Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kerry’s hypocrisy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Most of the weapons you cited are high end weapons there is some debate as to whether or not we need more low end capability.
    What can make a nigga wanna fight a whole night club/Figure that he ought to maybe be a pimp simply 'cause he don't like love/What can make a nigga wanna achy, break all rules/In a book when it took a lot to get you hooked up to this volume/
    What can make a nigga wanna loose all faith in/Anything that he can't feel through his chest wit sensation

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Kerry’s hypocrisy

      Originally posted by jimmytrick
      Kerry’s hypocrisy

      WASHINGTON (AP) - John Kerry, the Democratic presidential nominee-in-waiting, challenged the Bush administration Saturday to reimburse the families of U.S. troops "who had to buy the body armor" needed for protection in Iraq.
      "If I am president, I will be prepared to use military force to protect our security, our people and our vital interests," the Massachusetts senator said in the Democrats' weekly radio address.
      "But I will never send our troops into harm's way without enough firepower and support."


      This is the same man who voted against almost every significant weapons system proposed over the last thirty years.
      See if I was going to troll about this I would have pointed out his vote on the $87 billion spending bill for Iraq that had funding for this very equipment.
      I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
      For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Re: Kerry’s hypocrisy

        Originally posted by DinoDoc
        See if I was going to troll about this I would have pointed out his vote on the $87 billion spending bill for Iraq that had funding for this very equipment.
        Did it? If that is, he's truly dumb.
        In Soviet Russia, Fake borises YOU.

        Comment


        • #19
          Many of the weapons systems that Kerry voted against are cash cows whose existence would not positively effect the US's ability to conduct the type of combat operation currently being undertaken.
          "Remember, there's good stuff in American culture, too. It's just that by "good stuff" we mean "attacking the French," and Germany's been doing that for ages now, so, well, where does that leave us?" - Elok

          Comment


          • #20
            Such as the Stealth Bomber? The F-15?

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Re: Re: Kerry’s hypocrisy

              Originally posted by Oncle Boris


              Did it? If that is, he's truly dumb.
              Kerry likes having it both ways on any issue.
              I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
              For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Kerry’s hypocrisy

                Originally posted by DinoDoc
                Kerry likes having it both ways on any issue.
                Well, if these funds were really meant to 'refund body armours', then it was a silly move from him.

                However, it still may be true that he would refund the families with a separate program.
                In Soviet Russia, Fake borises YOU.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by skywalker
                  Such as the Stealth Bomber? The F-15?
                  Stealth aircraft is militarily insignificant. Do they really need them to drop their fragmentation bombs?
                  In Soviet Russia, Fake borises YOU.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Stealth planes were a critical component of the first Iraq war. They are not "insignificant".

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Oncle Boris


                      Stealth aircraft is militarily insignificant. Do they really need them to drop their fragmentation bombs?
                      So that goes to the point, if you are taking the stance that military technology is insignificant, then you must be either uneducated or intellectually dishonest, I suspect the latter, but in any case I will not such as you frame this or any other debate. It would be pointless.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Kerry's a worldview on America is that America is the problem not the solution. He consistently takes the side of Communist régimes and opposes all forms of resistance to communism. He was (and still is) an advocate of the North Vietnamese and the Sandinistas. During the Cold War he opposed every weapon system that would give American the advantage over our Communist opponent.

                        When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, Kerry was against removing him. Kerry was opposed to even protecting Saudi Arabia. Kerry saw no American interests in keeping the world's oil supply out the hands of a fascist madman.

                        When Kerry's campaign was in dire straits just prior to the Iowa caucuses, Kerry called in a number of liberal media folks and explained to them that had he been president we would have never gone to war against Saddam Hussein. Let us repeat that. He said, "Never." He did not say that he would've gone with French support.

                        Kerry has been among Israel's harshest critics to audiences other then Jews to whom he denies ever having criticized Israel.

                        If you like a pro Communist, anti-American anti-Israeli president, and Kerry is your man.
                        http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=en

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Kerry’s hypocrisy

                          Originally posted by Oncle Boris
                          Well, if these funds were really meant to 'refund body armours', then it was a silly move from him.

                          However, it still may be true that he would refund the families with a separate program.
                          Voting against funding the very thing you are complaining about not being funded is an intellectually consistent position to you?
                          I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
                          For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Ned
                            Kerry's a worldview on America is that America is the problem not the solution. He consistently takes the side of Communist régimes and opposes all forms of resistance to communism. He was (and still is) an advocate of the North Vietnamese and the Sandinistas. During the Cold War he opposed every weapon system that would give American the advantage over our Communist opponent.

                            When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, Kerry was against removing him. Kerry was opposed to even protecting Saudi Arabia. Kerry saw no American interests in keeping the world's oil supply out the hands of a fascist madman.

                            When Kerry's campaign was in dire straits just prior to the Iowa caucuses, Kerry called in a number of liberal media folks and explained to them that had he been president we would have never gone to war against Saddam Hussein. Let us repeat that. He said, "Never." He did not say that he would've gone with French support.

                            Kerry has been among Israel's harshest critics to audiences other then Jews to whom he denies ever having criticized Israel.

                            If you like a pro Communist, anti-American anti-Israeli president, and Kerry is your man.
                            1. Right now, in the U.S. press there is article after article pointing to the facts that Saudi Arabia is not much of an ally. Not a democracy. The 9/11 bombers were mainly Saudi Arabian. It makes more since to sponsor a regime change to the Arabic country with ties to 9/11. Yet we did not.

                            2. What should it matter to the average U.S. citizen if Kerry is pro or anti israel. I don't see any benefits from being pro israel although there is a benefit to being fair to both parties which we don't seem to be. When you are fair to both parties then you have credibility we don't have it. The question should be can Kerry get us some credibility as being a fair arbitrator between both parties or can he at least do a better job than President Bush. I find it troubling when the rhetoric from washington comes back everytime a Israel conducts an attack, builds a wall, and etc, the administration says "we are troubled" or "deeply concerned" by the recent events on the other side. The Palestinians are condemned for every suicide bomber, for every act berated and punished. It makes me wonder who's the hypocrite.

                            3. I doubt Kerry is pro communist. His wife is a big time capitalist. Just because he does not see communism as inherently evil does not make him pro communist.

                            4. As of today, there are no weapons of mass destruction the american people were promised. That leads me to believe that as of today, Kerry would have been right not to go to war with Iraq.

                            5. The U.S. has a technological advantage that is years ahead of the Iraqi's. At a certain point the effectiveness per dollar goes down. Why would you need the most expensive stealth aircraft to do X amount damage when a cheaper aircraft could get the same results and still come home safe.
                            What can make a nigga wanna fight a whole night club/Figure that he ought to maybe be a pimp simply 'cause he don't like love/What can make a nigga wanna achy, break all rules/In a book when it took a lot to get you hooked up to this volume/
                            What can make a nigga wanna loose all faith in/Anything that he can't feel through his chest wit sensation

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Admiral
                              Many of the weapons systems that Kerry voted against are cash cows whose existence would not positively effect the US's ability to conduct the type of combat operation currently being undertaken.
                              You mean, like the Abrams and the Bradley?
                              No, I did not steal that from somebody on Something Awful.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                He consistently takes the side of Communist régimes and opposes all forms of resistance to communism.
                                Ned, having problems getting over the Cold War?
                                meet the new boss, same as the old boss

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X