Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 51
  1. #1
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    808
    Hi all,
    been just too busy lately...but i coudn't stop my emotions from posting today as I hear about 30 innocent killed and over 100's injured in a terrorist attack held in gujrat...Heck they attacked a place of worship (Temple)

    the temple's audio visual room worth $200,000,00.00 destroyed

    Plus the continous loss of life...All for just keeping quiet. I still can't understand - why are we quiet.

    Why is the govt quiet? WAR is the only solution. Heck its not the best solution...but there is no other solution...

    The talk over it policy just doesn't seem to be working. I hope you support my thinking as I would be sending in pleas to the Indian Govt to go at WAR - as i do not see any alternative solution.

    Just months ago they did that...and the matter was closed. But their hunger just doesnt end.

    What would be ur opinion on it ?


    Regards
    Amit

    Lost...

    I had a dream!!! It's time It became reality...

  2. #2
    2005 Linkshare Golden Link Award Winner  ecomcity's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    St Clair Shores MI.
    Posts
    17,328
    The blood trails all over India all seem to lead back to Pakiland. If Hindus were more like the Israeli Jews this would have been cleared up years ago. I can't imagine the fear you guys must have just going to a voting booth. Over here we fuss about the ballots ..not the bullets and granades. You can bet the world knows the your country has had just about enough of these wanton killers.

    Let us take care of Saddam first as GWB is hell bent to do. When Saddam retaliates against Israel with some long range missiles ( most likey chemical warheads this time) the Middle East will revolt when Israel too will be forced into action with no gloves on.

    That would be the time for India to settle the score with Pakistan for all our sakes. I worry all the time the Paki militants will kill Mussariff and take over Pakistans Nuke arsenal. A quick sale of a Nuke bomb to Al Quaida Jehadi crazed nutcases, smuggled out through Iran or Kirachi's port and NYC wakes up in a Mushroom cloud.

    The silly weak French have egg all over their faces in the revolt in the Ivory Coast. Russia can't wait to jump into Georgia to clean out that nest of Islamic Militants. Add in the Sudan and Nigerian uprisings plus Indonesia -Malasia -Philipeans -Balkins and other places where the Islamic "freedom fighters" are trying to kill their way into land ownership and impose Islamic law ..and the World shares in your anguish and fears.

    It's a sad fact that the tree hugging peacenic Liberals are usually the first to get riled up when innocents are slaughtered and their adgenda then gets thrown to the winds of war.

    WebMaster Mike

    [This message was edited by EcomCity.com on September 24, 2002 at 03:57 PM.]

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    195
    The bottom line is kill or be killed. The liberals can't understand this. The difference between liberals and conservatives boils down to this: Liberals view the world as they wish it to be. Conservatives view the world as it is. The world, as it is, will not respect the wishes or fantasies of the weak. History has taught us this many times over. Yet we never seem to learn.

  4. #4
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    808
    T-Bone - Exactly right

    I had a dream!!! It's time It became reality...

  5. #5
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    315
    Or maybe the liberals see the better side of human nature, whereas conservatives only see the brutal, every-man-for-himself side?

    ---Hershey

    "Wherever you go, there you are."

  6. #6
    ABW Veteran Student Heyder's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    5,482
    Take off the labels and make decisions based on the real facts and you've got what the call an intelligent moderate.

    "I find that the harder I work, the more they steal from me."
    - Mike McNabb

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    145
    ditto, hershey!

  8. #8
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    246
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by T-Bone:
    The difference between liberals and conservatives boils down to this: Liberals view the world as they wish it to be. Conservatives view the world as it is. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    And some say that while conservatives live in the past, liberals live for the future.

    [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img]

    -- Less is more --

  9. #9
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    315
    Excellent point, Cellophane!

    ---Hershey

    "Wherever you go, there you are."

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    195
    I would like to thank Hersey, Heyder and Winkwa for helping me validate my point.

  11. #11
    Resident Genius and Staunch Capitalist Leader's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    12,817
    Me too.

    "Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it!"

    There is no knowledge that is not power.~~Ralph Waldo Emerson

  12. #12
    ABW Ambassador Greg Rice's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    4,889
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cellophane:
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by T-Bone:
    The difference between liberals and conservatives boils down to this: Liberals view the world as they wish it to be. Conservatives view the world as it is. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    And some say that while conservatives live in the past, liberals live for the future.

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Those who say that would have to be liberals. Conservatives don't live in the past, we just remember it-like our Founding Fathers did. The future liberals live for is Socialism, an idea that has no future.

  13. #13
    2005 Linkshare Golden Link Award Winner  ecomcity's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    St Clair Shores MI.
    Posts
    17,328
    Most Liberals convert while in a "fox hole" with bullets flying overhead. Those who don't usually end up dead on the battlefield...killed by someone carrying a White surrender Flag.

    WebMaster Mike

  14. #14
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    302
    Our "Founding Fathers" *were* liberals--and socialistic revolutionaries, to boot.

    It is a fallacy to associate passivism with liberalism.

  15. #15
    ABW Ambassador Greg Rice's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    4,889
    I'm talking about the American Founding Fathers. If you look at what Liberals stand for today, how can you even compare that to the Founding Fathers? If they were Socialists, America as we know it would not exist, this would be a Socialist country. Read the Constitution and The Bill of Rights and try hard to find a Socialist or Liberal ideal. Since when has Socialism ever worked?

  16. #16
    Super Sh!t Stirrer SSanf's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    9,944
    Praying for war is just plain sick.

    Pray for peace and that humans grow in wisdom and understanding.

    Pray that we gain insight and that we rapidly evolve to a better kinder species.

    Pray for our survival and the survival of our fellow travelers on this planet.

    Pray for peace and be prepared for war if it is thrust upon us.

    The Wolf Credo: Respect the elders. Teach the young. Cooperate with the pack. Play when you can. Hunt when you must. Rest in between. Share your affections. Voice your feelings. Leave your mark.

  17. #17
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    315
    How do you equate Liberalism with Socialism? Yes, Socialism is to the left of the spectrum, but Liberals do not automatically support Socialism. You may want to believe that, or you may not understand Liberalism or Socialism. My guess is the latter. It can be a little complicated for some Conservatives to grasp.

    Bush wants war for one reason: to take our attention off an economy that has been going to hell since he came into office. He probably wouldn't mind invading an oil-producing country, either, so we can have our own private stock of the stuff in the Middle East.

    If we invade Iraq, what is to stop China from invading Taiwan or Russia invading Georgia or India invading Pakistan? This new pre-emptive strike policy is reckless and dangerous.

    ---Hershey

    "Wherever you go, there you are."

    [This message was edited by hershey on September 29, 2002 at 04:59 PM.]

  18. #18
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    302
    I have read the Declaration of Independence many, many times. I have also read the Constitution and can recite the preamble by heart. As for the Bill of Rights, freedom of speech is a liberal ideal. Jefferson was a liberal, and the ideals that formed the writing of the Declaration and the Constitution were liberal--at that time. Changing government by revolt is a socialistic idea. Conservatives during this time were called Torries, and they loyal to the Crown.

    You seem to be confusing modern politics with colonial politics.

  19. #19
    ABW Ambassador Greg Rice's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    4,889
    "you may not understand Liberalism or Socialism. My guess is the latter." First, that kind of personal attack is typical of a Liberal. We're debating politics and you want to insult me. Second, I understand Liberalism and Socialism all too well. Liberalism, in itself, is not Socialism but their ideals are not that far apart. Most Liberals are in favor of taking away from those who earned it and giving it to those who didn't. That certainly sounds more like Socialism than what the Conservatives believe.

    "Bush wants war for one reason: to take our attention off an economy that has been going to hell since he came into office."
    Now you're making an assumption. First, it was Clinton who bombed another country to divert attention from his sex life. That was certainly worth people's lives! Second, this crappy economy was inherited from Clinton. Those who think the economy can turn on a dime need to study economics. I don't believe anyone in America wants to take over Iraq. I also don't believe the rest of the world would stand for it. If you believe someone is coming to kill you do you just sit there? I don't think we have much choice in this matter, we've seen what these people are capable of doing. Do you think an invasion of Iraq dictates what Russia, China, or India do? You're right, a pre-emptive strike isn't always the best thing to do but, in this case, it's the best of all the bad choices. Sitting on your hands hoping they don't come for you isn't a good choice at all.

    Tzu: Compared to most people of their time, the Founding Fathers were Liberal thinkers. Compared to today, they are very conservative. You can't take one instance, like revolt, and say the Founding Fathers are Socialists. If you look at everything they did and said, it would be very hard to make that comparison. As for being confused, you are the one who associated the modern Liberal to the Colonial Liberal.

  20. #20
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    315
    A.) Saying that you do not understand the difference between Socialism and Liberalism is hardly an attack.

    B.) Clinton has nothing to do with this (although this country did undergo the largest economic growth in its history under his presidency). It's BUSH who wants to go to war, and things didn't start souring economically until he came into office.

    C.) Once again, a Conservative is confused!

    ---Hershey

    "Wherever you go, there you are."

  21. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    195
    OK suppose I am confused here. Perhaps you can help me out.

    1. What specific actions or inactions by Bush has led to the current economic situation?

    2. Conversley, what specific actions or inactions
    by clinton were responsible the economic "boom" we enjoyed during his dubious tenure?

  22. #22
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    297
    I love the way conservatives bash Clinton for going after al queda in 1998. How is that any different than what Bush will do to Iraq.

    Both were pre-emptive strikes designed to defend America. Clinton's attack unfortnately did not succeed because the conservatives jumped all over him. Not to mention, wasting millions of dollars trying to figure out whether or note he got a BJ. Like I care about any of that.

    Bush will succeed because he has the liberal backing.

    Conservatives may say that Clinton's 1998 strike was to divert attention from his impeachment process. Well then, why wouldnt Bush's strike on Iraq be a diversion from the ugly US economy? Why is Clinton such a hated man for doing exactly the same thing that Bush is being praised for? Makes no sense.

    Ya just can't have it both ways, conservatives. Either give Clinton credit for having foresight in trying to prevent 9/11. Or criticize Bush for attacking a poor country in the midst of a very poor US economy.

    To me, both guys's actions are exactly the same.

    Please give me your thoughts.
    And for the record, I am in the just slightly to the left of the middle. The middle is where our country has been for a long time.

    Sal @ PHATBargains.com

  23. #23
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    297
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> 1. What specific actions or inactions by Bush has led to the current economic situation?

    2. Conversley, what specific actions or inactions
    by clinton were responsible the economic "boom" we enjoyed during his dubious tenure? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    This is my personal opinion. The tax cut was a disaster. Why is a surplus such a bad thing? Someone explain that to me. It always good to have something in the bank for a rainy day. Tragically, that rainy day came and now the economy is in really bad shape.

    We all know that economy runs in cycles. But policy does determine alot. The economy was starting to head south during the late Clinton era, no doubt about that. But Bush's tax cut caused the economy to get even worse. If there was no tax cut, it can be argued that the economy would have recovered much earlier and the recession would not have been as bad.

    Just look at the last 25 or so years. Is it just a coincidence that the economy seems to enjoy growth when the Democrats are in office? And that it heads south when the Republicans take control?

    Sal @ PHATBargains.com

  24. #24
    ABW Veteran Student Heyder's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    5,482
    I don't think it's the political parties that truely control the economy. Greenspan is the one making the decisions that have given us both the best economy the world has ever known as well as todays decline.

  25. #25
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    315
    Let's not forget the Bush tax cut, which has squandered the surplus.

    ---Hershey

    "Wherever you go, there you are."

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. god.only 2$
    By jackey in forum eBay Partner Network
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: May 30th, 2008, 09:18 AM
  2. Pray for My Little Princess [Caught a Flu]
    By Geno Prussakov in forum Virtual Family and Off-Topic
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: September 6th, 2007, 09:02 PM
  3. God Knows
    By NinaM in forum Introduce Yourself
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: August 16th, 2006, 09:06 PM

Posting Permissions

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