Paul O'Neil

[SCO]

Re: Paul O'Neil

Found this link on Drudge that illustrates the way the radical left thinks. Good example of real arrogance and fear mongering.<br /> http://www.drudgereport.com/mattmo3.htm

 

[SCO]

Re: Paul O'Neil

I'm out of here for a while. So long.

 

[boatingfool]

Re: Paul O'Neil

Posted by Toad:<br /><br />

Not to say he didn't need to be dealt with, but the timing was all wrong...

And is there ever a good time to go to war???<br /><br />I think the answer for you is simple.<br /><br />Had the Dems had the balls to do what was needed to protect this country you would be sining praise.<br /><br />The only reason you are not is because it was the Republicans in office.<br /><br />Look at your front runner Howard Dean.<br /><br />Running on a campaign to pull out of Iraq and not give anymore money to the cause.<br /><br />That is truly a scary thought.<br /><br />Wether you agree with this war or not it doesnt change the fact that the decision was made and we are there.<br /><br />We can not cut and run. No matter how ugly it gets.<br /><br />Everyday Americans understand the importance of seeing this to the end wether they agreed with us going in or not.<br /><br />You may say that going into Iraq was not needed because it was not a serious national Security threat.<br /><br />Lets give you that point for a minute.<br /><br />If it wasnt , it is now.<br /><br />Pulling out of iraq would be the biggest national secureity risk we could face because the country would become a massive terrorist state.And we both agree it is the terrorists that are our immediate threat.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Paul O'Neil

SCO - good link. The funny thing, which they don't seem to understand, is that they represent the American culture that people like Bin Laden want to destroy and are the sort of people who would be killed under Saddam. They just don't get it. A big part of radical Islams motivation for attacking the US is what the consider our poisonous, blasphemous culture - which these entertainers represent. How ironic.

 

[KennyKenCan]

Re: Paul O'Neil

SCO & Ralph,<br /><br />This goes beyond just real arrogance and fear mongering.<br /><br />If the Republicans were to make statements like that, they would be criminally charged with assault!<br /><br />Same goes about the remark Hillary made about Ghandi!<br /><br />Had Bush made that remark, they would already have impeachment proceedings underway.<br /><br />But because Hillary said it, it's OK, and no one will prosecute.<br /><br />Why didn't the Republicans go after her?<br /><br />I'll tell ya...<br /><br />The Republicans have more important things to do, like RUN THE COUNTRY and KEEP YOU and I SAFE from terrorist's, something that the previous Administration, REFUSED TO DO !<br /><br />This is the direct result of misinformed people directing their own personal insecurity at the President and expecting a reaction.<br /><br />Well guess what, they are not going to get a reaction, because no one has to answer people who don't have any idea of what they are talking about!<br /><br />Did anyone truely understand what was said in the link provided by SCO?<br /><br />I did not hear any political agenda.<br /><br />All I heard was 'BUSH BASHING"!<br /><br />Guess thats all they got.<br /><br />Thats all they know.<br /><br />The Dems definitly don't have any political agenda or direction!<br /><br />Them Dems are like the "blind leading the blind through a disaster area, without a walking stick"!

 

[SCO]

Re: Paul O'Neil

Cant resist another post though I am going to swear off iboats for a while.<br />Agreed and noticed independently Ralph. Makes you realize how "Moonie" style behavior is part of the human condition, and how powerfull the ideological identification to a certain groups way of thinking can be. Like some twilight zone episode, they think of themselves as free thinkers and us as the zombies in exactly the same way that we view them. Difference is, from my perspective eeek eeek eeek eeek(violins from the movie Psycho), is that we conservatives dont have our perspectives based on a lot of ideological nonsense borne of the 60's. I for one bought into that crud at the time, but know better with subsequent years of thinking about the issues. Nothing beats the need for survival to clear you head of the cobwebs(eek eek eek eek...the other side will say the same thing). I think of them( attendies of the moveon presentation) as the ones dancing on the penthouse roof in the movie "Independance Day"(eek eek eek eek...the other side will say the same thing). Seems hopeless sometimes, but we've got to count on the good sense of our countrymen. We're winning this fight so far(for the minds and hearts).

 

[Elmer Fudge]

Re: Paul O'Neil

hi Carpy, take it easy,at that rate you're liable to get a heart attack <br />Even though i quite understand your opinions and analogies,with all due respect sir,and i hope no bubble gets burst here when i say that i would not mention any of the Bushes and General Patton in the same sentence. General Patton never ever waffled on anything in his life.

 

[Carphunter]

Re: Paul O'Neil

Elmer Fudge, my analogy was to drive home the point that we need leaders who are willing to take an unpopular stand, and who aren't afraid to kick a little tail when necessary. In that respect, George W and General Patton are similar.<br /><br /> I absolutely do not apologize for the comparison.<br /><br />As far as my heart, don't worry, i'm a strappin young fella. <br /><br />The Libs will always make my blood boil. <br /><br />If some of Plywoodys posts don't get you riled up, then you might wanna check your pulse.<br /><br />What I need to remember is that the majority of the Libs that post here are trolls, and should be treated accordingly..........Thanks for reminding me.

 

[Elmer Fudge]

Re: Paul O'Neil

Carpy, I'll agree to disagree with the comparision of the Bushes and General Patton.<br /><br />Plywoody's posts never gets me riled up,they reinforce my beliefs and vigilance in recognizing appeasement.The doctrine of Neville Chamberlain has never been a viable alternative in safe guarding a free domocratic soceity.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Paul O'Neil

Same goes about the remark Hillary made about Ghandi! Had Bush made that remark, they would already have impeachment proceedings underway.

You know it....

 

[oddjob]

Re: Paul O'Neil

Yep....

 

[JasonJ]

Re: Paul O'Neil

The issue of the physical presence of WMDs is irrelevant. The former Soviet Union has plenty of that stuff the can be obtained by someone who wants to do us harm. The Main reason it is good that we are doing what we are doing in Iraq is deterence. As the only Superpower left on this planet, it is our responsibility to keep the petty dictators in check. If we didn't go over and spank some butt, we would be open to all sorts of problems. It isn't increased security that is keeping the terrorists out, it is the knowledge that we will carpet bomb the snot out of everyone we think was involved. We can't slow-stroke with reach-around our way through this, we have to kick butt and ensure everyone knows we won't take any crap. <br /><br />I was in the military during the Clinton Administration and all I saw was an aging fleet of vehicles, less and less men, our installations falling to dis-repair. Pay increases were small, the average soldier with a family lived at or below the national poverty level. Not too fitting for those who are giving us our freedom. I was happy when Bush was elected. I was not very happy when gas prices went up, and I am not happy that fellow soldiers are dying. I am happy that butts are being kicked, and the world is once again seeing us as what we are, the strongest nation on earth. If a few have to die, thats fine. Now that Iraq has been liberated, we have to see it through to the end, despite the cost. That is the price of being the world superpower. What will we get in return? Its hard to say, but every country we have kicked the snot out of is now a major contributor to the worlds best interests.

 

[Toad2001]

Re: Paul O'Neil

Jason,<br />I'm glad you brought up high oil prices. I think you hit the nail on the head. The US absolutely needed to harness the 2nd largest oil reserves in the word if it hoped to continue to dominate the sector. Iraq has 115 Billion Barrels of it. Deals have already been made with the Saudis and Kuwait, but the Iraqis were loose cannons.<br />India and China are growing at astronomical rates. With a combined population of about 2.3 Billion people, whats going to happen when more and more of these people have cars, use gas for heating their homes, etc etc. Its hush hush right now, to avoid panic, and hysteria, but the reality is, oil and natural gas reserves are and will be in crisis mode sooner than you think. If there ever is a nuclear war, my guess is it won't be over anything but fossil fuels.

 

[SCO]

Re: Paul O'Neil

May well be true Toad. Unfortunately oil is not a luxury we can do without even with conservation. Harkens to the movie Road Warrior.

 

[Toad2001]

Re: Paul O'Neil

We could all buy sailboats...<br /><br />;-0

 

[Elmer Fudge]

Re: Paul O'Neil

During the arab oil embargo in the early 70's, it was reported not so long ago by the BBC that plans were drawn up by the United states and Great Britain to seize the oil fields of the middle east, how true was that story,i don't know, but it would've either caused all hell to come loose or solved a lot of todays problems,my take on that would be the latter.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Paul O'Neil

They probably did. In fact, it would have been irresponsible not to at least have plans. The problem was it likely would have meant a nuclear war with the Soviets.... They were might powerful in the 70s<br /><br />I've said this before. If Iraq was about oil, we would have simply kissed and made up with Saddam, lifted the sanctions, and allowed him to flood the world market driving the price down. We could then buy all we wanted cheap.

 

[JasonJ]

Re: Paul O'Neil

We could solve our near-term oil problems by tapping into our own resourcea, like the gulf of mexico and up north. While I am not for having ecological damage, the current techniques do not cause the damage the older techniques did. We need to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil. Near term, use what we got, far term is alternate energy. We have the technology, but the price is too high. Why is the price too high, because the industry is influenced by Big Oil. The oil industry has the world by the short curly ones, and we are powerless. Thankfully we buy large gas sucking vehicles which make the problem even worse. I am one of those offenders, with my full size V8 powered truck. If they came out with an alternate energy truck that could do what I need it to, and the price was within reason, I would do it. Otherwise, the current hybrid vehicles save you no money. Yeah, you pay less for gas, but you pay more for the price tag. Big picture, it saves the environment and cuts fossil fuel usage, but how many people look beyond their wallets? Maybe we are being smart. Use up the middle east oil, the we tap into our own reserves and become exporters, making a mint of cash. The Gulf of Mexico deposit is huge, untapped, and ours for the using. If the tree huggers would throttle back a notch, that would help as well. Now I am rambling, with visions of that $3.00 a gallon by summer prediction swimming around in my tired brain......

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Paul O'Neil

It has nothing to do with the price. It has to do with the environmental lobby and liberals in this country which will not allow drilling in Anwar (Alaska) and offshore. Here in MA they won't even allow a wind farm off the coast of Nantucket. We could produce plenty of electricity through nuclear power but good luck getting a plant built in this country. Like most issues, nothing tough will be done until there is a crisis and no choice in the matter. It is easy to come up with conspiracy theories and blame consumers but the truth is, as a nation, we have not been forced to do anything yet.

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: Paul O'Neil

I didn't see any point in plywoody repeating party line rhetoric. All the arguements against GW is as complete and thorough past the point of saturation.<br />Nothing plywoody or toad can say will change my mind. Mainly because thier arguemnets come from a idealogy that is at best slightly worse then what is being demonstrated with this current administration.<br />The rhetoric is for dummies and sheeple. <br /><br />Ultimately my mind is made up by an administrations actions and deeds. It will be those actions and deeds that will change my mind.<br />I'll take it all into consideration.<br /><br />If by election time WMD's aren't found, I'll consider this administration misled the people. And denied honest and complete debate.<br />I already believe that this administration doesn't work hard enough for the judicial appointees it puts forward.<br />The President has already demonstrated his willingness to pander to special interests, illegal aliens, and ignore federal law pertaining to them.<br />The President again demonstrated his misguided priority by spending huge amounts of money for NASA, while we're in a war that we're far from winning.<br />This money and technology is much better spent on making us enegy independent. A cause that is way overdue and the root of many of our problems today.<br />He also seems to be hell bent on growing the government and on spending huge amounts of money.<br /><br />Plywoody, Toad...the President is very capable of demonstrating misplaced priorities and loosing an election all on his own.<br /><br />I'll never reward poor performance, misleading or lies, pandering and general irresponsibility with my vote. <br />As it stands now, I'm 90% sure I won't vote for GW. But I'm 100% sure I won't vote for the Democrats either. <br />It's purely principal.<br /><br />The positive side to all this is someday all this poor government is going to cause a positive effect in this great country. <br /><br />The Democratic Party has demonstrated thier corruptions and dysfunctions. And the Republican Party is in the process of demonsrating that now.<br />This will allow a door to open for a genuine alternative.<br /><br />What's sad plywoody, is with your rhetoric and denial, is that I feel you won't embrace that alternative over your own status quo.