Reasons why I am not voting for Kerry
-
DaveH wrote:
Thats not really what the report said. In fact, if you read the very first line of the Key Findings Summary you would see that the report said: (sorry, I gotta use cut-n-paste)."Saddam so dominated the Iraqi Regime that its strategic intent was his alone," He wanted to end sanctions while preserving the capability to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction (WMD) when sanctions were lifted."
Farther into the report it says:
"Saddam's primary goal from 1991 to 2003 was to have UN sanctions lifted, while maintaining the security of the Regime. He sought to balance the need to cooperate with the UN inspections â to gain support for lifting the sanctions â with his intention to preserve Iraq's intellectual capital for WMD with a minimum of foreign intrusiveness and loss of face."
DaveH talking here -> So he plays along with some inspections, and gets some of the sanctions lifted... which was the Oil for Food Program.
"which Saddam immediately saw could be corrupted to acquire foreign exchange both to further undermine sanctions and to provide the means to enhance dual-use infrastructure and potential WMD-related development."
Anyway, you get the general idea. The findings of the report have been manipulated by the left to suit their goals. If you read the report you can see what it really says. It's a very well written report, not sure how much I believe. http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/pdf/duelfer1_a.pdf
Soo....you are saying the sanctions were working...as long as we kept them on then the WMD's wouldn't be produced. I'm not saying he never intended to make/use WMD's, I fully believe he wanted to...but I think he wanted to wait until the heat was off him for a while, and 9/11 (even though not related to him and it happened w/o his involvement or support) but a lot of heat/tension on the middle east.
-
Oh, and I agree the Oil for Food program needed a serious revamping, there were a few loopholes for sure. I don't think they were big enough loopholes to fit a WMD through, but loopholes none-the-less
-
tjamz wrote:
Soo....you are saying the sanctions were working...as long as we kept them on then the WMD's wouldn't be produced.No, I just quoted the report. I interpret it to say that Sadom was walking a balance beam. He was trying to show the inspectors just enough to keep us off his back, while developing as much weapons material as he could get away with.
The more interesting quote is in my sig file, where Kerry basically says that just the fact that Sadom is a bad guy and is working towards WMD ("consistant grasp") is enough justification to disarm him. NOW he is saying that because wmd weren't found that the war was not justified... hmmm...
Which of these two positions do you think Kerry really believes? I sure don't know. I'd guess he actually believes the original statement.
-
Wasn't a soldier from the 3rd Infantry division just on the media under oath telling the world that his division just defused like 200 tons worth of explosives?
-
tjamz wrote:
Oh, and I agree the Oil for Food program needed a serious revamping, there were a few loopholes for sure. I don't think they were big enough loopholes to fit a WMD through, but loopholes none-the-less
Loopholes might be a bit of a understatement. You could fit the countries of France, China and Russia through the loopholes.
edit Ahhh, I feel a lot better now that Chuck is back
-
Kerry wants to ban guns and Hunting..FUCK HIM!
-
nvsgsx wrote:
Kerry wants to ban guns and Hunting..FUCK HIM!
Then what are you going to do? NOt vote at all If you dont vote you lose your oportunity to change this world thats why im voteing not for the presedent elction vote on laws when they come up you know what im talking about.
And yes I agree with you FUCK KERRY AND Fuck George W< The walking monkey> Its Just like Jesse Ventura Said ON a news report "These Guys Want you to go sign up for somthing That they didn't even sign up for, when it was their turn" jesse Ventura He should be presedent Have you seen his new look? He looks Like a 55 year old stoner now...LOL 
-
STiSchucky wrote:
Wasn't a soldier from the 3rd Infantry division just on the media under oath telling the world that his division just defused like 200 tons worth of explosives?
Yes, they removed 200 tons of "ammunition", when asked if it was the explosives that are thought missing, he said "I do not know" then the pentagon spokesperson said "we don't know". Its still up in the air AND the Kerry camp may have jumped to conclusions on this. Either way, when an AIEA seal is broken, the people that break the seal are required to report why it was broken, if something was removed, how much was removed, where it was moved, etc... Apparently that was not done as the AIEA and UN knew nothing about this. -
DaveH wrote:
Ahhh, I feel a lot better now that Chuck is back
You're just saying that cuz I promised you a cabinet position when I'm governor. -
nvsgsx wrote:
Kerry wants to ban guns and Hunting..FUCK HIM!
Again, POST YOUR SOURCE!!!!! Kerry is an avid hunter and fisherman, has several guns of his own. Field & Stream has stated that both candidates are good for the sportsman based on their research. Do some research of your own before posting crap you know nothing about. -
2k3WRXND wrote:
Actually you should reword your comment about Poland, considering that 65% of the special ops forces in the UN designed to combat terrorism are from Poland.
I still don't think of Poland as a fearsome army. They may very well have an excellent special ops team that works w/ the UN to combat terrorism, that doesn't mean that they are actually doing the grunt work. The could be doing things like compiling intelligence. I don't know, don't take what I am saying here as fact, I haven't researched it enough. It still doesn't change the fact that this is mostly a US war in Iraq. Great Britain is a significant player in the number of forces they put in, but they are still just (off the top of my head) like 10% of the forces in Iraq. Poland has a whopping 2500 soldiers there. That number alone should inspire "shock & awe" amongst Iraqi insurgents....afterall the insurgents only outnumber the Polish army like 10 to 1.... -
2k3WRXND wrote:
Don't matter - time and time again, general public may want Kerry if so, just seems to be they have a problem showing up and voting. People who stick to the issues and regard the issues, and in no offense, more upper class, have a higher percentage of presence in voting. Funny how that happens. Bush & Cheney in 04 -
Ummm...you might want to rethink that. ND has one of the lowest average household wages in the country, Second only to SD I believe...could be wrong, and yet we have the highest voter turnout per capita.You mention the polls, the only poll that matters is the one that happens on Nov 2. Too many variables for the current polls to be accurate. Honestly, I hope the election isn't close. If Bush wins I hope it is by a large margin, if Kerry wins I hope it is a wide margin as well. The thing that might make this interesting is that several states have talked about splitting their electoral votes based on the percent who voted for each candidate (if a state has 10 electoral votes and 60% voted candidate A and 40% voted candidate B the candidate A would get 6 electoral votes and B would get 4 votes.) I actually think this is a more fair system as each state would be better represented as to how the citizens of that state voted.
-
99slowGSX wrote:
Kerry still sucks................he is going to lose...damn right
-
"We don't believe in planners and deciders making the decisions on behalf of Americans."âGW Bush, Scranton, Pa., Sept. 6, 2000 he wasn't even president during that. you cant use that. god elections over in 4 full days...then one of us gets to hear an earfull from the nother
-
It was part of his campaign. I never said it happened when he was president, it just shows how incompetent he is when it comes to stringing together an intelligent sentence. The thing is, Kerry never said what you have him quoted as saying either...and he's not president now so I guess everything he has said can't be used against him either.
-
nvsgsx wrote:
Kerry wants to ban guns and Hunting..FUCK HIM!
Ok, I figured out your source....the NRA. Here, THIS should diisspell that rumor, thank you! (The link takes you to factcheck.org, the one the republicans seem so eager to send everyone to to check their facts._ -
More factcheck information about Kerry (some good, some bad):
http://factcheck.org/article286.html
http://factcheck.org/article284.html
http://factcheck.org/article278.html
http://factcheck.org/article264.html
http://factcheck.org/article272.html
anti-flip-flopping...things in context: http://factcheck.org/article269.html
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better đ
Register Login