Printable View
So no one has any sites that give detailed descriptions of how Kerry plans to achieve the things he is claiming he will do for the American people?
I'm not going to vote for Kerry just because he isn't Bush. I want long descriptive paragraphs going into detail on what he wants to do when elected and I want counter points to what he wants to do.
Douche. JohnKerry.com. Big PDF downloads.Quote:
Originally Posted by IronPlant
Come back and call 'em bullshit, say you don't like 'em, whatever you like, just quit saying they're not there.
Well, I think a lot of people me included will do just this. Like I've said before Kerry's going to be the lesser of two evils. As much as I want to hear some more fleshed out plans of what Kerry is going to do if he is elected, whatever it is, cant be worse than what Bush would do if re-elected.Quote:
Originally Posted by IronPlant
As complex and hard as you want to make it - Bush is an idiot and Kerry isnt. I'm not really keen on re-electing a bumbling idiot, and expect him to make sound choices concerning the future of our nation. Are you?
Kerry is for change. That is enough reason for me.
There is always the possibility for worse. History has proven this over and over again. There is no telling how many people have died because of decisions made out of desperation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetman
Do you enjoy fables?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetman
The Doe and the Lion
A DOE hard pressed by hunters sought refuge in a cave belonging
to a Lion. The Lion concealed himself on seeing her approach,
but when she was safe within the cave, sprang upon her and tore
her to pieces. "Woe is me," exclaimed the Doe, "who have escaped
from man, only to throw myself into the mouth of a wild beast?'
In avoiding one evil, care must be taken not to fall into
another.
Absolutely. I ask you, where in the Constitution of the United States does it give the President the power to do so? Nowhere. The U.S. never declared war on Iraq, and without any credible ties to WMDs or terrorism established there it does not fall under the dangerously broad term 'War on Terror' thus it is an illegal war conducted without the approval of the Congress.Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Meach
It's a propaganda illusion that the citizenry must somehow be beholden to the President. Yes, he is Commander-in-Chief of the Army & Navy (as stated in Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution) but that has absolutely no barring on the civilian population. He, under the Constitution, has no power to declare war of any kind without the Congress. In fact, until Teddy Roosevelt's administration the position of President was a largely ceremonial one. I'd like it to go back to that.
OK, being obtuse obviously doesn't work.Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Meach
Islamic Terrorism exists NOT because they're jealous of Western prosperity, and not because they want to burn the infidels who deny the sanctity of Wahad Allah. It exists because the West has consistently supported coups that crushed nationalist uprisings which threatened the control of resources of interest; in so completely destabilising the area and creating a power vacuum to allow for the growth of radical movements.
The most obvious examples being the Suez Crisis and Operation Ajax
Prior to Operation Ajax, Iran was governed by democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh. Iran was relatively stable and was becoming fairly secular and progressive. So what was the problem? Mossadegh was talking crazy talk like: all the oil in Iran should be controlled by Iran and used to better the lives of the Iranian people, and not by companies such as the AIOC who only got drilling licenses during the pre-democratic corruption; and, Iran should adopt a socialist principles like other capitalist countries with high standards of living.
So the CIA went in, popped caps in their democratic arses, installed a shitty inbred dictatorial Shah, the country went to shit, the living standards in Iran dropped dramatically, dissent grew, and what would you know, Islamo-Facists took control of the country.
Bombing Iraq just pisses them off more and makes more terrorists. Hence my obtuse thing. You may be cutting out the lung cancer (killing terrorists) but while you still smoke (control their resources through military strength and prevent the creation of Palestine) you're just going to grow more cancer.
g0zen
Well, the Congress authorized the President to use force should he deem it necessary to do so. Now, maybe they shouldn't have given him that power but...
Anyways, Presidents have had the right to deploy troops for numerous types of missions via Executive Order. This comes from the Cold War, where, the reasoning went, the Prez can't go to Congress everytime troops are needed somewhere (where they are put at risk).
One other thing, just an historical aside. The US has sent troops into harm's way (risk) many times w/o Congressional authorization. Now, many of these haven't been full-on wars like WWII or anything but it has been going on for awhile (see: Grenada/Beirut/Somalia/Haiti/Kosovo etc). Anyways, not trying to argue here, just saying...
Oh yeah. We agree it'd be nice if the Executive were less powerful but unfortunately it just isn't going to happen in a technological, post-modern society.
:\
Astro
See, that wasn't so hard. ;)
=/ could you link me. I'm not finding it.Quote:
Originally Posted by MysteriousRacerC
Oh, and do so with out being an ass about it?
Thanks, kisses.
I'm not debating the fact the President has this power and uses (more like abuses it). You asked me if I thought the President had the right to risk American lives for anything, I said that (according ot the Constitution) he does not. Have the Constitutionality of these 'Executive Orders' ever been challenged in the Supreme Court? I doubt it.Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Meach