we would not be safe with kerry in office. i am glad that we have a presedent that stays on the attack and not let them come to us.
They did and now they are going to die. if you dont unerstand that you are very stupid. it is not W falt that we are at war its the people who attacked us fault. listen if we new that 9-11 was coming do you think that W would of let in happen think again

quote:

Originally posted by bella123:
i find it funny that you say "kill this thread" but you reply a month later.

you hypocrite.

hear hear! (makes toast)

i find it funny that you say "kill this thread" but you reply a month later.

you hypocrite.

yes what you say is true goleafs but please kill this thread

Newsflash! Bush was president when we were attacked ! Just wondering how many times has this thread been revived ?

quote:

Originally posted by goleafs:
we would not be safe with kerry in office. i am glad that we have a presedent that stays on the attack and not let them come to us.
They did and now they are going to die. if you dont unerstand that you are very stupid. it is not W falt that we are at war its the people who attacked us fault. listen if we new that 9-11 was coming do you think that W would of let in happen think again

Firstly, may I point out that you posted this in the Environment Board? What does this have any relevance to in the Environmental section that you have mentioned?

And secondly: Do you use such terrible grammar to infuriate people more, or is it accidental? Please. It's rather difficult to decipher what you are saying most of the time.

Finally, if you have not yet, refer to Tigerwoman's post. That pretty much sums up whatever I could have said.

Reviving this thread was pointless. Just for the record Bush said that the US would be safe with Kerry in office. Kerry did support the war in Iraq. If he had won the election, he would have continued it. Of course Bush would have prevented the 9/11 attacks if he could have. I think many people take issue with the fact that some intelligence reports regarding terrorists hijacking airplanes were ignorned not just by Bush but his closest advisors. And for the record Iraq was linked to the 9/11 attacks in any way.

BAH!

Dead topic that did not need to be revived.

Oh, and your lack of knowladge on the threats to our environment disturbs me.

Thing is, Bush doesn't care half a crap about the environment. Once there's no more plants on this planet and there's no longer a source of oxygen or Ozone on this planet and we're either suffocated or fried to death, whatever comes first.. UH OH!!!! WHAT NOW!

ALSO: this nation has practically become another civil war environment for people of differring political parties. We've never BEEN so seperated.

This is the most ignorant thing I have ever read. It amazes me how much people don't know, and these are the people who voted Bush into office. 9/11 and iraw had no connection(the 9/11 commission declared that so for the ignorant people who didn't already know) and Iraq is who we are attacking. It was a huge diversion. We should have all our troops after Osama not stretched way too thin in Iraq.

quote:

---

Originally posted by goleafs:
we would not be safe with kerry in office. i am glad that we have a presedent that stays on the attack and not let them come to us.
They did and now they are going to die. if you dont unerstand that you are very stupid. it is not W falt that we are at war its the people who attacked us fault. listen if we new that 9-11 was coming do you think that W would of let in happen think again

---

how can you judge if we would be safe with kerry in office or not? you havent seen him as president yet!!!(VERY UNFORTUNATELY,OFCOURSE) hopefully during the next election, people will have more sense to elect someone with the same political views as kerry.

Very interesting article uptowngirl...It never ceases to amaze me how people can vote for Bush...

Handy that this is in the Environment section, and I worked with an environmental group for a while.

Thanks in large part to emissions from power plants, which Bush has allowed, one in six American women of child-bearing years now have unsafe levels of mercury in their blood. (www.environmentalactionpac.org) Human systemic effects include birth defects, muscle weakness, anorexia, tinnitus, liver changes. Questionable carcinogen with experimental tumorigenic data. (In layman's terms, it can potentially cause cancer.) (Hazardous Chemicals Desk Reference, 4th Edition, , Lewis.)

In case you don't like reading, here's a cute little graphic.

Agree with klibrary. (We may be past the election, but that doesn't put us past the issue)
Reasons we are given for attacking Iraq:

• Weapons of Mass Destruction
  Yea....well they've now admitted there are none, something the inspectors told us BEFORE we went in there.
  
• They attacked us
  I beg to differ. Al Quada attacked us. Osama Bin Laden attacked us. Saddam Hussien WAS NOT PART OF 9-11
  
• The people were being abused etc.
  I don't disagree, but we are not liberators! Tons of countries abuse their people, if we attacked them all we'd probably all be dead by now.
  

Those are the only reason they gave us that I can remember. Give me more and I'll tell you what i think of them.

I think either way, there's a great risk for danger or attack. I think ultimately it's inevitable.

You make a good point, Tigerwoman. We always talk about defending our freedom and "getting them back."

We really need to ask why we were attacked. What can we do to prevent a future attack?

I don't believe sticking our hands into other countries' business and shooting up all of their people will help. Yes, it is good that we have Saddam Hussein. But he did not attack us! Neither did the country of Iraq. I do not feel safe with Bush in office. I fear that he will just keep this war going, and possibly invade other countries.

I support the troops, just not the war. Peace is patriotic!

quote:

---

we would not be safe with kerry in office

---

And we're protected with Bush in office? He has no clue what his priorities are, except winning the election.

Hmmmm. I can't say if Kerry makes your country safe. In fact, I don't believe he will. A nation like the USA, which thinks it's the world police will always be in danger.

The only thing I know for sure is that Bush left the Kyoto protocoll and he doesn't want to admit that there's global warming.
With his politics he destroys so much of our environment, you can't imagine that!

I don't know if Kerry will be a good president. But I know: everything's better than Bush.

As for 9.11: I think what we really have to ask ourselves is: WHY was the USA attacked?
It's pretty obvious to me: on one side of the earth, people live like kings. They have far too much of everything and still want more. On the other side, children are dieing, starving, people die of diseases of which in developed countries not even small children die.

It's such a huge gap between poor and rich that it's really no surprise that things like 9.11 happen!
So I guess we should better try to solve some major world probblems instead of spending billions on wars.

klibrary is right, iraq didn't attack us.

but the point is, what could anyone have expected a president to do in a time like 9/11? there was a major crisis, we were attacked, the greatest attack in history on the nation. realistically, most people whether it was bush or not, would've gone to war. you can't just sit back and say "oh well we were attacked, lets get through this together." nothing is that simple. desperate times call for desperate measures.

Iraq did not attack us.