ShotGunWillie
New Member
Matt Black said:
are you being sarcastic.....
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Christian Democrat
- Thread starter ShotGunWillie
- Start date
are you being sarcastic.....
I have no idea which reply that was.Matt Black said:
This is a revision of the actual history. It was based on intelligence from 3 sources: 1. US Intelligence 3. British Intelligence 3. Israeli Intelligence Had Saddam complied with the inspections as he should there would be no need for intelligence. And since we gave them warning of going back in months in advance we cannot know how much was shipped out prior to out return. 12 years of a broken cease fire was long enough. And then his own people hanged him.
saturneptune
New Member
Why are we even going back and forth about American policy with a foreign national?
ShotGunWillie
New Member
Revmitchell said:
How do you know they hung him, it wasn't like it was video taped or something....
ShotGunWillie
New Member
saturneptune said:
Its fun. I did this last week, we had visitors from the UK, they were miffed and this was their argument.
"We hope Barack Obama gets elected, he promises a change in policies which should help the UK. Sarah Palin is too inexperienced. Barack Obama's inexperience is a breath of fresh air to government in the states."
I got up and walked off.
Some people in the UK are mad at us still....
One more thing, don't forget that they blame republicans for the bail out, not the Democrats. F-Mac and F-Mae were both going down hill fast under dims watch, so of course we get the blame.
GW Bush caused the economy to be driven into the ditch, BHO is gonna drive it out of the ditch, can't wait!!!
BHO stated last night in Missouri that the US has been under bad policy for decades, wouldn't Clinton be apart of those decades?
Last edited by a moderator:
No. Are you saying you are neither honourable nor a gentleman, then?ShotGunWillie said:
Here it is, then:Revmitchell said:
Because someone asked me, that's why. NCT, IIRC, on page 1:saturneptune said:
If you don't want an answer from a pesky 'forriner', don't ask the question. And I'd be more than happy for those here to comment on our General Election, next time we have one (only a maximum of 18 months to wait, guys). That's how we learn more about each other and our respective countries and that's a Good Thing, isn't it?
Last edited by a moderator:
ShotGunWillie
New Member
Matt Black said:
That is questionable and strictly determined by situation....
Bush and Blair went against the UN. And two liars (Bush and Bliar, for whom I did not vote) do not make a truthdonnA said:
Matt Black said:
I dont know what "YMMV" is but that was not the stated reason alone. There were many reason given. Selective memory is a convenient thing isn't it:
What lefties refuse to admit is that the onus was on Saddam under the 1991 cease fire agreement to prove he no longer has WMD's. He himself brought us back into Iraq by failing to do so. It was not our repsonsibility to prove if he has them or not. Any concern that he may have them was justified by his lack of cooperation alone aside from any intelligence.
After having gone in we discovered that Saddam was being propped up by France and UN officials who were profiting from the Oil for Food program. How dispicable! what was intended to supply provision for the Iraqi people was used by France and Crooked UN officials who were personally profiting from this program. If you want to balme someone blame France and the UN.
Just a bit if historical reality for ya!
"Your Mileage May Vary"
With WMDs, we gave Saddam the old insoluble problem of how to prove a negative.
With WMDs, we gave Saddam the old insoluble problem of how to prove a negative.
Matt Black said:
Well at least we got our history straight now.
Doubting Thomas
Active Member
When our government takes upon itself to be the 'world's policeman', I don't seen any problem with citizens of other nations (such as our brother Matt) expressing an opinion about who would be better, for the rest of the world, as our commander-in-chief (ie the world's 'chief of police', if you will).
Look at it this way--the US has over 700 bases around the world in over 150 nations; has a history of toppling (overtly or covertly) other nations' governments when they go against our corporate interests; has propped up some brutal dictators in the name of "fighting communism"; and has no qualms about crossing other nations' borders to bomb folks (often killing innocent civilians in the process) we suspect of being "terrorists" without a declaration of war by Congress (as called for in the Constitution). Can you not see how folks in other nations might have a strong opinion in the outcome of our presidential election?
However, we respond by saying "who cares what foreign nationals think?!". Some on here seem more interested defending American nationalism than seeking first the Kingdom of God along with our brothers and sisters in Christ over seas, as if American foreign policy is some sort of New Testament equivalent to the actions of the Old Testament theocratic nation of Israel.
And they "hate us for our freedoms"....:BangHead:
Look at it this way--the US has over 700 bases around the world in over 150 nations; has a history of toppling (overtly or covertly) other nations' governments when they go against our corporate interests; has propped up some brutal dictators in the name of "fighting communism"; and has no qualms about crossing other nations' borders to bomb folks (often killing innocent civilians in the process) we suspect of being "terrorists" without a declaration of war by Congress (as called for in the Constitution). Can you not see how folks in other nations might have a strong opinion in the outcome of our presidential election?
However, we respond by saying "who cares what foreign nationals think?!". Some on here seem more interested defending American nationalism than seeking first the Kingdom of God along with our brothers and sisters in Christ over seas, as if American foreign policy is some sort of New Testament equivalent to the actions of the Old Testament theocratic nation of Israel.
And they "hate us for our freedoms"....:BangHead:
Bless you for that; you expressed it far better than I could:thumbs:
BaptistBeliever said:
I seldom reveal my past votes (or future ones), but here you go...feel privileged
I voted for him...not as the "Christian" candidate, but as a better alternative than a socialist one. I was proud of my 2000 vote, and I very reluctantly gave him my 2004 vote.We do not know if someone is a Christian for sure. I've never held GWB up as one. Frankly, I don't consider him that great a president, either. However, please understand that sometimes we vote for someone because they will do less damage to our country. I hate it, and many here abhor and refuse to do the "lesser of two evils" vote, and I respect them for that. This election for me is certainly another "lesser" scenario. But I'd rather see ten terms of McCain than one of Obama. I don't know if either are Christian. But I know who will damage our country less. I know who respects liberty more. I know who will fulfill the Constitutional requirements better. I know who will leave me alone more.
It's not even close.
Doubting Thomas said:
It is false that we have taken it upon ourselves to be the worlds policeman. As if we have acted anywhere unilaterally. Another myth perpetrated by lefties.
As well it is also a myth that Some on here seem more interested in defending nationalism than first seeking the Kingdom of God. To get along with some others in this world is to compromise our values.
But lefties can only get their point across by perpetrating myths.
ShotGunWillie
New Member
Doubting Thomas said:
Your from Rome, what do you know....