Headlines from Europe

Xto, you're giving me a political manifesto, rather than taking one point at a time and examining it logically.

That takes this into the arena of pure political debating and rhetoric, in which I have no interest.

I'm glad that you're happy.

Ok.
Point one: Terrorist have to be cautious everytime they pop their head out of their holes, lest they catch a daisy cutter. They do not enjoy any form of a stable powerbase.

Point Two: Nobody I have run into, or heard of, in the last two years has changed anything fundimentally in their lives for fear of terrorism, except for when traveling abroad.

Prior to 9/11, there was no war on terrorism...so we were in a state of perceived security. They attacked, now there is war, perceptions have change. That doesn't mean they are winning, just that the world has changed.

Xto, I concede the debate in your favour.

Not the logic of even one of those three points mind you, just the debate as a whole.

Perhaps its Bush's courage of conviction and moral fortitude to fight for inalienable rights that gives you the priviledge to utter such tripe?
1) The evocation of the word God has nothing to do with my contempt for Kerry, his lack of conviction and proven lack of leadership qualities does.

2) The threat of terrorism is real, not imagined, as has been proven out by the first World Trade Center attack in 1993, this war on terror could have been resolved then, but it was yet another person with absolutely zero courage of conviction, a draft dodger even, who lacked the fortitude to do anything about it. Even when repeatedly offered bin Laden by the Sudanese Government. Even while being aware of bin Ladens hijack plans.

3) Scare Americans with terror alerts? If you prefer to live with your head in the sand, so be it. I don't think that any Americans barricade themselves up in their homes with a gas mask and gun when there is an alert, but many do appreciate the knowledge.

4) Lack of free information? Hmm, did you form your opinions via a crystal ball, or did you use sources i.e. newspapers, television that reported these supposed incidences to you? Where do I get my sources of information most likely the same sources you use.

5) When(more like if, a BIG IF) the revolution comes, I will stand proudly against the wall knowing at least I, and the majority of Americans and our duly elected leader of this country had the moral fortitude and courage of conviction to make a choice and stand behind it. Where will Mr CLinton and Mr Kerry be? On the next train to Canada, most likely with you carrying their luggage.

ROFL.

Jeez, I didn't realize the Off-Topic forum was this funny, or I'd have come here before.

Didn't the Catholics first pull this off with the Crusades? I guess one positive is this can only last 4 more years.. right!?!

Unless it's propped up by said stable powerhouse. Ie, the Taliban (propped up by us) in the 1980's, Saddam's regime in the 1980's (propped up by us), etc.



If a free society is unable to go where it wants to, is it really free?



You can't declare "war" on an idea. Look at the "war" on drugs. It's an idea, we're attacking it, it's failing miserably, with drug use not declining, billions of dollars spent, and no solid "victory" to rally behind (sound familiar?)

Likewise, you can't attack the "war" on terrorism, because "terror" is a nebulous idea at best. You can't even get scholars to agree what the correct definition is. Besides, if anyone MIGHT be a terrorist, does that mean we have to wage war against EVERYBODY?

LF

Oh, is that why he hides our "rights" under the carpet whenever a threat rears up? Is that why if the Terror Level goes "Red", we are under a perpetual state of martial law, with NO freedoms and rights? Is that why he forces protesters of his presidency to sit a mile away from where he's speaking, cordoned off, in "free speech zones" (isn't that oxymoronic?), unable to talk to the press, lest they get arrested?

What's that? Freedom of expression, press, and speech? What is this first amendment you speak of? It's unnecessary. Gotta catch those A-rabs...


A draft dodger! How did the nation ever survive with a <i><b>draft dodger</i></b> leading the way? He might even be a COMMUNIST SYMPATHIZER, SENATOR MCCARTHY. Quick, I'll get the tar, you get the feathers.



Yes, a nebulous terror alert is something I like hearing on the news every 5 minutes. The press release attributed to these? "We have no credible threats at this time, no defined targets, no defined timeframe. But please, stay alert." Gee, Thanks Mr. Ridge. Now I can sleep better knowing that the Terrorists are held off by the color yellow.



Only because they're Democrats, in your mind, I bet.

Think past the dual-party idealogies.

As for "majority", perhaps you meant "very slight majority", as 52% is hardly a landslide victory. Hell, in military numbers, it would be considered a "Pyhrric Victory (spelling?)", in which you won, yes, but at the cost of so many troops that it's considered pointless.

Have a wonderful day. May your closed mind wander through another bustling day of Fox News Alerts and Terror Levels.

LF

I am by no means participating in this debate, but only wanted to add my two cents into why I voted the way I did. That way you guys have something more to argue about. I am but one face in a crowd.
First of all, let me explain my situation. I'm a late twenty year old female who has previously refused to vote due to my inability to distinguish who is really telling the truth. Before you grumble, let me just say I know, I've heard all the reasons why I should vote and "make my opinion matter". This time, I think the whole difference is the war. As to why the war started or if we went into it wrongly, that's all in the past now. It's too late, we're already there. We've made our bed and now we must lie in it. I don't for one second blame Bush for the matter in which it was handled. He is but one man with an entire staff who helps him make decisions.
As far as the multitude of issues this election encompassed, I have to say I agreed with Kerry's side on more of them. More of them, except the biggest one, the war in Iraq. I watched every single debate between both candidates, including the vice presidential debate, and was terrified as to how Kerry planned to work on this issue. We are there, we cannot just leave now. I seriously got the feeling that this man had no real plan except to back out as soon as possible, but that is only my opinion based on my own observations. If we were to just leave Iraq in the state it is in now, they would hate us more than they already do. Their country is in ruins, they don't have enough supplies for their people, and they don't know who to trust anymore. What they need now is for us to show them how an entire nation can come together and help one another. We have to show them that they do not have to fit into the mold that their leader set forth and that we're here to help them. National reform is best expressed through personal reform. These people have no idea what personal freedom is, so let's show them the value of it.
I do not believe the people of the U.S. live in fear and terror, but rather have better prepared themselves for events such as 9/11. If anything, 9/11 inspired determintaion rather than fear. I do not claim to know all of the circumstances surrounding why this attack was inflicted upon us, I only know it will not succeed. Brutally slaying thousands of innocent people will not get your message out, but only distort it further and encourage hate.
I do not believe we should try and make a connection between Saddam and Osama when there is none. Our own intelligence who first reported this link has even renigged on it, but the fact remains that these are both very dangerous men (seperate OR together). The question is to whether or not our actions are helping or hurting the general public of these nations. We don't know that, because they've never been allowed the freedom to decide on their own or to voice their opinions. I don't believe you can have an opinion on such matter as politics when you're too consumed with basic needs such as food, water and shelter. Anyway, that's my opinion and thank goodness I have the freedom and option to express it here in this forum.

at least half the time anyways --mostly he's on vacation.

Oh! You mean Cheney!!! He's in an undisclosed location

1) Perpetual marsall law? Gee, never been shot at leaving my house, at threatcon red, have you? Having protestors sit a safe distance away, is just good security. While Don Corleone may believe in keeping his enemies closer, it would be a nightmare for the protection detail if they were allowed front row seats and as protestors, they do have the right to assembly, and I respect that. The president also has a right to protection, they didn't arrest, or abrogate the protestors rights, they allowed them to protest, didn't they?

Freedom of expression? Yep, you have it, you won't be shot, or imprisoned for the views you have stated here, will you?

2) You focused on the word draft dodger, entirely missing the point made there, if he had done something when given the opportunity, 9/11 may very well have never happened would it?

3) nebulous terror alert? I stand by my previous statement, I want to know, does that mean it changes my day to day routine? No, but I want to know.

4) Majority win, yes, a majority win, the largest in the nations history as well. And the largest since his father.

As for thinking past the dual party ideologies, where did I ever mention a political party? Not because they are Democrats, but because they are weak people as their past has demostrated.

In 2000 I would not have voted for McCain, my politics do not follow any specific party, but I do vote for who I think is the best man for the job, as did the majority of Americans, sorry you bet on a losing horse now take said defeat as graciously as your horse did.

LOL, Fox News? Not my news channel of choice. Hell my television has been busted for almost the last month, so I was spared all the campaign hype and rhetoric from both sides, thank goodness.

So, back to the point; we propped them up, they bit the hand that fed. We then attacked them. By your argument, the only power they ever enjoyed was provided by the west, which was taken when they acted.



So exactly which society provides the alternative today? France? England? Russia? I don't think travel within or from any other country today is any less restrictive. And exactly how are you unable to go anywhere? All I've seen is more security in airports and the same restricted travel countries that have been in place prior to the war on terrorism.


War is the final violent culmination of disagreement between two parties on idealistic grounds. Since the era of nation building it has come into favor to describe war as a conflict between two or more states, but that is just a newer definition of the term. The War of Roses was between landowners seeking the crown, the Civil War was between two opposing sides within a single country, The Revolutionary War was a breakaway colony fighting against its prior governing country, the Crusades generally concerned the securing of the holy lands for Muslims or Christians...all of them fought in the name of the respective groups ideas. So, yes, history has show us that war can be declared on an idea or belief system. Just because the only recent example that corresponds is the failed War on Drugs (which four administrations have now bungled), doesn't make the concept any less viable. The idea may be nebulous, but the actions of its participants are not. In the war on drugs, if you sell, take, or smuggle them...you are on the side against the U.S. government (personally, I hate the war on drugs, but the example still stands) - Similarly, in a war on terrorism, if you plan violent attacks or attempt to sow fearfulness with the threat of attack on another belief system, country, or group...you are a terrorist.
Once again, what is the alternative, decide that we cannot fight an idea and turn tail?

Considering Threat Level Red has yet to be declared, I would hope not. Wait until the next terrorist attack, and then try to protest something.



Nope. Arrests on the spot for anyone leaving the tiny "free speech zone". One elderly couple that snuck out into the crowd and displayed "Kerry/Edwards" shirts were arrested for a night's stay in jail. The charge? eh... who knows? No one really said.

And this "safe distance away" argument is laughable. A mile away, literally, 5,280 feet away is repugnant in a free society. If the President can't see that people are angry, then by God (haha), they must not be angry, right? Only let him see what he wants to see, and it'll be all right..

Furthermore, most of the Presidents of our fine Republic have lived perfectly fine lives in the public eye without any silly restrictive "free speech zone" a mile away, and without any silly Draconian measures to "protect the President's security". If he's that worried about public spaces, maybe he should just talk from his oval office.



Your sentence structure is wrong, so I must correct it.

It wasn't the largest "majority win" in the history of the nation. a 52% to 48% is, statistically, a tie (the golden +/- 5% rule). Yes, he got more votes, but it's not a major win by any stretch of the imagination.

LF

I quite concur.. I mean, the terrorists will for sure strike at Grand Rapids, the next chance they get!

You've bought into the hype.. swallow your pill and go quietly.

That was a very well considered and personal post, Ambient! Quite rare, amid all the simple parrotting of electioneering phrases. Well written.
That's where you went wrong initially of course, trying to find truth in the words of politicians. The operating keywords are of course power, money, influence, coercion, and deceit. Actual truth doesn't figure anywhere, although the empty word is used a lot as emollient for the unthinking masses, needless to say.

And that's fine of course, because the masses don't want truth, they just want the feelgood factor of nice clean, honest-sounding words. The fact that under the thin veneer, the blood of countless foreign innocents is running like rivers doesn't matter (not even for evangelicals who you'd think would respect life), nor does it matter that actions achieve nothing except streaming very welcome tax dollars into the arms industry.

Oh well, not to worry. As long as people are happy, that's all that matters, and that's why they chose the comfort of the blue pill at this election after all. The truth is very hard to bear, not enjoyable at all, and the voting majority have clearly indicated that they just don't wanna know.