Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Community
»
The Flameboard
»
Stupid Bastards
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Omega: [QB] Tahna: OK, I think you've been listening to a little too much liberal propaganda here. Now all you need to do is say that Republicans was to burn the faces and hair off people that don't look like them and use Clinton's new buzzword "isolationist". If we ratified this treaty, we would have no clue whether our nukes worked if we ever needed to use them, and neither would anyone else. Testing is a vital part of the nuclear deterent. And do you honestly think that China and North Korea would honor the treaty? They signed a non-proliferation treaty a while back, and we know that they didn't honor it. And if we suspected someone of breaking the treaty, there'd be no way to check it. We'd have to get a practically impossible number of countries to agree with us, and even if they did, whoever we were inspecting could grab a rather large area and not allow us in. This treaty is BAD for the USA, plain and simple. We're headed toward a Cold War with China, anyway, now that Clin-Ton has sold them a few decades of technology. See if I'm not right. Ahh! You'd vote for Clinton!?!?! (Assuming, of course, he could be elected again, which he can't. Only two terms allowed.) WHY!? The first thing he did when he got into office was give us something like a 90 billion dollar tax increase! His brother has said that he (Bill) is on drugs in a little-publicized tapped phone conversation! He has made more military deployments to different countries than any president in recent history! Thanks to him, the Chinese have 25 years of nuclear tech and the ability to blow up any city on Earth! Oh, and our old buddy Saadam has had nine months to rebuild his arsenal! And you'd STILL vote for the guy!? It comes down to Conservative vs. Liberal again. Liberalism just doesn't work. It favors spending money that doesn't even exist, and redistributing wealth to make everyone equal (ala socialism, which we all know doesn't work). This is not the American ideal. If someone has more money than someone else, 95% of the time, HE EARNED IT! He didn't steal it from the poor, he didn't cheat the government out of it, IT WAS EARNED, and the government has no right to take more of the rich man's money than it does the poor man's money. Liberalism is all about bigger government, more spending, and more taxes, and I can't see how anyone can possibly like that. Sol: I never thought I'd be relieved to read one of your posts. Some sanity every now and then when dealing with American politics is a comforting thing. I have to disagree, though. If there were a liberal majority in congress, the treaty would have been ratified. Another liberal tennant is "The USA being a superpower is BAD." The liberals in congress will do everything they can to equalize power between the USA and the rest of the world, even if that means compromizing national security. Now if we can only get the Republicans to stand up to the Democrats and actually advertize that the Dems actually wanted this thing passed, and what it would have meant for the country if it had been, the Dems are toast come next election. The only politics involved here is Clinton's "legacy", which is now effectively, how do you say, screwed. He signed this thing three years ago. Why is he just bringing it up now? So he'll have a "legacy" as the man who helped disarm the world, or whatever phrase he comes up with. If he really cared about this treaty, he would have A) brought it up years ago, and B) allowed the vote to be defered until he's out of office, so the politics of his "legacy" wouldn't matter. As for conservatives defending in fourty years what liberals defend now, I know I won't. In fourty years I'll still defending what I defend now. Liberalism is shifting, but conservatism is constant. There is always one goal in mind: to return to the US constitution and the values that made this country great. Xentrick: Yep, the very same. But I thought it was four former CIA directors... Monty: Again, what could it concievably do to preserve world peace? And since Clinton's the one unilaterally (and I believe in violation of US law) ordering all these military deployments, I'd have to agree with the "crazy guy on the roof with a shotgun" analogy. I do like the idea of a European union, though. Just make it a democracy and not a socialistic state. Otherwise it'll fall apart, and everyone'll be worse off than before. "...expect to find yourselves ever more isolated globally." Ah, THERE it is. Conservatives aren't isolationists. We just don't go around sticking our noses in other countries' business, and expect them to do the same for us. Jeff: I've wondered about that myself. What do you do if China breaks the treaty, bomb them? Iraq, yes, and maybe N. Korea, but what about China? Any suggestions? [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3