If 9/11 Had Never Happened........

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by CyberForce, Nov 25, 2005.

  1. daemonsabre

    daemonsabre Well-Known Member

    Age:
    37
    Posts:
    512
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Location:
    Almost there...
    Last time I checked, the president can't make decisions alone. thats what the branches of the government are for. [/b][/quote]
    in that case those innocent lives are on the conscience of the branches of goverment, doesnt make what happened any better that there were people who supported such a stupid crusade




    on a side note a friend of mine is taking a case study about how bush ----ed the U.S. economy, i cant remmber but some of the numbers were staggering
     
  2. handheldsquirl

    handheldsquirl Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    684
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2005
    Thats a really good question that has no answer.
     
  3. xlink

    xlink GR's Tech Enthusiast

    Posts:
    8,054
    Likes Received:
    3
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2004
    never said he did too much. I think what he has done has encouraged it a bit, but really presidential actions have little influence on the market, some may have a huge influence, but typical oens hace little influence(EG: quadrupling taxes on stock gains would push the market down, but you get the idea)


    a better case study would be comparing the standard of living in america to that of other world leaders for the past 20 years... you might be surprised.
     
  4. nekogai555

    nekogai555 Well-Known Member

    Age:
    31
    Posts:
    329
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Location:
    lawls
    Might have not declared war? But they will.

    I am 100% sure that they would still declare war, 'coz they already have all the weaponry they need. They got antimatter, they got massive laser guns, they have hundreds of atomic bombs - They have all the nukes.

    They can invade any country at any time they want.
     
  5. daemonsabre

    daemonsabre Well-Known Member

    Age:
    37
    Posts:
    512
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Location:
    Almost there...
    never said he did too much. I think what he has done has encouraged it a bit, but really presidential actions have little influence on the market, some may have a huge influence, but typical oens hace little influence(EG: quadrupling taxes on stock gains would push the market down, but you get the idea)


    a better case study would be comparing the standard of living in america to that of other world leaders for the past 20 years... you might be surprised. [/b][/quote]
    actually you would; right now the standard of living in japan is increasing at enormous rate, dwarfed only by the rate at which the standard of living in the U.S. is decreasing
     
  6. PUMAS!

    PUMAS! Well-Known Member

    Age:
    34
    Posts:
    834
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2005
    Location:
    Wisconsin -_-
    I said yes, cause I think Bush is a @sshole. I sugest that everyone listen to Cause of death by Immortal Technique, he says some pretty deep/intersting stuff about whats going in in Iraq, it also sugests different stuff to explain whats going on. But its just a song :P
     
  7. Níall

    Níall Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    68
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2005
    Could have hgappened.
    america looking for oil or whatever.
    never know
     
  8. Balnazzar

    Balnazzar Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    728
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Location:
    California
    Since there are like gazillion of posts that repeat the same thing over and over again (Bush is an idiot/retard/faggot/stupid asshole that just wants oil/al queda/blah blah blah blah, and so he decides to wage a war on Iraq)

    To those threads: Shut the ---- up already and go read the news. Those two current events aren't related. If Bush is so retarded, then how come you are not a president but he is? He just has trouble sending the message through, give him some time. True, comparing with other past presidents Bush doesn't excel much, but he is better than you. So sit down and read some books please.

    My stand: Yes, and here's why.

    Iraq has been a problem since US's new policy of being a world policy - to contain the Communist governments asap. So-called police action has been around before or after Vietnam War, and so it would not matter whether 9/11 happened or not. 9/11 imo is like a moral booster that pushes US to initiate the war that eventually will start anyway - not saying that it's good, but things are going to happen anyway, soon or later. Many mistake those two events as if they correlate, but they don't. Capturing Al Queda has nothing to do with liberating Iraq - at least not as signficant as containing the Communist government.
     
  9. COUNTRY

    COUNTRY Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2005
    I would say yes due to bush wants to rule every thing.
     
  10. Rufio

    Rufio Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    5,220
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    hmmm when did he annouce this? or are you just making ---- up like the rest of you n00bs
     
  11. mrfurious

    mrfurious Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    137
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    Do you really think it was for the oil? look at the effect all this supposed aquired oil has had on gas prices. If we had gotten oil from Iraq gas prices would have dropped not increased as they have. No im not a republican, democrat or bush freak. But just use your heads
     
  12. Amoebassassin

    Amoebassassin Well-Known Member

    Age:
    47
    Posts:
    1,881
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Location:
    Gotham City, NY
    The only reason people think this is for oil is because there is an oil crisis in the United States.

    We (The US/Allied Forces) are acting in the exact same manner as we did when we went into Bosnia/Herzegovina and overthrew Slobodan Milosevic, because of his ethnic cleansing.

    What's the difference? We were doing good then, but not now? Why, because it's easy for the rest of the world to hate George Bush and not that blithering idiot Bill Clinton? Clinton was a lame duck, and everyone loved him because he took no chances, and kept the economy stable. He even infused the Japanese economy with 3 or 4 billion american dollars, only for Japan to say 'Thank you for the financial assistance, but we still hate your guts."

    No one is perfect, this is true, and you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs. It's just that this omelet is bigger than it has ever been before, and we are under constant scrutiny, not because of what we're doing, but because of who we are.

    Terrorists destroy themselves and thousands of innocents each year, yet we are considered the 'Axis Of Evil'.

    There are some things I will never understand.
     
  13. Λtreyu

    Λtreyu Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,505
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    quoted for emphasis...

    my opinion on Bush is that he is a good leader. Far from the best, even farther from the worst. Under him the GDP grew as did the stock market. Prices in the US stayed well below inflation as well. Looking back in 50 years, most of the US will probably agree. I doubt anyone liked what Reagan was doing, but he's looked back upon as a great president now. Being a good leader is doing what has to be done even if a lot of people don't like it. The reason why Bush is a good leader is because he has the balls to get the job done. I don't care what you say. Honestly I try not to be biased though I know I am. I feal Clinton was a decent leader, nowhere near as good as most people rate him(there is a reason arkansa didn't give him electoral votes) but still decent. He lead people through good times during a world-wide economic boom. I don't even blame him for the Nasdaq popping and loosing 80% of it's value, nor the stock market dip of 01(the effects of a president aren't fealt too much until they have been in office for a year or two, the descisions of the past president are mostly in power at that time, same will apply for Bush too)

    Also people give too much credit to presidents for everything. Lincoln didn't single handedly win the Civil war nor did FDR single handedly get us out of the depression through socialist reforms(his effects really should have been cancelled after it was over though), a lot of events are independent of their leadership and would have happened no matter who who was elected.

    EDIT: schleprok <-thanks [/b][/quote]
    ''Quoted for emphasis''

    I'm giving you the benifet of the doubt. I'm sure the fact that because of this war the United States is in TRILLIONS of dollars in debt, and the children of today, tomarrow and probably the next generations to come will be forced to pay for our current governments stupidity, has just slipped your mind.

    As of April of this year, the US is now in $7,782,816,546,352.29 debt. Quite a mighty number, eh? Incase that is just a bundle of numbers for you, That is seven trillion, seven hundred and eighty-two billion, eight hundred and sixteen million, five hundred and forty-six thousand, three hundred and fifty-two dollars, and twenty-nine cents.

    Hell, if Clinton was still in office, we would be steadily climbing our way out of debt. Or, if Bush truely cared about his people, then he would have continued the way Clinton left off. Making our debts history.

    UNFORTUNATLY though, Bush is a complete vegitable when it comes to politics and running a country.



    Iraq will NEVER be liberated unless they DO IT THEMSELVES. No country in HISTORY has every invaded and set up a stable and succesful democratic government for another country, and then pulled out. This will not work unless they have the will to fight their leaders them selves. We are only letting Iraq fall deeper and deeper into tradgedy.

    Now i noticed you said He, president bush, has the ''balls to get the job done''. Oh really? Exactly which job? And when will it get done? And, exactly, how is he using his balls? By sitting, safe and sound, in his luxurious office while his countries sons and daughters are being slaughtered in the name of nothing? My my, that DOES take balls.

    And just remember, if you want some one with balls to run this country, you should read about a little man named John Kerry. Yes, i would consider serving 2 tours in one of the bloodiest wars this country has ever seen as having mighty fine balls. Big ones.

    Of course, bush served too! yeah, he served his country well...his balls prove that.
     
  14. EX0S

    EX0S Well-Known Member

    Age:
    31
    Posts:
    231
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2005
    Location:
    TeXaS
    We need to stop doing this crap to other countries. I mean we need to just think of our own countries. We allreayd have enough people hating us already. I'm not trying to be mean or anything I just don't want more people hating this beutifull country. :eek:
     
  15. Amoebassassin

    Amoebassassin Well-Known Member

    Age:
    47
    Posts:
    1,881
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Location:
    Gotham City, NY
    I may not agree with your philosophy, but I must say that what you've said means a lot considering you're a Texan! ^_^
     

Share This Page