anti-american sentimen, and whats wrong with our country Options

[sikdragon]

I am an American and i am proud. Now why the hell is anti-american sentiment news? we have been hated long before Iraq. We are hated because we allies with Isreal. Call me an old fashioned right winged cowboy, i dont care. but think what side would you rather be on the right or the wrong? thats what i thought. Don't you see how pussified this country has become?

faggots are fighting for their right to marry, what kind of **** is that? there was a time when these people were taken in the back and shot, its not a disease it is a choice. and since when do we care what other countries thought of what we do? the leaders of those countries are all using the same concept, make money.

Now i can see why poor people support liberalism/communism, yeah it'll cut out the middle class and make everyone around them poor, wait thats not a good thing. In this country the way it is there is room for advancement. Everyone one of you are being turned into robots, controlled by the tv. The tv is controlled by the liberal media which will spare nothing to keep you on it's side. You never hear about the good things that happen because of Bush because you have a news source that hates him with a passion, why because he has conservative values. What are those? u might ask, well those are those tiny things your parents vaguely remember before they began to stop listening to their parents. and we wonder why there is so much violence and murder and drunk driving in this country.

It's because the men aren't being men anymore. Running from their problems instead of fighting. Now kids are learning that if they join gangs they become men. WHAT KIND OF **** IS THAT? some guy picks on you, doesnt matter if he is smaller than you, you gotta have him jumped instead of being a man and getting your ass kicked. Taking it on the chin hurts too much, i gotta get my gun.

Feminism was one of the worst things that has happened to this country. Now im not saying women shouldnt have rights, im saying that by killing the home maker and giving her a choice you leave the child to be raised by the television or some day care center. that doesnt sound bad does it? well what happens when your child doesnt listen to you anymore, the child feels neglected, the child resorts to drugs to kill their problems, or drinks to drown their problems instead of facing them.

The new movie with the blonde whore from 8mile is such bullshit. yeah instead of confronting my boyfriend lets go behind his back and be "clever" teehee. < what was she scared she might break up with him because of a question? sounds like a great relationship doesnt it. trust, love, and faith arent things that define marriage, those things are only in the movies. those things arent virtues they are bullshit. oh wait is that why the divorce rate has gone up so much???

Clinton was the third worst president we have ever had, wait he did great with the economy? Hell no, he jacked up the taxes and used multi-billion dollar bombs on some walmart tents. That is some strategy isnt it? He sold military secrets to the chinese and now they have rockets? WOW, i am soo surprised.

Ok JFK was elected by the teamsters and assassinated when his brother started using government power to slaughter many important families. But before he died he decided to do some serious damage. This democrat got us into the vietnam war. Then his dumb ass VP kept us there slaughtering our troops. Bush is the warmonger? i dont think so. Instead of going in there full force he chose not to shock and awe. He sent inexpierienced troops into asia, and the most commonly known fact before you idiots starting drinking your polluted water, was never get in a land war in asia. Then when Nixon got in there and made him look like a fool, by asking congress to let him bomb the hell outta that country, they said no so he did the logical thing. Pull out our troops. This was only because we werent making enough body bags for the bodies.

Right now we're winning, Saddam has been captured, Iraqi gangs are killing off the old regime. It is not the same thing, there is no comparison between the iraq war and the vietnam war.

Does your hero support Kerry? does he/she also support NAMBLA? cuz they are on the same team. maybe your hero isnt as smart as you thought, try thinking for yourself.

If you are offended by any or all of these statements i got some words for you, quit being a hoe. DEAL WITH IT, I AM RIGHT.

MODS I APOLOGIZE FOR THE CUSSING, IT HELPS TO EXPRESS MY FEELINGS AND HOW MESSED UP IT REALLY IS. DONT DELETE THIS JUST BECAUSE YOU DISAGREE THIS IS THE DEBATE SECTION.

Quote of my life:"Stand up for what is right, even if you are standing alone."

[ComradeRed]

[quote]embarassed? no. I am not stuck in the middle ages. I think you need to reread my message up there. We as a nation have slowly been losing the meaning of what makes a man. Without a male influence children grow up with no discipline, or get discipline but no nurturing. There is the problem because generation after generation are becoming more and more unstable. Soon the whole country will be unbalanced and will leave us open to attack. Yes an actuall invasion of US soil. If it werent for people like me supposedly stuck in the "middle ages" we would just be a territory of Russia or some other country. I am still confused about how my statement reflects any lack of a life?![/quote]

No country on Earth has the physical capability of invading US soil... the two oceans make it hard for large armies to land.

[quote]Gerundio that wasnt a threat. I am saying your instigation is causing more death and division than any redneck supremist, which I am not.[/quote]

How so? The war is what caused death in the first place... By opposing it, you are causing division, which is not a bad thing most of the tmie.

Furthermore, the war was an executive (not congressional) action, and therefore Unconstitutional. Resisting--to the point of defensive force--an unconstitutionaal action of government is not only justified, but is a duty of all citizens.

[quote]So you are saying homosexuals should recieve therapy like cleptomaniacs and compulsive liars rather than take responsibility for their own short comings? Everyone has their problems and it is how we choose to handle them makes us good or evil in the eyes of man. If a person is gay and they just arent attracted to the opposite sex in any way, why not try celibacy? What if you were attracted to an animal? What if you were attracted to children and not your peers? That perversness would not be acceptable. Celibacy is the only escape. Like a cleptomaniac choosing to buy rather than to steal even though stealing seems easier.[/quote]

Sex with animals is legal in most states ... you see, animals don't have rights.

Sex with children SHOULD be legal --- AS LONG AS the children consent. You see, consentual activity is inherently legitimate, whereas passing laws against such activity is inherently coercive, and therefore bad.

If two people want to have sex, it is their right. If you oppose having sex with people of your same gender, Don't Do It!

[quote]No it's not the same. There is no law against the conquering that the Israelis did. It is illegal to steal.[/quote]

The Holocaust was cmopletely legal... does that mean it was a good idea?

In either case, law was used as legal fiat. It was not legitimate. The Palestinians had every right to resist an Israeli takeover of their land that the Poles had to resist the Germans, or we had to resist the British in the War of 1812.

[quote]No that is not what i was saying. Using the empirical method you can prove that when God says something, it happens. "Let there be light." so on and so forth.[/quote]

That's completely correct actually.

The logical statement If P, then Q is always true IF P IS FALSE in teh first place.

"When God says something, it happens" is true -- because "God says something" is false. Now try to prove using that method that GOD SAYS THINGS. It becomes harder, doesn't it?

[quote]Have you ever been dead? no. So you don't know if you are dead or not. You could still be alive. It is only by third party perception that your death is recognized.[/quote]

So... if I perceive you to be dead, then you are dead?

[quote]No the empirical method has nothing to do with it.[/quote]

To the contrary, the empirical method is how facts are established. It has everything to do with everything.

[quote]I have read it. You said that Samuel says not to pay your taxes when in fact it does not.[/quote]

Samuel says taxes are UNJUSTIFIED, not not to pay them. Let me get my bible:
1 Samuel 8:10-18:
"So Samuel reported all tehy words of the Lord to the people who were asking him for a king. He said "These will be the ways of the king who will reign over you: He will take your sons and appoint them to his chariots and to be his horsemen, and to run before his chariots and he will appoint for himself commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and some to plow the ground and to reap his harvest, and to make implements of war and the equipment of his chariots. He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive orchards and give them to his courtiers. He wil ltake one-tenth of your grain and of your vineyards and give it to his officers and courrtiers. He will take your male and female slaves, and the best of your cattle and donkeys, and put them to work. He will take one-tenth of your flock, and you shall be his slaves. And in that day you will cry ouy because of your king, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.

The Italics sections clearly describe a tax.

[quote]when they are aware that an attack is being provoked, there is no way you can say that was preemptive. That was the point I was trying to make. Nasser's quote supports that.[/quote]

A preemptive attack is when you attack first withotu being attacked. Israel was not attacked by Egypt. They attacked first.

It doesn't matter what they said. When someone says your hair looks messy is not an excuse to hit them.

[quote]You do not know this. No one knows what could've happened because it didn't happen. We can only speculate. The Israeli was 100 km from Cairo. In my opinion they could have taken Cairo and all of Africa if that was God's will.[/quote]

Too bad the Ark of the Covenant was in Ethiopia. .

The Israeli advance had STOPPED. They didn't have enough troops to break the Egyptian defenses around the Suez Canal. If they could've taken Cairo, they would have -- since that would've ended the war. The Israelis already overran their supply lines -- if the war went on, Egypt would've been able to rally and push the Israelis back. Plus, both the Soviets AND the Americans were supporting Egypt at this time ... a world war where the USSR and USA and teh Arabs allied against Israel and France would've ended very quickly in a USSR/USA/Egypt victory.

The Germans TOTALLY destroyed the Russian Army in 1941, but they STILL lost the war -- because they overextended their supplies. Without oil, they had to abandon their tanks while the Russians regrouped in Moscow to push them back.

THem taking all of Africa is entirely uneralistic -- America couldn't even do that. Guns are only one small part of the military -- the most important part of military science is supply and logistics. No power on Earth can supply forces everywhere in Africa. It's a big continent.

God is good for insprinig your troops to bravely defend teh home soil... but God won't rush new oil to your tanks, and new food to your troops.

[quote]Ok so if we were to become a communist nation so the world would become our allies would you believe America's interest would be fulfilled? but that's right you did say you think, so i guess you should rethink.[/quote]

No. I said BECAUSE WE INVADED IRAQ, communist parties around the world are GAINING STRENGTH and will soon be able to control the governments of our key allies, which will FORCE us to resort to Isolationism.

[quote]Israel protecting their interest in not letting the power of their enemies rise beyond their defenses is bad?  The most hated country in the world defending itself using a different set of laws in war is different. Israel was attacked first.[/quote]

No they weren't. The first two Arab-Israeli Wars, in 1948 and 1956, were started by Israel. Arab nations did not attack Israel until 1967.

[quote]Russia is a super power.[/quote]

The fact that they are losing a war with Cechneya proves they aren't.

[quote]The middle eastern countries are runned by counsels of hundreds of princes.[/quote]

If they are that weak, then they don't pose a threat to us. QED attack was unjustifiable.

[quote]Iraq was a very rich country. The whole of the nation's resources was being used to fund the interests of Muslim fundamentalists and terrorist organizations.[/quote]

Or fighting terrorism ... Hussein waged a massive war against Al-Qaeda when they bottled up in the North of the country. Al-Qaeda was supported by teh Kurds, who are historically very hostile to Saddam.

[quote]Not the side that disagrees with me. It is the side of greedy ignorant bastards.[/quote]

Rrrrrrrrright...

There are a lot of greedy ignorant bastards on both sides.

But the distinction between Liberal and Socialist is HUGE:
From the AMERICAN HERITAGE DICTIONARY:
Liberalism - 2a. A political theory founded on the natural goodness of humans and the autonomy of the individual and favoring civil and political liberties, government by law with the consent of the governed, and protection from arbitrary authority

Socialism - 1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.

Get it? Liberalism says: Individual good. Socialism says: Individual bad. Liberalism says: Capitalism, Constitutional Democracy, and Liberty. Socialism says: Planned Economy, Authoritarianism, and Social Equality. Liberalism is like the Thomas Jefferson. Socialsim is like Karl Marx.

MOST democrats today are actually socialists, not liberals (though a few can still be called liberals). There are very few liberals left in America -- and they are probably evenly split between teh Republicans and Democrats.