was america for the best half of the war??? too busy selling weapons to the germans turning a profit to care...

Spelljammer is there anything you can show to prove bush isn't the bad guy who messed up the world??

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
Yup the UN's crap hey??? just hope for your sake there isn't another war... without the Geneva convention in place theres nothing thats considered an atrocity against USA and its civilians...

The UN is crap because it tries to stop bush and his obvious attempts at breaking the law...

Yeah they sure did a reaaaaal good job of stopping him.

As Principal Skinner said on the Simpsons...."Children!!! Do you want to be like the real U.N. or do you just want to squabble and waste time?!"



xmarksthespot>..... I think Spelljammer is thinking of the League of Nations.

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
Spelljammer is there anything you can show to prove bush isn't the bad guy who messed up the world??
Easy proof.

Every president before him.

Also guess what, America isn't the only country in the world. Everyone everywhere is just as much to blame as Bush is. Rome wasn't built nor destroyed in a day..

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Star Wars: The Sand People Strike Back. XD You do realise calling a population of people "sand people", who are "barbaric", "AK-47" wielding, with "bombs attached to their butts" is racial/prejudice slur don't you? Why am I even asking. Of course you don't.Originally posted by Echuu
xmarksthespot>..... I think Spelljammer is thinking of the League of Nations. Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I highly doubt he even knows what the League of Nations is.

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Star Wars: The Sand People Strike Back. XD
Naughty, but humorous.

Star Wars: Revenge of the Tusken Raiders.

Yes, cause Lord knows SpellJammer cares about the feelings of some guy who'd probably rape SpellJammer with a razor blade if given half the chance.

Growup.

Originally posted by FeceMan
Naughty, but humorous.

Star Wars: Revenge of the Tusken Raiders.
SpellJammer loved tusken raiders the most in Star Wars. Grouchy, xenophobic madmen who'd talk jibberish and shoot you with a shotgun when you got on his territory. "DAMN KIDS! GET OFF THE SAND!"

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Yes, cause Lord knows SpellJammer cares about the feelings of some guy who'd probably rape SpellJammer with a razor blade if given half the chance.

Growup. Every time you post an angel gets its wings ripped off and shoved down its throat, you ignorant imbecile.

see thats where you wrong... america uses its superpower status to push little counties around... they know that if they don't comply they too will be invaded... the UN can't go to war with america... UN does squabble alot but they can't force another country to do stuff... they are not enforcers...

Bush even passed out of a bill to slow down the pollution levels...

Bush hasn't done a good thing for this planet... The cost to run one aircraft carier in the gulf war was more then Iraqs yearly defence bill...

If you spent 20million dollars a day since the birth of christ you still wouldn't sum up the total amount america has spent on defence since the second world war... ( I read it about 2 weeks ago might be a little off but that was the jist, I'll try to track down the correct line tomoz)

You waste all your money on war when piece comes cheaper...

Peace is a lie. There is only passion..

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Grouchy, xenophobic madmen who'd talk jibberish and shoot you with a shotgun when you got on his territory. "DAMN KIDS! GET OFF THE SAND!"

Sounds like your talking about Texas.... (sorry to anyone offended..)

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
Sounds like your talking about Texas.... (sorry to anyone offended..)
That's what makes the Texans so lovable! Thier hatemongering!

Originally posted by Spelljammer
Peace is a lie. There is only passion..


carry on turning to the dark-side... When everyone turns and you start killing each other in your sleep so that you can become Numero Uno sith...

I'll be there laughing at Democratic Justice...

Originally posted by Hit_and_Miss
I'll be there laughing at Democratic Justice...
What democratic justice? When ever in history have you seen ain inoffensive democratic state?

The answer is never. It can't be done. Anyone who believes it can is niave and sheltered. The real world is harsh, awful, and cruel. Learn to adapt, survive, and keep your dignity. Those are your only responsibilities.