John Kerry: Piece of Shat..or Future Presidential Material

Ah, okay my mistake then. Thought your were set out to get me.

Well, we can't ever agree on this, that's for sure. I will never support a war, no matter what the reason are. I don't know how I would react to an attack similuar to the one 11/9 because it will never happened here. We have never hurt anyone in the middleeast, so we are not targets to terror. The US has attacked middle east country's and east countrys several times, and therefor are a target. What I don't understand why Americans say "Why do they hate us, and so on" Well, that was just answered above. The islamic/muslim religion as an old and primitive way of thinking, and it's well alive in the middle east. We have accepted it in most country's in Europe and we live side by side with them. The US does appereantly not know the religion very well, since they don't understand why they are hated by the islamic and muslim people. Not all of cause.

How can you ever come to think that arrogance is a good thing? Arrogance is selfish, primitive and unlogical. Arrogance is a sign of something/someone thinking itself better than others. And again, the US is not better than anyone else.

 

This actually reasonates a lot of truth...It's hard to make head or tail out of where he stands on economic, national security and social issues. Friends and foes alike can find in his 19 years and over 6,500 votes whatever they are looking for.....His bold words and show-horse style suggest fresh ideas but his lack of follow-through suggests political caution. His propensity to shift positions on many pivitol issues can either be interpreted as exibiting capacities for growth or just simply....lacking core convictions.

Undoubtedly, Bush can't wait to unleash his GOP hit team on this guy....They made Al Gore look like a Massachusetts liberal. Can you imagine what they will do with a real Massachusetts liberal....Most democrats will vote for him because they believe he is a fisty veteran (with a lucky initials) who has the best chance to beat Bush...more so than because they have a good understanding of what he stood for....

 

A kid? I'm 18 and I'm considered and adult in Denmark, I know it's 21 in the US. But it's not here.

 

Jonas.....

I will never support a war, no matter what the reason are"

This statement is so assinine that it needs no comment. You however can still be saved Jonas....stop listening to what your programmers are feeding you as the unvarnished truth and think for yourself. Facts will always come back to haunt you if you are aware of them.......so let's talk about some facts......shall we ?

"The US has attacked middle east country's and east countrys several times"

Prior to 9/11......please name the examples you mentioned.....Kuwait in 1991, the hostage rescue attempt in 1980 and the Libyan bombing in 1986 do not count for obvious reasons......show where the US has attacked first and without provocation. You cannot. I can list 20 years of Islamic attacks against the US with little or no response until now.

"Arrogance is a sign of something/someone thinking itself better than others. And again, the US is not better than anyone else"

Well.......we can open the borders up to the world and prove you wrong......that would take about 2 weeks I figure for the immigration flood to start. And believe me.......Denmark will not have to worry. In order to be a good leftist citizen you must not let yourself think you are better than someone else......gawd forbid......heh.......

You are right Tifosi...he's a child.....so he can be saved and forgiven...it's the adults that think like that who cannot.

 

Jonas---

But you see, Jonas, "we are Americans".

We are a nation still very much in mourning since 9/11...The fact that you are not American is the reason we take offense at your voice of insensitivity and overt criticism.


Tom,

 

I have to ask! Saved from what?

The American way isn't always the right way you know! I live in a country were the gouvornmen is democratic. It works absolutely fine, as an example, it's impossible to be homeless, unless you have chosen to be. In America, with it's republic gouverment, you have millions of homeless people. I know this is a sidestep. But I think a democrat will be good for you country. Again I ask, saved from what?

 

I am still waiting for your list of situations where you claimed that America has attacked Middle Eastern countries....and a rebuttal on the other point as well.

You have to back up your claims in the real world kid.

Saved from yourself.

 

Shall I mention your retrieval from Vietnam when it got to hot and dropped all the remaing bombs in Laos. What about Vietnam itself. Irak 2 times, Korea, North Korea and Germany (all though not middleeast/eastern) Saved from myself? Hmmm.. I think not.

 

I am still waiting Jonas.......what Middle Eastern countries did the US attack firstly and without provocation to create all this deep and wide spread Islamic resentment that has apparently caused all the hatred against the US to culminate in 9/11.

If you have trouble with geography....and judging by your answer it seems that you are.....you may want to try using a map first......if you don't understand this basic and simple question you can try bablefish for a translation.

You said it....now prove it.....remember "facts"...they'll get you everytime.

I am a Canadian BTW....not that being an American is something I'd like be ashamed to be.

 

What do you mean? I just gave you a list of countries you attacked without them doing anything to you. When I mean provoked I don't mean when the US feel provoked because they don't like the dictator and so on. I talk about countrys you have attacked without them attacking you.

 

Tifosi,

I take a fair bit of exeption to your misinformation here. I was born in the UK, and your facts are simply wrong. If you are going to make an argument with complete misinformation, it lends doubt to your entire position.

What happened after Hitler took most of Western Europe, was the Allied Expeditionary Force was pulled out at Dunkirk. Shortly thereafter the battle of Britian started. The Luftwaffe had 3 times the number of planes as the British RAF. At this point the USA was not in the war. The germans began bombing RAF airfields, but the RAF planes started to use highways, small civilian airfields and any space they could to launch attacks. The germans goal was to take Britain before the USA got into the war. The RAF not only held off the Luftwaffe, but was beating them back. The Luftwaffe moved their attacks to London, hoping the RAF would be lured into a fight for England. That did not happen. London took severe collateral damage, but the RAF spread out their forces and repaired RAF airfields. With their development and implementation of Radar along the coast, they were able to detect, intercept and nullify German air invasions before they took place. This was further helped by their cracking of the secret german code. By the fall of 1940, the Battle of Britain was over, and the Germans had given up on taking the UK. They were moving forces to the Eastern front with Russia for Operation Barbarossa, and at that point knew that the USA was coming into the war, and would soon be a force to reckon with on the Western front.

Who told you London was occupied with German troops? Are you aware of where London is? I suggest you take a few history classes and come back to the discussion! London was never occupied by the Germans.

There is no doubt the US was instrumental in winning WW2. Britian was the last and only Western european country to hold out against the Germans, and I think they deserve a whole boatload of credit for that. Russia also lost (depending on who'se estimates you believe) between 10 MILLION and 25 MILLION of it's countrymen in WW2, and triple that number of total KIA/WIA. It's pretty arrogant to think any one country was responsible for winning the war, and it discredits the 300,000 US toops, 320,000 Yugoslavian troops, and other who lost their lives fighting alongside soldiers of varying nationalities.




In regards to the topic at hand, Jonas, what you must understand is that the USA does what is best for us, just like every country does what is best for itself. The reason Denmark is not "hated" is because what Denmark does doesn't have much of an impact on world affairs. What the USA does anything, it is scrutinized to the n-th degree and critiqued by every armchair leader in the whole world. I am not fully in support of Bush either, but one of the major reasons other countries don't like him is that he does what is best for the USA first and foremost. You can argue that it's not in the worlds best interests, but the USA has traditionally been asked to help most other nations at one time or another, and it's a little tiring when we feel we help everyone in the world all the time, and then they turn around and flame us for doing what is best for ourselves and not doing what they want.

Let me ask you something - why SHOULD the USA do what Europe wants us to do? Do you really think the countries of Europe know better what is best for us than we know what is best for ourselves? That is part of our problem - we HATE being told what to do by people who seem to think they know more or are better than us, because we look around at our wealth and power and we say "how come we've done so well yet all these other folks think they know better than us how to behave as a country?". It's insulting - don't you see that?

I'm sure there are lots of things your country could do that would be better for your neighbors, but nobody flames you for not doing it simply because what Denmark does isn't a hot subject in world affairs. I mean no disrespect by that.

Regarding your comments on homelessness, I don't think many Americans would be in favor of government provided housing for all homeless. That's what they do in Denmark? So if I just decide not to work and get hooked on drugs, the government will give me a house? That's not the American way.

As for gun control, it is written into our constitution that Americans have a RIGHT to have guns. Not a priviledge, but a right. This is because the founders of our country believed that a population that was unarmed was easily controlled by an armed government. Furthermore, it would be a lot harder to invade the US when the average citizen is going to resist you every step of the way with their arms. In countries where guns are prohibited, the government has absolute control over protection. Americans maintain their own right to protect themselves, in addition to the government.

One last thing I will say about the USA... I've traveled to a lot of countries, and it's easy to criticize this one based on one or two factors like crime or homelessness or health care. The bottom line is no other country has come up with such a recipe for success as the USA has. Many of the things we don't provide for free (healthcare, housing) are because we don't want to travel down the path towards socialism. We are one of the very few truly multi-ethnic countries in the world. I wonder how many Latinos, Blacks, Asians and Arabs are living in Denmark? Its probably a VERY homogenous society. Much easier for everyone to get along and agree when you're all very much the same. The diversity of the USA gives us tremendous strength, but also causes some problems. But I don't think most Americans would trade places with other countries. I sure wouldn't.

 

What countries did we attack who did nothing to us???

Iraq refused to conform to their 1991 agreement to weapons inspections, the stated (in writing) result of which was military intervention.

Afghanistans leaders, the Taliban, provided a safe haven to Al Qaeda. We told them to have over Al Qaeda, and they refused. We told them we wanted them and if they protected them, we would come get them anyway. They said "come over and we'll fight you". We did, they lost. Besides doing nothing about Al Qaeda, what other option would you recommend in Afghanistan?

What other middle eastern countries did we invade????

 

Hey, I would rather have much lesser casualties and crime and have a government which controls us. I have no problem with that. Have you ever been to Denmark? I think (Don't know) it's one of the best places to live in the world, it's almost impossible to be poor and homeless. You have to choose it yourself. As for your drug statement. No, they will not give you a house. They will send you FREE to a rehab facility and afterwards, you will recieve wellfare and a proposal of flat's where you will be able to live for the amount of money you recieve. You will then be send to "aktivering" That means, they GIVE you a job, where you will have to prove yourself and get paid. Thats how we give homeless and drug-addicts second, third and forth chances. We have all those ethnic people living that you mention. We are offcause not as many as in the US givin' the size of our country.

 

What about the bombing in Laos when you ran from Vietnam. Laos is the most bombed country in the world. And they have never been effectively in war, and the only country which has ever bombed them is USA.

And refusing to confirm weapons is not a reason to start a war. That's absurd. (My opinion)

 

Jonas....

 

Unless this was a sarcastic comment or some huge typo, I think everyone on this board can safely ignore anything you have to say in the future. Please tell us where you learned history?

-R

 

Yes but not middle eastern.

 

This is off topic, it doesn't have anything to do with Tifosi's other posts. I for one , happen to enjoy tifosi's post's, Ferrari or non Ferrari. This is just were we have different opinions Robin

 

So? I said the reason why they hate the US in middleeasy and East is ... bla bla bla.. I have not said middleeast only at any time.

The US giving money to Israel is another good example.

 

Oh and point to be clear: Muslims do NOT all hate America in the MiddleEast/Islamic countries

The same cannot be said about Isreal. That said most context of in which I have heard Anti-American sentiments with muslims are almost always in regards to Isreal or Iraq.

 

Offcause they don't. I haven't at anytime said that all mulsims are against the US. And I'm not either. As said earlier, I would love to live in US. It's Bush I have a problem with. This thread has just turned historic, and that wasn't really the meaning.