pookie23 Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by frenchbread ok first of all, that's where you insulted me:spragga25: "It ain't about color you dip." (page 3 of this thread)...second of all, i did not insult you, so don't threaten me with all you road of insults crap...and thirdly, i'm sure your insulting skills are tremendous...and uh...i'm real proud of there "bro"... Actually it was page 2 And you tried to bring race into this, so I wanted to make sure you got the point "son" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchbread Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by spragga25 Actually it was page 2 And you tried to bring race into this, so I wanted to make sure you got the point "son" whatever...i just checked again, and it shows on page 3 for me but that's probably because we have different "per page" settings (mine is 15)...and i didn't try to bring race into this...you made a very bad statement that generalized all french people to be the same...which is a very bad thing to do...and i just tried to show you how bad it is to generalize based on nationality or race by asking you this:spragga25:you love busting on the french huh?...yea i know it's so great to bust on a group of people just because of nationality and race...how do you like it when people bust on blacks?...and on top of that, my point still stands, that you're being high and mighty, because i don't care what point you're trying to make, you don't have to curse to make it...(p.s.: what was your point anyway?...oh yea that french are all gutless and pacifists...because you know...it's so bad to be pacifist...yea...what a shame that is...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cintron Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by frenchbread (p.s.: what was your point anyway?...oh yea that french are all gutless and pacifists...because you know...it's so bad to be pacifist...yea...what a shame that is...) I'd say a sizeable majority of them are opportunists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchbread Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by cintron I'd say a sizeable majority of them are opportunists. i'd say the same and worse of our gov't...and the people that support it (wethter they realize it or not)...and i'm curious...how many french people do you know?...how long have you lived in france?...how many french sources of information have you read lately?... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by frenchbread yea...that's called taking over the world:nobody else with wmd's but us...we push our way down everybody's throat...and we kill them if they don't go along with it...but as always, my mahs i appreciate you brutal honesty...at least you don't hide behind bs like the rest of the pro-war people on this board... If you agree with my brutal honesty why can't you accept that imperialism and oil are not the primary goal please put down the "I hate Bush" protest sign and see past the left 's argument of War for oil. If this were true why don't we own the kumaiti fields as repayment for liberating them in 1991??? That example there shows your argument although filled with conviction but because it was born from the hatred you have of the republican party, is flawed.. French,I will say it again.. If Iraq is liberated and some American companies get big contracts because of it or the price of oil drops, aren't we in a better situation?? If you don't agree on the buisness side just think of all the Iraqi's who will be fee and live a better life.. doesn't that make this war just? You say were are corrupt into going to war but the very country U use as a avatar is even crooketer and U can't argue that fact...Being a car buff I constantly read up on diffrent technologies and all car companies will incorporate hybrid fuel technology which will double the effeciency of cars by 2012... not a cure for the addiction but a start.. Who is pushing our way down anyones throat?? Seriously, this comment implies that the people of Iraq & Afghanistan were in better positions before we stepped in... you really don't beleive that right?? Your answer to terrorism is throw more money at it.. Shouldn't we try to lower the anti-american sentiment. Isn't this the plan? Peaceniks often state this but offer no plan to execute the goal.I consider the cure for terrorism is what this country is executing with OPERATION IRAQI FREEDDOM... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchbread Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by mr mahs If you agree with my brutal honesty why can't you accept that imperialism and oil are not the primary goal please put down the "I hate Bush" protest sign and see past the left 's argument of War for oil. If this were true why don't we own the kumaiti fields as repayment for liberating them in 1991??? That example there shows your argument although filled with conviction but because it was born from the hatred you have of the republican party, is flawed.. French,I will say it again.. If Iraq is liberated and some American companies get big contracts because of it or the price of oil drops, aren't we in a better situation?? If you don't agree on the buisness side just think of all the Iraqi's who will be fee and live a better life.. doesn't that make this war just? You say were are corrupt into going to war but the very country U use as a avatar is even crooketer and U can't argue that fact...Being a car buff I constantly read up on diffrent technologies and all car companies will incorporate hybrid fuel technology which will double the effeciency of cars by 2012... not a cure for the addiction but a start.. Who is pushing our way down anyones throat?? Seriously, this comment implies that the people of Iraq & Afghanistan were in better positions before we stepped in... you really don't beleive that right?? Your answer to terrorism is throw more money at it.. Shouldn't we try to lower the anti-american sentiment. Isn't this the plan? Peaceniks often state this but offer no plan to execute the goal.I consider the cure for terrorism is what this country is executing with OPERATION IRAQI FREEDDOM... see right there, i have to stop you man...that may be how you see the democratic party "hatred [...] of the republican party", but that's not how i see the republican party at all!!!!...and more over man, i have no party affiliation...and i'm dead serious there...i might agree with republicans on some issues, with democrats on some other, and with none on some other...so you have to change your whole view of me right there man...that's not at all where i'm coming from...i will not put down the "i hate bush signs" for one simple reason:i love this country, and i love the troops...i hate a guy who has no problem sending mostly poor young uneducated kids to get killed when he was AWOL when his country called him...i hate a guy that allows the use of depleated uranium in the munitions used (btw, major geneva convention violation) by our troops when he knows perfectly well that it will seriously damage the health of innocent civilians and our troops...but then again daddy did the same in the 1991 gulf war: 300 tons of depleated uranium...so that's ok right?...no it's not ok...because we now have 450,000 seriously disabled veterans from the gilf war because of that...and i hate a guy who's so willing to send troops to get killed and seriously ill, and at the same time cut the veteran's budget...as far as repayement of 1991:the u.s. gov't made a $30Bil net profit from the 1991 gulf war...and that's no conspiracy theory...that's admitted fact by the current administration...and we don't own the kuwaitii fields, because we couldn't impose our makeshift gov't there under the pretense of helping them, because their gov't is/was a friendly gov't and they didn't have a hussein-like dictator...Being a car buff I constantly read up on diffrent technologies and all car companies will incorporate hybrid fuel technology which will double the effeciency of cars by 2012... not a cure for the addiction but a start..it's not cure...you got that right...the traditional petrol-based combustion engine is 50 years outdated...individuals alone have come up with heathier alternatives (see hempcar)...forget about companies and researchers...they just want to ease into it...too much money to be made...Who is pushing our way down anyones throat?? Seriously, this comment implies that the people of Iraq & Afghanistan were in better positions before we stepped in... you really don't beleive that right??the u.s. is man...are you nuts?...have you ever been outside of the country?...have you ever lived in a foreign coutry?...u.s. is pushing the u.s. "way of life" with their economy (which relies on oil control...see IMF...u.s.a. only country alowed to have a deficit...)...and when the economy does work, use force...do you even know who the u.s. gov't put at the head of the afghani nation?...a former exxon consultant...and just like the vp of unocal had testified before the house..."the pipeline wouldn't be completed until a friendly gov't was put in afghanistan"...well look who they put in charge there (that's because the contender to the leadership of afghanistan got "killed by one of the last talkiban fighters put on the run by u.s. troops"...)...and guess what else...the pipeline is being built through afghanistan as we speak...the u.s. gov't wouldn't give a damn about the afghani or iarqi people if they weren't any oil there...former president bush on the first day of the gulf war: "we're going to bomb them back to the stone age"...no that doesn't sound to me like you want to take out the dictator and help the people...and if our gov't were for the good of the people...why didn't take out hussein after the gulf war?...why aren't we in africa now?...Your answer to terrorism is throw more money at it.. Shouldn't we try to lower the anti-american sentiment. Isn't this the plan? Peaceniks often state this but offer no plan to execute the goal.my answer is to use the money to protect ourselves, not to create more people that are going to try to kill us...my answer is to stop acting like were doing right now i.e. like we own the whole damn world and that we can decide unilaterally what needs to be done in other people's countries...(how would you like it if integrists came here with the world's biggest army and started bombing and invading us because they feel that we are ready for integrism?...how can you even think that this war will lower the anti-american sentiment????...are you delusional?...look after 9/11, most of the world (even countries that didn't have much) were ready to offer anything to us...look now...most of the world is against us...(and don't tell me great britain and spain...their people is against this war...who cares about 2 leaders that don't listen to their country)...OPERATION IRAQI FREEDDOM...yea...rightdon't you find it funny that they had to rename it this from:OPERATION IRAQI LIBERTY????...(OIL)yea i wonder why they had to rename it if it has nothing to do with it...especially when they didn't give any explanation for renaming it...(oh well another blunder by g.w. ...see "operation infinite justice"...)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchbread Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by mr mahs If you agree with my brutal honesty see...i agree with your honesty, because unlike the rest of the pro-war people here you don't try to hide the inherent profit from this war:If Iraq is liberated and some American companies get big contracts because of it or the price of oil drops, aren't we in a better situation?? If you don't agree on the buisness side...that's exactly my point...that we will monetarilly profit from this war even more than we did in the first gulf war ($30Bil)...and the gov't, the media and the pro-war people on this board all try to tell you..."no...it's not for oil...it's not for money...we could have taken the oil from there in 1991 if we wanted"...(btw, how bad does the last one sound...seriously...doesn't anyone see anything wrong with that?)...when it is...haliburton (formerly head by cheney) entered negociations to win a contract to rebuild iraq's oil infrastructure in 2001 (iraq was not even on the table at the time)...doesn't anyone see anything wrong with that?...they won the contract btw, in 2002...$6Bil...yea...there's no connection...please...and of course, only u.s. companies were allowed in the negociations...seriously... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cintron Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by frenchbread i'd say the same and worse of our gov't...and the people that support it (wethter they realize it or not)...and i'm curious...how many french people do you know?...how long have you lived in france?...how many french sources of information have you read lately?... historically, France has always begged for help when it's been needed, and given little to none in return. The only time the French ever move to do anything, is when they stand to gain a LOT out of it, preferably letting someone else take the fall.Look at their actions now. They spend considerable time and effort not simply opposing the coalition action in Iraq, but going so far as to build and lead a front AGAINST the united states.Why? Because if France manages to win that argument and forces the US/UK to back down under the pressure that THEY applied, then France gains prestige in the UN and around the world. They would have been the ones to make the great and mighty united states heel under their will.Of course, when we went ahead and ignored them and fought anyway, they suddenly started asking for a role in postwar Iraq because they were afraid that since we called their bluff and told them to shove it, now they were going to be left out of the big party.Naturally, since they're resilient little bastards, they bounced back and instead, managed to stand on a pillar and DEMAND [ballsy, eh?] that they have a role in Iraq, under the U.N. That way, by invoking the name of the U.N, they would be forcing us to stick to our word of turning Iraq over to the UN upon the conclusion of the campaign. That way, France is assuring that it will have the Iraq issue back on the diplomatic table, where it will be once again able to con and manuver its way into carviing up a piece for itself. There's always been a disdain, a sort of "upstart" attitude with them. I don't know if it's an excess of pride or what, but they seem determined to prove that they owe us nothing and if possible, they'll take everything.Kind of like the kid you help up off the ground after a bad fall, and once he's up, he goes and acts like he never needed you in the first place. But if you fall, you can be guaranteed he's not going to help you up. In fact he'll probably walk right past you and laugh on the way.That's no friend to me. That's "not exactly an enemy."Or maybe just a complete asshole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djxeno Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by frenchbread apotheosis...you're still here man?...wow...i haven't been on this board for ages, but a little bird told me about this thread...i had to come see it for myself...anyway, what a joke...you can give all the "would be speaking german if it weren't for us" you want man...bottom line is, this country wouldn't exist if it weren't for the french:1. gave this country its freedom (fighting the british fleet)2. gave this country the ideals its constitution is based uponso say "french can't fight" all you want man, they know enough to save this country's ass...and as far as having these great "patriotic" feelings about war...i have one word for you man:JOINnow...if you want to start using your brain a bit, you'll stop memorizing all the crap mass media feeds you and start looking for alternative sources of information and start thinking for yourself instead of playing parakeet...here's a fact for you:90% of the media in this country is owned by 6 peopleand you know what?...these 6 people are close to the government...so i wouldn't bet my life on all the great information about "liberating" the iraqi people...3000 iraqi exiles returned to iraq last week to fight the US troops...you know which other nation used embedded journalist?3rd Reich Germany...like to laugh at France's leader?...let's laugh at G.W. a bit...isn't it funny that he was AWOL during the Vietnam war?...he doesn't seem to have problem sending kids to war to die, now does?...he used to be a coke addict....he scored ~1200 on SAT...200 points less than the Yale freshman average at the time...but i'm sure he's got "street smarts" from all that 'nam experience...i'm patriotic man:i speak my mind...i want the troops back here...i don't want gov't officials to use their power for personal gain...i want the president to be elected by the people...and i want people to turn off their tv, stop believing all the bs on FOX, and start thinking for themselves...because you know what?...in 20 years, everybody will look on this like we now look on McCarthyism... How the hell did he pull off a 1200 on the SAT? Did he forget all of his verbal skills, he makes up words everyday like he was Tolkien....-XeNo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchbread Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by djxeno How the hell did he pull off a 1200 on the SAT? Did he forget all of his verbal skills, he makes up words everyday like he was Tolkien....-XeNo- yea i know right...isn't bush quite the orator...lol...first president to have books written to collect all the incoherent statements he makes...(that's a first)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchbread Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by cintron historically, France has always begged for help when it's been needed, and given little to none in return. The only time the French ever move to do anything, is when they stand to gain a LOT out of it, preferably letting someone else take the fall.Look at their actions now. They spend considerable time and effort not simply opposing the coalition action in Iraq, but going so far as to build and lead a front AGAINST the united states.Why? Because if France manages to win that argument and forces the US/UK to back down under the pressure that THEY applied, then France gains prestige in the UN and around the world. They would have been the ones to make the great and mighty united states heel under their will.Of course, when we went ahead and ignored them and fought anyway, they suddenly started asking for a role in postwar Iraq because they were afraid that since we called their bluff and told them to shove it, now they were going to be left out of the big party.Naturally, since they're resilient little bastards, they bounced back and instead, managed to stand on a pillar and DEMAND [ballsy, eh?] that they have a role in Iraq, under the U.N. That way, by invoking the name of the U.N, they would be forcing us to stick to our word of turning Iraq over to the UN upon the conclusion of the campaign. That way, France is assuring that it will have the Iraq issue back on the diplomatic table, where it will be once again able to con and manuver its way into carviing up a piece for itself. There's always been a disdain, a sort of "upstart" attitude with them. I don't know if it's an excess of pride or what, but they seem determined to prove that they owe us nothing and if possible, they'll take everything.Kind of like the kid you help up off the ground after a bad fall, and once he's up, he goes and acts like he never needed you in the first place. But if you fall, you can be guaranteed he's not going to help you up. In fact he'll probably walk right past you and laugh on the way.That's no friend to me. That's "not exactly an enemy."Or maybe just a complete asshole. historically, France has always begged for help when it's been needed, and given little to none in return. The only time the French ever move to do anything, is when they stand to gain a LOT out of it, preferably letting someone else take the fall.please you have to be kidding me...are you an american?...i hope for your sake that you're not...otherwise, you need to go back to highschool and hit those books man, because france gave the u.s. its freedom and ideals which upon the constitution was written......so go read before making ignorant posts...That way, by invoking the name of the U.N, they would be forcing us to stick to our word of turning Iraq over to the UN upon the conclusion of the campaign. That way, France is assuring that it will have the Iraq issue back on the diplomatic table, where it will be once again able to con and manuver its way into carviing up a piece for itself.and your post is great...it illustrates my point totally...somebody else made a post along these lines..you pro-war see this as a "cake"...you want to keep all the gain for yourself...not share with france since they didn't help...lol...i don't even need to argue anymore...you guys make my arguments for me...you see this war as the profit it represents...you hope to make monetary profit from it...THAT IS MORALLY BANKRUPT YOU FOOLfrance doesn't want to get in...not as france...and to not get a "piece of the cake"...france wants to make sure, that iraq is rebuilt under the supervision of the whole world not of one country (as it will bias the reconstruction to benefit that country (see "cake"))...france wants to make sure that eventhough the u.n. was not able to stop this unilatteral, interest-driven war, the u.n. can still ensure the healthy reconstruction of iraq, without the goals of u.s. oil companies being the utmost important thing...and you know what else?your precious british allies agree with france...so what's up with that?... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by frenchbread see...i agree with your honesty, because unlike the rest of the pro-war people here you don't try to hide the inherent profit from this war:If Iraq is liberated and some American companies get big contracts because of it or the price of oil drops, aren't we in a better situation?? If you don't agree on the buisness side...that's exactly my point...that we will monetarilly profit from this war even more than we did in the first gulf war ($30Bil)...and the gov't, the media and the pro-war people on this board all try to tell you..."no...it's not for oil...it's not for money...we could have taken the oil from there in 1991 if we wanted"...(btw, how bad does the last one sound...seriously...doesn't anyone see anything wrong with that?)...when it is...haliburton (formerly head by cheney) entered negociations to win a contract to rebuild iraq's oil infrastructure in 2001 (iraq was not even on the table at the time)...doesn't anyone see anything wrong with that?...they won the contract btw, in 2002...$6Bil...yea...there's no connection...please...and of course, only u.s. companies were allowed in the negociations...seriously... Haliburton has fell out of the race to bid for rebuilding Iraq oil fields..What is wrong with only allowing american countries doing the rebuilding?? What is wrong if we liberate Iraq and get reimbursed for it.. Isn't it up to the elected officials of Iraq to decide? Don't tell me that we will install a puppet govt because anything is better then sadam.. The administration is working towards allowing the people to elect the govt what would you suggest the U.N takje the controls?? Never!!! The oppenents of the war have their own hidden agendas which are more lucrative then what MIGHT be given if they go along with our PRE-EMPTIVE plan and the regime falls. French... everyone is shady it's a cut throat buisness in a perfect world it wouldn'tr exist but imagine if one of these finatical loons controlled everything...In the first part of this thread someone mentioned someone that made alot of sense and only convinced me more that this operation is important.. "What did war solve except nazism, factionism, communism & slavery".If you are aginst the war fine but If you are against the war because the U.S. is shady then you have to denounce every gov't!!! If you are aginst the war because you THINK Bush dodged the draft that's fine too but weren't college students exempt from the draft? Straight from his BIO:President Bush was born on July 6, 1946, in New Haven, Connecticut, and he grew up in Midland and Houston, Texas. He received a bachelor's degree from Yale University in 1968, then served as an F-102 fighter pilot in the Texas Air National Guard. President Bush received a Master of Business Administration from Harvard Business School in 1975. After graduating, he moved back to Midland and began a career in the energy business. After working on his father's successful 1988 presidential campaign, he assembled the group of partners that purchased the Texas Rangers baseball franchise in 1989. The real draft dodger is Clinton but how come you haven't brought him up? Going by your reasoning against the war, did you agree when Clinton committed U.S. troops to Kosovo or Somalia??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrishaolin Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by frenchbread historically, France has always begged for help when it's been needed, and given little to none in return. The only time the French ever move to do anything, is when they stand to gain a LOT out of it, preferably letting someone else take the fall.please you have to be kidding me...are you an american?...i hope for your sake that you're not...otherwise, you need to go back to highschool and hit those books man, because france gave the u.s. its freedom and ideals which upon the constitution was written......so go read before making ignorant posts... bro how did france give the u.s. its freedom and ideals? Some french philosophical writings? There were also a number of continental writers who contributed to the feelings of liberty.. so dont word it to sound like if it weren't for the french, the united states would never have gained its freedom... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchbread Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by mr mahs Haliburton has fell out of the race to bid for rebuilding Iraq oil fields..What is wrong with only allowing american countries doing the rebuilding?? What is wrong if we liberate Iraq and get reimbursed for it.. Isn't it up to the elected officials of Iraq to decide? Don't tell me that we will install a puppet govt because anything is better then sadam.. The administration is working towards allowing the people to elect the govt what would you suggest the U.N takje the controls?? Never!!! The oppenents of the war have their own hidden agendas which are more lucrative then what MIGHT be given if they go along with our PRE-EMPTIVE plan and the regime falls. French... everyone is shady it's a cut throat buisness in a perfect world it wouldn'tr exist but imagine if one of these finatical loons controlled everything...In the first part of this thread someone mentioned someone that made alot of sense and only convinced me more that this operation is important.. "What did war solve except nazism, factionism, communism & slavery".If you are aginst the war fine but If you are against the war because the U.S. is shady then you have to denounce every gov't!!! If you are aginst the war because you THINK Bush dodged the draft that's fine too but weren't college students exempt from the draft? Straight from his BIO:President Bush was born on July 6, 1946, in New Haven, Connecticut, and he grew up in Midland and Houston, Texas. He received a bachelor's degree from Yale University in 1968, then served as an F-102 fighter pilot in the Texas Air National Guard. President Bush received a Master of Business Administration from Harvard Business School in 1975. After graduating, he moved back to Midland and began a career in the energy business. After working on his father's successful 1988 presidential campaign, he assembled the group of partners that purchased the Texas Rangers baseball franchise in 1989. The real draft dodger is Clinton but how come you haven't brought him up? Going by your reasoning against the war, did you agree when Clinton committed U.S. troops to Kosovo or Somalia??? what a joke...how gulible are you????...it's in his bio, so it must be right...wow you don't need much to be convinced...but just like on the other thread, here we go:February 1968:Bush takes an Air Force officers test. Scores in 25th percentile in the pilot aptitude portion. Declares that he does not wish to serve overseas.May 27, 1968:Bush enlists in Texas Air National Guard. Aided by Texas House Speaker Ben Barnes, he jumps over waiting list. He pledges two years of active duty and four years of reserve duty.June 9, 1968:Bush's student deferment expires.September 1968:After basic training, Bush pulls inactive duty to act as gopher on Florida Senator Edward J. Gurney's campaign.November 1968:After Gurney wins, Bush is reactivated and transferred to Georgia. November 1969:Bush is flown to the White House by President Nixon for a date with daughter Tricia.December 1969:Bush transfers to Houston and moves into Chateaux Dijon complex. Laura lives there too, but they don't meet till later. March 1970:Bush gets his wings.June 1970:Joins the Guard's "Champagne Unit," where he flies with sons of Texas' elite. November 3, 1970:George Bush Sr. loses Senate election to Lloyd Bentsen, whose son is also in the "Champagne Unit."November 7, 1970:Promoted to first lieutenant. Rejected by University of Texas School of Law.January 1971:The Guard begins testing for drugs during physicals.Spring 1971:Hired by Texas agricultural importer, Bush uses F-102 to shuttle tropical plants from Florida.May 26, 1972:Transfers to Alabama Guard unit so he can work on Senator William Blount's reelection campaign. According to his commanding officer, Bush never shows up for duty while in Alabama, nor can anyone confirm he ever serves in the Guard again.August 1972:Bush is grounded for missing a mandatory physical.November 1972:Bush returns to Houston, but never reports for Guard duty. December 1972:In D.C. for the holidays, Bush takes 16-year-old brother Marvin drinking and driving. Confronted by father, Bush suggests they settle it "mano a mano."October 1, 1973:The Air National Guard relieves Bush from commitment eight months early, allowing him to attend Harvard Business School. so what were you saying?...student?...he voluntarily enrolled in the air national guard...yet he never served...mmhhmmmas far as dick cheney, he got 5 deferements...one of the reasons he cited: "...more important things to do..."and as far as clinton...you're funny, but i'll tell you again...you make it sound like i'm for clinton and against bush...whatever gave that idea?!?!?...i'm just against bush...that simple...and it's funny how when cornered all you pro-war can do is bring up clinton...we're not talking about clinton...we're talking about george w. bush... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchbread Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by chrishaolin bro how did france give the u.s. its freedom and ideals? Some french philosophical writings? There were also a number of continental writers who contributed to the feelings of liberty.. so dont word it to sound like if it weren't for the french, the united states would never have gained its freedom... i'll tell you how...the french fought the british fleet that would otherwise would have anihilated us...the founding fathers of our country (thomas jefferson, ben franklin, etc...) went to france to study, came back and wrote the declaration of independance (oh but you're right, the declaration of independance is just some obscure meaningless piece of paper)...that's how...but you wouldn't know now, would you?... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by frenchbread i'll tell you how...the french fought the british fleet that would otherwise would have anihilated us...the founding fathers of our country (thomas jefferson, ben franklin, etc...) went to france to study, came back and wrote the declaration of independance (oh but you're right, the declaration of independance is just some obscure meaningless piece of paper)...that's how...but you wouldn't know now, would you?... Just like today the greed of the French sided with the underdog to develop the country in the 1700's or supply weapons technolgy to Iraq today.. Either way the country only looks out for it's own interests. What was the stake the U.S. had in WWII we enetered after being attacked we didn't even want to be in the war.. But I can def tell you this we liberated France and time and time again they have fenced us in the back... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrishaolin Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by frenchbread i'll tell you how...the french fought the british fleet that would otherwise would have anihilated us...the founding fathers of our country (thomas jefferson, ben franklin, etc...) went to france to study, came back and wrote the declaration of independance (oh but you're right, the declaration of independance is just some obscure meaningless piece of paper)...that's how...but you wouldn't know now, would you?... the battle you speak of didnt take place towards the end of the war, and by that time, many would agree, we had already won.The founding fathers studied in France, so we owe our independence to the french? Get real.. if we're gonna use that logic, than we owe our freedom to Plato and the greek philosophers.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sassa Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by underwater there is no possible way that more civilians have died then military personel.....the US gov. is not releasing the # of iraqi soldiers that we have killed....the number is in the range of 30,000 - 50,000......for an accuarate count of civilian deaths go to iraqbodycount.net...... dude, it's all over the news, even cnn has said before that around a few dozen american soldiers were dead (it's probably more now...) versus more than 500 iraqi civilians... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by frenchbread what a joke...how gulible are you????...it's in his bio, so it must be right...wow you don't need much to be convinced...but just like on the other thread, here we go:February 1968:Bush takes an Air Force officers test. Scores in 25th percentile in the pilot aptitude portion. Declares that he does not wish to serve overseas.May 27, 1968:Bush enlists in Texas Air National Guard. Aided by Texas House Speaker Ben Barnes, he jumps over waiting list. He pledges two years of active duty and four years of reserve duty.June 9, 1968:Bush's student deferment expires.September 1968:After basic training, Bush pulls inactive duty to act as gopher on Florida Senator Edward J. Gurney's campaign.November 1968:After Gurney wins, Bush is reactivated and transferred to Georgia. November 1969:Bush is flown to the White House by President Nixon for a date with daughter Tricia.December 1969:Bush transfers to Houston and moves into Chateaux Dijon complex. Laura lives there too, but they don't meet till later. March 1970:Bush gets his wings.June 1970:Joins the Guard's "Champagne Unit," where he flies with sons of Texas' elite. November 3, 1970:George Bush Sr. loses Senate election to Lloyd Bentsen, whose son is also in the "Champagne Unit."November 7, 1970:Promoted to first lieutenant. Rejected by University of Texas School of Law.January 1971:The Guard begins testing for drugs during physicals.Spring 1971:Hired by Texas agricultural importer, Bush uses F-102 to shuttle tropical plants from Florida.May 26, 1972:Transfers to Alabama Guard unit so he can work on Senator William Blount's reelection campaign. According to his commanding officer, Bush never shows up for duty while in Alabama, nor can anyone confirm he ever serves in the Guard again.August 1972:Bush is grounded for missing a mandatory physical.November 1972:Bush returns to Houston, but never reports for Guard duty. December 1972:In D.C. for the holidays, Bush takes 16-year-old brother Marvin drinking and driving. Confronted by father, Bush suggests they settle it "mano a mano."October 1, 1973:The Air National Guard relieves Bush from commitment eight months early, allowing him to attend Harvard Business School. so what were you saying?...student?...he voluntarily enrolled in the air national guard...yet he never served...mmhhmmmas far as dick cheney, he got 5 deferements...one of the reasons he cited: "...more important things to do..."and as far as clinton...you're funny, but i'll tell you again...you make it sound like i'm for clinton and against bush...whatever gave that idea?!?!?...i'm just against bush...that simple...and it's funny how when cornered all you pro-war can do is bring up clinton...we're not talking about clinton...we're talking about george w. bush... The country is a diffrent place today!!!You have your opinions about his past I have mine but what does that solve??I would really like to know how pointing out the adminstrations flaws,-Makes us all safer-Improves terrorism which is the goal rememeber... To say he was appointed then elected or he dodged the draft won't get anything accomplished man... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sassa Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by mr mahs The country is a diffrent place today!!!You have your opinions about his past I have mine but what does that solve??I would really like to know how pointing out the adminstrations flaws,-Makes us all safer-Improves terrorism which is the goal rememeber... To say he was appointed then elected or he dodged the draft won't get anything accomplished man... no, except that it shows us the character of the person that is our "supreme commander"....he is obviously not a man of good judgement, dignity, and patriotism...if our troops are so brave and courageous, why couldn't he have proved himself while he had the chance...because he's a moronic selfish coward, that's why.how can you not be ashamed of our so-called president bush...if he can "run" this country then so can i... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrishaolin Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by mr mahs Just like today the greed of the French sided with the underdog to develop the country in the 1700's or supply weapons technolgy to Iraq today.. Either way the country only looks out for it's own interests. What was the stake the U.S. had in WWII we enetered after being attacked we didn't even want to be in the war.. But I can def tell you this we liberated France and time and time again they have fenced us in the back... Exactly.. not sure if it was mentioned on this thread or not, but does France's stance on the war have anything to do with the debt owed to them by Saddam or the lucrative oil deals that may be lost with the fall of Saddam's regime?? Always looking out for themselves.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchbread Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by mr mahs The country is a diffrent place today!!!You have your opinions about his past I have mine but what does that solve??I would really like to know how pointing out the adminstrations flaws,-Makes us all safer-Improves terrorism which is the goal rememeber... To say he was appointed then elected or he dodged the draft won't get anything accomplished man... this is not an opinion...these are facts...ergo it is a fact that bush was AWOL during the vietnam war...that's a fact...i don't care what your opinion is...it doesn't matter, because established fact superseeds it...but you can't say anything back to that so what's your come back?...wahwah...the country is a different place now...i'm not talking about the country...i'm stating the fact that bush WAS AWOL and that now sends kids off to war!...(none of his btw)...that shows you what kind of man he is...he's a yellow belly...hides, and sends off others to fight...subjects them to illegal weapons (depleated uranium) and has no regard for their health...he no regard for anything but what the pnac has written... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchbread Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 Originally posted by chrishaolin Exactly.. not sure if it was mentioned on this thread or not, but does France's stance on the war have anything to do with the debt owed to them by Saddam or the lucrative oil deals that may be lost with the fall of Saddam's regime?? Always looking out for themselves.. i'm sorry but that's really retarded...how wrong is that?...lollisten chris, the best way for france to get that money back is to take saddam down, have his assets seized and get reimbursed...either through reconstruction or from saddam's assets...always looking out for themselves????...are you insane?...let's talk about the states here for a second...the states are not ALWAYS looking out for themselves?...i don't even know what to begin with...you better believe it man...if any country is the king of shady deals, it's our good old u.s. of a.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 The answer to your post is in his bio... He was in college when they were drafting 18 year olds to vietnam... I will not say anything else because I don't beleive your claim and you are so convinced that I feel U would kill over it .. The places you are deriving these so called facts are from independent loons looking to blame america FIRST... Vietnam was a bad situation for everyone but why harp on it? How come you can't answer how critcizing the govt right now helps... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchbread Posted April 7 Report Share Posted April 7 it's funny how none of your pro-war people will recognize bush's history (all the facts stated before)...but what's funnier, is that you can't deny it, because the facts are there and they are irrefutable...you can't admit it because that would make that whole sand castle crumble down down to the ground...yet you can't deny it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.