You all cool with the president be chosen

1356

Comments

  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    macgyver06 wrote:
    ??? what are you talking about??


    are you telling me... you are in favor of a guy who says his plan is to re-deploy troops elsewhere?? THATS IT... no further questions... elect this man


    im nto against obama... but when he says this on national tv when he is debating McCain... its going to bury him
    Maybe, maybe not. But it's still a plan.

    And, yes, I am in favor of redeploying troops elsewhere. So are a lot of people. It's o.k. if that's not what you are in favor of - but, you simply can't say McCain has a plan and Obama doesn't.

    In fact, the whole "Obama has no plans" meme is a complete media creation. So, since you're someone who's so against the media, I find it odd that you'd latch on to it so fervently here.
  • macgyver06
    macgyver06 Posts: 2,500
    soulsinging wrote:
    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA.

    good god, that's the funniest thing i ever read. you say mccain will win becos he's a strong war leader and people like that, then you say NADER can beat him? what planet are you from? last i checked, nader was not much of a credible war guy.


    because he is a polar opposite! and he wont get on stage and dance around.. he tells you the truth... he opposes the war and will list reasons why and what to do...

    if you know anything about Nader... than you should know the man... he has no tricks up his sleeve...and he is straight and to the point... this kind of character is the only one who could beat McCain..

    when Obama gets up there.. and says he opposes the war but is for a continuance occupation.. and McCain has generals on his side that claim to have a plan to stay in Iraq and win...

    this will be viewed as they are both in favor of the war...but McCain has experience and a plan


    IM NOT AGAINST OBAMA

    i will probably leave when McCain is elected
  • macgyver06
    macgyver06 Posts: 2,500
    ledvedderman wrote:
    Sorry man, but re-deploying the troops to Afghanistan sounds like a good idea to me.


    he said he is putting all the troops in afghanistan?
  • macgyver06
    macgyver06 Posts: 2,500
    soulsinging wrote:
    calling people 'sheep' rather than supporting your views with any form of what the rest of us call 'logic' is no reply.



    i never did this so... this message is a falsity... replies are found in my posts... there is no message where i wrote you are a sheep and nothing else...

    whoa re you trying to fool?? people who visit this page of the thread and dont retrace the messages???
  • macgyver06
    macgyver06 Posts: 2,500
    RainDog wrote:
    Maybe, maybe not. But it's still a plan.

    And, yes, I am in favor of redeploying troops elsewhere. So are a lot of people. It's o.k. if that's not what you are in favor of - but, you simply can't say McCain has a plan and Obama doesn't.

    In fact, the whole "Obama has no plans" meme is a complete media creation. So, since you're someone who's so against the media, I find it odd that you'd latch on to it so fervently here.


    my question...which ive made threads in the past about still remains unanswered


    what is his plan????


    and if his plan is to close his eyes and point to a place on the map to send troops to... sure its a plan... but he wont be elected
  • ledvedderman
    ledvedderman Posts: 7,762
    macgyver06 wrote:
    he said he is putting all the troops in afghanistan?

    Everything I've ever heard him say has been re-deploying SOME (not all of the troops in Iraq) to Afghanistan to continue the war against the people that killed 3,00 Americans before George W. Bush took his eye off the ball.
    E8toX.gif

    http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    macgyver06 wrote:
    because he is a polar opposite! and he wont get on stage and dance around.. he tells you the truth... he opposes the war and will list reasons why and what to do...

    if you know anything about Nader... than you should know the man... he has no tricks up his sleeve...and he is straight and to the point... this kind of character is the only one who could beat McCain..

    when Obama gets up there.. and says he opposes the war but is for a continuance occupation.. and McCain has generals on his side that claim to have a plan to stay in Iraq and win...

    this will be viewed as they are both in favor of the war...but McCain has experience and a plan


    IM NOT AGAINST OBAMA

    i will probably leave when McCain is elected

    when has straight talk ever won an election? dubya got elected twice.

    i know nader. i campaigned for him in 2000. he wouldnt stand a chance in a general election. and he has less experience than obama. nader has never held an elected national office in his life.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    macgyver06 wrote:
    i never did this so... this message is a falsity... replies are found in my posts... there is no message where i wrote you are a sheep and nothing else...

    whoa re you trying to fool?? people who visit this page of the thread and dont retrace the messages???

    nobody. it doesnt matter what the rest of your post said. the fact that you dismiss any argument against you with the "sheep" insult discredits you. you have no facts. only wild conjecture and supposition.
  • macgyver06
    macgyver06 Posts: 2,500
    ledvedderman wrote:
    Everything I've ever heard him say has been re-deploying SOME (not all of the troops in Iraq) to Afghanistan to continue the war against the people that killed 3,00 Americans before George W. Bush took his eye off the ball.


    finally a little truth :) hopefully someone who doesnt follow politics will read this message rather than turning on fox news...

    however... the people who killed 3000 americans... died that day.
  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    macgyver06 wrote:
    my question...which ive made threads in the past about still remains unanswered


    what is his plan????


    and if his plan is to close his eyes and point to a place on the map to send troops to... sure its a plan... but he wont be elected
    Did you read the part that I posted earlier in this thread?

    And I don't really think he'll close his eyes and point. I imagine he'll move more combat troops into Afghanistan, and other troops onto already existing bases/areas where were not currently being attacked. Wait. Scratch "imagine," 'cause that's what he said he'd do. A plan.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    macgyver06 wrote:
    finally a little truth :) hopefully someone who doesnt follow politics will read this message rather than turning on fox news...

    however... the people who killed 3000 americans... died that day.

    you're right, bush is not at all responsible for the deaths of thousands of iraqis.
  • macgyver06
    macgyver06 Posts: 2,500
    soulsinging wrote:
    when has straight talk ever won an election? dubya got elected twice.

    i know nader. i campaigned for him in 2000. he wouldnt stand a chance in a general election. and he has less experience than obama. nader has never held an elected national office in his life.


    you may not be aware of this...but have you heard george Bush speak?? or just clips on a comedy show???

    he tells you whats going to happen and than he does it... thats why he won the second time while Kerry was stuttering on how to avoid the truth.
  • macgyver06
    macgyver06 Posts: 2,500
    soulsinging wrote:
    you're right, bush is not at all responsible for the deaths of thousands of iraqis.


    i never said this and i dont know where you got this from.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    macgyver06 wrote:
    you may not be aware of this...but have you heard george Bush speak?? or just clips on a comedy show???

    he tells you whats going to happen and than he does it... thats why he won the second time while Kerry was stuttering on how to avoid the truth.

    i recall a lot of things he said about saddam and al-quaeda, saddam and nukes, saddam and liberation. none of them turned out to be "straight talk." i kinda tuned him out after that.

    kerry lost becos he had no personality and nobody could understand what he was saying. people are understanding obama.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    macgyver06 wrote:
    i never said this and i dont know where you got this from.

    it's called "logic." if the people responsible for 9/11 all died that day and the people who backed them (afghani sponsored terrorists) are not in any way responsible or accountable, then our soldiers have killed iraqis but the people who backed them (dubya) should not be responsible or accountable either.
  • macgyver06
    macgyver06 Posts: 2,500
    RainDog wrote:
    Did you read the part that I posted earlier in this thread?

    And I don't really think he'll close his eyes and point. I imagine he'll move more combat troops into Afghanistan, and other troops onto already existing bases/areas where were not currently being attacked. Wait. Scratch "imagine," 'cause that's what he said he'd do. A plan.


    rain dog.. i love you :) this is what i am arguing... can you admit... that obama hasnt been completely clear on what his plan is... the people who want him elected i think we can all agree want peace... if they want peace and obamas plan is to try and achieve peace... why is he not being completely clear??

    i would vote for him if he could start speaking the truth..and who knows we may have to wait until he is nominated by the democrats... but he needs to makie it clear or he doesnt stand a chance
  • ledvedderman
    ledvedderman Posts: 7,762
    macgyver06 wrote:
    finally a little truth :) hopefully someone who doesnt follow politics will read this message rather than turning on fox news...

    however... the people who killed 3000 americans... died that day.

    Touche, the people literally attacked us that day are dead. However, I don't think anyone has ever said that these 19 men pulled this off by themselves. To assume that no one else was involved or that we shouldn't go after them is distorted logic to say the least.
    E8toX.gif

    http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
  • macgyver06
    macgyver06 Posts: 2,500
    soulsinging wrote:
    it's called "logic." if the people responsible for 9/11 all died that day and the people who backed them (afghani sponsored terrorists) are not in any way responsible or accountable, then our soldiers have killed iraqis but the people who backed them (dubya) should not be responsible or accountable either.


    whoah whoah whoah... are you saying the people who flew planes into buildings were spnsored by afghans? and i couldnt quite understand the part about iraqis.. are you saying george bush is responsible for the mess in iraq

    im not arguing against it.... or for it... i really couldnt grasp it..i had a bad lunch :)
  • macgyver06
    macgyver06 Posts: 2,500
    ledvedderman wrote:
    Touche, the people literally attacked us that day are dead. However, I don't think anyone has ever said that these 19 men pulled this off by themselves. To assume that no one else was involved or that we shouldn't go after them is distorted logic to say the least.


    i agree and i think eventually the saudis will be directly linked to funding it... but that hasnt happened yet and is another thread :)
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    macgyver06 wrote:
    whoah whoah whoah... are you saying the people who flew planes into buildings were spnsored by afghans? and i couldnt quite understand the part about iraqis.. are you saying george bush is responsible for the mess in iraq

    im not arguing against it.... or for it... i really couldnt grasp it..i had a bad lunch :)

    im saying the people who flew the planes were trained in afghanistan with the blessing of the taliban.

    im saying george bush and his administration pushed for the iraq war and thus are reponsible for its consequences.

Categories