Breathe a little..........slowpoke said:I think screwge's post is bang on! Yours, on the other hand, is dismissive, overbearing and just plain rude. You might just as well have told him that there was simply no point in expressing his opinion here because:
A) OTB has done it longer, more often and so perfectly that nobody will ever compare.
B) Screwge couldn't possibly have a new or even interesting point of view because he doesn't have anywhere near the required number of posts. Either that or he just isn't welcome to say anything here until he's got a much greater number of posts.
C) Nobody else on terb will pay any attention to screwge's POV because we're all so utterly convinced that yours is the one and only truth.
D) We're all perfectly happy to let you decide what or who we should be listening to. Although we've never formally elected you as the editor of American content here on terb, it is universally accepted that you will act as our spokeperson and protector against all thoughts critical of GWB in particular and the US in general.
E) Screwge mustn't question your supremacy out here in the open forum. Instead he must send you a PM so you can finish the job of dusting him off in private.
Here's a novel idea: We Canadians can welcome screwge and encourage him to continue expressing his opinions here on the TORONTO Escort Review Board.
So you don't think tax cuts are good?onthebottom said:Not even number 4, but thanks for asking.
OTB
Everyone's ideas are welcome here. The operative word is "everyone". I thought screwge's response to your challenge was very mild, considering...onthebottom said:Breathe a little..........
There, that’s better.
My response was a bit harsh, I will admit. I thought Screwge was just stirring the pot without any desire to understand the other point of view. Screwge did responded and I was wrong, he really was interested so you will notice I spent quite a few words explaining my position to him. I don't represent anyone but myself, never have had a desire to actually.
You Canadians can do whatever you like on this or any other board - or am I a second-class citizen here because I'm an American?
OTB
y2kmark said:……..
4. Those who genuinely care little about their fellow human beings or society and think that tax cuts for the rich will ultimately benefit them - regardless of who else may suffer or what the long term consequences are. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer and inevitably some day it all comes crashing down - but they don't care since they will already be dead with more toys at the end.
Bit of room between the two don’t you think?Drunken Master said:So you don't think tax cuts are good?
Jesus, just why the hell do you vote for Bush?
I was really referring to people in power in this (my) government and others, but I should have said Blix and *d* LOLbbking said:Not to deflate your over sized ego - but I think OTB was referring to the many Governments of the World that approved sanctions because they felt the WMD issue was not taken care of by the Iraq Government.
But not to worry, I'll send a note to the Security Council to remind them to get your advice in the future.
bbk
It was a very generous responce and that's why I responded the way I did.slowpoke said:Everyone's ideas are welcome here. The operative word is "everyone". I thought screwge's response to your challenge was very mild, considering...
The world governments approved sanctions back in '91. Those sanctions and UN weapon inspections lead to the destruction of 95% of Iraq's WMD(actually 100%, 5% wasn't documented). It wasn't just me that thought it odd that with all those weapons being destroyed over the next 10 years, Iraq had suddenly become an imminent threat all over again. As if somehow the event of 9/11 made Iraqi WMD rematerialize. And with weapon inspections near completion, the UN Security Council found this new threat odd as well. If you remember the council disagreed with the US's unilateral move to war.bbking said:Not to deflate your over sized ego - but I think OTB was referring to the many Governments of the World that approved sanctions because they felt the WMD issue was not taken care of by the Iraq Government.
But not to worry, I'll send a note to the Security Council to remind them to get your advice in the future.
bbk
The council did disagree but I don't remember Germany, Russia or France saying Iraq was disarmed, perhaps you could find a quote. These countries wanted to end sanctions so that they could get paid on their contracts with Iraq, the war has negated those contracts (or at least made it impossible to collect on them).*d* said:The world governments approved sanctions back in '91. Those sanctions and UN weapon inspections lead to the destruction of 95% of Iraq's WMD(actually 100%, 5% wasn't documented). It wasn't just me that thought it odd that with all those weapons being destroyed over the next 10 years, Iraq had suddenly become an eminent threat all over again. As if somehow the event of 9/11 made Iraqi WMD rematerialize. And with weapon inspections near completion, the UN Security Council found this new threat odd as well. If you remember the council disagreed with the US's unilateral move to war.
5% of WMD were unaccounted for and the SC wanted the inspections to continue. Blix did say that weapon inspections were within weeks of completion, just before the US decided to go in. But you answered your own question. France, Germany, China etc wanted the sanctions to end. Because there was no Iraqi threat -and to continue business as usual.onthebottom said:The council did disagree but I don't remember Germany, Russia or France saying Iraq was disarmed, perhaps you could find a quote. These countries wanted to end sanctions so that they could get paid on their contracts with Iraq, the war has negated those contracts (or at least made it impossible to collect on them).
OTB
I remember the council discussions very clearly. The speeches from France and Russia especially voiced their disapproval of any unilateral move to invade Iraq. Any resolution to invade, tabled by the US or any other country, would have been vetoed. As for Saddam re-arming --a hypothetical assumption. Saddam, to be sure, would have been watched, US bases in Saudi or not. In fact after sanctions ended the SC could easily agree to keep spot check weapon inspections going.bbking said:The point *d* was that the World Governments believed Iraq still had WMD - hence the be nice to the inspectors or else resoultion. And as far as I know - there was no resolution even tabled to the security council acknowledging a disagreement about the US's unilateral actions. Stop re-writing history - you may disagree with the reasons the US went to war that's fine, and there is plenty to disagree with but we can do without a history lesson according to *d*. I personally believe that it is entirely possible that left alone, Sadaam would have re-armed - along with the problems with the Saudi bases, the US would no longer be able to contain Iraq when they had to leave Arab bases. I am not alone in this view that a re-armed Iraq along with a growing and strong Al-Quada would be a huge menace to the World and I have no doubt that Sadaam would have used the Jihad movement to further his ambitions. If 9/11 had not occured - I firmly believe that the Bush administration would have invaded Iraq anyways.
You can kick and scream all you want but people have gone to war for less. Wasn't WW2 started with some phoney Polish attack on Germans in the Danzig.
bbk
Of course you failed to mention France and Russia were involved in shady dealings with Sadaam.*d* said:I remember the council discussions very clearly. The speeches from France and Russia especially voiced their disapproval of any unilateral move to invade Iraq. Any resolution to invade, tabled by the US or any other country, would have been vetoed. As for Saddam re-arming --a hypothetical assumption. Saddam, to be sure, would have been watched, US bases in Saudi or not. In fact after sanctions ended the SC could easily agree to keep spot check weapon inspections going.
And just how are those decisions desired to be taken out of your hands and dictated by government? In a way that Americans, as a collective whole, could do better?langeweile said:Health care
Education
Social Security
Those just for starters
Abortion and drug use? I'm guess it's the liberals who are trying to take those options from government and put it back in the hands of the people. Farm subsidies? And just how is that a decision that's taken out of your hands?langeweile said:I might add
Abortion
Drug use
Farm subsidations
I am still thinking
Unlike in Canada or most of Europe, the church gets no money from the goverment in the USA.danmand said:And don't frget to build lots of churches where people can pray to stay healthy and employed etc.
In other words, can't afford health care? Tough. Then die. Can't afford education? Tough beans. Be stupid. Old people? Go rot, losers.langeweile said:Health care
Education
Social Security
Was it something I said or did you forget to pick up your medication?Ickabod said:........
Here's a clue OTB, you're one gene away from having downs syndrome. Act like a human being. Act like you understand that concept. Not everyone is as lucky as you. And it's not because they're lazy. Or stupid. In a lot of cases it's because of dumb freakin' luck. So go make your money. Enjoy it. Spend it how you please, on things that make you happy. But give back. Give back and shut the f*ck up about it. There's a 19 year old punk from Raleigh NC somewhere in Iraq. That punk has never met you. Wouldn't know you from Adam. But he's in Baghdad doing you the biggest favor anyone could ask someone to do. And how do you repay that 19 year old punk? By bitching about having to help take care of his grandmother. Or having to help put his kids through public schools. By bitching about having to make sure he has health care.
But go ahead. Vote for the guy who's gonna cut your taxes. Says more about you than it does about George Bush or John Kerry.
Ickabod said:In other words, can't afford health care? Tough. Then die. Can't afford education? Tough beans. Be stupid. Old people? Go rot, losers.
You're a piece of garbage. If i had my way, i'd let you keep your freakin' tax money. Far as i'm concerned, you can shove it up your no good freakin' ass. You're nothing but one lucky, priveleged, elite bastard who goes around thinking he works harder than anybody else. I got news for you Mr Iworkharderthaneveryonewhomakeslessthanido. I can name 500 jobs off the top of my head that you wouldn't work if they were the last jobs on earth AND they paid $2mil a year. Yet there are people who work them at $20,000. $30,000. Some even less. The reason you have it so good is because there are people who are willing to work those jobs. Go out and get a bite to eat. Imagine what the world would be like if waitresses acted like you'd act if you had to work for minimum wage. Join the military. Stick your arse in downtown Baghdad if you think you deserve how much you make.
Here's a clue OTB, you're one gene away from having downs syndrome. Act like a human being. Act like you understand that concept. Not everyone is as lucky as you. And it's not because they're lazy. Or stupid. In a lot of cases it's because of dumb freakin' luck. So go make your money. Enjoy it. Spend it how you please, on things that make you happy. But give back. Give back and shut the f*ck up about it. There's a 19 year old punk from Raleigh NC somewhere in Iraq. That punk has never met you. Wouldn't know you from Adam. But he's in Baghdad doing you the biggest favor anyone could ask someone to do. And how do you repay that 19 year old punk? By bitching about having to help take care of his grandmother. Or having to help put his kids through public schools. By bitching about having to make sure he has health care.
But go ahead. Vote for the guy who's gonna cut your taxes. Says more about you than it does about George Bush or John Kerry.