Erollisi Marr - The Nameless

Go Back   Erollisi Marr - The Nameless > NON EQ Stuff (Real life, other games, etc.) > Steam Vent


Reply
 
Add/Share Add/Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-02-2004, 05:13 PM   #26
Alauradana
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,460
He didn't vote for it because he didn't like the aspects of the bill that weren't so readily publicized, and he found somebody who wants to speak out in that regard.

I suppose Kerry is a psychic now and he can see in the future? I won't vote on that bill because they won't do what they say? Please, if he did that, then he is lamer than I originally thought. He voted that down for no good reason. Go look at the site I posted with all the specifications for the breakdown of the monies. What do you disagree with? Most of that money went to our forces overseas. Gerick brought up the missiles, that wasn't a hidden agenda, it was there point blank, to replace the ones lost. If Kerry doesn't want to support our troops, he can screw himself. Throwing it back at Bush is hypocrasy. Easy to see where you stand--blinded by the same light that Bumble follows.
Alauradana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2004, 05:20 PM   #27
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
I suppose Kerry is a psychic now and he can see in the future?
You are really dense. It is called using common sense.

Bumble, what you say has not been proven. You are saying that the monies have not been used over there, based on one person who is obviously very disgruntled?
Here ya go...
http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/sto...MPLATE=DEFAULT
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2004, 05:44 PM   #28
Alauradana
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,460
Ok Bumble--way off in left field again. That is money that was put there for rebuilding Iraq--not the money allocated to our troops. HELLOOOOO!!!! Secondly, the new government has not been established yet. That money was allocated for fiscal year 2004. That money is through end of September, 2004. It is the beginning of May. Does it make sense to dump all the money in Iraq at the beginning when the insurgents over there are still out of control blowing things up? I think not. Surely you have a better argument than that?
Alauradana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2004, 06:12 PM   #29
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Well we know by your own admission that the troops don't have what they need. Either Bush didn't ask for what he needed, he hasn't allocated it properly, or it is not being spent at all. Either way, it all falls on Bush, not on Kerry.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2004, 06:17 PM   #30
Alauradana
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,460
Post where I said that they weren't getting what they needed. I posted what that idiot said. Being as you are saying on other threads that cons don't back up what they say, where is your proof Bumble? Either way it is Bush's fault--fault for what? You haven't proved anything. You are totally clueless and cannot even follow through on your self-proclaimed board rules. Totally hilarious.
Alauradana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2004, 06:32 PM   #31
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Originally Posted by Alauradana
The Dems started slamming WAY before Bush did.
I don't think it matters who started the slamming. What matters is if we can see through it.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." óMonty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2004, 06:58 PM   #32
FanonFaythunder
ThreadKiller, Bitches
 
FanonFaythunder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,874
Send a message via ICQ to FanonFaythunder Send a message via AIM to FanonFaythunder
I suppose Kerry is a psychic now and he can see in the future?
Or maybe he, like every other person who voted on it, had a copy of the bill sitting on his fucking desk?

The Dems started slamming WAY before Bush did.
Yay kindergarten comebacks. I'll buy that the Democrats started campaigning before Bush did, but if you try to tell me that the Republicans didn't do the same near the end of Clinton's term, I will laugh in your face.

You've yet to make any kind of point... you're simply pointing out aspects of our political system. We know about it, it's on the news all the time, most of us participate in it.

Original thoughts please.
__________________
Fanon
Pinhead of Whit`s End

No, I don't play... except when I do.
FanonFaythunder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2004, 07:17 PM   #33
Alauradana
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,460
"Or maybe he, like every other person who voted on it, had a copy of the bill sitting on his fucking desk?"


My oh my it gets tiring having to repost to clear up the misconceptions people get by not reading comprehensively. That statement I made was in reference to Bumble saying that Kerry knew that the money allocated would not go where it was supposed to. How would having a copy of the bill sitting on his fucking desk make a difference? We are talking about knowing the future, which John Kerry doesn't.

"You've yet to make any kind of point... you're simply pointing out aspects of our political system."

If you can't follow the points I have made, then I am sorry. I am not going to sit here and spoon-feed you all night. Read for comprehension, maybe you will understand.
Alauradana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2004, 08:07 PM   #34
FanonFaythunder
ThreadKiller, Bitches
 
FanonFaythunder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,874
Send a message via ICQ to FanonFaythunder Send a message via AIM to FanonFaythunder
That's funny... because when you said that... you quoted me...

Originally Posted by Me
He didn't vote for it because he didn't like the aspects of the bill that weren't so readily publicized, and he found somebody who wants to speak out in that regard.
Originally Posted by You
I suppose Kerry is a psychic now and he can see in the future?
Same post. Check again if you have to, it's okay, I'll give you a minute...

All done? Okay, good, moving on.

My main point here is this; and I'll admit you're quite clever in dodging it.

1) Kerry didn't vote for the funding. (I'm not going to go into his reasoning)
2) Kerry criticizes the war in Iraq.
3) Kerry found somebody from the military who was willing to speak up with views that criticize a plan that Kerry himself voted against.

How's that for spoon-feeding?

Now, where do you see the flip-flop here? Where is the hypocrisy, where is the problem?

If Kerry had voted for the funding, then yes, this would be a flip-flop, this would be hypocritical, and this would be a problem. But you've yet to show anything along those lines.

Continue talking down to me all you want, and keep telling yourself that you're thinking circles around me, if it makes you feel better, but I'm not following your "points" because there aren't any. You took a few jabs and all of them have a very weak foundation.
__________________
Fanon
Pinhead of Whit`s End

No, I don't play... except when I do.
FanonFaythunder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2004, 08:47 PM   #35
Alauradana
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,460
You honestly don't understand what the posts were about. I will explain it one more time, then I will address the OTHER things you keep bringing up.

Here was Bumble's original post:

He voted against the money because there was no guarantee that it would be used properly.

My POINT was, how would Kerry know that money would not be used properly? He had in his hands the documentation that I linked on this thread. Kerry is not a psychic is he? He had no way of knowing if the money would not be used properly or improperly (the fact that you haven't shown it was used improperly is addressed in the next paragraph and on your Number 3, down below--I used your format seeing as it is obvious that is what you CAN understand).

The second point I am making is that you just assume (you apparently being you and Bumble) that because one disgruntled (and yes he is disgruntled because he is reserve and didn't get to go home when he wanted to) soldier says that the soldiers aren't equipped properly. I asked to show some proof, which hasn't been provided. I am sure Bush can go out and get some soldier to go through his campaign to put out the message that they are taken care of. Do you see the point now? This whole argument that you and Bumble have is based on the word of one individual. When asked to show proof, Bumble pulled up a site that talked about how the money for Iraq rebuilding was being handled, not the money that went to our troops.


1) Kerry didn't vote for the funding. (I'm not going to go into his reasoning)

The only reasoning the dems are throwing (according to Gerick--insinuated through other posts) is that the money would go to missiles/star wars technology. I posted the whole accounting for the Act. No where in there is it stated that the money was going to those areas. The only things in there are funding for our troops, to replace equipment, to replace weapons and MISSILES that were damaged during Iraqi Operation Freedom, to help the new Iraq government and the country rebuild, funds to help combat the drug war in Afghanistan, also some for our military bases overseas--all defense items. What in that list do you dems think is unneccessary?


2) Kerry criticizes the war in Iraq.

Kerry has criticized everything. This is standard Kerry, it is his whole platform! His idea of rebuilding Iraq is to give it to everyone else. The wonderful UN who was involved in the scandal in the food for oil program and the other wonderful countries who were on the take from Saddam. Yes, what a grand plan!!

3) Kerry found somebody from the military who was willing to speak up with views that criticize a plan that Kerry himself voted against.

I wonder how long it took him to find a guy, and at least you quoted him right, find the guy. Their campaign will do anything to smear. Show me a source other than someone from Kerry's camp to back that up. If the guy wasn't biased, why did he go to the Kerry campaign versus AP?

I cannot explain it anymore basic than that. I am sure if you don't understand it this time, you will again accuse me of not having a point or not backing it up or any of your pathetic insults. It is one thing if you disagree with me, but if you cannot understand me, well that is your problem. So go ahead with your useless insults--I can back what I say everytime.
Alauradana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2004, 05:10 AM   #36
Gerick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
Ala, what do we need more? missle when our boys would be effected as well, or armor for the ground troops that are already there? missles are for hard targets(other missle sights, depo's, ammo storage)

only reason to restock them right away instead of allowing the annual military budget replace them is we eather have

A. more bullshit research we want to do(remember the moble rocket platform that wasnt moble? )

B. bush has another country he would like to flip off and piss off.

im going with the later
Gerick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2004, 05:17 AM   #37
Gerick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
hell let me make it clear for you

one bullet, that is all it takes to kill, costs 50 cents, 1 average daisy cutter bomb can cost hundreds of thousands, can cost more then the training and upkeep of 20 soilders(or 40 mercinarys)

bombs are not cost effective for "peace keeping"

bombs can wait
Gerick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2004, 06:19 AM   #38
Alauradana
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,460
Saving one soldier's life is cost effective enough for me. How many soldiers do you think would have been killed had they ran through Fallujah versus using strategically placed missiles as they did? Go tell that to the families of those soldiers. You really disgust me--you place a price on human life? You obviously have never served your country.

Last edited by Alauradana; 05-03-2004 at 06:39 AM.
Alauradana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2004, 06:21 AM   #39
Alauradana
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,460
And by the way, please enlighten everyone of Bush's plans to do research and bomb another country with those missiles. It was crystal clear in the Act--they are for replacing the ones damaged in Operation Iraqi Freedom. You dems are so paranoid it is pathetic.

Do the math, the Act provides 51 million in equipment, pay for our troops and 6 million to replace the missiles. At least read before you try and argue, if you had you would have known that and not posted that the missiles were taking place of armor.

Last edited by Alauradana; 05-03-2004 at 06:35 AM.
Alauradana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2004, 07:44 AM   #40
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
[quote]You really disgust me--you place a price on human life? You obviously have never served your country.[quote]
You disgust me. You wish to waste human lives (ours and Iraqis) because we have a dumbshit president that was too intellectually lazy to find out about the ethnic squabblings in Iraq before we went in there. Had the president done that he would have known that there would be power struggles from day one.

And speaking of being a hypocrite, if you haven't served how can you tell someone else they disgust you because of that. You haven't a fucking clue what the military's objectives are because you haven't ever had to make up those objectives. Neither have I, but I go to the expert that I know to ask when I have questions. My father, Lt. Col., West Point class 1962 tells me that the main objective is defensive not offensive. That is always the military's objectives. You cons tend to think offensive and offensive only. That is a losing battle. A good defense always outlasts a good offense.
Dumbfuck president thinks that offensive and military toys are the answer.

And as far as putting value on people's lives, I don't see where he is doing that. You have made that point up to try to demean him, but nowhere has he mentioned about the cost of a life. He mentioned about protecting our troops who are mostly getting killed by ambushes in guerilla attacks as opposed to funding for a missile to strike an insurgent point. I scarcely think that missiles are going to win this war and stop our boys from being killed. All he did was make a choice as to what would serve our military better. You can disagree all you want. Its obvious that the people on the ground such as this Lieutenant believes that body armor is the more sensible manner. I tend to think they might actually know more about military needs than our president. Let's not forget that our president never served in any combat manners. In fact, only one person in his administration did- Colin Powell- but we all know how much they listen to him.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2004, 08:23 AM   #41
darue_ivywood
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 681
---short interjection---


You really disgust me--you place a price on human life?

now THATS funny.

thats a mother of one-liners.

seeing as how its in a thread about allocating monies to 'soldiers' and 'weapons' for a war ...


some how I'm thinking you meant

" You really disgust me--you place a price on Americans life? "


i now return you to your regularly scheduled rant.

darue_ivywood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2004, 09:09 AM   #42
FanonFaythunder
ThreadKiller, Bitches
 
FanonFaythunder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,874
Send a message via ICQ to FanonFaythunder Send a message via AIM to FanonFaythunder
By: LIZ SIDOTI - Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush, trying to counter John Kerry's record as a decorated Vietnam War veteran, argues in a new campaign ad that his Democratic rival has turned his back on U.S. soldiers engaged in war.

"Though John Kerry voted in October of 2002 for military action in Iraq, he later voted against funding our soldiers," the Bush-Cheney campaign ad says.

The four-term Massachusetts senator backed the congressional resolution authorizing Bush to use force in Iraq. The 30-second commercial focuses on Kerry's vote last year against an $87 billion aid package for Iraq and Afghanistan, contending that the vote denied troops body armor and higher combat pay, and reservists better health care.

The Kerry campaign responded that the Democrat voted against "the failed Bush policy in Iraq" not against soldiers, and faulted Bush for "refusing to take responsibility" for the aftermath of the war.

"He has a mounting, widening and deepening credibility gap in his ability to take care of the troops," said Stephanie Cutter, a Kerry spokeswoman.

Bush's ad, which started airing Tuesday in West Virginia, is designed to counter Kerry's potential appeal - his Vietnam record - in the state that boasts more than 203,000 veterans. It's the first sign of a new strategy for the Bush team: ads targeted to specific states.
Full story here.

Read that last part, then read it again, then think.

You're doing nothing more than describing normal politicking. Welcome to 2004, this is the way politics work in modern America.

*Quick edit note* That article was last modified in March, by the way.
__________________
Fanon
Pinhead of Whit`s End

No, I don't play... except when I do.
FanonFaythunder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2004, 09:35 AM   #43
Gerick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
Originally Posted by Alauradana
Saving one soldier's life is cost effective enough for me. How many soldiers do you think would have been killed had they ran through Fallujah versus using strategically placed missiles as they did? Go tell that to the families of those soldiers. You really disgust me--you place a price on human life? You obviously have never served your country.

we.......are........already.......in........iraq.......we... ...dont.......need......fucking.....missles......anymore.... ..why.....
would......we......when.....all.....the.....hard.....targets ......have......already.....been.....blown.....up?

can i say it any slower?
Gerick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2004, 09:44 AM   #44
kanibaal
korpse
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 796
rinse, repeat, enter same ol internet board jargon<here>. will these threads ever change?
kanibaal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2004, 09:55 AM   #45
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
How would having a copy of the bill sitting on his fucking desk make a difference? We are talking about knowing the future, which John Kerry doesn't.
Considering the lack of trust that Bush exhibited when Kerry voted to give the President powers to go to war or when Bush started handing out unchecked contracts to Halliburton I would be very skeptical of giving Bush a blank check as well. Kerry wanted specifics and rightfully so. He didn't get them. Now he is complaining because the funds aren't being used for what they had been told (but not in the bill) they would be for.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2004, 10:23 AM   #46
crimsonedge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 767
Originally Posted by Gerick
we.......are........already.......in........iraq.......we... ...dont.......need......fucking.....missles......anymore.... ..why.....
would......we......when.....all.....the.....hard.....targets ......have......already.....been.....blown.....up?

can i say it any slower?

Can you be any more dense ?
crimsonedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2004, 11:42 AM   #47
Alauradana
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,460
Fanon, by putting in that site, you just furthered MY point. So because Kerry now doesn't support the war (that he voted for--flip-flop), he is not going to vote for funds to equip our troops that are there? Regardless of whether you support the war or not, to make our troops pay for it is bull.

Gerick, Please pay attention to the news. Do you remember seeing the attacks on Fallujah just a few days ago? Those WERE missiles. There is obviously a reason why YOU are not in charge of the military--not worth debating with you anymore when you aren't even up to par on current events. Missiles have given our troops an edge on Fallujah without costing a lot of American lives. And yes, considering Iraqis are our enemy, I am not too worried about their lives when they are killing American soldiers.

So Bumble, you and your "LT COL FATHER (insert giggle of disbelief here) honestly believe that not giving troops the weapons, armor, and benefits they deserve is going to help them? Oh dear, I have no doubts now about you. My bad, you live in your own little world.

Go look at the site I posted. How more specific did it have to be? It listed what they want and what it was to be used for, broken down into the dollar amount. I am sure they did a complete breakdown, but do you honestly think all the senators have the time to go line by line? Kerry could have had that information if he wanted. So according to you, Kerry voted for the war, then decided he was against it, so he thought sending gear to the troops would be in support of the war so he voted against it?

"Considering the lack of trust that Bush exhibited when Kerry voted to give the President powers to go to war "

so you are saying that Bush couldn't be trusted when Kerry voted to give the president powers to go to war? If Kerry believed that, why did he vote yes? How logical is that of Kerry?


"Its obvious that the people on the ground such as this Lieutenant"

Where does it say anywhere that the people on the ground feel this way Bumble? One guy said that. ONE GUY. Not the whole army, it isn't obvious. I asked you to show me that this is widespread and you couldn't.
Alauradana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2004, 05:11 PM   #48
AresProphet
Priest of Hiroshima
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,932
Send a message via MSN to AresProphet
Originally Posted by Alauradana
Here was Bumble's original post:

Originally Posted by bumbleroot
He voted against the money because there was no guarantee that it would be used properly.
My POINT was, how would Kerry know that money would not be used properly?
He didn't know, with the 100% certainty of a psychic, that it would not be used properly.

But by the same token, he did not know, with the 100% certainty of a psychic, that it would be used properly.

You're flailing at a straw man, and it's glaringly obvious when you quote bumble saying he had "no guarantee", and then attack him saying "how would Kerry know?" Bumble never said that.

I haven't seen debating skills this poor since the sixth grade.
__________________
One of the wonders of the world is going down
It's going down I know
It's one of the blunders of the world that no-one cares
No-one cares enough


Attachment 181
AresProphet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2004, 05:16 PM   #49
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Any politician that does not vote for support of our troops has nothing less
then an arrogant political agenda. <--Liberals will hate to agree, but it's the truth.

We as Americans should also support our troops. How? By telling our senators
to get on the ball, and stop creating this bias that supports their enemy
terrorist friends in the name of a political win. Nobody wins if Iraq looses.

And the Media is trying for another Vietnam by embolding them. (T. Kennedy)
Thats a fucking fact!


Bumble, You've said before that your father was a West point grad in 1962.
Well, good for you. Have you told him your veiwpoint yet? Seems now I see
where you get your bias from. Do you hate your father that bad?

Grow up already. Your 40-Something and acting like a spoiled child.
Did your father kick your ass one to many times? Get over it. So did mine.
My father was also an officer, "in the Navy".

Write your Senators and Congress. Just Be calm, collect, and sincere.
Your voice will be heard. Trust me.




God Bless America
God Bless our Brave American Troops

Zolmaz.
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2004, 05:23 PM   #50
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Originally Posted by AresProphet
He didn't know, with the 100% certainty of a psychic, that it would not be used properly.

But by the same token, he did not know, with the 100% certainty of a psychic, that it would be used properly.

You're flailing at a straw man, and it's glaringly obvious when you quote bumble saying he had "no guarantee", and then attack him saying "how would Kerry know?" Bumble never said that.

I haven't seen debating skills this poor since the sixth grade.
Spin Spin Spin, You will never win. Bias is the key to your company.
But not to the troops af EZ, HOO'RA! Go GO GO!


Piss off Ares. You deserved a much harder attack.



God Bless America
God Bless our Brave American Troops
God Bless President George W. Bush and his resolve

Zolmaz Zo'Boto (Leaders make themselves clear, followers always spin to make their job easy)
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:16 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.