lol

i almost wanted to say, good point CALI...until i read more than the first sentence


Mim's....he does raise one interesting point. Mccain on a global scale....compared to Obama on a global scale. Fuck dude, Obama drew 200000 people in GERMANY....thats fucking insane

He is way way way way way better diplomat than Mccain could ever be.

But what do you think?

__________________

Yeah, I was starting to think CALI was going to say something legit, but he managed to drive himself into the ground.

I'm not sure who would be a better diplomat. Neither one of them has had to convince foreign leaders to do anything yet. Obama seems to be more popular in foreign countries, but that doesn't necessarily translate to be being a better diplomat. He could be, though.

Like I said, the main reason I'm voting McCain is because he won't raise taxes. The debate about who's going to be a better diplomat isn't one I'm very interested in because I don't really feel very strongly one way or another.

We aren't on the best of terms with the UN right now because Bush is incompetent, but that doesn't mean their frustration will still hold when McCain or Obama get elected. I couldn't tell you though, I'm not very well read on our relationships with foreign countries, or who has the better foreign policies.

we would'nt need such a great diplomat if our presidents would stop picking fights with everyone.even the u.n don't agree with us nomore.mccain will piss everyone off and start world war three if he don't die of old age first

__________________

U almost had a correct statement

you just should have said, we need a great diplomat more than ever, becuase obviously the old way of doing things isn't working anymore. Being a bully to other nations, and tryin to push people around is only making other countries more pissed off @ us. Making us isolated on the global stage more and more. Obama on the other hand can fix this.

__________________

i don't thinkanyone can fix it but at least obama will try.

__________________

Well, how can you vote for someone on only one issue? N why not look @ the whole picture here?

Being a great diplomat, and being favorable in other powerful coutnries is just as important as what someone can do about taxes.

__________________

I'm not voting for McCain solely because of his tax policies. That's just the one I feel the most strongly about. I also agree with McCain on some smaller stuff, but the taxes are the biggest one for me.

I don't believe being a great diplomat is just as important as keeping our economy capitalistic. You may believe that, but I don't.

what i find to be so fuckin funny is how people tried to play that shit back @ obama when he said 'he'd be willing to talk to the Iranian leaders'

people like, WTF...YOU A TERRIOST, YOU MUST BE DOING SOMETHING WRONG


Its like, wtf....is every rich ass fuckin politican a fuckin 12 yr old? Grow the fuck up and talk face to face. Get the shit resolved. Obama's on the right path, that talkin things out and facing the issue is better than ignoring it

__________________

to each there own, and i can respect that

good chat.

__________________

i see your point on taxes, and it is a very good point if u fully trust ur candidate... but with any presidential candidate, i never fully Believe them when they say "no new taxes".... especially since McCain has said "no new taxes" than later backed away wen asked about if he would raise social security taxes (basically saying that there is no option he has dismissed for it), than said he wouldnt fully commit to the tax question but that he feels there is no situation where he would accept a tax increase, and now hes finally back to his Promise of no new taxes as the convention rolls around....

im not saying he's lying but Tax increase/decrease talk from candidates is usually one of the most unreliable platforms to follow, specifically when they vow to not increase taxes or to even give tax cuts... it just never lives up to the full potential and promise even if they try to say it does... there are too many situations that may arise that will almost cause them to shift.... or they might just be telling the american people wat they want to hear in the first place

and dude, Pinky, im not saying it was his fault that we went into Iraq, im not even Just referring to the initial entry into Iraq... im talking about Everything... im simply stating the fact that he agreed with every issue or legislation the president wanted passed over 90% of the time once Bush took office.... which would imply that he wouldve put the country into a very similar hole if he had been president himself for those 8 years....

and no everyone didnt agree on an attack ON Iraq, maybe on attacking someone, but not specifically Iraq.... i remember being, i think, 11 years old when september 11th happening, and i wanted to attack the people who did it, too.... and from watching the news updates then i figured the Iraqis were Those people.... not until i was 13 did i wise up to the fact that Bin Laden was Not from Iraq, but was an Afghan terrorist..... it wasnt a push back.. it was like a domino, "afghanistan" hits us, we hit iraq.... wheres the logic in that...

__________________
Cash Money Mill eon air

Fucka Katrina Gustav

[QUOTE=Mannie Fresh]i see your point on taxes, and it is a very good point if u fully trust ur candidate... but with any presidential candidate, i never fully Believe them when they say "no new taxes".... especially since McCain has said "no new taxes" than later backed away wen asked about if he would raise social security taxes (basically saying that there is no option he has dismissed for it), than said he wouldnt fully commit to the tax question but that he feels there is no situation where he would accept a tax increase, and now hes finally back to his Promise of no new taxes as the convention rolls around....

im not saying he's lying but Tax increase/decrease talk from candidates is usually one of the most unreliable platforms to follow, specifically when they vow to not increase taxes or to even give tax cuts... it just never lives up to the full potential and promise even if they try to say it does... there are too many situations that may arise that will almost cause them to shift.... or they might just be telling the american people wat they want to hear in the first place

and dude, Pinky, im not saying it was his fault that we went into Iraq, im not even Just referring to the initial entry into Iraq... im talking about Everything... im simply stating the fact that he agreed with every issue or legislation the president wanted passed over 90% of the time once Bush took office.... which would imply that he wouldve put the country into a very similar hole if he had been president himself for those 8 years....

and no everyone didnt agree on an attack ON Iraq, maybe on attacking someone, but not specifically Iraq.... i remember being, i think, 11 years old when september 11th happening, and i wanted to attack the people who did it, too.... and from watching the news updates then i figured the Iraqis were Those people.... not until i was 13 did i wise up to the fact that Bin Laden was Not from Iraq, but was an Afghan terrorist..... it wasnt a push back.. it was like a domino, "afghanistan" hits us, we hit iraq.... wheres the logic in that...[/QUOTE]


lol....bro. We went to Afghanstan...and almost a year later, than we decided to invade Iraq

our 'push back' was us goin to Afghanstan....we were naive about the situation and told lies to go to war with Iraq.

It obviously worked like a domino effect, for the people who wanted to go to war in Iraq, Karl Rove and Cheney

i think people put alot of blame on Bush, and over look Cheney...that dudes one evil mother fucker.

__________________

oh i know we went to afghanistan, too, but it was/is very much a US vs Iraq war... if 9/11 did not happen then the Iraq War would not have happen.... and thats not what everyone wanted... and almost as a direct consequence we started having Iran problems and even Korean issues, and now there's a whole dark shadow cast over the US and an even bigger Target on our heads...

no one blames bush or mccain or cheney for entering Afghanistan in this "push-back"... the concern was the domino effect it had on attacking Iraq, and getting involved in a way bigger mess, and during this mess losing sight of the actual terrorists..

__________________
Cash Money Mill eon air

Fucka Katrina Gustav

well...for one, you can't focus anything on 'terriosts'

terriosom in general is an ideology. N unless you can insitutite martial law, you can't get ride of an idea.

So trying to attack/defend/defeat 'terrisom' is a simple 'scare' tactic devised by goveremnt officals to make us continue to fear something that isn't always there.

Its the same concept as any type of thing that can kill us. A car, for example, is extremely dangerous...but we aren't afarid of it becuase we have no reason to be afaird. But, many people are killed each year by car's that hit pedestrians.

Same thing can be applied to terriosm, its always there, obviously people want to attack and hurt other people. But, its not like every day of every week people are like, LETS STRIKE!!!

Death is apart of human life, n we've only made terriosm recuritment easier for terriosts by publicing the fucking shit out of it.


N i'm pretty sure that the Iraq War was what alot of people wanted, considering that signs up for the Army were pretty fucking high. People wanted to prove a point, not to fuck with America, unfourtnely, when you go into another person's home country...and try to fight somethign thats unfightable, than destory there homeland. Your going to loose that war. Period.

__________________

hah, i think u sort of ran with my "lost sight of the terrorists" comment and took it out of context... i obviously am referring to one group of terrorists in Afghanistan, not to just the ideology of terrorism, and applying that to all terrorists... and of course i understand that its hard to "kill" these groups because there will always be someone to replace them and to keep the movement going... i was simply making the point that we stopped focusing our attack on the people who were the Real threat because they Actually attacked us, but instead aimed our attack at a country that did not attack us but was believed to have nuclear weapons.... your whole concept of "you cant focus on terrorists" and "scare tactics" is a little too conspiracy theory to me.... im saying that we proved our message to the wrong people

and yea military signups were up... but thats because of the Terrorist Attack, not because of the Iraq "threat"..... and because the average American was almost brainwashed into thinking that Iraq was our actual enemy of more terrorism. Now that was the scare tactic, because they werent a real threat.... trying to attack afghanistan was not a scare tactic, per se, because they attempted to kill thousands of innocent people and the most important people in Washington...

sign ups did not increase to fight Iraqis, they were increased to fight "terrorists", which the government attempted to basically label the Iraqis as.... many people in Washington were smarter, and many more Should've been smarter.... Obama opposed the Iraq War from the start but now realizes that since we are already there we cant simply pull out all of a sudden... that would be more irresponsible than going there in the first place on false grounds

and btw, the thing about cars... there is actually a small likelihood that people will actually begin to be innately scared of cars and guns, just as many are innately scared of spiders and other deadly animals/foods/insects.... this has nothing to do with wat you're talking about, but i read a psych report basically discussing the possibility... its interesting to think about... babies are way more likely to be scared of a spider when they first see one than when they first see a dog or cat, another human, or even a gun....even tho the latter are obviously much bigger imposing figures or provide more danger... and this has to do with that classic discussion of survival of the fittest, and the survival instinct, and blah blah blah, moral of the story is that things like guns and cars havent been long enough to pass this instinct along (i never actually read anything about the possible genetic connection) but they believe soon enough theres going to be these innate phobias of guns and cars... just like there are phobias of heights, animals, and all the other dangers of the world... just thought it would be interesting

__________________
Cash Money Mill eon air

Fucka Katrina Gustav

I think we can all agree Rudy would be the best battle rapper of all time. He was throwing haymakers all night tonight. What a G.