Bahaha...my town made the news...

Peleng 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye MC In M42 Mount

01/27/2006 07:15:19 AM · #51

Originally posted by BrennanOB:

One little irony of the OP is that of course no American can just go to hear the current president speak if he comes to your town. Any person who is in the audience at a presidential speech is there by invitation. The ability to see the leader of our country has been discontinued, and the lack of dicord that this creates ought to insure that all future presidents do the same to keep reporting of the speach on message. as an interested American who lives near a major city I have seen presidents Ford, Carter, Regan and Clinton at public events. I will probably never see another one without paying.

When Bush was campaigning for re-election, if you were not already planning to vote for him you were NOT ALLOWED IN to the campaign. I'm sorry but isn't that what a campaign is for to persuade voters, or is it JUST a PEP RALLY, rah-rah. There is something very wrong with an american citizen not being able to see THEIR President in a public forum.

milo655321: I need to go research the Benjamin Franklin quote. If it is valid I LOVE it!

Bush acts like a THUG, doesn't have a ounce of Professionalism in his body. I am embarassed that man represents ME. Truley exemplifies the 'ugly American' view.

As for 9/11....lets not forget that SADAM didn't blow up the WTC. We went to Iraq to get SADAM out of power. We have him....why are we still there??

And our soldiers that are getting hurt in Iraq are not being taken care of by our government. Its ok to get shot-down defending our country, break your back, but because you can stand up, but can no longer fly, they deam you medically separated from the ARMY (the Army's choice not his), when it comes down to a military retirement, they say, "OH NO you are only 10% disabled. Thanks but no thanks, go fend for yourself."

Thus, it is even more important to Support Our Troops- the individuals not the war!!

Oh well,....my blood is boiling now....gotta shut up before my phones get tapped. Doesn't sound like AMERICA...

Matthew

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

01/27/2006 07:35:13 AM · #52

Originally posted by dassilem:

As for 9/11....lets not forget that SADAM didn't blow up the WTC. We went to Iraq to get SADAM out of power. We have him....why are we still there??

I think that it is because after:

embroiling the country in an illegal war;
demolishing public infrastructure;
disbanding the army and all forms of civil control;
inciting fundamentalists to populate the country;
exacerbating existing national tension;
imposing a temporary puppet ruler;

there is something of a moral obligation not to just leave an entire nation to fall apart, be invaded, and/or allow Saddam to be replaced by a truly despotic leader (Taliban or Al Quaida sponsored).

The US (and the West) must remain in Iraq and accept the consequences of its actions.

As for the troops themselves: they follow orders. Of course our criticism must be reserved for those giving the orders, not the servants obliged to effect them.

Message edited by author 2006-01-27 07:36:10.

Peleng 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye MC In M42 Mount

01/27/2006 07:43:22 AM · #53

legalbeagle, altough I was ranting, I do agree with what you said. I'm just frustrated. I'm not pro-military and am now in a personal relationship that is pro-military. (boyfriend, SFCUSAR(R); his son-in-law, is the pilot I refer to

Just usually better for me to keep my mouth shut, which is difficult :-0

While I am proud of Bob and Justin, I am angry that Justin is not getting what I feel he deserves.

Message edited by author 2006-01-27 07:45:01.

Matthew

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

01/27/2006 08:27:56 AM · #54

understood and agreed: I would merely ask "why were we ever there".

However, you should not keep your mouth shut: it is far better to say something, but IMO one should be prepared to listen to any response. You may find a competing response persuasive, in which case you might think about the issue differently. You may find it obviously wrong, but it will be a response that you can anticipate to better make your point in the future. You may find alternative supporting arguments, which will help you consider the issue from more angles and be more sure of your convictions.

IMO, life is more interesting if you are prepared to speak out, and more rewarding if you are prepared to listen.

milo655321

Nikon D70

Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4.0 AT-X Pro DX

01/27/2006 10:18:38 AM · #55

Originally posted by dassilem:

milo655321: I need to go research the Benjamin Franklin quote. If it is valid I LOVE it!

While there apparently is debate, it's generally attributed to Franklin. From Wikipedia:

Originally posted by Wikipedia:

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

This statement was used as a motto on the title page of An Historical Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania. (1759) which was attributed to Franklin in the edition of 1812, but in a letter of September 27, 1760 to David Hume, he states that he published this book and denies that he wrote it, other than a few remarks that were credited to the Pennsylvania Assembly, in which he served. The phrase itself was first used in a letter from that Assembly dated November 11, 1755 to the Governor of Pennsylvania. An article on the origins of this statement here includes a scan that indicates the original typography of the 1759 document. Researchers now believe that a fellow diplomat by the name of Richard Jackson to be the primary author of the book. With the information thus far available the issue of authorship of the statement is not yet definitely resolved, but the evidence indicates it was very likely Franklin, who in the Poor Richard's Almanack of 1738 is known to have written a similar proverb: "Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power."

Many variants derived from this phrase have arisen and have usually been incorrectly attributed to Franklin:

"They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
"He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security"
"He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither"
"If we restrict liberty to attain security we will lose them both."
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

01/27/2006 10:27:02 AM · #56

thanks, hadn't the chance to go look yet!! you saved me the time.

Flash

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED

01/27/2006 11:09:59 AM · #57

Originally posted by legalbeagle:

IMO, life is more interesting if you are prepared to speak out, and more rewarding if you are prepared to listen.

True wisdom.

Flash

rox_rox

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

01/28/2006 11:53:17 AM · #58

Just for kicks, here's my prediction for the future. It's a little scenario for the â��Nothing to Hideâ�� crowd:

July 15, 2008. Hillary Clinton has, somehow, managed to get elected as President. Another terrorist attack on American soil has killed 1000 people. An investigation determines that the bombs were fashioned from items purchased at your local Home Depot on February 22, 2008. Hillary has decided that she needs to take a hard stance on terrorism if she wants to serve a second term.

There is no time for subpeonas. All credit card records of those who purchased items from that store during the suspected time period are secretly seized. Wire taps are placed on everyone who shopped there that day. Hillary mentions this to a couple of Congressmen and feels that is sufficient notification. She refuses to get court orders for the wire taps. After all, she is the president and must do whatever is necessary to fight terrorism.

It turns out that the terrorists were citizens of the same country your anscestors migrated from. Everyone who shopped at that Home Depot on February 22, 2008 with surnames from this country of origin disappears. Their families have no idea what happened to them and are being secrety surveiled without court order under Hillaryâ��s command.

You are one of these people. You have gone missing, but itâ��s been said that phone calls from your house were made to the leader of the terrorist movement. No one will ever know for sure, because itâ��s based on Hillaryâ��s Intelligence and the surveillance crew is being held accountable by Hillary alone. Due to the precedent set by the former president, she orders that infrared surveillance be placed on your home so that agents can make sure your wife is not trying to make a bomb. Hopefully there are no perverts on your wife's surveillance crew, because she is sexy. They are also tracking every purchase your family makes and all internet activity is being recorded. Someone sent your son a link to a gay porn site and he spent an hour browsing it out of curiosity. The agents are being entertained, but havenâ��t found anything incriminating, so they decide to scour the past of everyone you are close to. Donâ��t worry, itâ��s all for a good cause.

You donâ��t trust the government headed by Hillary; and you have serious reason to believe that the American leadership is rampant with corrupt Democrats who are breaking international treaties and American Constitutonal Law. You are being detained, without charges, in a secret prison. When you ask for a lawyer they laugh and give you another body cavity search, just for the hell of it. Does it matter that you have nothing to hide?

It could happen.

Message edited by author 2006-01-29 01:25:04.

Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4.0 AT-X Pro DX

01/29/2006 12:56:43 PM · #59

just found this going through Reuters portfolio of the best of 2005

this is just to emphasize what I've said before, the US troops are doing terrible things in Iraq !

milo655321

Nikon D70

01/29/2006 02:30:07 PM · #60

Originally posted by DanSig:

this is just to emphasize what I've said before, the US troops are doing terrible things in Iraq !

Would you care to elaborate on the circumstances surrounding the incident?

Gatorguy

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VR DG IF-ED

01/29/2006 02:55:03 PM · #61

Originally posted by DanSig:

just found this going through Reuters portfolio of the best of 2005

this is just to emphasize what I've said before, the US troops are doing terrible things in Iraq !

It's certainly very easy to find an emotion stirring image like this to illustrate your point, no different than the anti-abortion people use to sell their points, or Peta people use to sell their point. Just take a worst-case scenario and promote it as the norm. Problem with this image, while indeed powerful, is we don't know the circumstances behind it. Was this bus driving into a checkpoint without heeding the the warnings to stop? You could just as easily found an image of a child killed by an Iraqi insurgent blowing up a candy store (just happened). How many innocent people were killed and tortured previously at the direction of Saddam Hussein? I bet you could find a picture of that too if you wanted to make that arguement. Here, I'll help: Torture under Saddam. There are plenty of images and articles about Saddam's death camps and torture chambers, and the atrocities he committed against his own people who had different beliefs than him available - google them if you wish.

Don't kid yourself, propaganda is a two way street. Your type of posting is one type, an emotional tug at the heartstrings in an attempt to illustrate your point of view. Here is another that could be used to illustrate the opposite point of view:

The fact is, niether of them are objective evidence of anything other than a single snapshot in time.

The fact remains, war sucks and innocent people get hurt. But for the right reasons, it may be justified. In this case, WMD or not, I think getting Saddam out of there was the right thing to do. What we (the coalition) are failing at is in establishing a way of getting out without leaving behind a horrific civil war.

Regards

01/29/2006 06:46:40 PM · #62

Originally posted by Gatorguy:

There are plenty of images and articles about Saddam's death camps and torture chambers, and the atrocities he committed against his own people who had different beliefs than him available - google them if you wish.

Don't kid yourself, propaganda is a two way street. Your type of posting is one type, an emotional tug at the heartstrings in an attempt to illustrate your point of view. Here is another that could be used to illustrate the opposite point of view:

The fact is, niether of them are objective evidence of anything other than a single snapshot in time.

The fact remains, war sucks and innocent people get hurt. But for the right reasons, it may be justified. In this case, WMD or not, I think getting Saddam out of there was the right thing to do. What we (the coalition) are failing at is in establishing a way of getting out without leaving behind a horrific civil war.

Regards

so since Saddam killed and tortured Iraqis that were his own people, it makes it alright for the US troops to go to Iraq and keep killing and torture Iraqis ? Saddam was captured over a year ago, heÂ´s on trial now for what he's done to his people, should we put the US soldiers on trial when they get back from Iraq ? they have commited the same horrible crimes that Saddam commited, the only differense is that the US soldiers invaded another coutry to commit their crimes.

the Iraqis will probably commit Saddam Hussein to death for his crimes, and the same punishment should be waiting for the US troops when they leave Iraq ! same crimes, same punishment !

what the president of a country does to it's people is their buisness, if the people don't like it, they just get rid of their president, it is NOT the job of the American goverment to police the world. Saddam was a bad man, he treated his people badly, but all he did he did within the borders of his country, he was no threat to any outside country and specially not to America.

the ruler of China treats his people even worse than Sadddam, the ruler of Sudan is much worse, the regim of Rwanda is killing it's people, and so are many other countries, but most of them have one thing in common, they are very poor, but China is rich, but outnumber America 8 to 1, so the US Goverment does not invade these countries to stop the civil war and help the people to build a civil goverment.

Iraq is a big country, it had a small army, old and malfunctual weapons, they had no weapons of mass destruction, they had no means to invade any country, the people were poor and starving, but the country is one of the richest in the world, it makes you wonder about the integrity of the US Goverment, that they chose to invade Iraq to "get" Saddam, and now that they got him they refuse to leave, even when the ruling goverment of Iraq has requested that they leave, it is the belive of most non Americans that the US Goverment is in Iraq to control the oil, it's the only sensible explanation since the reason they gave for invading Iraq doesn't add up, they got Saddam, they helped the Iraqis to elect a new goverment, they helped them to build up their army and police and now that the Iraqis think they can run their country the US refuses to pull their troops out.. WHY ? isn't it the Iraqis that should rule their country, or is America Colonizing the world ? do they not recognice the goverments they help build, do you have a new Hitler running your country ?

I think Bush is just like Hitler was just before he invaded Poland, so I really hope that Bush does not get elected again so he can't continue his warmongering

just my opinion.. and probably the opinion of 5 billion people worldwide !

Gatorguy

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VR DG IF-ED

01/29/2006 08:32:10 PM · #63

Originally posted by DanSig:

I think Bush is just like Hitler was just before he invaded Poland, so I really hope that Bush does not get elected again so he can't continue his warmongering

Uh Oh. . . you invoked Godwin's Law.
Godwins Law

That means debate over - I guess you win.

Regards

colyla

Canon EOS-50D

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM II

01/29/2006 08:51:39 PM · #64

Originally posted by DanSig:

even though I'm against war, I'd still like to see the USA invaded by a major army, just so you'd know what it's like.

I've read a few of your posts in the fast and obviously seen that you're unhappy with the USA. I've seen a few people on DPC that are a little fanatical (both sides) in their postings....but I have to tell you Mr. Dan....I found this extremely offensive and ugly. Not too hard to figure out how you feel about me....and I don't even know you. Let me post this though....I do NOT wish anyone to ever invade your country...for whatever reason.....even though I don't like you....I still wouldn't wish that on you....or anyone. I find your comment very disheartening :/

EDITED TO ADD: Thank you D&L for the allowing us the choice of choosing to 'ignore' threads such as these. I will do so now....

Message edited by author 2006-01-29 20:53:05.

Cam

Sony DSC-F717

01/29/2006 09:03:12 PM · #65

Originally posted by greatandsmall:

July 15, 2008. Hillary Clinton has, somehow, managed to get elected as President.

That will never happen, too many folks on both sides can not stand her.

If the left wants to get back into the White House they better stay clear of that woman.

milo655321

Nikon D70

Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4.0 AT-X Pro DX

01/29/2006 09:15:05 PM · #66

Originally posted by Riggs:

Originally posted by greatandsmall:

July 15, 2008. Hillary Clinton has, somehow, managed to get elected as President.

That will never happen, too many folks on both sides can not stand her.

If the left wants to get back into the White House they better stay clear of that woman.

I'd have to agree. I don't want Bush, but I don't want H. Clinton either.

rox_rox

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

01/29/2006 10:39:53 PM · #67

Originally posted by milo655321:

Originally posted by Riggs:

Originally posted by greatandsmall:

July 15, 2008. Hillary Clinton has, somehow, managed to get elected as President.

That will never happen, too many folks on both sides can not stand her.

If the left wants to get back into the White House they better stay clear of that woman.

I'd have to agree. I don't want Bush, but I don't want H. Clinton either.

Me either. As disgusted as I am with the mockery Republicans have made of our govt. I'd still vote for McCain before Hillary. I Don't agree with many of his ideas, but at least he has integrity; and I'm pretty sure he's read the Constitution.

My illustration was designed to "out" those who claim to have unconditonal faith in the Executive authority. I believe that they'd be singing a different tune about their "privacy" if a Democratic fanatic were in control as opposed to a Republican.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

01/29/2006 10:46:46 PM · #68

Originally posted by DanSig:

I really hope that Bush does not get elected again so he can't continue his warmongering

He CAN'T be elected again, he's in his second term and we have a 2-term limit on the presidency.

R.

rox_rox

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

01/29/2006 10:51:05 PM · #69

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by DanSig:
I really hope that Bush does not get elected again so he can't continue his warmongering

He CAN'T be elected again, he's in his second term and we have a 2-term limit on the presidency.

R.

;^) Really? Maybe he'll change that rule too.

Peleng 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye MC In M42 Mount

01/30/2006 02:24:51 AM · #70

Originally posted by colyla:

Originally posted by DanSig:

even though I'm against war, I'd still like to see the USA invaded by a major army, just so you'd know what it's like.

I've read a few of your posts in the fast and obviously seen that you're unhappy with the USA. I've seen a few people on DPC that are a little fanatical (both sides) in their postings....but I have to tell you Mr. Dan....I found this extremely offensive and ugly. Not too hard to figure out how you feel about me....and I don't even know you. Let me post this though....I do NOT wish anyone to ever invade your country...for whatever reason.....even though I don't like you....I still wouldn't wish that on you....or anyone. I find your comment very disheartening :/

EDITED TO ADD: Thank you D&L for the allowing us the choice of choosing to 'ignore' threads such as these. I will do so now....

I never said that I didn't like the American people, I know many Americans and they are all very decent people, it's the American Goverment I don't like and what the American Goverment is doing and have done in the past 50 years, your country is being controlled by the same kind of people they are fighting.

America was a part of the world war II, they helped fight Hitler because he was so bad, they attacked Japan because the Japaneese were so cruel, they even helped in the attack on Russia to fight back the Russian Army invading Europe, then they invaded Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and now Iraq, all bacause the ruler of these countries were evil and had to be taken out, but in all these invasios the American army has shown the same cruelty as the one they are fighting, so what is the true purpose of the invasion ?

Amnesty International tried to set international laws that allowed soldiers to be prosecuted for their crimes, the reason for this law was that soldiers were cought raping and killing children, but the American Goverment refused to be part of this agreement, they just staded it was a great idea, but the American soldiers should be excluded... WHY ? so they could keep raping and killing innocent children ? there is no sane reason why they should be excluded, the agreement was to make soldiers responsible for their action, not to prosecute them for taking part in the war, just to keep them from geting out of line.

this is a part of why I don't like the US Goverment.

PS My country has already been invaded by the USA, so I kow what it's like !

and like in every other country they have invaded, the US soldiers raped women here to, andd now 50 years later there is a lot of people named soldiers-son, and soldiers-daughter, because the soldier remains unknown, if the Icelandic goverment wanted the rapist to face procecution here in Iceland the soldier was sent to America so he wouldn't be procecuted. way to go America.. Crimes are ok, as long as they are done by Americans against foreigners.. or is it ok.. the rest of the world don't think so !

petrakka

01/30/2006 02:49:42 AM · #71

Originally posted by DanSig:

Originally posted by petrakka:

Is it wrong that I am incredibly irritated by someone who says he wants our country to be invaded so 'we know what it feels like'
Dude was 9/11 not an invasion!?
I'm going into anything about the war, or the president blah blah, cuz I'm not a fan of war either. But please, if you are going to speak about political issues in the United States, don't do it from the safety of beautiful land up north. I'm all for visiting and becoming educated about countries all over the world, but I would not speak about the politics of the country until I had at least lived there for awhile.

It's so much easier to take what you hear and read and spew off on that, rather than living in the country. You might feel different if you lived here and were surrounded by people with other ideals.

actually 9/11 was NOT an invasion, it was a terrorist attack made by a small group of people, a real invasion would be when 100.000.000 chineese soldiers would come marching through every street in every major city in the states.

and i wouldn't want to live in the states while Bush is president, the USA is the one of the most restricted country in the world, second to countries like Rwanda, Burundi, Sudan and other really frightening places.

you American can't seee that because you live in the country and for decades the US goverment has screend the news brodcasted through the states, the first man in decades to contradict what the goverment says is Michael Moore, and he's not a big favorite in the white house ;)

we europeeans see news from all over the world made by freelance reporters that don't answer to anyone, so we see things as they are, not as the goverment wants us to see it, and the news we see from Iraq are all like this

"US troops shot and killed 20 innocent people most were women and children after a bomb went of in a car nearby, nobody got injured in the bombing"

the report you see is like this

"US troops shot 3 terrorists after they blew up a car killing 20 innocent people"

not exactly the same story, but the same event told by one US reporter that was briefed after the incident and one freelance that was on site and saw what went down.

while the US goverment behaves that way it's not a country that free people wants to move to ;)

Dan, your assumptions about me really baffle me. You seem to know the news that me and my friends, colleauges etc. pay attention to, even though YOU DO NOT LIVE HERE, and you do not know anything about me.

You also assume the fact that I have not spent extended periods of time in other countries, where I can get other points of view. I have experienced news from several different countries on other occasions, and spent half a year living abroad, where I was exposed to news about the war on a daily basis from an 'international' perspective.

I have the option, like you, to get the news I want to get. I can find liberal news, conservative news, and every kind in between....yes, even in this oh so controlled and restricted United States I can find this.

You do not know what it was like to be invaded by the USA, because you were not alive at this point.

My stating that 9/11 was an invasion is not an ignorant statement. I did not comment on the scale of the invasion, but nonetheless an uninvited and unwelcome group of people killed thousands of our innocent civilians.
Grounds for war? I won't comment on that, as it really isn't pertinent.

Yes, our soldiers do and have done horrible things, but so have soldiers from every country. While this does not justify it, it is not right to single out the US in instances of war atrocities. Like mentioned before, it is easy to illustrate a point with photos. As a photographer you should know how selective the truth of a photograph can be. As a country we have been victims, we have been aggressors. No one is saying what is going on is right, but you are really being close minded on the subject and offending many people that could be your best friend had you ever lived in the United States.

I would never wish an attack on you or your people, although I wouldn't mind if your keyboard broke.

edit - thousands. sorry i was tired...i know it was not millions.

Message edited by author 2006-01-30 12:38:14.

Matthew

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

01/30/2006 05:54:04 AM · #72

Originally posted by petrakka:

I do not support the way in which DanSig presents some of his arguments, but think that there are one or two points here.

Millions?

I thought that 9/11 involved the death of around 4,000 US civilians. I am not belittling the figure - it is the largest single act of terrorism the world has seen, and was horrific. But in terms of scale, it does pale against the number of Iraqi civilians killed. And it certainly was not an invasion in any traditional sense of the word.

The perception in the UK press has very much been that GWB sold the war on Iraq as a response to 9/11. The connection between 9/11 and Iraq had to be manufactured after the event. Seeing people believe that their country has been invaded and millions been killed appears to support the view that there has been some kind of sales campaign based on misinformation.

One of my points earlier was that your "invasion" comment reflects the Orwellian sentiment "Ignorance is strength". The US has certainly acted strongly, and I believe that the misselling of facts to its people and resulting widespread ignorance has been critical to enabling that show of strength.

NB - not that the US government is alone in this political methodology - I see it used increasingly in all Western politics.

01/30/2006 11:42:28 AM · #73

Originally posted by petrakka:

My stating that 9/11 was an invasion is not an ignorant statement. I did not comment on the scale of the invasion, but nonetheless an uninvited and unwelcome group of people killed millions of our innocent civilians.
Grounds for war? I won't comment on that, as it really isn't pertinent.

Yes, our soldiers do and have done horrible things, but so have soldiers from every country. While this does not justify it, it is not right to single out the US in instances of war atrocities.

LOL millions.. get your stats right before posting !
All 9/11 Attacks, 3030, Total Deaths WTC 9/11 Attack, 2801.

that's like the amount the American army killed in Iraq the first 3 days, now they've been there for about 2 years, and over 100.000 innocent Iraqis killed by the US troops, not counting the actual terrorists and soldiers fighting them !

so the Iraqis and other countries invaded by the USA can kill 100.000 americans before any action should be taken, just to make things even ! this is how people can see this that just read the numbers without taking sides, I'm against killing in any form exept capital punishment for drugs, violent crimes and child abuse. those that can't live in peace with the rest shouldn't live at all !

I am not against America as a country, or as a nation, just the idea the US goverment has, that Americans are superior beeings, that they should be above the laws that everyone else must follow, that if they don't like what some country is doing, that they can invade that country, even against the majority desicion of NATO and UN, that they don't have to answer to anyone !

this is not the way to run a country, when other countries are run that way, they get invaded by the US because it's the wrong way, but the americans cant see what they have become, they are doing exactly the same thing they are fighting. stop the war, take a breather, look in the mirror and see what you've become. and the sayings from the '60 and '70 apply here.. make love not war, y'all need to think about that.

Peace ;)

01/30/2006 01:13:52 PM · #74

Originally posted by legalbeagle:

...it is far better to say something, but IMO one should be prepared to listen to any response. You may find a competing response persuasive, in which case you might think about the issue differently.

IMO, life is more interesting if you are prepared to speak out, and more rewarding if you are prepared to listen.

Dan...some good advice from legalbeagle. YOU are leaving me speechless in your one-sided, anti-American views. THIS American will no longer read any of your rantings. Your extreme negativeness is overshadowing any point that you may be trying to get across.

Gatorguy