2004 Election

Kerry, obviously. While he may not have his goals as straight as Walker himself, he isn't the same war-crazed lunatic. Yes, Bush is better for the US economy in the long run, as it is heavily based on war to make its wheels turn, but give me a break, collateral damage for profit? If Bush remains president, I, for some reason, foresee invasions of Iran and North Korea; the latter if capitalism can't take its toll soon enough on the nation.

Who said the cold war was over because Soviet "lost"?

Chruser whats wrong with invading a country that starves there people and has slave work camps like NK?

Bush all the way.

http://zelaron.com/forum/showpost.php?p=411563

Bush all the way.

............

It makes me laugh to consider that D3v made more sense than K_A at the time...

Hey... I was 17 at the time and in a drug-induced haze.

Fuck you.

I'm sorry, but i'm totally disappointed with Obama's performance the first year. I understand what he has inherited makes his job terribly difficult, and I understand that the Republican machine is something you can't take on yourself, but him bowing out to them is just troubling.

Chruser whats wrong with invading a country that starves there people and has slave work camps like NK?

Collateral damage. Militia renegades and revolts. Making the people revolt is more efficient. Treat it like DDR, not like Iraq. Kennedy was a genius unlike Bush.

Chruser NK has an army of 1 million all of which are loyal to Kim, what do you think would happen to a weak little peasant rebelion supported by the US?

Someone please explain to me on what basis would we use to justify our foray into North Korea?

North Korea is a communist country, they hate the U.S.A, they have nuclear weapons.

The General of Vietnam in 1975 said "if it wasn't for these guys (Kerry's Vietnam Veterans Against the War) we would have lost."

North Korea is a communist country, they hate the U.S.A, they have nuclear weapons.

That would be the perfect justification if you were a playground bully, but that in no means justifies a millitary advancement into North Korea. China is a communist country with nuclear weapons, but we aren't attacking them. Plus, a large part of the world hates the USA. So again, how is it that attacking North Korea would be justified?

We aren't the sole country with the rights to nuclear arms. We can not make political blunders simply because we feel threatend. Going to war with them for that reason would make no sense whatsoever. That's like a country coming into the USA and telling us we aren't allowed to have nuclear weapons. As you have already guessed, that would most likely spark a war, most likely a nuclear war, and we all know the reprecussions to that. Attacking North Korea for that reason would simply make the United States a power-hungry warmonger.

Albeit a small one, there is a communist party in the USA. Why don't we dissolve them? Because we are a democracy, and they have the right to express whatever political views they want to. Going to war with North Korea would just be forcing our political views upon them. Now, if I recall correctly from my social studies class, America was founded by the pilgrims because they were being opressed from expressing their views. Going over to North Korea and forcibly making them a capitalistic democracy, simply because we can, would be a quintessential demonstration of hypocrisy, and an indirect attack on what this country stands for.

Even if everything you said correctly justified going to war, why wouldn't we do the same thing to China? They are also an evil communist country, but we have made no encroachment upon their territory. So why North Korea, and not China? Asserting something on a much weaker country, and then not doing the same thing on another country that would require much more of a struggle is "being a pussy," as some have so eloquently called me for saying anything against this frivolous, over-done depredation in Iraq. Going into North Korea would be even worse.

Someone please explain to me on what basis would we use to justify our foray into North Korea?

Ok MJ lets stear away from the "Lets please the rest of the world instead of ourselves" reason and go onto something more urgent, the fact that North Korea's Leader Kim is starving his people and has active torture chambers. Or the fact that he threatens South Korea's Capital Seol once a month with a nuclear attack. Or if thats not enough the fact that Kim's army is digging under ground tunnels thrue South Korea in preperation for a future invasion. But I can understand, your way to imbeded with the rest of the "lets all be against Bush cuzz he actually did something!" crowd to give a damn about the kids in North Korea that work 12 hours a day and resemble a walking stick while their "harmless leader" and his devote zealots live a luxuroius life style while their people starve to death. John Kerry is a hypocrite, he claims that there are "Benedict Arnold companies" in the US, yet, he benefits from his wifes Hienz Ketchup company who is a major out sourcer.

Ok then MJ, let's just sit around and wait for them to nuke us. Did you not read it very well? THEY HATE US AND THEY HAVE NUKES. 2+2=NUKED.

Woops, forgot the whole point of this thread. Neither Bush or Kerry are pleasing me too much right now, but I'd take Bush over Kerry any day. He knows how to get things done the right way and he does them. Democrats are teh sux.

Kim is digging underground tunnels and threatens South Korea with a nuclear strike every month? I'd like to see your source for that information, zagggon.

!King_Amazon!, as far as I know, the range of the North Korean nukes is unknown. And once again, wouldn't it be BETTER if everything worked out like DDR in '89? The two instances are very similar; only the scale of the conflict in the Koreas is far greater. And honestly, assume for a moment that North Korea DID have ICBM's. I'd hardly want to invade such a nation with controversial forces. "Hey, let's invade RUSSIA with 400,000 men from the infantry. I'm sure they will want to play this game fair and square, even though they know they can't deal with us in field battle."

You'd get nuked.

You die.

You lose.

So does the whole fucking world, from the nuclear winter. Think twice before you want to start a war with a nuclear nation. In fact, think twice before you want to start a war at ALL!

I Vote Kerry because he's a democrat. Look at how badly we are off when a Republican is in office. The fucking statistics don't lie, they give us a little money from tax breaks, then they fucking do some stupid shit and ruin our economy. Look at Clinton, he had the economy going great, keeping out of wars, Smokin the peace pipe with many nations. Then gay ass Bush comes in here, we (get attacked) Then we go to war with Afghanistan. (88 billion dollar war). Then we go to Iraq, (800 billion dollar war). Now our economy is shot, gas prices going up, our reputation as a nation is shitty, and everything is out of line. Bush's time is up, get him the fuck outta office.

I'd vote for John Kerry. Bush looks like a drunken monkey.
-frick

So far all you liberals can say against bush is "hes ugly, he's stupid, he looks like a monkey" and a bunch of stuff that isn't even true.

So far all you liberals can say against bush is "hes ugly, he's stupid, he looks like a monkey" and a bunch of stuff that isn't even true.

http://www.zelaron.com/forum/showthr...919#post411919. I briefly explained why I dislike Bush.