Republican Candidates

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by Tarball
How many more shall die before the insanity of the likes of you stop. You are no different then the people you war against & hate. War minded people love hate & destruction.
Like minded people will surely lead us to our demise.
Excuse me if I rebut against those.
SO...you claim to now support two wars...but state here war will lead to our demise?
So, do you love hate and destruction since you supported two wars?
You are flip flopping like a trout.

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by Tarball
Don't ask me stupid questions.
hard to see a consistent position with your posts.
Hillary, is that you?

 

[tarball]

Originally Posted by ScubaDoo
So, you supported the first Iraq war. But according to this post, you appear to claim that "Daddy Bush" was part of this vast conspiracy theory?
Your right Daddy Bush had no influence over Jr before he became President.
Also Daddy Bush didn't have Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wulfowitz, & many of the conservatives that Jr put in his cabinet when he became president. & jeb had nothing to do with his brother being elected.
Why am I Asked so many stupid questions?

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by Tarball
911 was a terrorist act against our government that killed 3000 plus American.... YES
And SAddam did not support terror at all?
So, do you beleive the initial attacks on the WTC's was a terrorist act of war against our government?
What was the difference in theory between the first and second attack on the WTC? Both attempted to destroy the buildings and cause loss of life. THe first acheieved it to a lesser degree...as less than 10 died and the buildings did not fall. The plan was for the bulidings to fall regarding attack one...or to casue significant damage . And our repsonse to this or lack thereof led to?
Do you beleive Saddam NEVER supported terrorists and was harmless in general?

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by Tarball
....
Why am I Asked so many stupid questions?
I'm beginning to notice a trend. Instead of attempting to answer questions about obvious contradictions in your posting, you make posts like this attempting to deflect the conversation.

 

[tarball]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
I'm just trying to nail down your thought process. You seem to be contradicting yourself.
Can a nation be a sponsor of terrorism, and if so, does that make them a legitimate target?

Define terrorism?

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by Tarball
Your right Daddy Bush had no influence over Jr before he became President.
Also Daddy Bush didn't have Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wulfowitz, & many of the conservatives that Jr put in his cabinet when he became president. & jeb had nothing to do with his brother being elected.
Why am I Asked so many stupid questions?
Cheney was Sec of Defense undder "daddy Bush".
I suggest you go back and study history before you continue on.
You see, your conspiracy theory is already factually..in error in your mind.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by Tarball
Define terrorism?

Seriously, is that the angle you now want to go down? You're going to try to pull the "is is" argument?
The United States has defined terrorism under the Federal Criminal Code. Chapter 113B of Part I of Title 18 of the United States Code defines terrorism and lists the crimes associated with terrorism. In Section 2331 of Chapter 113b, terrorism is defined as:
"..activities that involve violent... <or life-threatening acts>... that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State and... appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and ...<if domestic>...(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States...<if international>...(C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States..."

 

[tarball]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
I'm beginning to notice a trend. Instead of attempting to answer questions about obvious contradictions in your posting, you make posts like this attempting to deflect the conversation.
I'm not deflecting any comment, the thing is I will not allow my comments to be twisted out of context. I'm very clear, you just don't get it. I think outside the Box. You think in a very small black mini-con box. That's why you do not get what I'm saying.
Thing is,.... I get what you knuckleheads are saying.

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by Tarball
Define terrorism?
Tball..you have already contradicted yourself a few times. You do not even know recent history regarding past presidents, members of their cabinet, etc. ...yet make this a main point for your position.
You hate war yet supported it...etc, etc.
We know you hate Bush...but now you are really scewing up the facts and you are sounding like a hater with little knowledge of the subject matter.

 

[1journeyman]

Tarball, we have been taking the things you said very consistently in context. In fact we've even been using whole quotes from you.
You're also, to my best recollection, the only one who consistently resorts to name calling.

 

[tarball]

Originally Posted by ScubaDoo
Cheney was Sec of Defense undder "daddy Bush".
I suggest you go back and study history before you continue on.
You see, your conspiracy theory is already factually..in error in your mind.
I know that, do you not recognise sarcasm when you read it?

 

[1journeyman]

Another good "terrorism" definition:
The CIA defines Terrorism: The Intelligence Community is guided by the definition of terrorism contained in Title 22 of the US Code, Section 2656f(d):
The term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.
Feel free to use any of the definitions i've posted to answer the question.

 

[tarball]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
Tarball, we have been taking the things you said very consistently in context. In fact we've even been using whole quotes from you.
You're also, to my best recollection, the only one who consistently resorts to name calling.
Once again... ?

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by ScubaDoo
There is nothing wrong with defending our nation.
But, there is something wrong with supporting a president that is willing to attack a country for its resources.
I thought spending money on defense is why we were attacked and why we will be attacked again in the future? How can we defend our nation if in perparation for doing so we must spend money?

 

[1journeyman]

Can a nation be a sponsor of terrorism, and if so, does that make them a legitimate target?

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by Tarball
I know that, do you not recognise sarcasm when you read it?
I have no reason to beleive you are factually based.

 

[tarball]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
Another good "terrorism" definition:
The CIA defines Terrorism: The Intelligence Community is guided by the definition of terrorism contained in Title 22 of the US Code, Section 2656f(d):
The term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.
Feel free to use any of the definitions i've posted to answer the question.
So with that definition, what Bush did in Iraq was not Terrorism?
Terrorism is the act of terror. Look it up in the dictionary.
Bombs kill indiscriminately, no matter who set them off or who drops them.

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by ScubaDoo
If we as the people of our nation allow our government to spend more then the rest of the world combined in a aggressive nature. We will surely meet another attack.
its common sense.
SO, you support defending our nation? How..with water pistols? You do not want to spend money on the military...yet....you want to defend the nation?
it's hard to follow any consistent thought. How can you make this statement along with the others..then claim you support or supported two wars?
Your hatred for Bush is getting in the way of being consistent with comment/opinion.

 

[tarball]

Originally Posted by Tarball
I thought spending money on defense is why we were attacked and why we will be attacked again in the future? How can we defend our nation if in perparation for doing so we must spend money?

There is a difference between spending money offensively vs spending defensively, get it?