[Colonel]

Originally Posted by Madmartagen

Bush is obviously not looking for Osama Bin Laden.

I'm just curious, did you come to this conclusion just because we are not getting any stories in the media about Afghanistan? or because that is what Senator Kerry wnts you to believe? We have never stopped looking for that guy. One of our clan members just got back from a year in Afghanistan. He certainly has first hand knowledge. Therefore, I'll take his word when he says that we are still looking.

[Crpl. Crunch]

Maybe it's just me, but I don't think much will change if Kerry wins. Our army will still be over there (which I don't have a problem with), the economy won't change much...etc. etc. It'll take more than four years to fix our problems. People are probably out there thinking that every thing will be peachy, with everybody in the world holding hands and singing and shit. B. S.

I just fear if he does win, he'll be suckin all the dicks of those crooked U.N. fucks. That scares me to death. I don't want my country under the influence of the French.... Sorry, I'm just sick of this whole thing.

[Bean 2]

Originally Posted by Colonel

I'm just curious, did you come to this conclusion just because we are not getting any stories in the media about Afghanistan? or because that is what Senator Kerry wnts you to believe? We have never stopped looking for that guy. One of our clan members just got back from a year in Afghanistan. He certainly has first hand knowledge. Therefore, I'll take his word when he says that we are still looking.

So then why doesnt he bring troops from Iraq over to Afganhistan. I still dont understand the point of invading Iraq. But gj Bush for sending us over there.

[Madmartagen]

I typed all that and the only thing you guys respond to is that? Our troops are looking for Bin Laden, but Bush isnt. if he had not invaded Iraq and had sent those troops to Afghanistan and blocked off the Pakistani border, im sure Bin Laden would have been dead or captured by now. I really do not see the logic in knowing where Bin Laden is and sending a whole armada to Iraq whilst sending a few amount of troops to look for the worlds most wanted man. Im not a total Kerry supporter either, Im just picking the lesser of two evils. Im going to try to make this as simple as I can without resorting to name calling and bashing. I am obviously anti Bush, but im not anti Bush because I think hes stupid or that hes a fag. I dont want Bush to win because i honestly do not see Bush or his administration fixing or solving any of the problems this country has. He has had 4 years to do something, and he hasnt improved a single thing that i can think of. His business dealings with teh Bin Ladens, Enron, the Saudi Royal family as well as Cheneys involvent with Halliburton have a serious conflict of interest in matters going on rigth now. Bush has had 4 years to do something about the environment, the economy, foreign relations, civil rights, war on terror, and the war in iraq and i do not see any sufficient amount of progress that would qualify him for a second term. There are just too many problems going on right now and i am not confident in Bush's ability, or in some cases, willingness to remedy them. I think John Kerry can do a better job and thats why im voting for him. Im not saying hes going to solve all the countries problems, but i think he will turn things around so that we can see some definate progress. I just dont think Bush is the right man to take care of the challenges our country and the world has to face. I think its time for a change.

[TonyMontana]

If there was any news on Osama, I think the FIRST people to know should be the president, then the families of the soldiers fucking looking for him

[Colonel]

Originally Posted by Madmartagen

I typed all that and the only thing you guys respond to is that? Our troops are looking for Bin Laden, but Bush isnt. if he had not invaded Iraq and had sent those troops to Afghanistan and blocked off the Pakistani border, im sure Bin Laden would have been dead or captured by now. I really do not see the logic in knowing where Bin Laden is and sending a whole armada to Iraq whilst sending a few amount of troops to look for the worlds most wanted man. Im not a total Kerry supporter either, Im just picking the lesser of two evils. Im going to try to make this as simple as I can without resorting to name calling and bashing. I am obviously anti Bush, but im not anti Bush because I think hes stupid or that hes a fag. I dont want Bush to win because i honestly do not see Bush or his administration fixing or solving any of the problems this country has. He has had 4 years to do something, and he hasnt improved a single thing that i can think of. His business dealings with teh Bin Ladens, Enron, the Saudi Royal family as well as Cheneys involvent with Halliburton have a serious conflict of interest in matters going on rigth now. Bush has had 4 years to do something about the environment, the economy, foreign relations, civil rights, war on terror, and the war in iraq and i do not see any sufficient amount of progress that would qualify him for a second term. There are just too many problems going on right now and i am not confident in Bush's ability, or in some cases, willingness to remedy them. I think John Kerry can do a better job and thats why im voting for him. Im not saying hes going to solve all the countries problems, but i think he will turn things around so that we can see some definate progress. I just dont think Bush is the right man to take care of the challenges our country and the world has to face. I think its time for a change.

I understand what you mean but I think that the information that you received that lead to that decision is faulty. I can vouch first hand that the economy is better off today than it was four years ago. I don't know why they don't feel the need to report the facts. For the last two years of the Clinton administration the manufacturing sector in this country was really in a world of hurt. That decline continued into the first year or two the current administration. But if you look at the last two or three years it has been steady growth. So, I guess if you look at job growth over the four year period you may have a net loss but that is due to the situation that President Bush was handed when he took affice. To see the true picture of what he has done you have to look at the last couple of years.

As for why he didn't send the whole army to get Bin Laden, I can't really answer that...other than to say he gave the Army what they said they needed to do the job. And keep in mind, if Al Gore had been president we probably wouldn't have even tried to go get Bin Laden. We probably would have asked if he would turn himself in and when he didn't we would have just complained that there is nothing we can do. It does kind of crack me up that the same guys that are made at President Bush now for not going in 100% are the same guys that back when it happened didn't want him to go in at all.