Anabolics
Search More Than 6,000,000 Posts
Results 1 to 20 of 20
  1. #1
    Bigen12's Avatar
    Bigen12 is offline AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    4,301

    Zell Miller's Speech at the Republican National Convention

    What do you think?



    "Text of Zell Miller's Speech at RNC

    Wed Sep 1,10:13 PM ET

    By The Associated Press

    Text of speech by Democratic Sen. Zell Miller (news, bio, voting record) of Georgia as prepared for delivery Wednesday at the Republican National Convention:



    ___


    Since I last stood in this spot, a whole new generation of the Miller Family has been born: Four great grandchildren.


    Along with all the other members of our close-knit family, they are my and Shirley's most precious possessions.


    And I know that's how you feel about your family also. Like you, I think of their future, the promises and the perils they will face.


    Like you, I believe that the next four years will determine what kind of world they will grow up in.


    And like you, I ask which leader is it today that has the vision, the willpower and, yes, the backbone to best protect my family?


    The clear answer to that question has placed me in this hall with you tonight. For my family is more important than my party.


    There is but one man to whom I am willing to entrust their future and that man's name is George Bush (news - web sites).


    In the summer of 1940, I was an 8-year-old boy living in a remote little Appalachian valley. Our country was not yet at war, but even we children knew that there were some crazy men across the ocean who would kill us if they could.


    President Roosevelt, in his speech that summer, told America "all private plans, all private lives, have been in a sense repealed by an overriding public danger."


    In 1940, Wendell Wilkie was the Republican nominee.


    And there is no better example of someone repealing their "private plans" than this good man. He gave Roosevelt the critical support he needed for a peacetime draft, an unpopular idea at the time.


    And he made it clear that he would rather lose the election than make national security a partisan campaign issue.


    Shortly before Wilkie died, he told a friend, that if he could write his own epitaph and had to choose between "here lies a president" or "here lies one who contributed to saving freedom," he would prefer the latter.


    Where are such statesmen today?


    Where is the bipartisanship in this country when we need it most?


    Now, while young Americans are dying in the sands of Iraq (news - web sites) and the mountains of Afghanistan (news - web sites), our nation is being torn apart and made weaker because of the Democrat's manic obsession to bring down our Commander in Chief.

    What has happened to the party I've spent my life working in?

    I can remember when Democrats believed that it was the duty of America to fight for freedom over tyranny.

    It was Democratic President Harry Truman who pushed the Red Army out of Iran, who came to the aid of Greece when Communists threatened to overthrow it, who stared down the Soviet blockade of West Berlin by flying in supplies and saving the city.

    Time after time in our history, in the face of great danger, Democrats and Republicans worked together to ensure that freedom would not falter. But not today.

    Motivated more by partisan politics than by national security, today's Democratic leaders see America as an occupier, not a liberator.

    And nothing makes this Marine madder than someone calling American troops occupiers rather than liberators.

    Tell that to the one-half of Europe that was freed because Franklin Roosevelt led an army of liberators, not occupiers.

    Tell that to the lower half of the Korean Peninsula that is free because Dwight Eisenhower commanded an army of liberators, not occupiers.

    Tell that to the half a billion men, women and children who are free today from the Baltics to the Crimea, from Poland to Siberia, because Ronald Reagan (news - web sites) rebuilt a military of liberators, not occupiers.

    Never in the history of the world has any soldier sacrificed more for the freedom and liberty of total strangers than the American soldier. And, our soldiers don't just give freedom abroad, they preserve it for us here at home.

    For it has been said so truthfully that it is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us the freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech.

    It is the soldier, not the agitator, who has given us the freedom to protest.

    It is the soldier who salutes the flag, serves beneath the flag, whose coffin is draped by the flag, who gives that protester the freedom to abuse and burn that flag.

    No one should dare to even think about being the Commander in Chief of this country if he doesn't believe with all his heart that our soldiers are liberators abroad and defenders of freedom at home.

    But don't waste your breath telling that to the leaders of my party today. In their warped way of thinking America is the problem, not the solution.

    They don't believe there is any real danger in the world except that which America brings upon itself through our clumsy and misguided foreign policy.

    It is not their patriotism — it is their judgment that has been so sorely lacking. They claimed Carter's pacifism would lead to peace.

    They were wrong.

    They claimed Reagan's defense buildup would lead to war.

    They were wrong.

    And, no pair has been more wrong, more loudly, more often than the two Senators from Massachusetts, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry (news - web sites).

    Together, Kennedy/Kerry have opposed the very weapons system that won the Cold War and that is now winning the War on Terror.

    Listing all the weapon systems that Senator Kerry tried his best to shut down sounds like an auctioneer selling off our national security but Americans need to know the facts.

    The B-1 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, dropped 40 percent of the bombs in the first six months of Operation Enduring Freedom.

    The B-2 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered air strikes against the Taliban in Afghanistan and Hussein's command post in Iraq.

    The F-14A Tomcats, that Senator Kerry opposed, shot down Khadifi's Libyan MIGs over the Gulf of Sidra. The modernized F-14D, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered missile strikes against Tora Bora.

    The Apache helicopter, that Senator Kerry opposed, took out those Republican Guard tanks in Kuwait in the Gulf War (news - web sites). The F-15 Eagles, that Senator Kerry opposed, flew cover over our Nation's Capital and this very city after 9/11.

    I could go on and on and on: against the Patriot Missile that shot down Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s scud missiles over Israel; against the Aegis air-defense cruiser; against the Strategic Defense Initiative; against the Trident missile; against, against, against.

    This is the man who wants to be the Commander in Chief of our U.S. Armed Forces?

    U.S. forces armed with what? Spitballs?

    Twenty years of votes can tell you much more about a man than twenty weeks of campaign rhetoric.

    Campaign talk tells people who you want them to think you are. How you vote tells people who you really are deep inside.

    Senator Kerry has made it clear that he would use military force only if approved by the United Nations (news - web sites).

    Kerry would let Paris decide when America needs defending.

    I want Bush to decide.

    John Kerry, who says he doesn't like outsourcing, wants to outsource our national security.

    That's the most dangerous outsourcing of all. This politician wants to be leader of the free world.

    Free for how long?

    For more than 20 years, on every one of the great issues of freedom and security, John Kerry has been more wrong, more weak and more wobbly than any other national figure.

    As a war protester, Kerry blamed our military.

    As a Senator, he voted to weaken our military. And nothing shows that more sadly and more clearly than his vote this year to deny protective armor for our troops in harms way, far away.

    George Bush understands that we need new strategies to meet new threats.

    John Kerry wants to re-fight yesterday's war. George Bush believes we have to fight today's war and be ready for tomorrow's challenges. George Bush is committed to providing the kind of forces it takes to root out terrorists.

    No matter what spider hole they may hide in or what rock they crawl under.

    George Bush wants to grab terrorists by the throat and not let them go to get a better grip.

    From John Kerry, they get a "yes-no-maybe" bowl of mush that can only encourage our enemies and confuse our friends.

    I first got to know George Bush when we served as governors together. I admire this man. I am moved by the respect he shows the first lady, his unabashed love for his parents and his daughters, and the fact that he is unashamed of his belief that God is not indifferent to America.

    I can identify with someone who has lived that line in "Amazing Grace," "Was blind, but now I see," and I like the fact that he's the same man on Saturday night that he is on Sunday morning.

    He is not a slick talker but he is a straight shooter and, where I come from, deeds mean a lot more than words.

    I have knocked on the door of this man's soul and found someone home, a God-fearing man with a good heart and a spine of tempered steel.

    The man I trust to protect my most precious possession: my family.

    This election will change forever the course of history, and that's not any history. It's our family's history.

    The only question is how. The answer lies with each of us. And, like many generations before us, we've got some hard choosing to do.

    Right now the world just cannot afford an indecisive America. Fainthearted self-indulgence will put at risk all we care about in this world.

    In this hour of danger our President has had the courage to stand up. And this Democrat is proud to stand up with him.

    Thank you.

    God Bless this great country and God Bless George W. Bush. "

  2. #2
    Pale Horse's Avatar
    Pale Horse is offline F.I.L.F.
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    ACLU headquarters
    Posts
    6,425
    Very powerful speech. Not much more to add.

  3. #3
    Bigen12's Avatar
    Bigen12 is offline AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    4,301
    I agree I didn't get to watch him last night, stayed in the Gym until bed time! When I read it his morning I was very pleased.

  4. #4
    Psychotron's Avatar
    Psychotron is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    2,581
    great speech. too bad i missed it on tv

  5. #5
    chances is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    290
    Try to catch clips of it if you can. He was on a mission and pissed as he11. I mean his speech stands on its own, but with the venom with which it was delivered, the disgust in his voice, it was probably one of the better speeches I have ever witnessed.

    chance

  6. #6
    darmadoc is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    568
    Interesting, considering that back in 2001 he said Kerry was a patriot, a hero and a great supporter of the military. Just another politician, probably looking for a cabinet post.

  7. #7
    chances is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    290
    Actually, he said his whole opinion on national security change on 9/11, and he has been very vocal about it since then. Up until 9/11 he was just like every other American, thinking it would never happen to us. He wrote a book, has done interviews, and numerous speeches since then with basically the same general message, just not quite as vehement as last nights.

    I hope his motivation is what he says it is. I truly do. But, sadly, it also wouldn't suprise me if it was as you suggest darmadoc.

    chance

  8. #8
    Bigen12's Avatar
    Bigen12 is offline AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    4,301
    Quote Originally Posted by darmadoc
    Interesting, considering that back in 2001 he said Kerry was a patriot, a hero and a great supporter of the military. Just another politician, probably looking for a cabinet post.

    Here is what Zell Miller had to say about that event,

    "WALLACE: Let's talk about John Kerry. You introduced the senator at a big dinner in Georgia in 2001, and let's take a look at some of what you said there.

    "My job is an easy one: to present to you one of the nation's authentic heroes."

    Question: Anything that you've heard over the last few weeks in the Swift Boat controversy make you change your mind about whether John Kerry is an authentic hero?

    MILLER: No, I think he's a hero. This is a man who volunteered, who volunteered for combat, who volunteered to go to Vietnam. I think anyone who did that is a hero."

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C293...0497%2C00.html

    In the above speech, at no time does he down play John Kerry's service in the military, he simply addresses his actions since leaving the Military.

    I am not aware of Zell Miller ever saying that Kerry was a "a great supporter of the military" if you have any evidence of him saying this please share it with us.

  9. #9
    decadbal's Avatar
    decadbal is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    North Charlotte
    Posts
    11,924
    brotha sounded mad..

  10. #10
    Jdawg50's Avatar
    Jdawg50 is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Mountains
    Posts
    3,095
    HE WAS AWESOME, He put Kerry in his place regarding his record and defense spending...
    Spit wads-- I love that!!!!!!

  11. #11
    tryingtogetbig's Avatar
    tryingtogetbig is offline Whiney Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    NW of DFW TX
    Posts
    3,463
    he did a good job showing even more evidence of why we would be crazy if we put kerry in office......

  12. #12
    elicotton is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    North Alabama
    Posts
    368
    Georgia boys don't **** around.

  13. #13
    darmadoc is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    568
    Here you go.

    "In his 16 years in the Senate, John Kerry has fought against government waste and worked hard to bring some accountability to Washington. Early in his Senate career in 1986, John signed on to the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Deficit Reduction Bill, and he fought for balanced budgets before it was considered politically correct for Democrats to do so. John has worked to strengthen our military, reform public education, boost the economy and protect the environment." -- U.S. Senator Zell Miller (Remarks to the Democratic Party of Georgia Jefferson Jackson Dinner 2001)

  14. #14
    saboudian's Avatar
    saboudian is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Michigan State University
    Posts
    1,712
    "Motivated more by partisan politics than by national security, today's Democratic leaders see America as an occupier, not a liberator. "

    More importantly, what do the peoples of afghanistan and Iraq see us as? Why would Al-Sadr lead such an uprising against america when they took down the dictator that killed his father?

    This war on terror is not WWII, Bush is kicking a beehive. Republicans have no understanding of the war on terror.

  15. #15
    chances is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    290
    Quote Originally Posted by saboudian
    "Motivated more by partisan politics than by national security, today's Democratic leaders see America as an occupier, not a liberator. "

    More importantly, what do the peoples of afghanistan and Iraq see us as? Why would Al-Sadr lead such an uprising against america when they took down the dictator that killed his father?

    This war on terror is not WWII, Bush is kicking a beehive. Republicans have no understanding of the war on terror.
    Actually, more importantly is how our leader views us.

    Occupier: One who seize possession of and maintains control over by or as if by conquest.
    Liberator: To set free, as from oppression, confinement, or foreign control.

    If we are truly liberators, the afghan and iraqi people may or may not see us as such but I would hope we would leave their countries in better shape than they were when we came in. Keyword being LEAVE.

    If we are occupiers, they will continue to hate us and we will never leave those countries and then we will be in some serious ****.

    The war on terror is not like any war anyone has ever fought. Who has an understanding of the war on terror? The Democrats? John Kerry? Give me a break. Do you think turning over the war on terror to the UN is going to get it done? That's what the Dems want to do. The UN has absolutely no reason to actually fight a war on terror. Sure, they'll make speeches and pass resolutions, but what else? They have no authority in any of the countries that harbor terrorists, nor do they have the might to back up the war. So they're going to need our troops. We end up fighting the war, but instead of the president leading our military the UN will be. Great solution.

    Who else is there? You seem to think you have an understanding of the war on terror. Enlighten us. And don't give me that crap about stop supporting Israel blah blah blah. All that is is an excuse to attack us. If we pulled out, Israell would be destroyed and they would find some other reason to attack us.

    chance

  16. #16
    saboudian's Avatar
    saboudian is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Michigan State University
    Posts
    1,712
    Quote Originally Posted by chances
    Actually, more importantly is how our leader views us.

    Occupier: One who seize possession of and maintains control over by or as if by conquest.
    Liberator: To set free, as from oppression, confinement, or foreign control.
    I was watching the Daily Show tonite, and they showed a couple clips of george bush in a past press conference, saying I wouldn't like it either if i were being occupied. Hmmmm.... I think there's a word for that.

    Quote Originally Posted by chances

    If we are truly liberators, the afghan and iraqi people may or may not see us as such but I would hope we would leave their countries in better shape than they were when we came in. Keyword being LEAVE.
    Afghanistan is a lost cause. Iraq is still in worse shape. But you're right, we need to leave.

    Quote Originally Posted by chances
    If we are occupiers, they will continue to hate us and we will never leave those countries and then we will be in some serious ****.
    As long as we are there, there will be no peace. We're not going to win by killing more iraqi's, when some view themselves as minute men. Let our troops come home.
    Quote Originally Posted by chances
    The war on terror is not like any war anyone has ever fought. Who has an understanding of the war on terror? The Democrats? John Kerry? Give me a break. Do you think turning over the war on terror to the UN is going to get it done? That's what the Dems want to do. The UN has absolutely no reason to actually fight a war on terror. Sure, they'll make speeches and pass resolutions, but what else? They have no authority in any of the countries that harbor terrorists, nor do they have the might to back up the war. So they're going to need our troops. We end up fighting the war, but instead of the president leading our military the UN will be. Great solution.
    The UN is extremely important, without multilateral cooperation the US will only be seen as a bully, occupant, and hubris. The UN does have power, had the working weapons inspections been allowed to continue for another month, france would have changed their vote, and we would have had full UN cooperation instead of fighting an illegal war on false pretenses. Had it been an imminent threat, we would not have even bothered wasting so much time trying to get UN approval. Now we are fighting a war over a year after "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" and where over 90% of the casualties are American, over 6,000 americans injured, all of this when we are trying to HELP or liberate the ppl of iraq. Where are the parades of roses today? As I said earlier, why would Al-Sadr so vehemently oppose the US? Have we heard anything from the Iraqi PPL? Oh wait, their soccer players were finally given a chance to speak, lets hear what a typical iraq might have to say, sure I bet they'd be most gracious to the US.

    Hamd was quoted as saying: "The American army has killed so many people in Iraq. What is freedom when I go to the stadium and there are shootings on the road?"

    "My problems are not with the American people," Iraq's soccer coach, Adnan Hamad Majeed, told the Associated Press. "They are with what America has done in Iraq: destroy everything. The American Army has killed so many people in Iraq." His star midfielder, Salih Sadir, agreed: "Iraq as a team doesn't want Mr. Bush to use us [in an ad] for the presidential campaign... We don't wish for the presence of the Americans in our country. We want them to go away."

    Ahmed Manajid, demanded to know: "How will [Bush] meet his God having slaughtered so many men and women? He has committed so many crimes." The athlete added that were he not playing for his country he would "for sure" be fighting in the Iraqi resistance. "I want to defend my home. If a stranger invades America and the people resist, does that mean they are terrorists?" Manajid asked.

    This is what the ppl of Iraq think. It doesn't look like the roses will be coming out for the liberators anytime soon, how many more americans have to needlessly die?

    Quote Originally Posted by chances
    Who else is there? You seem to think you have an understanding of the war on terror. Enlighten us. And don't give me that crap about stop supporting Israel blah blah blah. All that is is an excuse to attack us. If we pulled out, Israell would be destroyed and they would find some other reason to attack us.

    chance
    The way to fight terror is not to just begin invading more countries, you're only going to incite more anti-american sentiment and bush has lost his legitimacy with the rest of the world. A huge blow to diplomacy, a big reason why he can no longer be president.

    You mention not giving any crap about Israel, do you not think this is part of the problem? One of the big elephants missing from the 9/11 report is that it doesn't mention the effect of our foreign policy on israel and its effect. This is definitely part of the problem.

    To fight terrorists, it has to be a slow systematic process working with other nations' police force. We must restore diplomatic links, why doesn't Bush call a meeting with the western powers, invite the arabs, and ask them, we're in iraq now, regardless of what you think, what do we have to do to make this work? Isn't this what a leader is supposed to do?

    We must use multi-lateral support in any case where military involvement is needed. When all the american police were white, it only generated more hate from the african-american community, start mixing in some african americans and other minorities and all of sudden, some of the hate starts to go away and the police again have some validity in all communities.

    We need to fund alternative fuel research. This is an oil administration, this will not happen under Bush. The less our dependency on Oil, the better of we are off. This president hasn't even asked the american ppl to conserve oil when we go to war in the middle east, and he is filling the natl reserves, when they're are at the highest point where they have ever been, and he's is doing so when there is not an over supply of oil and oil is not at a low cost. The technology to make a humvee get 50 mpg is already here, its been here for at least 10 years, there is no reason it can't be done today. Can you imagine cutting the US's oil consumption in half in less than a decade, (with a rather easy fix)? This would have an enormous effect on our foreign policy and involvement in the middle east and venezuela. If bush wins this election, I'm putting all my money into haliburton stock.

  17. #17
    Bigen12's Avatar
    Bigen12 is offline AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    4,301
    Quote Originally Posted by darmadoc
    Here you go.

    "In his 16 years in the Senate, John Kerry has fought against government waste and worked hard to bring some accountability to Washington. Early in his Senate career in 1986, John signed on to the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Deficit Reduction Bill, and he fought for balanced budgets before it was considered politically correct for Democrats to do so. John has worked to strengthen our military, reform public education, boost the economy and protect the environment." -- U.S. Senator Zell Miller (Remarks to the Democratic Party of Georgia Jefferson Jackson Dinner 2001)

    Thanks,

    Can you please give me a link to this information?

  18. #18
    Bigen12's Avatar
    Bigen12 is offline AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    4,301
    [QUOTE=saboudian]The technology to make a humvee get 50 mpg is already here, its been here for at least 10 years, there is no reason it can't be done today. QUOTE]

    Could you please provid a link to any legidimate information on the "technology to make a humvee get 50 mpg"

  19. #19
    tryingtogetbig's Avatar
    tryingtogetbig is offline Whiney Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    NW of DFW TX
    Posts
    3,463
    saboudian....quit watching so much CNN and reading the NY Times......you sound like a broken record.....your liberalism is definitely showing bro....and it ain't pretty.....

    peace,

    ttgb

  20. #20
    chances is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    290
    Quote Originally Posted by saboudian
    Afghanistan is a lost cause. Iraq is still in worse shape. But you're right, we need to leave.
    You would just leave these countries in the mess they are in now. And that would benefit anyone how? Leaving these countries to fall into chaos would only achieve leaving their citizens with a hatred for the US because we came in and then didn't finish the job. We left them at the mercy of anyone who has the power to muscle their way to the top. Abandoning them is not a good option and a decent society would not do that.

    Our troops knew the risks when they volunteered. Being a combat veteran I understand what they (the troops) are feeling. Sure they would rather be home, but they feel they are doing the right thing trying to help the people who, at this point, can't help themselves. Before you talk forour troops, you might want to find out whether or not they think they should just abandon these countries.

    Quote Originally Posted by saboudian
    ...fighting an illegal war on false pretenses.
    Illegal to whom? This war was fully authorized by our Country's leadership. See below my opinion of the UN.

    Quote Originally Posted by saboudian
    This is what the ppl of Iraq think. It doesn't look like the roses will be coming out for the liberators anytime soon, how many more americans have to needlessly die?
    That's funny. The Iraqi olympic soccer team is "the man on the street" in Iraq? They just have olympic level athletes walking around everywhere. Come on. You know that elite level athletes are so pampered and isolated from daily life that they have no conception of what a regular guy thinks. There are several blogs, yes blogs, I've been reading written by Iraqis in Iraq and they paint quite a different picture.

    Healing Iraq
    Where is Raed?
    The Messopotamian
    Iraq at a glance
    Hammorabi
    Road of a nation

    None paint a rosy picture, but neither do they call for us to leave. As a matter of fact they call Sadir a thug and ask us to stay and help them through the hard road ahead.

    Quote Originally Posted by saboudian
    The way to fight terror is not to just begin invading more countries, you're only going to incite more anti-american sentiment and bush has lost his legitimacy with the rest of the world. A huge blow to diplomacy, a big reason why he can no longer be president.
    When GW was elected the various leaders around the world were so used to pushing us around at their whim thanks to 8 years of Clinton spinelessness, they thought GW would be the same. They tried it with Kyoto and Bush fought back, they tried it at the G-8 and he fought back. He stood up to them and would not be controlled. He put US interests first and to Chirac, Schoeder and Putin to get bent. They didn't like that and the only one who grudgingly accepted the fact that GW was not going to be pushed around was Putin (mostly because he needed our foreign aide to keep his country afloat). The other two went on a campaign to portray GW as difficult and uncooperative all the while they blocked and fought any position GW took on any issue. When he fought back they pointed and said,"see, not a team player!" GW spanked them in PUBLIC and they want payback. Has nothing to do with some moral high ground, or Bush's inabilty to be diplomatic. Has everything to do with bruised egos.

    Quote Originally Posted by saboudian
    You mention not giving any crap about Israel, do you not think this is part of the problem? One of the big elephants missing from the 9/11 report is that it doesn't mention the effect of our foreign policy on israel and its effect. This is definitely part of the problem.
    Of course I think that is the excuse NOW. If we withdrew support for Israel, they, the terrorists, would just find another excuse to attack us. This is not about Israel, it is about religious zealotism and as long as the US exists as a nation, we will be targets of their hatred. Despite what the ACLU would like, the US is the largest Christian nation on the planet, thus the largest target for islamic extremists.

    Quote Originally Posted by saboudian
    To fight terrorists, it has to be a slow systematic process working with other nations' police force. We must restore diplomatic links, why doesn't Bush call a meeting with the western powers, invite the arabs, and ask them, we're in iraq now, regardless of what you think, what do we have to do to make this work? Isn't this what a leader is supposed to do?
    And that has worked where? It worked in Syria? How about Lebanon? Egypt? How about in one of our "puppet" governement nations, Saudi Arabia? How about with our ally nations Greece? Italy? No one wants to do anything because it is not effecting them in a negative way. France and Germany aren't going to help because if we fail, that makes the less than stellar performance of the EU look better. The Arab nations aren't going to help because they are producing the terrorists. The only reasons the Saudis are doing anything is because the terrorists started hitting them.

    Quote Originally Posted by saboudian
    We must use multi-lateral support in any case where military involvement is needed. When all the american police were white, it only generated more hate from the african-american community, start mixing in some african americans and other minorities and all of sudden, some of the hate starts to go away and the police again have some validity in all communities.
    This is a war. This is not a police action. Who gives a **** whether it makes it easier to swallow if there are token "minority" nations involved. Do you really think that the image of occupier would change in anyone's mind if there were French or German troops in Iraq? We are not the only ones in Iraq now. Yet one of the men who wants to lead this Nation views us as occupiers. If that is how our potential leader views us, how is adding other nations going to change that?

    Quote Originally Posted by saboudian
    We need to fund alternative fuel research.
    I agree, but this is not the magic bullet.

    Quote Originally Posted by saboudian
    This is an oil administration, this will not happen under Bush.
    First off, this is an oil country. Secondly, alternative fuel research IS happening under George Bush. US automakers are closer to producing a viable fuel cell engine than ever before, and they made the most significant strides in the last 5 years. So if Bush wanted to squash this, why are they getting closer and closer every day?

    Quote Originally Posted by saboudian
    The less our dependency on Oil, the better of we are off. This president hasn't even asked the american ppl to conserve oil when we go to war in the middle east, and he is filling the natl reserves, when they're are at the highest point where they have ever been, and he's is doing so when there is not an over supply of oil and oil is not at a low cost.
    The less dependent we are on any foreign supply of anything, the better we are.

    Quote Originally Posted by saboudian
    The technology to make a humvee get 50 mpg is already here, its been here for at least 10 years, there is no reason it can't be done today.
    I too would like to see a credible source on this. I know I've never heard of it. I know of quite a few experimental technologies that are trying to replace oil, but none of them are viable alternatives mostly due to reliabilty and machine size. But that is changing rapidly.

    Quote Originally Posted by saboudian
    Can you imagine cutting the US's oil consumption in half in less than a decade, (with a rather easy fix)?
    I would like to hear what this fix is.

    Quote Originally Posted by saboudian
    This would have an enormous effect on our foreign policy and involvement in the middle east and venezuela.
    Do you really believe that our foreign policy is enormously based on oil? That's a pretty naive and tunnel visioned view.

    Quote Originally Posted by saboudian
    If bush wins this election, I'm putting all my money into haliburton stock.
    You should have done that 4 years ago.

    chance

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •