Funny Comics

Anything and Everything political, express your view, but play nice
shortski
Site Admin
Posts: 8067
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 07:28
Location: Between the Dark and the Daylight
Contact:

Re: I'm with you DMC...

Post by shortski »

DMC wrote:
shortski wrote:We asked they refused, not the same as going it alone. We through our elected representative decided that our interest were best served by taking action, believe it or not it is that simple. Stop saying we are going it alone, it has been posted before the allies that support us.
I know - I know... I saw your list...
but...

Could you please post the countries that are still with us and suppporting us in Iraq with ground troops and $$$???
And the precentage that they are contributing...?

Just wondering if it's changed...
Better I post the members of the United Nation and their contributions, care to venture a guess as to who carries more than 80% of the burden?

With the Libs & Dems I thought it was the thought that counted, is it not enough that they are there? Don't disenfranchise them just because they don't have the financial wherewithal to give more support.
Cogito, ergo sum

Sometimes it is that simple.

ImageImage
Cityskier
Wanted Poster
Posts: 3165
Joined: Nov 8th, '04, 11:08
Location: NYC

Re: I'm with you DMC...

Post by Cityskier »

shortski wrote:We through our elected representative decided that our interest were best served by taking action, believe it or not it is that simple.
I respectfully disagree. All that means is that we are taking action. Any claims that it means it is in our best interest is certainly debatable, and in my opinion completely out of line.

This is anything but simple. I'm quite aware of how the election works and I realize the W got more votes and is therefore "our" leader. What I have big trouble with is the representation that on overwhelming majority of Americans have given him a mandate. Not much I can do about at this point. I realize that. But I'm concerned about the direction we are going and the repercussions for the future.

No election result is going to change that. I'm just happy I live in a place where I'm allowed to voice my opinion and disagree. Sadly it's not fashionable these days, but thankfully I still have the right.
shortski
Site Admin
Posts: 8067
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 07:28
Location: Between the Dark and the Daylight
Contact:

Re: I'm with you DMC...

Post by shortski »

Cityskier wrote:
shortski wrote:We through our elected representative decided that our interest were best served by taking action, believe it or not it is that simple.
I respectfully disagree. All that means is that we are taking action. Any claims that it means it is in our best interest is certainly debatable, and in my opinion completely out of line.

This is anything but simple. I'm quite aware of how the election works and I realize the W got more votes and is therefore "our" leader. What I have big trouble with is the representation that on overwhelming majority of Americans have given him a mandate. Not much I can do about at this point. I realize that. But I'm concerned about the direction we are going and the repercussions for the future.

No election result is going to change that. I'm just happy I live in a place where I'm allowed to voice my opinion and disagree. Sadly it's not fashionable these days, but thankfully I still have the right.
This is what make us different from a lot of countries, we can peacefully disagree and debate without picking up an AK-47. 300+ years and we continue to elect/re-elect a new government every four years without a war or a coup d'état, what a country. If you think the action is out of line make sure you take it up with you Senate and Congressional Representatives, because Bush couldn't have taken the action without them voting for it, a fact that is too often lost by the main stream media when the say Bush is going it alone.
Cogito, ergo sum

Sometimes it is that simple.

ImageImage
Cityskier
Wanted Poster
Posts: 3165
Joined: Nov 8th, '04, 11:08
Location: NYC

There is the little issue...

Post by Cityskier »

of him actually going about it the way he claimed he was going to go about it, but I have work to do!

Golfing tomorrow and hopefully skiing Saturday! Things are looking up.

Have a good weekend.
DMC
Post Office
Posts: 4576
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:11

Re: I'm with you DMC...

Post by DMC »

shortski wrote:With the Libs & Dems I thought it was the thought that counted, is it not enough that they are there? Don't disenfranchise them just because they don't have the financial wherewithal to give more support.
Not with this Democrat...
Lots of countries have tons of cash and lots of soldiers...
I just want to see stats...

Thought you had them...
Scotty K
Beginner On Rentals
Posts: 41
Joined: Nov 8th, '04, 16:12
Location: Fairfield County, CT

Post by Scotty K »

It's great to get onto another forum

And see the same kind of emotional, misinformed, judgemental statements, increasingly from the right. There was a time when the term "knee jerk" applied only to "liberals."

Shortski, get your facts straight: the US contributed $1.012 billion of the total $3.72 billion of the UN annual budget, or 27.2% (US State Dept.). We always have the largest contribution, but also usually pay late. At last count, we owed about $700 million (US State Dept.). Where did you come up with your 80% figure? Or is that the new, right wing "If we say something, it must be true" strategy?

As for coalitions and the world, we had a coalition in the first gulf war. Most of the world supported going into Afghanistan and many sent troops after the Taliban fell. The only noticeable supporter in the current Iraq war is Britain. The third largest contingent of armed forces in Iraq are private security, almost all paid by DOD and other US governmental agencies or corporations. Many of the "coalition of the willing" countries are no longer willing (Spain, Phillipines, Costa Rica), never contributed anything except their verbal support in exchange for aid (Micronesia and several other pacific island nations) or saying they will get out (Poland, Hungary). Thinking we "invited" the rest of the world to support us is a semantic argument; I like to think we presented our (flawed) case to the world, they mostly rejected it, so Bush did exactly what he wanted to do.

Finally, billions of people are muslims. Very few of them are terrorists; most just want to live in peace and prosper, just like us. The growing perception in the muslim world is that we are waging a religious war against them after years of waging a cultural and economic war. Try and put yourself in their shoes, or the shoes of the rest of the world, for awhile.
Post Reply