First off we did not use ****ing farm tools to fight off Hitler's army. We had a military but it was quickly crushed. Later we had an underground resistance. As far as the allies you speak of they didn't do a whole lot to help Poland out. Before the invasion we had a packt with the UK and France that if Poland was invaded by Hitler then they would immediately jump in. Well they spread out pamplets telling the world that hitler shouldn't have done what he did. It wasn't until later that they realised that Hitler wants more than Poland. As far as the ****ing Soviets go than the story of betrayal is even worst. They secretely had a peace packt with Hitler and drove their "freedom" army through half of Poland and shook hands with Hitler to our dissmay. Later when Hitler screwed them over the Soviets agreed to help us overthrow the Nazis. We schedueled a fight for Warsaw and when the uprising began the Soviet forces srayed put waiting for the remaining Polish army to be slaughtered. The goal was to have a completely defensless Poland after Hitler was pushed out.

The finall allied punch came during the Yalta conference where our great friends USA and GB gave us away to the Soviets. They knew well that the Soviets weren't good, but they simply didn't care to argue with Stalin, who is a greater killer then Hitler!!!!!!! So now you see that you don't have to tell me about freedom. Poland recieved ours on our own. We were the first country to abolish communism and we have the second oldest democratic constitution (usa having the longest) that is still in use.

 

good call

 

Wow where to start?

Christianity has a bloodier and more violent history, with everything ranging from the Crusades to the Inquisition to the occupation of the New World. Islam has a significantly more benign history until recently.

Vietnam was not fought strictly in battlefields either, which contributed to our defeat. It was fought village to village as well, with locals taking up arms against American troops. Did you forget about the grenade traps, staked pits, and jungle ambushes that troops in Vietnam had to deal with? And on a more global scale, we entered Vietnam in the early 60's in a similar role as in Iraq now, to provide training to police and Vietnamese troops. In Vietnam we ended up being dragged into a decade long conflict with 50000 casualties only to pull out in 1973; the national pride of the Vietnamese people basically pushed out the American presence. The question is whether or not the same thing will happen in Iraq.

:werd:
My choice of president isn't simply a function of whether I believe in the Iraqi invasion. To be quite frank, I don't think that without significant breaches to our Constitution (namely privacy, firearms, search and seizure, trial by jury, and cruel and unusual punishment) that we can ever be "terrorist proof," regardless of who is president. Countries like Britain, Spain, and Israel grant their security forces significantly more leeway and still suffer from bombings from terrorist groups, and significantly more in number. The key to anti-terrorism is intelligence, and in the Middle East fair-skinned Caucasians tend to have a hard time getting info.

I don't believe Bush's anti-terrorism strategy will work. He is attacking nations in the hopes of destroying a non-national entity. In particular, Al-Qaeda has just moved on to other places. One could argue that by attacking Iraq and Afghanistan, we have made it more difficult to trace the movements of Al-Qaeda.

I also disagree with Bush's domestic policies. Yeah, I'm a moderately left person, and I don't see eye to eye with Republicans on many issues, and this does matter to me when I choose who to vote for. Some of Bush's highlights: cessation of stem cell research, proposed amendment to ban gay marriage, tax refunds in the face of increased military expenditure (bullets cost money) and at the cost of other programs. I agree with Kerry's stances on many more issues than I do with Bush. Say what you will about Kerry's voting record, or about how he is a career politician or how he's just full of hot air; in the end, Bush is no less of a career politican, and no less bombastic. I disagree with the direction that Bush is taking this country, and my vote is going to reflect that.

 

Point taken.

I didn't say that the USA liberated Poland. I said they allied with several other countries (notice how the word FREE was quoted) to defeat Hitler. Which Stalin... or no Stalin... needed to be done. The Soviet Union was a bunch of schmucks, and the USA didn't support communism... but they were instrumental at wiping out Hitler's military and money. We didn't get into that war to liberate Poland, or France, or the Soviet Union. We did it to stop Hitler, and that was for the good of everybody. Hitler couldn't fight the war on multiple fronts. So you're welcome, damnit.

But anyway, this thread isn't about WW II or why to vote for Kerry either. If you read the title of the thread, it states clearly what it's for. This thread is for Bush voters. So, in other words, Let's try to keep this pro-Kerry bullshit out of here. Or better yet, start your own poll in another thread. Because non-Bush voters have nothing to do with this topic. Democrats posting pro-Kerry dribble here are just proving how totally uneducated they are, how would you ever expect one to follow directions. ... they can't even figure out a stinkin' butterfly ballot.

Again. I'm from Texas.

 

[QUOTE=Jafro]Point taken.

I didn't say that the USA liberated Poland. I said they allied with several other countries (notice how the word FREE was quoted) to defeat Hitler. Which Stalin... or no Stalin... needed to be done. The Soviet Union was a bunch of schmucks, and the USA didn't support communism... but they were instrumental at wiping out Hitler's military and money. We didn't get into that war to liberate Poland, or France, or the Soviet Union. We did it to stop Hitler, and that was for the good of everybody. Hitler couldn't fight the war on multiple fronts. So you're welcome, damnit.
QUOTE]


Ofcourse my rant was no aimed at the allies role in providing freedom. I'm sure if it wasn't for the US getting involed I might be speaking german right now and serving some blond kid LOL. I know the US went in to stop Hitler and Poland was not a priority. I just feel my country recieved the shaft throughout and after the war. Ok thats enough on this subject.

 

There is one, and it got inundated with Republicans.

 

i go poooopieeeeeee...on this thrend

 

...hey buddy...the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one in the same h:

 

That's because Democrats are the minority.

 

I have my Qur'an (proper spelling) handy as a matter of fact. Chapter 9, Verse 34.

:eh: Quite frankly this is about the point where I started to second guess my interest in this faith. What religion has the right to call out any other religion IN THEIR HOLIEST OF BOOKS and declare them to be lesser?

Correct answer: not a single one.

Anyway, somewhatly closer to TOPIC. Bush is a religious man and that's perfectly fine. But when he chooses to impose his religion's views on legislature he crosses that dark line in the sand between church and state. The simplest example is his attack on Planned Parenthood and other similar organizations. Click here for details. What's worse is Bush restricting foreign aide funds to nations who endorse condom use.



Let me get this straight. You want to prevent the distribution & use of condoms, as well as eliminate sex education, in nations where AIDS is running rampant? Where local folk lore states a man can rid himself of a disease by having sex with a virgin? This sounds like a good reason to hold aide money over a government's head.

Ok, granted, this is just a small slice of Bushy Junior but it's a telling one. If he can't seperate his personal belief systems from his job then maybe he shouldn't have his job.

Every word out of his mouth is a crock. Ok, where exactly are those weapons of mass destruction? He lied. Where is Osama, the man we're so close to capturing? He lied. Where are all of those jobs? Oh, yeah, he ****ing lied.

"This is George W. Bush and I approve of this message."