tjamz wrote:
Why would they want to rebuild? The same reason Grand Forks rebuilt after '97, because they can....and will....regardless of the fact that it will probably happen again

Because Grand Forks and the rest of the Red River Valley wouldn't be totally underwater. Not to mention the cities populations are a lot smaller than New Orleans. The river is NO comparison to the ocean as well, we are more able to protect our towns/cities up here from flooding of the river than they could protect New Orleans from the ocean/hurricanes. Not really fair to compare us who have just a small river to deal with to a huge metropolitan city built in a bowl at the oceans edge.

And I also agree that > just because your views happen to classify you as a republican or democrat etc doesnt mean you have to support your parties nomination...

I'm more Republican than anything but I in no way support much of what Bush has done.

98sh wrote:
What makes you think I'm a fan of John Kerry?

You're obviously not an "idiot" that voted for Bush... maybe you're more of a Nader kind of guy.

50stang wrote:
John Kerry rulezzz!!!!
Best line ever.... never gets old...
"I actually did vote for the $87 billion, before I voted against it." --Sen. John Kerry, on voting against a military funding bill for U.S. troops in Iraq

What makes you think I'm a fan of John Kerry?

tjamz wrote:
Why would they want to rebuild? The same reason Grand Forks rebuilt after '97, because they can....and will....regardless of the fact that it will probably happen again
Great so more FEMA money is spent towards cars instead of shelter and food.

fuck new orleans.

98sh wrote:
That wasn't the point. New Orleans, education, healthcare, and a million others. This country needs to focus more time and money at home. If we had a decent education system idiots like Bush would not be elected. The biggest problem with this country is that there's another idiot born every minute and no education system to vaccinate the disease.

John Kerry rulezzz!!!!
Best line ever.... never gets old...
"I actually did vote for the $87 billion, before I voted against it." --Sen. John Kerry, on voting against a military funding bill for U.S. troops in Iraq

StangerBanger96 wrote:
Why would we want to rebuild New Orleans? Just so it can flood again? How stupid is it to rebuilt a large city in the middle of a bowl that will NEVER be able to withstand a category 4/5 hurricane.?

Why would they want to rebuild? The same reason Grand Forks rebuilt after '97, because they can....and will....regardless of the fact that it will probably happen again

Stormwalker wrote:
whoever strikes first wins.

Or it could also be, whoever strikes first causes life on earth to cease. If ANYONE fired a nuke at the US or Russia than an automatic retaliation would occur i bet, then when the one country retaliated the other would launch in order to destroy the other, and a chain reaction could occur that would basically destroy everything on earth. Im pretty sure anyone who has or wants to obtain nuclear weapons knows that if they launched them at Russia/its major allies or USA/its major allies, the world would be over.

98sh wrote:
Last time I checked we couldn't drum up enough money to rebuild New Orleans.

Why would we want to rebuild New Orleans? Just so it can flood again? How stupid is it to rebuilt a large city in the middle of a bowl that will NEVER be able to withstand a category 4/5 hurricane. It's a waste of money, it'd probably cost less in the long run to rebuild elsewhere. If it happened once it's going to happen again, why press their luck and waste OUR money to rebuild a doomed city?

tjamz wrote:
to me it seems like a big political chess game:

Country 1 Imposes sanctions
Country 2 develops nuke program
country 1 threatens to attack country 2
country 2 offers to end nuke program in exchange for aid/food/etc...
country 1 accepts offer
country 2 happy
country 1 gets upset about something else and imposes sanctions again
country 2 starts nuke program again......

Very true, and it all seems sort of silly. However, what people tend to forget is how high the stakes are. When we talk about a country that hates us and has the potential to develop nuclear weapons, we must remember the rule of nuclear war - whoever strikes first wins.

MrScary wrote:
I can't wait til the Palistinians take back their land.
That will never happen. Isreal has one of the strongest militaries in the world for the size of the country. That and the fact that if they were ever in serious danger of losing their country to war the US would get even more involved, which in turn would lead to other countries getting involved (both for Isreal and whoever was attacking them).

Also doesn't it already seem like we kind of are in WW3 all the time now? There's fighting going on all over and everyone hates everyone, it's just not a full blown "lets round up all the jews and kill them and blitzkrieg(sp) across europe as well."

Country 1 Imposes sanctions
Country 2 develops nuke program
country 1 threatens to attack country 2
country 2 offers to end nuke program in exchange for aid/food/etc...
country 1 accepts offer
country 2 happy
country 1 gets upset about something else and imposes sanctions again
country 2 starts nuke program again......

tjamz wrote:
Damn conservatives, I hate when I agree with them. I don't really want to go to war with Iran, but not having a plan is a bad bad bad thing. Iran enriching uranium is of concern to me, I admittedly have not been following this too closely, but the last I'd heard is that they want to use nuclear (or nukular) power as a source of energy, I am ok with that, but the second they stop allowing inspectors into the facilities, the facilities should be taken out. Period.

DaveH wrote:

1. Iran's govt (and prob most citizens) basically vows to kill americans at all costs
2. Iran is enriching uranium
3. this should concern us all
4. we have war plans for most all countries that are hostile to us
5. if we didn't have a war plan for Iran, Bush should be impeached
6. the Bush hating press loves making a big deal out of knowing that we have war senarios for Iran
7. we should (and will) try negotiations, but Iran is basically flipping us the bird

Should we allow Iran to build a nuclear weapon? That is the question.

Damn conservatives, I hate when I agree with them. I don't really want to go to war with Iran, but not having a plan is a bad bad bad thing. Iran enriching uranium is of concern to me, I admittedly have not been following this too closely, but the last I'd heard is that they want to use nuclear (or nukular) power as a source of energy, I am ok with that, but the second they stop allowing inspectors into the facilities, the facilities should be taken out. Period.

MrScary wrote:
Isreal has been the center of all problems since way before WW2. The british owned the area for a while, which included Palistine, Syria, and Jordan. Then the muslims kicked them out but Britain kept Palistine, then after WW2 gave it to the Jews. And how many seperate wars came against "Isreal", at least 5 that I can think of. I can't wait til the Palistinians take back their land.

Also we the US are the capitalist terrorists. If it at all effects "free trade" or affects someone making money, then the US is there to stop it. And who put Saddam and most of the Dictatorships in the world into power because dictatorships make money for them, oh yea the US.

Edit: I don't know how good the history is so don't hold me to it.

You really took introductory college courses to heart, huh?

Also we the US are the capitalist terrorists. If it at all effects "free trade" or affects someone making money, then the US is there to stop it. And who put Saddam and most of the Dictatorships in the world into power because dictatorships make money for them, oh yea the US.

Edit: I don't know how good the history is so don't hold me to it.

99slowGSX wrote:
I guess the real question is " what will they do with those nuclear weapons?"

DaveH wrote:

1. Iran's govt (and prob most citizens) basically vows to kill americans at all costs
2. Iran is enriching uranium
3. this should concern us all
4. we have war plans for most all countries that are hostile to us
5. if we didn't have a war plan for Iran, Bush should be impeached
6. the Bush hating press loves making a big deal out of knowing that we have war senarios for Iran
7. we should (and will) try negotiations, but Iran is basically flipping us the bird

Should we allow Iran to build a nuclear weapon? That is the question.

I guess the real question is " what will they do with those nuclear weapons?" I have heard they do not want Isreal to exist anymore.........so should the US stay out of it? :icon_scratch:

Should we allow Iran to build a nuclear weapon? That is the question.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/04/12/060412175200.juvi43ic.html

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000100&sid=aduNTcpDuDd4&refer=germany