akarunway 1 #1 January 2, 2005 http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050102004209990004&_mpc=news%2e6&cid=842 Updated: 02:54 PM EST U.S. Considering Lifetime Terror-Suspect Detentions Newspaper Report Cites Defense, Intelligence WASHINGTON (Jan. 2) - A reported U.S. plan to keep some suspected terrorists imprisoned for a lifetime even if the government lacks evidence to charge them in courts was swiftly condemned on Sunday as a "bad idea" by a leading Republican senator.I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tf15 0 #2 January 2, 2005 Quotehttp://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050102004209990004&_mpc=news%2e6&cid=842 Updated: 02:54 PM EST U.S. Considering Lifetime Terror-Suspect Detentions Newspaper Report Cites Defense, Intelligence WASHINGTON (Jan. 2) - A reported U.S. plan to keep some suspected terrorists imprisoned for a lifetime even if the government lacks evidence to charge them in courts was swiftly condemned on Sunday as a "bad idea" by a leading Republican senator. "Becoming"? A bit late for that. Three times is enemy action Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #3 January 3, 2005 QuoteAre we becoming what we are supposedly fighting against The fact that there are strong objections to this plan coming from both the right and left in congress will lead to an easy answer for you: no. . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #4 January 3, 2005 QuoteThe fact that there are strong objections to this plan coming from both the right and left in congress will lead to an easy answer for you: no. The fact that we invaded Iraq without regard to those strong objections from either side makes me wonder if the answer is quite that easy, or even no.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #5 January 3, 2005 QuoteThe fact that we invaded Iraq without regard to those strong objections from either side makes me wonder if the answer is quite that easy, or even no. How many more years of delay would've done it for you? . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #6 January 3, 2005 QuoteHow many more years of delay would've done it for you? Considering Shrub's adminastration, prior to 9-11-01 specifically stated that Iraq did not have WMD, I don't think any delay would have helped, only an honest President.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #7 January 3, 2005 QuoteConsidering Shrub's adminastration, prior to 9-11-01 specifically stated that Iraq did not have WMD, . . . Got a source for that? I haven't heard it before. . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #8 January 3, 2005 Check out Farenheit 9-11, it has video clips. Colen Powell was one of those quoted, I believe. It is tough to deny the credibility of the video clips, regardless of what one may think about the "viditorial" as a whole.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #9 January 3, 2005 QuoteCheck out Farenheit 9-11, it has video clips. Colen Powell was one of those quoted, I believe. It is tough to deny the credibility of the video clips, regardless of what one may think about the "viditorial" as a whole. It is easy to take video clips and edit them into meaning something not actually intended by the subject. Farenheit 911 is a masterful example of that. Almost every day, I find a moment to silently thank Michael Moore for his very real contribution towards getting Bush re-elected. Without Moore, Kerry just might've pulled it off. . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #10 January 3, 2005 QuoteThe fact that we invaded Iraq without regard to those strong objections from either side makes me wonder if the answer is quite that easy, or even no. Congress gave the go ahead...The time for them to say no was when they voted on it...But at that time it was not a popular idea... Now that war bashing is popular many of them are saying they didn't want it. But the records show they voted to allow it."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #11 January 3, 2005 QuoteConsidering Shrub's adminastration, prior to 9-11-01 specifically stated that Iraq did not have WMD And Clintons admin DID say SH had them.... QuoteI don't think any delay would have helped, only an honest President. Again do you have any proof he lied? -Didn't think so."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #12 January 3, 2005 >How many more years of delay would've done it for you? How many wars did it take to render one of the greatest threats to the US in the 60's (Cuba) impotent? Which war did we defeat the USSR in? When hammers are your favorite tool, all problems look like nails. Good diplomats can use more than one tool (i.e. war) to solve problems. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #13 January 3, 2005 I would suggest seeing the film before you try to claim that the plain as day sentences given by Whitehouse representatives were taken so far out of context as to change their meaning. If you see them, you will know that, while Moore's message may be exaggerated, many of his points are not. Watch the film.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #14 January 3, 2005 QuoteAgain do you have any proof he lied? When he keeps offering contradictory statements, its hard to come up with a different reason. For example, during his 2000 campaign he said he would not participate in nation building. Probably learned it from his father. "Read my lips- No new taxes." G.H.W.B. 1988Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #15 January 3, 2005 QuoteWhen he keeps offering contradictory statements, its hard to come up with a different reason. So, no. You don't have proof....OK thanks."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #16 January 3, 2005 Actually Ron, it is called an indirect proof. YWMath tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #17 January 3, 2005 QuoteActually Ron, it is called an indirect proof. YW So, still no real proof? Thought so."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #18 January 3, 2005 QuoteCongress gave the go ahead...The time for them to say no was when they voted on it...But at that time it was not a popular idea... Really, please tell me when the declaration of war took place. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #19 January 3, 2005 QuoteReally, please tell me when the declaration of war took place. They voted to authorize force. The time for them to challenge it was then, not after they voted for it. But to do that would have been political suicide. So they voted for it. Now that its cool to be against it, they ignore they voted for it and speak out. Sad."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #20 January 3, 2005 QuoteThey voted to authorize force. The time for them to challenge it was then, not after they voted for it. But to do that would have been political suicide. So they voted for it. Now that its cool to be against it, they ignore they voted for it and speak out. Sad. so, you agree you are not at war then? No politician voted to go to war. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #21 January 3, 2005 They voted to authorize the president to use force if diplomacy failed. I've explained that to you a million times already. Why do you keep skewing your statement and saying that congress authorized war? They did not! That would be a declaration of war, and they didn't do that, did they? They gave him a tool to use if the tool of diplomacy failed. Bush skipped that first step and went right to the second. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #22 January 3, 2005 QuoteNo politician voted to go to war. They voted to use force."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #23 January 3, 2005 QuoteThey voted to authorize the president to use force if diplomacy failed And they should not have voted for it if they did not want it. How hard is that to understand? Simple they didn't want to do what they now claim they wanted to becasue it would destroy their chances of being re-elected. Now that it is in some circles cool to claim the war is bad, NOW they say otherwise. They should have spoken up when they had the vote...But the spineless twits didn't. Quote They gave him a tool to use if the tool of diplomacy failed THEY GAVE HIM THE TOOL. End of story."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #24 January 3, 2005 QuoteThey voted to use force. But not to go to war. You did not asnwer my question though. Do you agree that the US is not at war? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #25 January 3, 2005 I wonder how many resolutions are constructed: "If (something subjective and wierd) happens, then (action) can happen." Doesn't sound very 'resolved'. Spineless twits. No, not 'spineless' rather "two-faced pandering" twits. Personally I would say a resolution should always be in the form of "(action) will happen". period, say what you mean and live with it. It's sad. And a sign that "leaders" can't let themselves make real decisions. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
