Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,920 Year: 4,177/9,624 Month: 1,048/974 Week: 7/368 Day: 7/11 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   GOP FRAUD
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 106 of 127 (156431)
11-05-2004 9:21 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by crashfrog
11-05-2004 9:16 PM


Not really helpful.
Crash, that post doesn't really further the dabate.
You might list some facts that are apparently disagreed with or suggest something more pertinent to the debate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by crashfrog, posted 11-05-2004 9:16 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
paisano
Member (Idle past 6453 days)
Posts: 459
From: USA
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 107 of 127 (156432)
11-05-2004 9:23 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by crashfrog
11-05-2004 9:16 PM


With the facts? I realize that.
With your opinions and conjectures. Please don't confuse these with facts. Neither you nor I know what the chief causative factors in terrorist recruitment are. It is likely there are many factors.
I say, the more terrorist recruits there are, the more we need to kill them.
Neither you nor Kerry, really offer much more than Monday-mornig quarterbacking, and that's a key reason he lost.
We are in Iraq now, like it or not. If it is not vital that we be there, we should withdraw as fast as logistically possible and leave it in whatever state it's in, however chaotic, and deal with the consequences using other tactics.
If it is vital that we win now that we are there, we must pay any price, bear any burden, until either we win or are utterly defeated.
This message has been edited by paisano, 11-05-2004 09:24 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by crashfrog, posted 11-05-2004 9:16 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by crashfrog, posted 11-05-2004 9:54 PM paisano has replied
 Message 115 by nator, posted 11-06-2004 2:12 PM paisano has not replied
 Message 117 by Silent H, posted 11-06-2004 6:16 PM paisano has not replied
 Message 121 by nator, posted 11-07-2004 9:27 AM paisano has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1436 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 108 of 127 (156438)
11-05-2004 9:43 PM


GOP Fraud ... oh yeah, the TOPIC!
this started as a thread on voter registrations that were tossed in several states so that those who filled them out wouldn't be able to vote when the time came.
has anyone seen any follow-up on this action to see if (1) charges are being brought and (2) if anyone couldn't vote because they weren't registered (although we may never know this is the provisional votes are never checked back with the people who filled them out)?
it is not that I expect the results to change so much as to see if any justice is being served or will things be worse next time

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 109 of 127 (156445)
11-05-2004 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by paisano
11-05-2004 9:23 PM


Neither you nor I know what the chief causative factors in terrorist recruitment are.
Funny, it seems obvious to me. It's the same reason the poorest states in the country all came out to vote against equal rights for gay people.
When your life sucks, you'll get behind the guy who's telling you that some other group is making your life suck, and you'll stay there. Especially when he gives you a job to do and a hope of making things better for your family.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by paisano, posted 11-05-2004 9:23 PM paisano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by paisano, posted 11-05-2004 11:13 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
paisano
Member (Idle past 6453 days)
Posts: 459
From: USA
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 110 of 127 (156478)
11-05-2004 11:13 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by crashfrog
11-05-2004 9:54 PM


Funny, it seems obvious to me. It's the same reason the poorest states in the country all came out to vote against equal rights for gay people.
Well, hmm. First of all, GA, MI, OH, and OR are all about in the middle of the pack in per capita income amoong the states, IIRC.
Secondly, the states voted to deny gay marriage, not the more general "equal rights for gay people". Gay people still have the right to vote, to work, to reside where their incomes allow them to afford, to keep and bear arms, etc. And nobody but the Fred Phelps types, who are really a tiny fringe, want to deny them these rights.
Finally, people voted for these initiatives for varying reasons,and most of them have lives that don't suck.
But again, we're digressing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by crashfrog, posted 11-05-2004 9:54 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by nator, posted 11-06-2004 2:14 PM paisano has not replied

  
paisano
Member (Idle past 6453 days)
Posts: 459
From: USA
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 111 of 127 (156485)
11-05-2004 11:33 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by Rrhain
11-05-2004 2:15 AM


I stand corrected, your argument is not affirming the consequent. My mistake.
However let's revisit your argument, in as simple terms as possible:
1) All Racists disenfranchise blacks (R--->B)
2) All Republicans disenfranchise felons
3) Many felons are black
Your conclusion,
4) Therefore All Republicans are racists
does not follow. It's some sort of correlative fallacy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Rrhain, posted 11-05-2004 2:15 AM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by Rrhain, posted 11-07-2004 4:49 PM paisano has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17828
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 112 of 127 (156574)
11-06-2004 4:52 AM
Reply to: Message 93 by paisano
11-05-2004 7:55 PM


Re: Paesano, why are you avoiding my questions?
Of course the major point in my response was that by limiting the area of concern to the European Theatre, you excluded operations against Japan - by definition operations against Japan could not occur in Europe. That you simply ignored.
Unfortunately for you you also excluded Operation Torch, since that was not in the European theatre either - it was in Africa. Moreover the primary target of Operation Torch was the Axis forces in North Africa. The Vichy French areas simply made a convenient landing point and base of operations.
So the real issue here is that you either have no knowledge of geography or - more likely considering your evasion of my primary point - you are simply being dishonest.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by paisano, posted 11-05-2004 7:55 PM paisano has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by AdminJar, posted 11-06-2004 8:09 AM PaulK has not replied

  
AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 113 of 127 (156596)
11-06-2004 8:09 AM
Reply to: Message 112 by PaulK
11-06-2004 4:52 AM


Hey PaulK
So the real issue here is that you either have no knowledge of geography or - more likely considering your evasion of my primary point - you are simply being dishonest.
Come on. Defend your points, contribute to the discussion.
We have more than enough examples of folk calling others dishonest in other threads.
The last part does not further the conversation.

How pierceful grows the hazy yon! How myrtle petaled thou! For spring hath sprung the cyclotron How high browse thou, brown cow? -- Churchy LaFemme, 1950

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by PaulK, posted 11-06-2004 4:52 AM PaulK has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2200 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 114 of 127 (156674)
11-06-2004 2:07 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by paisano
11-05-2004 8:49 PM


quote:
No objection at all. We're digressing from Iraq. The point I am trying to make is that Iraq could be seen as an operation intended to draw terrorist groups into engagements with US forces. I know that many insist there is absolutely no connection between the war on terror and Iraq. I disagree, and the scenario I present is one reason why I hold the views I do.
But this is your rationale NOW.
I wish to discuss what Bush, Cheney, and the rest led the American people to believe about Iraq, WMD, terrorism, and 9/11 BEFORE we invaded.
Did you read the study? Are you just going to dismiss it or ignore it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by paisano, posted 11-05-2004 8:49 PM paisano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by paisano, posted 11-06-2004 7:38 PM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2200 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 115 of 127 (156675)
11-06-2004 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by paisano
11-05-2004 9:23 PM


quote:
Neither you nor I know what the chief causative factors in terrorist recruitment are. It is likely there are many factors.
I've got some wild guesses about why it's increased dramatically in Iraq since we've been there:
1) The continued US endorsement of anything Israel does to Palistiniams, including assasinations and the killing of civilians.
2) 100,000 civilian deaths in Iraq, the destruction of their infrastructure and the sluggishness of our military in getting it back up and running, and a long, long occupation of their country.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by paisano, posted 11-05-2004 9:23 PM paisano has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2200 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 116 of 127 (156676)
11-06-2004 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by paisano
11-05-2004 11:13 PM


Gay people don't get social security benefits if their partner dies.
They can be denied access to a dying or ill partner in the hospital.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by paisano, posted 11-05-2004 11:13 PM paisano has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5850 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 117 of 127 (156780)
11-06-2004 6:16 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by paisano
11-05-2004 9:23 PM


Neither you nor Kerry, really offer much more than Monday-mornig quarterbacking, and that's a key reason he lost.
This is of course what you want to believe and will repeat it like a mantra.
The fact is I called the Iraq War correctly based on public intel information and analyses. The Administration and its defenders insisted (or insinuated) the Administration had additional info they could not share. That turns out not to be true and was proven so by the Congressional investigation.
One of the things that impressed me with Kerry was when I saw a segment of a taped address he had given to West Point cadets before the Iraq War began. He laid out what the administration would need to do and what would happen if it didn't. It was being shown during the primary run and it certainly made Kerry look pretty damn smart.
Let me repeat that, there were many people using solid public information which correctly called how the Iraq War would turn out before we went in. Although he did believe WMDs would be found he had carefully laid out operational considerations that this administration completely missed, and correctly named the consequences.
There is not a monday morning quarterbacking game being played. What game is being played is a revision of what the planners of the Iraq War had said and done to justify their action, and a casual dismissal of everyone that was right as simply making it up afterward.
We are in Iraq now, like it or not... If it is vital that we win now that we are there, we must pay any price, bear any burden, until either we win or are utterly defeated.
This is partially correct. Now that we are in Iraq I agree we cannot just let it fail and turn into chaos. That however does not lend any legitimacy to its initial action and should not make us pretend it was correct. We went in, and now must take care of it.
I do not see why we must pay "any" price. I think there is a point where, if it gets bad enough, we may have to pull out. Vietnam is a pretty damn good example of where us being there simply wasn't doing anything anymore except getting our people killed. I don't think we are at that stage and I hope we don't reach it.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by paisano, posted 11-05-2004 9:23 PM paisano has not replied

  
paisano
Member (Idle past 6453 days)
Posts: 459
From: USA
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 118 of 127 (156831)
11-06-2004 7:38 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by nator
11-06-2004 2:07 PM


Are you just going to dismiss it or ignore it?
Yes. I'm just not very interested in this discussion. Yawn. Find something else.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by nator, posted 11-06-2004 2:07 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by nator, posted 11-06-2004 10:45 PM paisano has not replied
 Message 120 by nator, posted 11-07-2004 8:31 AM paisano has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2200 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 119 of 127 (156874)
11-06-2004 10:45 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by paisano
11-06-2004 7:38 PM


It's a nice luxury you have, avoiding discussions of the rationale for war and whether America was misled, while American troops and Iraqi civilians die every day for a war no-one would have supported if the truth had been told.
I think thousands of wasted lives deserves a moment's consideration on your part as to why Americans by and large didn't understand the truth about Iraq and Saddam Hussein.
Put down your pom-poms for a moment, and think about it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by paisano, posted 11-06-2004 7:38 PM paisano has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2200 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 120 of 127 (156924)
11-07-2004 8:31 AM
Reply to: Message 118 by paisano
11-06-2004 7:38 PM


Paisano, please address these specific findings from the study:
ndeed, the only issue on which the survey found broad agreement between the two sets of voters was on the question of whether the Bush administration itself has been actively propagating the misconceptions about Iraq’s WMD and connections to al Qaeda
One of the reasons that Bush supporters have these (erroneous) beliefs is that they perceive the Bush administration confirming them, noted Steven Kull, PIPA’s director. Interestingly, this is one point on which Bush and Kerry supporters agree. .
The survey found that 72 percent of Bush supporters believe either that Iraq had actual WMD (47 percent) or a major program for producing them (25 percent), despite the widespread media coverage in early October of the Central Intelligence Agency (news - web sites) (CIA (news - web sites)’s) Duelfer Report, the final word on the subject by the one billion dollar, 15-month investigation by the Iraq Survey Group.
It found that that Hussein had dismantled all of his WMD programs shortly after the 1991 Gulf War (news - web sites) and had never tried to reconstitute them.
Nonetheless, 56 percent of Bush supporters said they believed that most experts currently believe that Iraq had actual WMD, and 57 percent said they thought that the Duelfer Report had itself concluded that Iraq either had WMD (19 percent) or a major WMD program (38 percent).
Only 26 percent of Kerry supporters, by contrast, said they believed that pre-war Iraq had either actual WMD or a WMD program, and only 18 percent said they believed that most experts agreed.
Similar results were found with respect to Hussein’s alleged support for al Qaeda, a theory that has been most persistently asserted by Vice president Dick Cheney (news - web sites), but that was thoroughly debunked by the final report of the bipartisan 9/11 Commission earlier this summer.
Seventy-five percent of Bush supporters said they believed that Iraq was providing substantial support to Al Qaeda, with 20 percent asserting that Iraq was directly involved in the 9/11 attacks on New York and the Pentagon (news - web sites). Sixty-three percent of Bush supporters even believed that the clear evidence of such support has actually been found, and 60 percent believe that most experts have reached the same conclusion.
By contrast, only 30 percent of Kerry supporters said they believe that such a link existed and that most experts agree.
But large majorities of both Bush and Kerry supporters agree that the administration is saying that Iraq had WMD and was providing substantial support to al Qaeda. In regard to WMD, those majorities have actually grown since last summer, according to PIPA.
On WMD, 82 percent of Bush supporters and 84 percent of Kerry supporters believed that the administration is saying that Iraq either had WMD or major WMD programs. On ties with al Qaeda, 75 percent of Bush supporters and 74 percent of Kerry supporters believe that the administration is saying that Iraq provided substantial support to the terrorist group.
Remarkably, asked whether the U.S. should have gone to war with Iraq if U.S. intelligence had concluded that Baghdad did not have a WMD program and was not providing support to al Qaeda, 58 percent of Bush supporters said no, and 61 percent said they assumed that Bush would also not have gone to war under those circumstances.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by paisano, posted 11-06-2004 7:38 PM paisano has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024