US soldiers death toll 1,002

On the bright side of the 40 million abortions that have taken place in america 70% most likely would of been Democrats. The Democratic support for abortion cost gore the election. And for the next 20 years republicans will injoy ever increasingly greater numbers of voters. News Week Titled "The cradle will rock"
The Democrats are so stupid that they have killed off their voteing base. Why to go boys. They were wrong on slavery and wrong on abortion. Oh Blackie hope you like Republicans, there are going to be a lot more of us in the future.

 

campbell, please don't turn every thread into an abortion thread. It is perfectly okay to be against abortion, but can we stay on topic?

Plus I certainly hope that you aren't saying that the lives lost during this war is okay because democrats abort so many babies...

I also find it pretty lame to come here to what is obviously a liberal forum just to insult anyone who is not a republican.

 

I dont support this whole war on iraq thing. If I get sent over there I will do my job, but only because im told to. now if they told me to go to chechnia to help russia I would be all about it. The school hostage takeover situation was just fucked up.


I really don't even know why were still over in iraq. And im thankful that I havn't been deployed there yet.

Anyways thats my rant im out

 

would you take those kids hostage if you were ordered to?

 

Yeah man, Good Question, I would REALLY like to hear him answer that one...

Peace and Love,
Dan

 

The black widows are a terrorist group, they give their own orders, and my answer to that is no. I joined the airforce because i didnt want to be in an infantry and shoot people. My job is to guard and protect. I dont leave bases and run through villages shooting people. I stand around and look busy, and make sure no one blows up our planes. We in the military still have choices not to shoot people. Its all in the person. If my commander told me to shoot a school full of children, id tell him to fuck himself, and contact his commander for an unlawful order.

 

Green, to answer your question/veiled accusation:


I don't have a car.
I don't have television.
I don't have a computer in the house.
I don't eat meat, nor do I eat any factory-produced animal products.
I buy almost all organic produce, and try to buy in-season from local farmers.
I don't shop at Wal Mart. I buy nearly everything used, or at one of our two local co-ops.
I am homeschooling my daughter.
I do not use any hygiene or cleaning products that are not produced with natural non-animal products.
We were living in cooperative housing until violent people moved in and were not evicted, so we moved out for our daughter's (and our own) safety. I am currently assisting with a group attempting to start a family-friendly community/organic farm.

Oh, and my cat is neutered.

While all of the above should perhaps "qualify" me (in your opinion) to speak on the issues here, I will STILL not be voting for Kerry. Your claims that voting for Kerry will move us away from war simply do not hold up, if you believe Kerry is telling the truth in his platform. He has not only stated that he would have voted to invade Iraq even WITHOUT weapons of mass destruction and/or a threat to the US, he has stated that he will "solve" the problem in Iraq by shipping MORE soldiers there. Either Kerry is a LIAR and doesn't mean this (in which case, we can't have any idea what he truly believes about anything, which makes him equally scary) - or he is telling the truth, in which case I would rather vote for a ficus plant.

To be clear, I won't be voting for Bush either. I'll probably vote for Nader, as I did in the last election. Or perhaps I'll do a write-in for Chomsky or Cornell West. Or myself. Unless, of course, Kerry grows a spine and starts saying what we all KNOW is true - that the Iraq invasion was a fiasco, a massive human-rights violation, and a crime against humanity that can only be solved by admission of guilt and removal of US troops (with the US paying for substitution of international peacekeepers and IMMEDIATE democratic elections).

 

you should of mentioned how the Democratic party supports the murder of 40 million american children by abortion

Abortion is a medical term for the termination of pregnancy, including miscarriages. Statistically, this "god" beast is the primary killer of babies. Looking at his history as claimed in the Old Testament, I wonder how anyone could worship such a fucking monster. He knowingly permits evil to happen on a scale beyond our worst nightmares, yet we're supposed to worship him out of fear. This "god" insect makes Mao, Stalin, and Hitler look downright Christian in comparison.

One day we will bring him to justice. Or, learn once and for all that he's just an imaginary, ahem, "friend."

That said, my wife and I were faced with two unplanned pregnancies during our marriage (is "the sponge" still even legal?- it didn't work well), and found the very thought of abortion as unacceptable. Our kids are now the kindest people I know, and now the trick is just to keep them away from the military recruiters and their supporters who claim this "god" monstrosity is on their side.

Oh yeah, and they're voting for Kerry. The leech shall lose this round.

 

You can bash someones opinion all day long, but don't bash their religion.
We cant always blame everything on God, or whatever. Humans are in control of their own actions. I dont get how you people (not referring to everyone, but people who says things like that.) What do you believe in that makes you so high and mighty? Anyway thats what the religion thread is for this is america attacks buddy. Not the "your gods evil" forum.

How did "US soldiers death toll 1,002" turn into, "your god sucks because he lets puppies and babies die?" Stick to the religion thread if you want to make broad generalizations like that. I will even make a thread for you there. .....Seriously....I really made a thread for you.

I made the thread for you in the christian forums, cause I guess thats who you were targeting.

 

You can bash someones opinion all day long, but don't bash their religion.

I think that's a very unfair double-standard. If I asserted that I could produce a cold fusion reaction, I would be expected to back it up with proof. If I argue that John Kerry would make a better president than George W. Bush, I'm expected to back that up with some sort of evidence that can be evaluated by the standards of reason.

But religion is supposed to get an automatic nod of approval. It's not okay to challenge it, according to the views of many. And I'd be totally okay with that if people were not using religion to force their beliefs on others. For instance, by putting the Ten Suggestions That In Many Situations Make Good Sense in a court of law in front of juries who will decide the credibility of witnesses. Or who make laws restricting the right of adults to freely marry, or who make laws against natural plants on the grounds that they might make someone feel good.

My intention wasn't to change the topic, but only to respond to someone else who did.

And, of course, I could be wrong. I'll say it again: I could be wrong! I'm certainly willing to hear any evidence presented, and will evaluate it just like any other assertion. But to claim that a being that is all-knowing and all-powerful isn't responsible at least partially for its actions/inactions? I just don't accept that.

Douglas Adams put it in much more nicely:

The invention of the scientific method and science is, I’m sure we’ll all agree, the most powerful intellectual idea, the most powerful framework for thinking and investigating and understanding and challenging the world around us that there is, and that it rests on the premise that any idea is there to be attacked and if it withstands the attack then it lives to fight another day and if it doesn’t withstand the attack then down it goes. Religion doesn’t seem to work like that; it has certain ideas at the heart of it which we call sacred or holy or whatever. That’s an idea we’re so familiar with, whether we subscribe to it or not, that it’s kind of odd to think what it actually means, because really what it means is ‘Here is an idea or a notion that you’re not allowed to say anything bad about; you’re just not. Why not? "Because you’re not!" If somebody votes for a party that you don’t agree with, you’re free to argue about it as much as you like; everybody will have an argument but nobody feels aggrieved by it...

...Why should it be that it’s perfectly legitimate to support the Labour party or the Conservative party, Republicans or Democrats, this model of economics versus that, Macintosh instead of Windows, but to have an opinion about how the Universe began, about who created the Universe, no, that’s holy? What does that mean? (the full context is at http://www.biota.org/people/douglasadams/)

I probably shouldn't have popped off the way I did, but I'm really tiring of people using religion to manipulate others, to justify senseless laws, and then hide behind the veil of religion when the beliefs are challenged, as if it's just not up for discussion. But in a still somewhat-free nation, it is up for discussion.

Again, I'm not trying to change the topic, only respond to someone who did.

 

You talk so smart yet you are so dumb. Im saying this isn't a religion thread. Take the religious shit to the religion threads.

 

*raises hand*

I second the motion.

This thread's about the death toll of U.S. soldiers in Iraq.

 

I own 2 cars, I absolutely love walmart, I love starbucks coffee, and fast food is the shit

To each his own, I have no problem admiting to these. I am everything but a hippie, thats for sure. To tell you the truth, hippies annoy me. all protesting and clouding the streets and shit smokin their life away. Hell why not!

 

You talk so smart yet you are so dumb.

"The bible says so? Well, sure can't argue with logic like that!" -Bill Hicks

 

Wonder how many people complained on D-Day? I am sure there had to be a few. Considering over 70,000 people died in 2 days time. Of course, those lives that were lost were indeed missed and cried over, but imagine how much pain would have continued if Hitler had not been stopped?

There are always two sides to a story. Apparently, we are only talking about one side. Allow me to bring up the other side. There are thousands of Iraqis that are very thankfull of our presence in Iraq. These people were quite pissed at us for leaving the first time in the early 90's. This time however, we came and did what we said we would do. Our troops are not in Iraq fighting Iraqi people. They are over there fighting Islamic terrorists. The war is against terrorism. Good vs Evil. I am not saying that our country is complety devoid(sp) of evil, but we sure as hell aren't flying planes into buildings now are we? I think(if I remeber correctly) that there are currently something like 20 wars going on in the world right now. Seventeen of those wars include some sort of Islamic group. You can sit here and bring up all the crap you want about oil and the like. In the end we were and currently are helping an oppresed nation. I am all for helping others. If you are my neighbor, and I see you in danger, I'll jump in and do whatever I can. Thats what we are doing for Iraq.

As far as the death tole of American lives in Iraq, what is the point? Do you realy care about American lives? What about the number of people killed in car accidents in a year? The number of teenage suicides per year? Even the number of abortions per year? The number of hate crimes? Numbers go on and on and on. Unless you only care about people in Iraq, then I can understand.

War is a terrible thing. For whatever reason it seems to follow man throughout history. It is definatly sad to see a mother and father cry over a lost child(soldier) in a war. But damnit it makes me feel proud when I see that same mother and father pick up the flag, hang it high, and pray for the other soldiers. It makes me proud when I see other people, not just Americans, thankful for the men and women who have faught and died for the rights of others. I get so sick and tires of hearing people complain about these wars. Are you so selfish you think other people do not deserve freedom? Or is it that because we as a nation faught for our own freedom, you think others should do it on their own? Guess what? We had help winning our freedom too.

 

WHen we had help winning our freedom we didn't have another come, occupy us, take out our leader, and force it on us. Any help we had was asked for and greatfully recieved.

Anyhow, My father's business partner is Iraqi, and he said that the biggest mistake we made was disbanding the Iraqi military. The Iraq military was very skilled at keeping these insurgents under control. In fact, most of Saddams "bad deeds" many people talk about was simply Saddam keeping control in the area, and cruching these types of uprisings before they got out of hand. (Not saying that I support all of Saddams actions by any means. I don't support many of the U.S. actions, let alone his)

He also said people wern't afraid to walk on the streets like they are now.

 

If you think that that is true, I've got a bridge to sell you,

 

Just giving you an Iraqi's opinion. I think he might know a bit better than you. It is his country and all.

 

There have been MANY reports from Iraq - even in conservative mainstream media - in which people state that they were not afraid on the streets like they are now. Not only was this because of the authoritarian nature of the police in Iraq, but because unemployment was not so high (it's between 70 and 80% now), people were not as poor, and the country was not on the verge of complete civil war.


Also, a great deal has been written recently about the net LOSS of freedom and autonomy women are experiencing in Iraq. Prostitution is WAY up, as are street attacks on women. Women report being encouraged to stay home and stop working or looking for work by the Muslim extremists who are now gaining a foothold in that country. The government appointed by the Bush regime has proposed all manner of draconian restrictions on women, including forced Muslim dress and rescinding women's right to divorce and child custody.

Certainly Saddam ran a brutal regime - but it doesn't change the fact that Iraq is also CURRENTLY a complete mess, and nearly every credible report suggests that the people of Iraq, while happy to be free of Saddam, would now like to be free of the oppressive foreign armies terrorizing THEIR COUNTRY.

 

It doesn't help that we've switched sides repeatedly. At the outset, we were fighting Sunnis and Baathists. Then Bush decided that Saddam's secret police were to be the new government, and we befriended the Sunnis and Baath Party people and helped them track/kill their Shia enemies. Then we decided that was bad, fired them all and went back on the offensive against Sunnis. I've lost track at this point, we've been back and forth so many times.

Switching sides in war is bad enough, but worse when you use all sides against each other, then claim to care about "the people."

At the outset, I pretty much believed that removing Saddam was at least "arguably necessary" (though I still thought it to not be in our own best interests to get involved) just due to what "we" found after the first gulf war. I thought the political left was exaggerating just how corrupt Bush and Cheney really were.

Republicanism really is a full-fledged fascist movement, and nothing less.