Bush Opens Double Digit Lead

[Ace195]

You know what, I'm a republican I don't like some of the things bush does.. But he's been a good president.. I say hell if you don't want either bush or kerry in office vote for nader for the sake of god

[Blackmane]

Originally Posted by GiMpY-wAnNaBe

because doing so would be called "unpatriotic"

and he did recieve quite a lot of crap over the war in Iraq, and many other issues. Its not necessarily true that he tries to win off of his mistakes, John Kerry has an excellent service record. I usually see it the other way, for example, (i just KNOW i'm gonna recieve violent replys for this but here goes), what has George W. Bush actually accomplished other than America's worst Job deficit, an unneccesary war costing in surplus of 200 billion with many lives tragically lost, and Osama Bin Laden still missing?

Well, I'll give it a shot.

He has created tax cuts for everyone (not just the rich), has led us through a recession which is now beginning to turn around into an economic boon which is creating new businesses and jobs (in the last few months, new jobs have been created, at a rate faster than the fastest in Clinton's presidency.), and he captured Saddam Hussein, a tyranical leader with the ability to get his hands on and make WMD's and the balls to use them on anyone, including his own people.

Let's not forget to mention that Kerry supported giving the president war powers to go into Iraq. Not just Kerry, by the way, but quite a big majority of the Senate, if I'm not mistaken.

A better question would be is, what would Kerry do in the White House based on his campaign? The answer is, nothing, because his entire campaign is not based on his qualifications for being president, but it is based on poking fun at Bush.

[Crono]

Originally Posted by GiMpY-wAnNaBe

what has George W. Bush actually accomplished other than America's worst Job deficit, an unneccesary war costing in surplus of 200 billion with many lives tragically lost, and Osama Bin Laden still missing?

It's Bush's fault that Bin Laden is still missing? Why don't you go there and try looking for him yourself if you're so confident that it's easy to find him. He is hiding in the mountains that border Afghanistan and Pakistan (possibly). He could be anywhere by now.

Good luck.

And I'd just like to know why taking out one of the worst dictators of all time was unneccesary. Maybe I should just think that WWII in Europe was unnecessary.

[Neo]

The analogy is slightly flawed in that while Hitler was trying to take over the world, Saddam couldn't even take over kuwait without getting his ass kicked. He was a threat to no one except his own people.

[Crono]

Originally Posted by Neo

The analogy is slightly flawed in that while Hitler was trying to take over the world, Saddam couldn't even take over kuwait without getting his ass kicked. He was a threat to no one except his own people.

If the U.S. hadn't have stepped in, then he wouldn't have got his ass kicked. Same with Hitler.

Saddam still gassed his own people, inlcuding a major gassing of Kurdish people in 1988 I think it was. He had rape camps. He had torture prisons. He developed chemical weapons and used them on his own people.

Saddam sounds more like a Stalin than a Hitler, though.

[Stonecutter]

Originally Posted by Crono

If the U.S. hadn't have stepped in, then he wouldn't have got his ass kicked. Same with Hitler.

Saddam still gassed his own people, inlcuding a major gassing of Kurdish people in 1988 I think it was. He had rape camps. He had torture prisons. He developed chemical weapons and used them on his own people.

Saddam sounds more like a Stalin than a Hitler, though.

Actually, he got his chemical weapons from the United States.

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by Crono

Why don't you go there and try looking for him yourself if you're so confident that it's easy to find him.

Im sorry, but where did he say it was easy?

And second, Bush...well, actually the US...well..technically an Iraqi boy found Saddam in a fraction of the time they have been searching for Osama for.

Originally Posted by Crono

He could be anywhere by now.

Most likely dead. Whens the last time you saw one of his little, "I hate America" movies? And in the latter of them, he was getting more an more decreped.

But searching for Osama Bin Laden in the middle east is like looking for someone dressed up as Chewbacca at a Star Wars convention. They all look alike. (Kidding)

[Jason1]

Simple fact of the matter is: The Demacrats picked the wrong candidate. Shouldve picked Edwards. Kerry is just too liberal for his own good.

That being said, If I could vote in this election(Im missing it by 2 months), I would vote for Kerry because Bush is a bumbling idiot and Kerry would still make a helluva lot better President than Bush.

Oh, and Typhoid, If you honestly think Bin Laden is dead, your nuts. No way hes dead.

[Dylflon]

Originally Posted by Crono

If the U.S. hadn't have stepped in, then he wouldn't have got his ass kicked. Same with Hitler.

America didn't fair as successfully in WWII as you may think. Sure, they did a great job but it was Russia that did most of the damage. Had Hitler not gone back on his strategy of not opening a war on two fronts and didn't attack Russia it's very possible he could have won the war.

[Bond]

That's funny you say that to Crono, Dylflon. Considering he had a Stalin avatar and supports Russia in almost any argument. Go figure...

[Crono]

Originally Posted by Dylflon

America didn't fair as successfully in WWII as you may think. Sure, they did a great job but it was Russia that did most of the damage. Had Hitler not gone back on his strategy of not opening a war on two fronts and didn't attack Russia it's very possible he could have won the war.

Yeah, and who did Russia rely on for supplies in the early years of the war? That's right, the US. The western allies practically fed the Soviet army for quite some time. The Soviets were even using American tanks at one point. If you don't believe me, go look it up, but there's even a Russian-made film about Stalingrad where it shows the soldiers eating food sent from the US via Britain, even they don't deny it.

And it wasn't the fact that Hitler fought on two fronts, his big mistake was taking personal command of his army and not listening to his strategic advisors. His generals wanted to wait out the Russian winter, von Paulus wanted to pull out of Stalingrad until the spring, Hitler even decided to attack Russia in three major directions when only two were needed. Hitler was just a dumbass.

Edit: And yeah, I just want to say something else. The Russian army was a mess in 1941 when Hitler invaded. It wasn't even a real army, just a horde of soldiers who were getting their asses handed to them. And in the end Russia lost 20 million people. Yeah, 20 million, over 3 times the amount of Jews killed in the war. And where's the recognition? There is none. But yeah, 20 million people lost in exchange for a Communist Empire superpower which eventually collapsed. Not a good trade off, I don't think.

Though I do think Stalin was a great man in ONE sense... the fact that if it wasn't for him, Russia would not have won. His determination led them to victory. He would not let them retreat just to show his own soldiers how serious he was. And unlike Hitler he actually let his officers command the army.

Aaand... if Russia wasn't in the war, the US and it's allies would have won it eventually anyway.

[GiMpY-wAnNaBe]

Theres only one small flaw in your arguement Chrono, alright, so they took out a dictator, whom do you believe is worse though? Iraq or North Korea?

And to the risk of sounding like a neo-nazi, Hitler was not an idiot, not even close. Any one man that can be labeled responsible for an event to the mass of WWII, is no idiot. He knew how to lead his country, he was misled in what he wanted to do with it.

[Crono]

Originally Posted by GiMpY-wAnNaBe

Theres only one small flaw in your arguement Chrono, alright, so they took out a dictator, whom do you believe is worse though? Iraq or North Korea?

And to the risk of sounding like a neo-nazi, Hitler was not an idiot, not even close. Any one man that can be labeled responsible for an event to the mass of WWII, is no idiot. He knew how to lead his country, he was misled in what he wanted to do with it.

When it came to war tactics, he was an idiot. I'd go on and list all the mistakes that HE made for his army, though I'd be here for a while. So he knew how to lead the country... NOT IT's ARMY.

North Korea is just as bad. The people of that country are starving almost to death as we speak. However, with it's proximity to China, I do not think war with North Korea is likely, or even possible. But he should be removed from power also, and the entire Korean peninsula should unite.

[GiMpY-wAnNaBe]

Originally Posted by Crono

When it came to war tactics, he was an idiot. I'd go on and list all the mistakes that HE made for his army, though I'd be here for a while. So he knew how to lead the country... NOT IT's ARMY.

North Korea is just as bad. The people of that country are starving almost to death as we speak. However, with it's proximity to China, I do not think war with North Korea is likely, or even possible. But he should be removed from power also, and the entire Korean peninsula should unite.

...thats like saying losing 1000 men is bush's fault because he doesn't know how to lead a war. He doesn't actually lead it.

[Crono]

Originally Posted by GiMpY-wAnNaBe

...thats like saying losing 1000 men is bush's fault because he doesn't know how to lead a war. He doesn't actually lead it.

Argh, obviously you don't understand. Hitler had PERSONAL control of his army. There's a damned difference. Hitler basically told them when to do it, where to do it, and how to do it. Bush doesn't do that.

But this is way off topic. I don't want to talk about it anymore.