ooo and one more thing, dont believe everything in the paper and in the news. theres more s*** going down that you dont know about.

Correct.

 

 

 

Hiltler and Saddam are not the same though.

 

 

 

One tried to take over the world.

 

 

The other had not gotten to the point of doing that.

 

 

You can argue that it was a pre-emptive strike, but you cannot predict what a ruler will do. If you try to do that you are treading into dangerous water.

 

 

The Iraqi people will not accept the form of government we set up for them, because it opposes their Islam religion. I hope Bush realizes this and allows the people to do what they feel is best for them. For some reason I dont see this happening. I hope I am wrong.

yea but hitler got to try and take over the world. and yea maybe we did jump the gun on hussin or maybe we didnt

 

its better to be safe than sorry

But by your theory though, we leave Hitler in power in Germany because he has the right to be his own government though right?

The US have been neutral for a long time. they supported the allies but thjey were not actively involved (officially). WW2 started with pearl habor (dec, 7th 1941) for the US, but AFTER the US declared war to Japan (dec. 8th), Hitler followed the treaty he had with Japan and Italy and GER & IT declared war to the US (dec, 11th) Canada was faster. It declared war 1939 already.

 

Saddam Hussein didn't have the possibility to take over the world. It was his aim, but...... But honestly said, I agree with you. Its better to be safe and what saddam did with the Iraqis was awful.

 

Noth Korea is different. they are a real threat, because trey're insane AND have WMD AND they're insane. a potentially deadly combination.

 

@Phlub: where are YOU getting your information? China is a strategic important trading partner to the US. they need each other, but China needs the US more. China is also the most important partner for North Korea, economical and ideological! Since 1961 (long after the Korean War), they have a "Friendship and Mutual Assistance Treaty". But I don't think china would really intervene if the US would go to North Korea. China needs the US more than North Korea.

 

Edit: mistakes corrected

WW2 started with pearl habor (sept, 7th 1942) for the US

XIII pearl harbor was december 7th not september

 

its all good though cuz you know your s***

WW2 started with pearl habor (sept, 7th 1942) for the US,

I didn't really like the guy, but I'll quote FDR on this one:

 

"December 7th, 1941. A date which will live in infamy....."

why didnt you like him?

 

juanky you sound like you voted aainst him when he came into office in 1933. lol

why didnt you like him?

I don't like him because he was a socialist.

oooooooo ok juanky

 

i tend to kinda give him credit since he helped us get out of the great depression and guided us in WW2

 

but everyone has there opinion

Make no mistake about it, World War 2 got us out of the Depression. Patton and Eisenhower were the real US Leaders in WW2, and Churchill was the most influential of the actual political leaders.

Everyone always brings up how evil Saddam was and how we "freed the poor Iraqis" from him. Saddam and his sons had been torturing people for a long time...do you think the U.S. honestly cares about the innocent Kurds that he gassed? of course not. If they did, they would have stopped it a long time ago. Get real, people. There are plenty of murderous dictatorships in the world. Saddam was not the only one, and if you attack one to "free his people", then you put yourself in a position where you have to attack and "liberate" them all. Which the US (thankfully) has no intentions of doing.

 

Where are these so-called "WMD" on which this war was waged on? If you'll remember way back, the primary goal (and selling point, if you will) of this war was that evil Iraq had WMD that they were aiming at the US. Freeing the people was never one of the main goals of this war until no WMD were found and the Bush administration found themselves scrambling for a reason to be in Iraq.

 

Since when do we in the US have the right to draw the line and say "ok, it stops HERE."? We don't.

I agree Katrina.

 

 

But the die hard Republicans will never admit this.

 

 

Neither will the Bush adminstration.

 

 

Gotta love the lies and doubletalk.

and technically many of the programs enacted by Roosevelt during the Depression were socialist based programs.

and technically many of the programs enacted by Roosevelt during the Depression were socialist based programs.

Go no father than Social f***ing Security

 

I feel really bad for all the old people of this nation in 15 or so years that were too lazy, relied on the government and didn't set money away in a mutual fund or something along those lines for the future in the private sector, and will pay for it because Social Security will collapse. All because a president who will remain nameless right now decided to "improve society".

XIII pearl harbor was december 7th not september

 

its all good though cuz you know your s***

I'm sorry :whistle

Maybe I can't read.....got it from encarta and it's right there. was my mistake.......... :banghead

I'm gonna edit my post....

Retirement funds through businesses didn't become available until the 80s, but independent retirement funds were available for use. No one used them, their loss. People now will know better. And no you don't just throw the old people on the streets for the "Not So Great Society"'s mistakes. But Social Security should be finished off already so people starting to enter the workforce now know its dead and start thinking about doing something themselves.

 

You must have voted for Bush.

Nope :whistle

Know what sucks.

 

 

I pay into Social Security and I will probably never see a dime.

 

 

How 'fair' is that? I get to pay for the retirements of the old people, but yet when I am old, there will be no young kids to pay for mine?

 

 

Thats just great.

I pay into Social Security and I will probably never see a dime.

Exactly. The system was at least decent when the government stored the money away and never touched it. But then they started using it for this and that, expanding with the use of the social security money. They figured there will always be new taxpayers coming into the system to keep the money flowing. This was done, however, before Roe v Wade. The government didn't count on abortion whiping out a whole generation of new taxpayers. So the government was too big and didn't have the reserves that they thought were coming, so they are basically just letting Social Security die quietly.

Know what sucks.

 

 

I pay into Social Security and I will probably never see a dime.

 

 

How 'fair' is that? I get to pay for the retirements of the old people, but yet when I am old, there will be no young kids to pay for mine?

 

 

Thats just great.

similar problem as we have. Everyone pays and pays...... the problem is that the birth-rate here is decreasing since the 1980s. The result is, that my generation never sees a cent of the money we paid, coz there are no younger people who can pay. same with health-insurance.

So how to reform the system? Thats our main question right now. No one knowsw a good answer, hehe :thumbdown

Well, how do you propose fixing the system?

there is no fix for the system.

 

 

its beyond fixing.

 

 

too many people have taken the money from it....the only way to possibly fix it would be to pay back all the IOU's into the system with the proper interest.

 

 

But that would cost taxpayers even more.

I think the only way to fix the system is to cancel it. Then a new one has to be created. But no govenernment would dare to try that.

But what right do we have to go in and destroy another form of government?

 

 

Especially in China and/or North Korea.

 

 

How does that truly effect life in the United States?

Because the form of communism IS a threat to the United States.

 

It would effect life in the US because it would effect our economy. I don't think you want to experience another depression like in the begining of the 20th century... I sure don't..

 

China and North Korea are threats because of their weapons, population and government. Communism can spread and if it does some more, it will gradually effect our lives. Have you ever heard of the domino theory?

 

I'm not a big history buff, I really kinda hate it, I only do it if I have to, but the history channel is pretty cool.

 

Trust me, the more communism there is in the world, the more we are threatened & effected through economy.

North Korea presents little if any threat to the western world.

 

 

Just because a nation uses a form of government we do not like, does not mean we have the right to go in and change their government to suit our fancy.

 

 

By maintaining the diplomatic ties that we have had, there will be no expansion of communism into a developed nation...however since Bush has been hell bent on destroying all diplomatic ties forged in the 20th century, well other nations could very well go out and do what is worst for the United States just in spite of us.

 

 

PS...the depression that hit the United States and the world in the 1930s will never be repeated. Communism had nothing to do with that event, they are exclusive events, Communism was in its infancy still....The wide speculation and free wheeling occuring during the roaring 20s contributed to it greatly, along with a massive drought in the Plains. In addition basically destroying Germany and their ability to recover not only added to the depression, but also led to the rise of Hitler.

Yea, Das, you're right. Seriously, what country has Bush NOT pissed off already?

 

 

http://maddox.xmission.com/limits_to_freedom.html

 

you have to check this out.

Next Year we can all make a difference.

 

 

 

Vote Dean.