bush to use nukes!

TincoSkin · Post by **TincoSkin** » Sun Apr 09, 2006 10:48 am

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... altop.html

i think hes try'n to start ww3 with the arab world.

Punu · Post by **Punu** » Sun Apr 09, 2006 11:30 am

whoa.

What is going on man!? Were all going dowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwn.

air_hog · Post by **air_hog** » Sun Apr 09, 2006 1:04 pm

TincoSkin · Post by **TincoSkin** » Sun Apr 09, 2006 1:51 pm

air_hog wrote:ROTFALMAO

???

Redskins Rule · Post by **Redskins Rule** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 10:29 am

TincoSkin wrote:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=C3HY5I431EHHRQFIQMGSFFWAVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2006/04/09/wbush09.xml&sSheet=/portal/2006/04/09/ixportaltop.html

i think hes try'n to start ww3 with the arab world.

Is this some kind of joke or something? Its gotta be a joke. There is no way this can be for real.

Justice Hog · Post by **Justice Hog** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 11:32 am

The Bush administration is planning to use nuclear weapons against Iran, to prevent it acquiring its own atomic warheads, claims an investigative writer with high-level Pentagon and intelligence contacts.

Okay, folks, ask yourselves this question. Do you really think that the Pentagon's "inner circle of security" would really allow this type of information to "leak" out? Absolutely not! This is garbage. This is sensationalism at its best.

Don't believe the hype, folks. I don't.

Although Iran claims that its nuclear programme is peaceful....

Quick, please, someone look up "oxymoron" in the dictionary!

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Tue Apr 11, 2006 1:24 pm

The Bush administration is planning to use nuclear weapons against Iran, to prevent it acquiring its own atomic warheads, claims an investigative writer with high-level Pentagon and intelligence contacts.

Okay, folks, ask yourselves this question. Do you really think that the Pentagon's "inner circle of security" would really allow this type of information to "leak" out? Absolutely not! This is garbage. This is sensationalism at its best.

Don't believe the hype, folks. I don't.

Actually, not that I believe the story is credible, this story could easily leak out. Say you're a Pentagon official and you hear this news. You think it is a terrible, terrible idea... so you tell your reporter friend. He blows up the story and all of a sudden the Bush administration has to scrap the idea... it happens ALL THE TIME.

Although Iran claims that its nuclear programme is peaceful....

Quick, please, someone look up "oxymoron" in the dictionary![/quote]

Yeah, the idea is that Iran wants to have a nuclear program so they can make nuclear power... yeah, okay.

skins#1fan · Post by **skins#1fan** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 3:07 am

you libs dont get it. America is fed up with these bogus stories that aren't true. The whole media hates Bush so bad that they will put anything on the front page to make him look bad. On that note I hope this dumb media keeps it up because it really helps the repubicans win more elections. The Democrats love to bash Bush about everything he does wrong but can someone tell me what there actual plan is step by step? Oh wait they dont have one. All they do is bash instead of comming up with there own ideas to help this country. Well its ok because America sees that and we proved it on election day.

....Liberalism is destroying our country. First they want us to take "in God we trust" of our dollar bills and coins. Second they want us to stop saying "Merry Christmas" and say happy holidays. Now they are trying to put a stop on saying "Easter". All of the things I just mentioned is absolute insane and most of America agrees!!!

Sir_Monk · Post by **Sir_Monk** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 8:34 am

..Liberalism is destroying our country. First they want us to take "in God we trust" of our dollar bills and coins. Second they want us to stop saying "Merry Christmas" and say happy holidays. Now they are trying to put a stop on saying "Easter". All of the things I just mentioned is absolute insane and most of America agrees!!!

Redskins Rule · Post by **Redskins Rule** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 9:56 am

skins#1fan wrote:you libs dont get it. America is fed up with these bogus stories that aren't true. The whole media hates Bush so bad that they will put anything on the front page to make him look bad. On that note I hope this dumb media keeps it up because it really helps the repubicans win more elections. The Democrats love to bash Bush about everything he does wrong but can someone tell me what there actual plan is step by step? Oh wait they dont have one. All they do is bash instead of comming up with there own ideas to help this country. Well its ok because America sees that and we proved it on election day. ....Liberalism is destroying our country. First they want us to take "in God we trust" of our dollar bills and coins. Second they want us to stop saying "Merry Christmas" and say happy holidays. Now they are trying to put a stop on saying "Easter". All of the things I just mentioned is absolute insane and most of America agrees!!!

For a second, but only for a second, I thought you were being serious! :oops:

nuskins · Post by **nuskins** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 2:45 pm

skins#1fan wrote: The Democrats love to bash Bush about everything he does wrong but can someone tell me what there actual plan is step by step? Oh wait they dont have one. All they do is bash instead of comming up with there own ideas to help this country. [/u]

Yeah...the current administrations step by step plan is really working out for us. :roll:

More like step by step deception on their part.

On a completely seperate subject: How can anyone in this country beleive that the steep uptrend in the price of oil/gas and record profits within the oil industry while former oil execs Bush/Cheney are in the White House is coincedence? Hardly :evil:

The only "step by step" plan the Bush admin has is manipulation of facts and perception. Oh, and BTW, I am sure the poor performance of Bush and his cronies will be reflected in the upcoming House and Senate elections all the way forward to 2008.

UK Skins Fan · Post by **UK Skins Fan** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 2:54 pm

I appreciate that this is off topic, but can anybody tell me why liberalism is an acknowledged political/social doctrine over this side of the pond (not supported by all, as election results show), but it seems to be an utterly detested word by many people in the States, at least anybody on this site that doesn't vote Democrat? I swear, I've seen more bile posted about liberals on this site than I have about fascists.

Just curious.

nuskins · Post by **nuskins** » Wed Apr 12, 2006 3:21 pm

UK Skins Fan wrote:I appreciate that this is off topic, but can anybody tell me why liberalism is an acknowledged political/social doctrine over this side of the pond (not supported by all, as election results show), but it seems to be an utterly detested word by many people in the States, at least anybody on this site that doesn't vote Democrat? I swear, I've seen more bile posted about liberals on this site than I have about fascists.

Just curious.

Unfortunately there has been an extreme "brain drain" across this land in reference to individualism and "free thought". In some respects the Terrorists inflicted far more harm in this country by incubating an enviroment where narrow mindedness and blind patriotism rule rather than with the actual physical tradgedy that occured on 9/11.

WE as a nation are to blame, just as much as the current administration is for the path we have walked down. Our status in the international community has never been worse, our own economic freedom is being sold to the lowest bidder with the outsourcing of production in industry that built this country. No longer is this nation a producer of commodities, we are only a consumer as our trade deficit reflects.

In my mind the truth lies in the fact that over the last 6 years we have been conditioned to be frightend. When people are scared they follow the herd, it is a basic survival instinct that this administration has predicated on and as a result of manipulation of an order that most cannot comprehend we have been led down this path by this administration. It has nothing to do with GOD, or gays, or abortion, or the pledge of allegiance.......it is about control.

Also note that this is the Redskins, whose fan base is primarly drawn from the very capitol which the conservatives have unequivocally held absolute power in every branch of our goverment for the last 6 years. The very nucleus of the "conservative movement". When I was 18 and registered Republican I thought the value of the party was small goverment and individual rights. Ironically this is more in line with today's Democratic party than the Republicans. Look at the size of our goverment today, it is the largest ever in history. Federal spening is completely unchecked, the gap between rich and poor has grown wider over the last 6 years than even during the Industrial Revolution of the late 19th century!

This is probably more than what was asked but I am a 31 yr old patriot who is dumbfounded on a daily basis with the decisons made 50 miles away from me in the capitol of this land.

Sorry for the rant..........The short answer.......watch Fox News channel.

TincoSkin · Post by **TincoSkin** » Thu Apr 13, 2006 5:04 pm

UK Skins Fan wrote:I appreciate that this is off topic, but can anybody tell me why liberalism is an acknowledged political/social doctrine over this side of the pond (not supported by all, as election results show), but it seems to be an utterly detested word by many people in the States, at least anybody on this site that doesn't vote Democrat? I swear, I've seen more bile posted about liberals on this site than I have about fascists.

Just curious.

in addition to what nuskins wrote;

liberalism is portrayed by republicans as too close to communism. i think this might be left over brain damage from the cold war, the fight against the reds. ive been in some good conversations on this site about communism. i have earlier stated that people were brain washed in the 50s and 60s to think that communism was the enemy. while in fact it was a nuclear USSR and fascism; communism was a red herring. i took some flack for it because i overlooked the fact that communism wasnt government control of production. now i understand it was a real threat. but now the same threat is coming from the other side.
neocons use liberalism as a sly way of calling someone a commie, or to be unpatriotic. playing on the old 50s view of our place in the world stage. calling liberals commies means they are painted as wanting to take control from the people. while in fact the neocons are absorbing all of the power these days. they are again using this "leftists are evil" in tandem with watch out for terror we need a strong leader, to gain independance of power. i see neocons as facists. they are projecting their own evil onto liberals and terrorists. now, dont think that i am siding with terrorists, im only saying that this campagin of fear that has been instituded is working to move the USA toward fascism.

the republican party used to be about small governement, states rights, and the constitution. now its about absolute power, surpressing ideas and other political parties, and war.

why dont other conservatives see whats broken in their party?

i for one am no longer a republican.. i am a libertarian and afraid of the fascist right. liberals are fine in my book in fact i am socially liberal. but if the government keeps growing we are all in trouble.

i just realized that was a rediculous tangent. sorry

Redskins Rule · Post by **Redskins Rule** » Fri Apr 14, 2006 10:58 pm

TincoSkin wrote:
UK Skins Fan wrote:I appreciate that this is off topic, but can anybody tell me why liberalism is an acknowledged political/social doctrine over this side of the pond (not supported by all, as election results show), but it seems to be an utterly detested word by many people in the States, at least anybody on this site that doesn't vote Democrat? I swear, I've seen more bile posted about liberals on this site than I have about fascists.

Just curious.

in addition to what nuskins wrote;

liberalism is portrayed by republicans as too close to communism. i think this might be left over brain damage from the cold war, the fight against the reds. ive been in some good conversations on this site about communism. i have earlier stated that people were brain washed in the 50s and 60s to think that communism was the enemy. while in fact it was a nuclear USSR and fascism; communism was a red herring. i took some flack for it because i overlooked the fact that communism wasnt government control of production. now i understand it was a real threat. but now the same threat is coming from the other side.
neocons use liberalism as a sly way of calling someone a commie, or to be unpatriotic. playing on the old 50s view of our place in the world stage. calling liberals commies means they are painted as wanting to take control from the people. while in fact the neocons are absorbing all of the power these days. they are again using this "leftists are evil" in tandem with watch out for terror we need a strong leader, to gain independance of power. i see neocons as facists. they are projecting their own evil onto liberals and terrorists. now, dont think that i am siding with terrorists, im only saying that this campagin of fear that has been instituded is working to move the USA toward fascism.

the republican party used to be about small governement, states rights, and the constitution. now its about absolute power, surpressing ideas and other political parties, and war.

why dont other conservatives see whats broken in their party?

i for one am no longer a republican.. i am a libertarian and afraid of the fascist right. liberals are fine in my book in fact i am socially liberal. but if the government keeps growing we are all in trouble.

i just realized that was a rediculous tangent. sorry

I must say, why are you apologizing? Are you okay? Dude! Don't apologize! bush is an idiot! Most people know that!!!...............By the way, I endorse your post 98% Just please don't apologize for saying your thing on Bush being an idiot! Most people, who have a brain, know that!

Tom C · Post by **Tom C** » Sat Apr 15, 2006 8:56 am

UK Skins Fan wrote:I appreciate that this is off topic, but can anybody tell me why liberalism is an acknowledged political/social doctrine over this side of the pond (not supported by all, as election results show), but it seems to be an utterly detested word by many people in the States, at least anybody on this site that doesn't vote Democrat? I swear, I've seen more bile posted about liberals on this site than I have about fascists.

Just curious.

The far right has been demonizing the word liberal in the US for a long time. They have turned the meaning of the word from a political philosophy to a label for tree-hugging, PC loving, sissies who want to control every aspect of your life using the government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_liberalism

Negative use of the term "liberal"
The negative use of the word "liberal" in American politics dates at least from the time of self-proclaimed American liberal President John F. Kennedy. In his speech accepting the Presidential nomination by the New York Liberal Party on September 14, 1960, Kennedy contested the claims of his "opponents" that "liberal" meant "someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar."[13].
John Lukacs, in "The Triumph and Collapse of Liberalism," observed a change in the political usage of the term "liberal" from the 1950s onward. Noting that in 1951, Senator Joseph McCarthy used "liberal" positively when condemning "a conspiracy of infamy so bleak that, when it is finally exposed, its principles shall be forever deserving of the maledictions of all liberal men," and that conservative leader Senator Robert A. Taft stated "he was not a conservative but "an old-fashioned liberal."[14], Lukacs also asserted that the word "liberal" "has become a Bad Word for millions of Americans."
The use of pejorative terms such as "bleeding-heart liberal", "knee-jerk liberal", "tax-and-spend liberal," and "limousine liberal," are a common political tactic in modern American politics. As an example, Republican political consultant Arthur J. Finkelstein was known to repeat the word "liberal" in negative television commercials as frequently as possible, e.g.: "That's liberal. That's Jack Reed. That's wrong. Call liberal Jack Reed and tell him his record on welfare is just too liberal for you."[15]. Many liberal contemporary politicians have tended to shy away from the "liberal" label, preferring terms such as "progressive" or "moderate."[16], [17]
Conservative columnist Ann Coulter made the case for using "liberal" as a slur in her book How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must) in which she likened liberalism to treason. The Conservative Book Service [18] sells a talking doll of Ann Coulter that says, "Liberals hate America". Conservative talk radio hosts Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity often use anti-liberal slogans; the latter titled a book Deliver Us from Evil: Defeating Terrorism, Despotism, and Liberalism. (See also Politicized issue, Propaganda).
Conservatives frequently make accusations of liberal elitism, implying that affluent, educated liberals are not in a position to decide what is best for Middle America. During the 1988 presidential election, then-Vice President George Bush accused Democrat Michael Dukakis of being a "Harvard boutique liberal"; during the 2004 presidential election, a television advertisement accused Democratic nominee John Kerry of being "another rich liberal elitist from Massachusetts who claims he's a man of the people." [19]

The word also has different meaning in different locations and times.

Classical liberalism (also called classic liberalism) is a political ideology that embraces individual rights, private property and a laissez-faire economy, a government that exists to protect the liberty of each individual from others, and a constitution that protects individual autonomy from governmental power.[1] It originated in the 17th and 18th centuries. As such, it is often seen as being the natural ideology of the industrial revolution and its subsequent capitalist system. Ideas such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of thought, self-responsibility, and free markets were first proposed by classical liberal thinkers before they were also adopted by thinkers of other ideologies. Classical liberals tend to focus on the individual, freedom, reason, justice and toleration.[2]. Classical liberal ideas inspired both the American Revolution and the French Revolution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism

TincoSkin · Post by **TincoSkin** » Sat Apr 15, 2006 3:35 pm

Redskins Rule wrote:
I must say, why are you apologizing? Are you okay? Dude! Don't apologize! bush is an idiot! Most people know that!!!...............By the way, I endorse your post 98% Just please don't apologize for saying your thing on Bush being an idiot! Most people, who have a brain, know that!

wasnt apoloogizing for what i said but rather for rambling... i wish i had been more concise in all

but thanks for endorsing me!

welch · Post by **welch** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 10:57 pm

April 17 issue of New Yorker has a spooky artlce by Seymour Hersch about the planning for military action against Iran, in case negotiation fails. Conclusion: many options, each bad.

AZHog · Post by **AZHog** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 9:21 am

welch wrote:April 17 issue of New Yorker has a spooky artlce by Seymour Hersch about the planning for military action against Iran, in case negotiation fails. Conclusion: many options, each bad.

Yes, all of Washington's "unnamed sources" are just so reliable...

This is just more democratic spin on a republican party supposedly trying to demolish the middle east. Absolute trash -- I wouldn't even use the New Yorker to wipe my a__.

Redskins Rule · Post by **Redskins Rule** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 9:23 am

If this plan really is for real, like I think it is, The only way I can see us fighting Iran, Iraq, and Al Queda in Afghanistan is to reinstate the draft. 11 Generals have retired since this Iraq War. They all say we should have invaded with a heck of a lot more troops then what we did. Of course, Rumsfield and Bush ignored that...IDIOTS...And now there is Iran....We'll have to reinstate the draft. There is no other way. And I sure as heck wouldn't support that. Would any of you?

TincoSkin · Post by **TincoSkin** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:30 pm

Redskins Rule wrote:If this plan really is for real, like I think it is, The only way I can see us fighting Iran, Iraq, and Al Queda in Afghanistan is to reinstate the draft. 11 Generals have retired since this Iraq War. They all say we should have invaded with a heck of a lot more troops then what we did. Of course, Rumsfield and Bush ignored that...IDIOTS...And now there is Iran....We'll have to reinstate the draft. There is no other way. And I sure as heck wouldn't support that. Would any of you?

call me a pussy but im only going into the military if there is a real war, with china or russia or luxemburg...

if there is a draft id burn my draft card and go straight to jail.. remember kids there is always a penalty for civil disobedience

welch · Post by **welch** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 6:26 pm

This is just more democratic spin on a republican party supposedly trying to demolish the middle east. Absolute trash -- I wouldn't even use the New Yorker to wipe my a__.

When did the entire world become nothing more than party politics?

TincoSkin · Post by **TincoSkin** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 10:45 pm

welch wrote:
This is just more democratic spin on a republican party supposedly trying to demolish the middle east. Absolute trash -- I wouldn't even use the New Yorker to wipe my a__.

When did the entire world become nothing more than party politics?

are you surprised?

welcome to reality

The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

bush to use nukes!

bush to use nukes!

Re: bush to use nukes!

I'll try and take this on...............