you are completly clueless overdose

Originally posted by Travh20
you are completly clueless overdose
Oh nice rebuttal, Trav! You win! :rolleyes:

thanks for you stellar input. perhaps you and overdose should familiarize yourselves with the arguments the swiftvets are making before claiming complete victory, as it is clear you have no idea what they are even claiming if you use the fact he got the medals as your proof.

Originally posted by Travh20
thanks for you stellar input. perhaps you and overdose should familiarize yourselves with the arguments the swiftvets are making before claiming complete victory, as it is clear you have no idea what they are even claiming if you use the fact he got the medals as your proof.
Way to drag me into this. I was just pointing out that you didn't refute a thing, not "claiming complete victory".

it is impossible to refute the guy when he cant pull his head far enough out of kerrys posterior long enough to even consider he may not be the greatest war hero since Sgt York. The government says its so so it must be, but also the government told him to commit war crimes, go figure

Trav, I’ve argued the swift boat’s claims. You are the one who didn’t reply back to my rebuttal.

I can not possible reply to your rebuttal one more time. you are a block head who takes the governments word as gospel in one sentance then accuses them of making kerry commit war crimes in the next. you make no sense. yo dont understand that there is no ofcial Navy Commisar on these boats documenting the exploits of the crew. Kerry wrote his own citation, which means he can pretty much make himelf out to be whoever he wants. the whole argument is if he really did all that he claims under the conditions he says existed at the moment. Its not if he got the medals, as he clearly did. Maybe if you undrstood the arguments being made you could give a rebuattal that made sense

Originally posted by Travh20
yo dont understand that there is no ofcial Navy Commisar on these boats documenting the exploits of the crew. Kerry wrote his own citation, which means he can pretty much make himelf out to be whoever he wants.
First of all, the men serving under John Kerry support his claims. Plus, the initials that were signed on many of his “records” were not JFK (as I pointed out to you already) That thus shows that he did earn all of what he says he did. He has the backing of the people who witnessed him commit the acts he did, that won him his awards.

I’ve argued the Bronze Star, and how the man who claims there was no enemy fire was wrong. How he back in the Vietnam Ear, said there was, and now he says there wasn’t (also leaving out he too, got a Bronze Star for the same thing) How the other men on the boat said there was, as well as other captains on other Swift Boats at the time. How the doctor the Swift Boats claim “treated” Kerry is not true. For they have given no documentation to support themselves, while Kerry has given official reports to show it was a different doctor.

I’ve gone through each and every claim they make in their ads, and given a reply. You on the other hand, don’t want to debate the issues…and just say I’m not “worthy of a reply” Nice try, but I’m not buying it.

who wrote the citiations overdose? If all the officers there that day say they didnt do it who did? Kerry has never come forwarda and denyed writing them. I dont care whose initials signed off on them, I want to know who wrote them. It has to be an officer, so unless you are going to say the officer who later died wrote them that would leave one person, John F'ing Kerry. Your insistance on focusing on initials and who signed where is just lame. you have no idea how many hands something like that goes through. how many people have to sign things. its like the doctor who treated kerrys wound wasnt the guy who signed him out. that doesnt mena he didnt pull the little piece of metal out of his forearm, it means he wanst the last person to see him at the infirmary that day. I have been in the military overdose, I know the amount of red tape absolutly everything passes through, so excuse me if your insistance a few intials PROVE every single swift boat veteran to be liars doesnt completly sway my opinion

Another officer outed -- seems that admiral who claims to have been there and proven he wasn't there -- ROTLMAO -- has now been exposed as being a lobbyist for the company that was just awarded a 40 million dollar contract from the bush administration.

ROTF -- nah, these not-so-swift liars aren't in bed with bush.

BWAhahahahaha

Dop

again, does that mean they are lying? no. its just another lame attempt to try and show they are somehow all lying by some backdoor connection. it doesnt matter if these guys are having inner with bush every night, they are clearly not a bunch of liars or they would ahve dissapeared a long time ago. releaswe your records kerry, prove them wrong.

First of all Trav, your whole reply was based on the initials section of my post. That hardly has anything to do with anything I posted. I’ve given you the reasons why the Purple Hearts, Bronze Star and Silver Star were all earned. If John Kerry has to sign it, why are you criticizing him for doing something he had to do? But regardless, I’ve given you a large reply on how the awards he had in Vietnam were earned. You haven’t replied. That isn’t my problem.

yes, we know you think they are all earned overdose. it doesnt matter he got his first purple heart froma round HE fired while recieving no enemy fire, its the fact they GAVE it to him that matters, not how he actually got it. one day you willr ealize how idiotic you sound and be embarrased

lol...yep. You can see the future yet again Trav.

your the only one here who continually has to change his story overdose, and has at least 5 times.

lol, yep. 5 times.

And you bitch at Trav for being evasive OD?

yep, and I've done it 5 times.

im sorry, i didnt catch that....how many times?

5

....happened to be listening to a radio show on the way home, and it had a vet on who was over in vietnam. He was held prisoner and tortured for 4 months or so. He tells how they used Kerry's statements against America as grounds to torture....

John Kerry, what an American Patriot......

LOL

How to start each day with a positive outlook.

1. Open a new file in your PC.

2. Name it "John Kerry."

3. Send it to the trash.

4. Empty the trash.

5. Your PC will ask you, "do you really
want to get rid of John Kerry?"

6. Answer calmly, "yes," and press the
mouse button firmly.

7. Feel better.....

HaHaHa.

You nuts are a joke.

I would like to seriously know why you can only attack a vietnam veteran for serving his country, and never give one hint as to why you support Bush, who didnt serve his country nor has he effectively served it now.

I like the way Dop put it best.

Kerry Served, Bush Swerved.

even IF(and thats a big IF) Kerry's service was 100% honorable, he doesn't have much to offer as far as political stances. Bush has already been the leader of the biggest country in the world, he has nothing to prove. Kerry ISN'T the incumbant here you know, kerry has a lot more proving to do than bush does. And from what i've seen Kerry is swerving from the United States knowing who he really is.

Bush is criticized for not showing up....while Kerry was absent for 76% of the intelligence meetings. And the reason bush didnt make some of his military commitments was because he was starting his political career. Oh yea....and Bush isn't running on his service, Kerry is. That's why we tear into Kerry so much about it. The facts are he has been absent to meetings and his records havn't been released. why would you run off of that?

I find it funny that your excuse for Bush's failer to complete his military stint, was that he was starting his political career.

Thats such a brave thing to do. Hes too big a wus to actually fight...but now he thinks he can be a war time president and effectively run a country that is currently involved in a war on terror.

Hes a joke.

wake up call!! he IS a war time president!!! he doesnt think he can be, he freaking IS! I guess it is true the democrats are still living on 9-10-01.

A war time president he may be, but not an effective one.

We got Saddam Hussain....but no Osama bin Laden. 3 years, and no Osama bin Laden.

We hadnt even lost 200 men when he declared mission accomplished....fast forward a year and a half, over a 1000 dead.

gee....you make deaths in war sound like something that doesnt happen....

3000 died on 9-11, so far only 1/3 of the people have died......

just look at it this way.....who would Saddam or Osama vote for?

John Kerry

And you make it sound like it doesnt matter that the misson was "accompilshed" prior to 800 more deaths.

That really sounds like it was accomplished.


And as poor a job as we have done finding Osama, he probably will be voting in November, he is probably living on the coast of Florida as we speak:rolleyes:

And I bet he votes for Bush, because Kerry might actually use the intelligence to find him.

screw osama, who would our own military vote for. one hint, its not the swift boat idiot kerry

Obviously, either of us know who the military is going to vote for, and we NEITHER of us can make such a claim educatedly.

However, if I was on active duty right now, I would vote for Kerry in a heartbeat. If I was fighting for no reason, I would vote for Kerry, and I think that word is getting around that they are, and it is not good for their morale or their safty.

LOL, if you were in the military you would vote for kerry? really?? anyway, the majority of the military will vote for bush. I know a butt load of people in the military now and who have gotten out, and even a few about to go in. most of them are bush supporters, 80% easily. and one day you will grow up and realize that all these so called peace marches and crap are not good for the troops moral and safety. it may make you feel good, but its dangerous to our troops when the people they fight see that if they can just hold out a little longer, then the peace movement will get stronger and maybe enough poilitical pressure can be put on the US government by these ignorant selfish peace marchers who think they are doing so much good that the US may pull out and they can then impose shia law on iraq. dont you understand that every time the "insurgents" see a peace march or some jackass american attacking bush instead of the terrorist they get a little more pep in thier step? irresponsible dissent by people who have no clue the ammount of moral their "protests" give the terrorists are the real threat to our troops moral and safety, not the president. emboldening the enemy is the realm of john kerry, so I guess someone like that will fit right in with your side.

The protests are protesting the ideals of the war, not the troops who are in war. You are wrong on your ideas of what these protests are like. Why would we be Anti-Troops? It’s not their decision to go, it’s not their choice, therefore we have no reason to attack them. We attack the Government and the War the Government wants to fight.

I understand that the military is very much conservative, but many have taken the side of John Kerry. Take Tony Mickpeak for example. He was a strong Bush supporter, in 2000, and now he is a supporter of John Kerry. He was one of the head leaders in the Gulf War, and has always been a huge Republican. My mother knows his wife somewhat since they live in the same city as me, and it’s silly to assume that the majority of the military now is supporting Bush.

But if you can’t understand that the protests are not attacking the troops, but the war, you are more shallow then I thought.

if you think its possible to attack the war and not the troops fighting it you are stupider then I thought. Explain to me how you seperate the hatred for the war for those actually involved with it? if there is a seperation, it is very thin, and only noticeable by you. I doubt al qeda and the iraqi insurgents give a shit why you protest the war, all they know is that americans are fighting americans, and if they hold out long enough you may help them win.

Lets see Trav. It’s a very simple equation, and I’m sorry you don’t understand common logic.

The troops did not choose or decide to go to war. Which thus means it’s not their fault, and that means they are not to blame.

The Government, or Administration at the time, who decides to put our troops into harms war, should be criticized if you disagree with the war they launch.

It’s a very large line…and it’s not thin what-so-ever.

The troops are forced to go, and they didn’t decide to go to war. When I protest, I’m protesting the policies, our Government and the reasons they gave to go to war. It’s the Government’s fault, not the troops.

overdose, first of all, its an all volunteer force. you seem to think the men in the armed forces area bunch of idiots that dont know what they are doing. you treat them like unfortunate victims. they know what they are doing and know what thier job is. they are not"forced" to do anyhting, its called ordered. I think you need a wake up call overdose. the military doenst need yor sympathy, they re big boys, they can take care of themselves. stop treating them like the retared cousin who cant do anything for themselves.

Originally posted by Travh20
overdose, first of all, its an all volunteer force.
As of right now, I think it is. I don't think their is a draft...yet?

Originally posted by Travh20
you seem to think the men in the armed forces area bunch of idiots that dont know what they are doing.
Luckily, I don't think that. Thanks for playing though, Trav.

Originally posted by Travh20
you treat them like unfortunate victims.
When they are sent into a war, that I don't believe in, they are in my opinion victims of a corrupt Administration.

Originally posted by Travh20
they know what they are doing and know what thier job is.
Yes, they do know what they are doing. I never said they didn't...where are you getting this? And of course they know what their job is, they were trained for months. What are you trying to get at?

I never said they didn't know what they were doing, nor did I say they didn't know what their job was.

Originally posted by Travh20
they are not"forced" to do anyhting, its called ordered.
Hmmm, usually when you are "ordered" to do something in the military, you are mostly forced to do what you are ordered. Don't get so anal about these things Trav.

Originally posted by Travh20
I think you need a wake up call overdose. the military doenst need yor sympathy, they re big boys, they can take care of themselves. stop treating them like the retared cousin who cant do anything for themselves.
Yes, and I respect them. I give them sympathy because they shouldn't be fighting this war. But as I showed you earlier, you can protest the war and not protest the troops.

in your little world of nice orderly life with grocery stores on every corner and a light with the flip of a switch you cna protest the war and not the people acutally in the war you are protesting, but in real life, only you know the fine line between the two. do you think some 20 something insurgent n falluja gives a shit about you distincitions? hell o. he is against bush and the troops, he sees you as the same, you are giving him comfort, end of story. he sees you as hope. dont think everyone has enough free time as you and me to make distinctions betwen all the different reasons people are agaisnt the war

Trav, I protest the war itself not the troops. I’ve explained to you why, and you refuse to acknowledge it. I don’t like arguing with someone who cannot understand that protesting the policies of a war, is not protesting the troops.

Because the troops did not make the decision to go to war, they are being forced to out of obligation of joining the military. Which thus means it would not be ethical to protest them. But it would be ethical to protest the Government who is sending them there for reasons I believe to be wrong and false.

I dont "refuse" to believe you. when you say that you say it assuming what you say is cold hard truth, which it isnt. Of course I know you believe in why you protest the war. I never said I didnt. I said, the iraqi inusrgents who feed off american opposition to thier own war dont give a crap about any reasons you have. all they see is americans opposing thier own policies. they could care less what oyu think of policies, all they know is you want the troops out o there as much as them. If you dont want to pull the troops out, then stop acting like you do. like was said before, you may not knowingly side with the enemy, in this case the iraqi insurgents and al qeada terrorists backing them, but if you were knowingly siding with them, you would act no differently.

The war is a just war. I propose we end it in 30 days however. Give them 30 days notice to clear out, then turn the entire region into a big kitty litter box by one drop of the bomb.

Trav, when did I say I wanted to pull the troops home?

what about kerry's never-ending expanding deadline for how long it would take him to get the troops out. First it was 6 months...than it was a year...than it was 3 years...now its 5 or something like that. Why doesn't the man take a stand on anything?

lol. Care to cite it buddy?

sorry....ill try to find it but i heard sound clips of kerry saying it on the radio.

Ahhh, well if it's true...it's only because the Iraq War keeps getting worse and worse. Which thus makes him have to change when he thinks he'll finish the job in Iraq.

well that's awfully inconvenient for voters, having a candidate who can't make up his mind on issues.

It's awfully inconvenient that Kerry has to change his mind because of Bush’s miss planning about the war in Iraq.

kerry doesnt have to change his mind.....he's just unsure of what his stance is. And you claim the situation in iraq is getting "worse and worse"....i would disagree with that statement. Democrats just WANT the situation to get worse so bush looks bad.

Originally posted by Decka
kerry doesnt have to change his mind.....he's just unsure of what his stance is.
No, he has to because of Bush's mistakes in the Iraq War.

Originally posted by Decka
And you claim the situation in iraq is getting "worse and worse"....i would disagree with that statement.
Then you are not paying attention. Americans are dying at a higher rate then ever before, hospitals are not up to date, deformities are huge, chaos is running high, car bombings are occurring daily, world disgust for America is high, and honestly, where is their Democracy? In a land of ruins?

We need three times the amount of troops in Iraq and that thus means we will never be able to secure Iraq. I suggest you get out of your Republican Fantasy World.

Originally posted by Decka
Democrats just WANT the situation to get worse so bush looks bad.
Umm, not really. But you can think what you want, but I'd expect nothing more coming from a Republican.

------------------

BUSH WARNS OF INCREASING VIOLENCE IN IRAQ. I would hope you’d believe your President.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6036212/

Originally posted by Overdose
No, he has to because of Bush's mistakes in the Iraq War.


I understand if you think going into iraq was a mistake, you are welcome to your opinion....but did bush make 4 different mistakes that prompted the 4 changes in stances by kerry? Nope.

Originally posted by Overdose

Then you are not paying attention. Americans are dying at a higher rate then ever before, hospitals are not up to date, deformities are huge, chaos is running high, car bombings are occurring daily, world disgust for America is high, and honestly, where is their Democracy? In a land of ruins?


Americans are dying at a higher rate than EVER before? LOL i'd like to see the stat on that one.....americans ARE dying, its a shame but if we are going to secure ourselves and that area sacrifices have to made. only 1000 have died, thats much less in comparison to the 3000 that died on 9-11.

Hospitals not up to date? i wouldn't know, ive never been in a hospital over there. But hey i agree with you we should be sending more supplies and people over there.

Deformities are huge? Chaos is running high? These are vague "filler" statements just so you can have a long list against bush lol. Chaos is ALWAYS running high in the middle east....duh. And car bombings happen ALL THE TIME over there.

World "disgust"....you are so pessimistic.....hey, many nations didnt like us taking down saddam....BECAUSE THEY HAD INTEREST AND MONEY INVESTED!!! I don't think the picture is as bad as you paint it....but when it comes to painting a portrait of bush, a democrat will only use black. I agree that nations didnt totally agree with us.....but they weren't being attacked so they can just sit on the sidelines and continue to not care. If they really didnt like it they would really stand up against us which they aren't.

Originally posted by Overdose

We need three times the amount of troops in Iraq and that thus means we will never be able to secure Iraq. I suggest you get out of your Republican Fantasy World.


I suggest you quit taking one man's opinion for factual information. You get a quote from a retired veteran who says we need 3 times the amount of troops.....and then ITS STONE COLD FACT: WE NEED 3 TIMES MORE TROOPS!!!! Hey, i wouldn't mind getting 'er donnnnneee and taking all we got. We both agree that more troops are needed.

Originally posted by Overdose

Umm, not really. But you can think what you want, but I'd expect nothing more coming from a Republican.


It really does seem that way though....i feel a lot of pessimism coming from your side...sorry.

------------------

BUSH WARNS OF INCREASING VIOLENCE IN IRAQ. I would hope you’d believe your President.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6036212/ [/B][/QUOTE]

Originally posted by Decka
I understand if you think going into iraq was a mistake, you are welcome to your opinion....but did bush make 4 different mistakes that prompted the 4 changes in stances by kerry? Nope.
Yes, he did. Because the way in which George Bush has managed the war, has lead Kerry to change his stance.

Originally posted by Decka
Americans are dying at a higher rate than EVER before? LOL i'd like to see the stat on that one.....americans ARE dying, its a shame but if we are going to secure ourselves and that area sacrifices have to made.
I would suggest you stay up on the news, my friend. Americans are dying at 2 a day rate. They were dying at 1 a day. It has increased.

Originally posted by Decka
Hospitals not up to date? i wouldn't know, ive never been in a hospital over there. But hey i agree with you we should be sending more supplies and people over there.
Yes, the hospitals are not up to date. They do not have enough supplies, the conditions are sick, and people are dying in them because they have no way to cure the people the come in. Many hospitals don’t even have electricity, let alone enough room for all the people with injuries.

Originally posted by Decka
Deformities are huge? Chaos is running high? These are vague "filler" statements just so you can have a long list against bush lol. Chaos is ALWAYS running high in the middle east....duh. And car bombings happen ALL THE TIME over there.
Yes, and if you’ve noticed…by threads in World News etc, there has been more car bombings, and attacks. Which thus means, it’s getting worse.

Bush even said we need to be aware that there will be increased attacks.

Originally posted by Decka
World "disgust"....you are so pessimistic.....hey, many nations didnt like us taking down saddam....BECAUSE THEY HAD INTEREST AND MONEY INVESTED!!!
LOL! I’m sure they did.

Originally posted by Decka
I agree that nations didnt totally agree with us.....but they weren't being attacked so they can just sit on the sidelines and continue to not care.
How did Saddam attack us?

overdose only wants to take action after we have been attacked. even if the next attack kills one million americans, we have no right to attack anyone unless ataacked first. the typical september 10th liberal, saying everything agaisnt the war as if 9-11 never happened. tell me overdose, is there ever a time when a pre emptive strike would be justified? there is no way to actually be 100% sure of any intelligence until its to late. so if you and kerry are going to wait until your 100% certain whoo you are going to attack has WMD that means you have already been hit. all your arguments are irrelevant overdose, becasue you dont take into account the entire premise of the war on terror, that being hit them before they hit you. if there is some psycho with WMD who hates your guts, he has got to go.

Originally posted by Travh20
overdose only wants to take action after we have been attacked. even if the next attack kills one million americans, we have no right to attack anyone unless ataacked first.
How was Saddam a threat? How was he linked to 9/11?

Originally posted by Travh20
tell me overdose, is there ever a time when a pre emptive strike would be justified?
If the place we were attacking was a threat...but Saddam wasn't a threat.

Originally posted by Travh20
there is no way to actually be 100% sure of any intelligence until its to late.
Sorry to burst your bubble Trav, but the UN Inspectors were 100%, and had reports to prove Saddam had no weapons. Bush didn't listen, and that's his fault.

oh overdose your shortsightedness will be your undoing. It amazes me that all these liberals with all of their elaborate conspiracy theories about Bush and Cheney cant possibly comprehend any sort of connction between saddam and al qeada. So, as you see, its not about 9-11!!!! you seem to think all we are doing is getting vengance for 9-11, if that s what you think you are seriously wrong. its about preventing another 9-11 man, wake up. NO ONE EVER SAID SADDAM HAD TIES TO 9-11---REPEAT----NO ONE EVER SAID SADDAM WAS TIED TO 9-11, do you get it now? stop bringing it up like some sort of fucking trump card. if you think this whole war on terror is simply pay back for the 9-11 victims familys you are wrong, if you think its only to get back at those responsible for 9-11 and it ends you are wrong. please stop with the idiotic argument that saddam had nothing to do with 9-11, no one ever said there was!!!

.....and who would Saddam and Osama vote for?

John Kerry

And Trav, the fact remains. Saddam had no link to 9/11, very weak ties to Al Queda, other countries were far more linked to Al Queda, he had no ties to Osama Bin Laden and yet he was our first pick on fighting terrorism? Or wait, I forgot Afghanistan was! Where we sent 15,000 troop to, and over 150,000 troops to Iraq. And where is that Osama Bin Laden? So we really aren't fighting terrorism by going after Saddam. He was NOT a threat, deal with it Trav.

And Decka, yes, they would vote for John Kerry! hahahaha

your dang right they would...."hahahahahaha"?

Because Osama would actually vote for George Bush. Bush let him escape in Afgan. because he sent 15,000 troops there, and ove 150,000 to Iraq. We were closing in on where we thought Osama was, and then we launch a war against Iraq. So I think he'd vote for Bush...

If hes still alive.

15,000 american troops chasing his ass is far worse then a sympathetic taliban regime giving him aid and confort, but that doesnt fit the anti bush attack sheet this dumb shit is following, so 15,0000 US trops is like nothing. fuck man, 10 us troops chasing the son of a bitch is better then what we had before 9-11, which was jack shit

15,000 compared to 150,000? ....i suggest you take math again...

I wasnt aware we had 150,000 troop chasing bin laden before 9-11

When did I say there was?

I am not going to rehash it all agaisn because you are lazy, use your wheelmouse and scroll up a few posts and read it for yourself

I said we had 15,000 in Afgan...
and over 150,000 in Iraq....

how many were in afghanistan before 9-11?

Dont see the relevance.

They had not attacked us then.

exactly. think about it.

Did anyone catch the screw up Kerry made in a speech a few weeks ago?

The Lord has a way of revealing those of us who really know him, and those that don't! Think about it! Kerry gave a big speech last week about how his faith is so "important" to him. In this attempt to convince the American people that we should consider him for president, he announced that his favorite Bible verse is John 16:3. Of course the speech writer meant John 3:16, but nobody in the Kerry campaign was familiar enough with scripture to catch the error. And do you know what John 16:3 says? John 16:3 says; "They will do such things because they have not known the Father or me." The Spirit works in strange ways.

That was some of his speech a few weeks ago...Notice the John 16:3....You tell me...

Interesting observation, DRC. Welcome to Allforums.

Originally posted by The Praetorian
Interesting observation, DRC. Welcome to Allforums. kiss ass

Originally posted by DirtRacerChic24
Did anyone catch the screw up Kerry made in a speech a few weeks ago?

The Lord has a way of revealing those of us who really know him, and those that don't! Think about it! Kerry gave a big speech last week about how his faith is so "important" to him. In this attempt to convince the American people that we should consider him for president, he announced that his favorite Bible verse is John 16:3. Of course the speech writer meant John 3:16, but nobody in the Kerry campaign was familiar enough with scripture to catch the error. And do you know what John 16:3 says? John 16:3 says; "They will do such things because they have not known the Father or me." The Spirit works in strange ways.

That was some of his speech a few weeks ago...Notice the John 16:3....You tell me... they used that same damn joke for bush about 6 months ago........late

kiss ass
Was that necessary?

Sen. Kery is such a lying [ad hominem].... You can smell the desperation..... Kerry also renewed his suggestion that a second term for Bush could bring the return of the military draft -- something that deeply divided Americans during the Vietnam War.

"With George Bush (news - web sites), the plan for Iraq is more of the same and the great potential of the draft," Kerry said in an interview with the Des Moines Register newspaper.

The Bush campaign accused Kerry of resorting to "scare tactics" and pointed to a new University of Pennsylvania Annenberg Election poll of active military members and their families.

The poll found Bush was viewed far more favorably by those whose lives and families were on the line in Iraq. In the poll, 69 percent had a favorable opinion of Bush and 23 percent an unfavorable opinion, compared to only 29 percent with a favorable opinion of Kerry and 54 percent unfavorable.

"It shows the president is trusted, especially by families who are most directly involved in what's going on in Iraq and around the world," said Bush strategist Matthew Dowd.

I loved it in the last debate, when President Bush compared Kerry to [ad hominem] Teddy Kennedy.... "Kennedy is the conservative senator from Massachusettes..."
Kerrys' goin' down.... Of course, he's got all his little [ad hominem]s in place to scream bloody murder after the votes are counted.... As long as the media can keep in mind that Florida is in two time zones...... Otherwise the Dems will have to cry twice.... Hey, then that little [ad hominem] [ad hominem] liberal [ad hominem] Michael [ad hominem (Moore)] can make a Part 2 for Farenheit 9-11......

[This post certified ad hominem-free and thus fit for debating by the Allforums staff. No actual substance of this post was edited in any form. Merely the inflammatory remarks, and only then because they went overboard. Have a nice day! :)]

Is that how you're gonna do business here "moderator"? I'm sure there are plenty of other posts you can go and "edit".... But that's alright.... you're gonna play your little games..... I can assure of one simple fact. If you ever played to my face, you'd have a hard time "moderating" with your fingers..... edit that punk.

Originally posted by NoFlakjacket
Is that how you're gonna do business here "moderator"? I'm sure there are plenty of other posts you can go and "edit".... But that's alright.... you're gonna play your little games..... I can assure of one simple fact. If you ever played to my face, you'd have a hard time "moderating" with your fingers..... edit that punk.
I will be fair and tell you exactly why your post was edited...because phrases such as "bag of shit" serve no purpose on this site. You want to rant about Michael Moore (or, for that matter, George Bush) using such terms, go elsewhere. You come here, you come here to debate. And at least attempt to be civilized.

By the way, firstly, I'm not a little guy and I wager with the benefit of youth behind me, I could probably at the very least hold my own in a fight...but I'm glad you brought that up, because it gives me a chance to bring up an important point. That being, if you threaten any members with physical attacks, etc...that's pretty much an automatic ban. Just a heads-up.

That being, if you threaten any members with physical attacks, etc...that's pretty much an automatic ban. Just a heads-up.

Awww...take it easy on him.

They can't mount much of a rebuttal or debate when it comes to reason or facts or the issues......all they are left with are the physical threats.

Originally posted by NoFlakjacket
Is that how you're gonna do business here "moderator"? I'm sure there are plenty of other posts you can go and "edit".... But that's alright.... you're gonna play your little games..... I can assure of one simple fact. If you ever played to my face, you'd have a hard time "moderating" with your fingers..... edit that punk.

Nice...:rolleyes:

Easy to use physical threats to someone in another part of the nation, eh Flak? You cant actually carry on a half informed, intelligent worded debate, so you need to act like, given the chance, you could do something physical in real life?

What, judging by your failer at debate, makes you think we believe you could do anything in real life. Im sure youre probably just as bad at that, as you are verbally debating.

you guys are a laugh.... I mean really... I don't think the Borghunter needs any help from the likes of the 3 stooges....

You cant actually carry on a half informed, intelligent worded debate,
LMAO! :) That's pretty funny, JJB...

They can't mount much of a rebuttal or debate when it comes to reason or facts or the issues......all they are left with are the physical threats.
Oh, yeah, and you have a litany of interesting points to make while you virtually fellate the likes of people who follow communism, you nation-screwing, swine.

Originally posted by NoFlakjacket
you guys are a laugh.... I mean really... I don't think the Borghunter needs any help from the likes of the 3 stooges....

On the other hand it's fairly obvious that you need help.

What do you mean, Vile?

Originally posted by The Praetorian
What do you mean, Vile?

Help of a psychiatric kind...anger management issues.

Seems to me like a nice banning is in order....:)

Seems to me like a nice banning is in order....
And you claim president Bush is a fascist...geesh. :confused:

Help of a psychiatric kind...anger management issues.
His post was altered, and it pissed him off. I like Borg, but I don't think he should've done that...

One thing you have to admire about NoFlak - he's got balls. I say he's a welcome addition.

Plus he has much larger feces than everyone else. :rolleyes:

Larger feces??? WTF? I was speaking figuratively. How the hell do you know how big his dumps are? That's a pretty weird statement, Lionel. :)

Originally posted by The Praetorian
I like Borg, but I don't think he should've done that...
I completely agree with you. I shouldn't have done that. In my defense, it was late and I was very tired and pissed...but it still was a lapse in judgement. I already apologized to Mr. Flak about it through PMs. :)

Lionel,
yer not helpin.... heh heh "It's part of my medical condition..." ie.. I'm full o shit....
hey, people assume that jarheads are automatically full of shi*, right?
Lionel is referring to statements I made in some other threads: "I shit bigger than you" just a figure of speech....

Prae, thanks....

For anyone concerned:
Borg and I discussed last weeks postings in PM, we're past it.
So, maybe we can all get back to bashing kerry...

Here here!

NoFlak

I take it you are a grunt (no insult intended). Just want to take a minute to tell you I have the highest degree of respect for the corp. I've had the pleasure of serving with many jarheads and still today keep in touch with most of them. The corp does a great job.

My oldest brother is ex-navy and was in nearly every major campaign in the pacific during WW2 until in 1944 his gun mount aboard a destroyer was taken out by a kamikazi which ended his career.
He still today talks very highly of how the Marines did such a great job during that war. And I've heard it more than once from the Korean war vets.

And of course, the job the corp did in Viet Nam is unprecedented.

As an aside, I once served in the Hunter-Killer group desron 36 aboard the USS Basilone named after one bad-ass Marine -- John Basilone. I'm proud to have served on his namesake.

Just wanted to pass this along to you.

Dop

ya, but now the corp pulls iraqis out of cars and beats them to death just for the fun of it right dop? or puts a few rounds into a passing group of children just to watch them die?

Geeesh Trav -- isn't it past your bedtime ?

And I want to lodge a complaint -- the 'bash bush' thread was shut down for some strange reason ... well ... maybe I played a small part in it but the 'bash kerry' thread lives on ...

Where's my union steward when I need him (her?)

Dop

excuse me if I get a little pissed seeing someone who does nothing but attack our military men in iraq as "theocratic racist bullies" and thrill killers praising the exploits of those same guys

Hey don't take my word for it -- you have a VA close to you -- go there and talk to the returning troops and ask them if they're proud of what they did in Iraq.

You might be surprised and while you're there do some volunteer work like the rest of us vets do -- push a wheechair, drive someone home, shuffle papers, help clean up the grounds and talk to the troops while you're doing it -- it's a nice feeling.

Dop

Lungdop,
I appreciate the compliment. I hold a high degree of respect for all those who have served also, any branch of the service, war or peacetime. I believe it takes a certain degree of character to commit "your life" to the service of your country. (granted, I reckon there are exceptions to some...)
I am in the Marine Corps, however I am not what we affectionately refer to as a grunt.... Although all Marines are basically trained riflemen/infantry, I am assined to the airwing (an "airwinger", or as the Navy refers to it "airdale"...)
The Marine Corps does have a rich tradition of honor and valor, all services do, I reckon Marines just like to "brag" about it more than the others.... heh heh heh.
John Basilone- A True war hero, Recipient of the Navy Cross... Could have stayed home and sold war bonds, been promoted to 2nd Lt., etc.... He chose to return to action, Iwo Jima.....
He served an enlistment in the Army before joining the Corps.... His story is awesome....
Anyway, I don't want to jack this thread anymore than I already have... So, I will say this.
Kerry has been built up to be this great "war hero" by the liberals/democrats(the same people who built up max cleland to be some vietnam hero...) Am I dishonoring his service? He did that all on his own.

Originally posted by NoFlakjacket

John Basilone- A True war hero, Recipient of the Navy Cross... Could have stayed home and sold war bonds, been promoted to 2nd Lt., etc....

Yeah.

Or he could have had his rich Daddy pull some strings and get him a position in the National Guards.

And then he could have neglected to show up for his assigned duty to his National Guard post.......

But then, only a truly disreputable piece of shit would do that.