• Best of luck to the class of 2024 for their HSC exams. You got this!
    Let us know your thoughts on the HSC exams here
  • YOU can help the next generation of students in the community!
    Share your trial papers and notes on our Notes & Resources page
MedVision ad

Respect for terrorists. (9 Viewers)

Komaticom

Bored Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2004
Messages
589
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Uni Grad
2008
If bin Laden is removed... then people would see the War on Terror to be easy going in the future, so less money can be spent on the War and more on domestic issues like the economy and unemployment and stem cell research... Kerry is promising more resources to be allocated for homeland issues. So why vote for Bush? Why have a tough leader if the future is easy-going.
bin Laden's demise would shake the support structure of al-Qaeda and it's warriors.

People vote for Bush because they fear change. Let Bush finish what he started 3 years ago. But if Laden is dead, the misconception (according to high brass) that the War On Terror will be over soon, will shift favour to Kerry, whose policies focus on domestic issues. Why over-fund a war against an enemy who's half dead?
 
Joined
Aug 1, 2004
Messages
3,564
Location
Above you...look up
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
of course the bin laden tape is a set up by bush to convince the poor and dumb that osama fears him

even though 'f 9/11' was completely false and mike moore is a lier' according to the internet geeks that are too afraid to admit they were wrong, Bush always has, and always will be a cheater, lier and fucking scum of the earth
 

Rorix

Active Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2003
Messages
1,818
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Komaticom said:
If bin Laden is removed... then people would see the War on Terror to be easy going in the future,
No.
They wouldn't.
This is because, unlike you, they don't equate Osama Bin Laden = all terrorism.
 

Komaticom

Bored Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2004
Messages
589
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Uni Grad
2008
hiphophorray123 said:
of course the bin laden tape is a set up by bush to convince the poor and dumb that osama fears him
The only problem is that Bush administration hasn't argued that point yet, and the voters are too dumb to realise, or have better things to do (than analysing the political effect of his tape).

hiphophorray123 said:
Bush always has, and always will be a cheater, lier and fucking scum of the earth
He gave Australian soldiers something else to do apart from building see-saws in Timor Leste and hauling bodybags in Rwanda.
I don't like Bush all that much either.
 
Last edited:

Rorix

Active Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2003
Messages
1,818
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Please don't quote hiphop, I'm trying to avoid his stupidity by putting him on my ignore list:(.


EDIT: Unless he's quoting me that 'regulation' which prevents 'Vote or Die' from being partisan.
 

Komaticom

Bored Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2004
Messages
589
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Uni Grad
2008
Rorix said:
No.
They wouldn't.
This is because, unlike you, they don't equate Osama Bin Laden = all terrorism.
At the bottom of my post I state that:
Komaticom said:
if Laden is dead, the misconception (according to high brass) that the War On Terror will be over soon
I don't "equate Osama Bin Laden = all terrorism." But then again I'm not American. As far as Americans are concerned it is bin Laden who is the main threat. Sure, there are other, independent terror organisations, but bin Laden is the main threat. Americans won't "equate Osama Bin Laden = all terrorism", but sure as hell bin Laden is the biggest fish in the pond that has bitten the US in the ass. The other small fish haven't bitten yet, so Americans don't care about them.

We have to deal with the other fish, like jimah-islameh (however it's spelt), that have bitten Australia in the ass, hard, in Jakarta.
 
Last edited:

Rorix

Active Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2003
Messages
1,818
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Oh, you meant Al Queda (i can never spell this properly...dsadh WHATS A WEB SEARCH). I agree that if Al Queda was defeated then that may act favourably for Kerry (although I think Bush might get another term for doing the job) but that's impossible, and just killing Osama won't stop Al Queda.
 
Joined
Aug 1, 2004
Messages
3,564
Location
Above you...look up
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
interpretation of rorix's post: 'please don't quote hip hop as he proved me wrong now im crying like a baby so i put him on my ignore list so i can concentrate on better things like taking over the world with my unlimited knowledge and far more superior opinions'
 

Not-That-Bright

Andrew Quah
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Messages
12,176
Location
Sydney, Australia.
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
hiphophorray123 said:
interpretation of rorix's post: 'please don't quote hip hop as he proved me wrong now im crying like a baby so i put him on my ignore list so i can concentrate on better things like taking over the world with my unlimited knowledge and far more superior opinions'
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOOLOL

uAre A GeNiAnuS!
 

Komaticom

Bored Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2004
Messages
589
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Uni Grad
2008
hiphophorray123 said:
interpretation of rorix's post: 'please don't quote hip hop as he proved me wrong now im crying like a baby so i put him on my ignore list so i can concentrate on better things like taking over the world with my unlimited knowledge and far more superior opinions'
That's a rather harsh interpretation!

If bin Laden was killed before the election, Kerry's "failure to capture bin Laden" arguement flies out the window, but it's not going to backfire on him.

Both candidates have strong policies on the War, but a new Commander In Chief will not have the respect of his fellow commanders because he's new. Bush has been at it for years. Bush has the experience in leading his war. He has the respect of his soldiers,so it's not the time for a new Commander In Chief. It's not the time for change. Let Bush finish what he started.
 
Last edited:

Rorix

Active Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2003
Messages
1,818
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Komaticom said:
That's a rather harsh interpretation!
Argh! Stop quoting! :( Anyone that wants to set the record straight can go look at the Latham or Howard thread.

PS: hiphop, following me around with your 'e-beef' is kinda, yknow, lame.

Both candidates have strong policies on the War, but a new Commander In Chief will not have the respect of his fellow commanders because he's new. Bush has been at it for years. Bush has the experience in leading his war. He has the respect of his soldiers,so it's not the time for a new Commander In Chief. It's not the time for change. Let Bush finish what he started.
Republican Presidents always have the respect of the Armed Forces. Anyway, basically capturing/killing Osama would cause all those who are hostile about the war in Iraq to forgive Bush for that. Let's not forget Bush's astronomical poll ratings after 9/11.
 

Nick

foregone conclusion
Joined
Feb 8, 2003
Messages
972
Location
sydney
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Rorix said:
Republican Presidents always have the respect of the Armed Forces.
except when it comes to actually fighting in them

or sending waves of them to die so they can line their pockets
 

Rorix

Active Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2003
Messages
1,818
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Nick said:
except when it comes to actually fighting in them
Yeah, he flew planes instead.

HOW DARE HE DESERT THE GROUND TROOPS TO BE A FIGHTER PILOT.

or sending waves of them to die so they can line their pockets
By 'lining their pockets' you mean 'stopping the Oil for Food program which was lining America's (and various nations which opposed the war in Iraq) pockets and having all the money from Iraqi oil go toward the reconstruction of Iraq, a la Germany', right?
 

Nick

foregone conclusion
Joined
Feb 8, 2003
Messages
972
Location
sydney
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Rorix said:
Yeah, he flew planes instead.

HOW DARE HE DESERT THE GROUND TROOPS TO BE A FIGHTER PILOT.



By 'lining their pockets' you mean 'stopping the Oil for Food program which was lining America's (and various nations which opposed the war in Iraq) pockets and having all the money from Iraqi oil go toward the reconstruction of Iraq, a la Germany', right?
it's a shame he went AWOL or that argument might work

how about giving most of the government contracts in iraq to halliburton who then contract them out for a fraction of the price

points to scene in fahrenheit 911 where all the big business execs are rubbing their hands together in glee about all the money iraq is going to make them
 

Not-That-Bright

Andrew Quah
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Messages
12,176
Location
Sydney, Australia.
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
rofl wow he gave contracts to a company affiliated with the republican party... there's probably companies affiliated with the democrats who got a slice of the metaphorical cake too!

points to scene in fahrenheit 911 where all the big business execs are rubbing their hands together in glee about all the money iraq is going to make them
Points to scene where Micheal Moore Makes up a bunch of bs propaganda using 'fancy' camera tricks to trick dumb people like nick.
Points to Other Sceens "HEHEHEEH THERE ARE NONE!"
 

Nick

foregone conclusion
Joined
Feb 8, 2003
Messages
972
Location
sydney
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Not-That-Bright said:
Points to scene where Micheal Moore Makes up a bunch of bs propaganda using 'fancy' camera tricks to trick dumb people like nick.
Points to Other Sceens "HEHEHEEH THERE ARE NONE!"
yes he obviously staged that scene using actors to play greedy corporate leaders

what an idiot i am
 

Not-That-Bright

Andrew Quah
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Messages
12,176
Location
Sydney, Australia.
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
**remembers back to bowling for columbine** well he did pay a dog to pretend it had just shot someone.. i spose getting humans to play greedy corporate leaders wouldn't be that hard.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 9)

Top