How do you know?

There seem to be several different discussions going on at once, however I just wanted to say that you brought up some interesting points about the electoral college, Freelancer. I'd never really considered what it would be like to live and vote in a Republican or Democratic stronghold while being a member of the opposite party.

I am :p



People who don't vote, don't have the right to complain. Why? Well, if you didn't do anything to contribute (whether or not the person you wanted is elected doesn't matter), or voice your right of opinion, then who are you to say anything, complaints or not, about the decision that the people who DID vote made?. It's like a writer, putting his name on the credits of a story they didn't write, then complaining about what was in the story because they didn't like it....Yet they had the opportunity to contribute and change things they didn't like, but didn't. They contributed, you didn't. End of story. There are no arguments.

I'll vote once they institute a vote of no-confidence, and then I'll be sure to put in votes for both Kerry and Bush.

Until then, I see no reason to vote; if I vote third-party, the only person who even has a remote chance (and even then it's not going to happen) is Nader. I don't like Kerry, and I don't like Bush. I don't want either of them in office, and so I see no reason to throw my lot in with either of them.

So take this "you don't have the right to voice your opinion if you don't vote" garbage and swallow it. There are people like me who think that Bush and Kerry -- the only two viable candidates -- are both of equal ranking with respect to douche bag quality and fitness to serve in office. I get so sick and tired of people saying I have to vote for someone, that I have to like one candidate more than the other.

**** that. If I want to be forced to ****ing vote, I'll move to Belgium. Until then, you can promptly shut the Hell up.

That attitude is exactly what gets the people who you dont want elected, well, elected.

If everyone were to say "Oh, I dont like him, so I wont vote...." There would be millions of vote's that didn't count, which could turn the tide of a vote. Think about it. It's simple math, and common sense.

You don't HAVE to vote for someone you don't like, but if and when they are elected, you can't complain. Because you did absolutely nothing to try and stop it. Even if you didn't stop it, at least you voted, and tried to stop it from happening.

If you didn't contribute to something, you don't have the right to contribute your opinion on the matter. Consider being part of the process, rather than being a critic of the process when it doesn't work out in your favor.

EDIT: I gotta ask, what the hell is with the attitude here? I swear, if most of you talked to me like that in real life, I'd have smacked the **** out of you by now, regardless of who the hell you were.. As well, I don't show you that kind of disrespect in the first place, so how about you be civil and don't disrespect me? kthxbi

alls i gotta say is, if you are not iraqi and you are in iraq, you might get your head sawed off. so get out of iraq if you don't might want to get your head sawed off. :/

has anyone seen the video...

man what kidn of people in the name of 'god' can do that and feel righteous about it...

i have seen all the videos and this by far the most disturbing as they get past his vochal chord his screams turn to high pitched squeels... i would do anything in this world to get my hands on them and to torture them... **** turning the other cheek begin a christian, they deserve a special place in hell

what about all the children that were crushed by falling debris from 1000lb bombs falling on the residential areas of iraq trying to flush out the bad guys? who is responsible for killing the children of iraq? sadaam? because he shoulda just done what he was told by bush? all those little screams that did not reach the ears of america. all the gushing blood from stumps where limbs once were, were not seen by america's eyes. all the helpless mothers crying out to god asking 'why? why my children? why my husband?'
who i ask is responsible? sadaam because he didn't do as he was told? blind and deaf adolencents that can not learn because they are sensory impared. orphans of liberation that some people may have wanted, but not at the expense tolled. who is responsible? sadaam because he didn't tell everyone that he wasn't making huge bombs? why does america cringe when they see a few white guys get their heads sawed off, but not too many seem to think that so many iraqi families that will be less one within the next 10 minutes is worth anything? 'it's worth thier freedom. just ask us. we'll tell you what it's like over there. we saw it on cnn.'

give me a ****ing break. those poor guys that have been beheaded is NOTHING, ****ING NOTHING!!!, compared to the outright violence and blood and gore that america has unleashed on the people of iraq.

I have personally seen the video and I agree it is very disturbing. I want to forget it as soon as possible. But maybe such graphic discriptions shouldn't be posted here. It was our decision to view the video but others may not wish to know anything about it other than the CNN report. We should respect them by not posting discriptions of it here. I'm not at all saying what you said was wrong in anyway whatsoever, sometimes reality is graphic. But it's something to maybe consider.

The first two are fake, proven.

In the second one, the terrorists speak Russian, the film is obviously edited, and one of the terrorists is wearing a gold ring--specifically forbidden in their supposed religion.

ok, when I saw the video last night and it very nearly made me vomit, they cut it before the actual beheading. The description given here has now made me quite nauseaus again.

Dave, I was talking to NobleOutlaw about this last night (couldn't sleep for obvious reasons), about how our reactions differ for different atrocities. I think what it comes down to is how much you can identify with the victims. When the war started, I was really really upset, because anyone could end up a victim when that level of violence is unleashed. With these hostages, it's the same sense of completely unjustified victimisation that's so upsetting.

Ok, I'm not making much sense, and I really don't want to think about this anymore.

Good Sarcasm, I give you a cookie.

You know, I never have heard of a good argument for going over into Iraq.

There are plenty of dictators. There are plenty of people with the same sentiment and armament Saddam had. Yet we seem to not have anyone in our sites. IF there were CLEAR and present danger, technially a bunch of wars would be justified.

Our main goal was to capture Bin Laden. Which we still have not been able to do. But before we finished that main course, we had some dessert. And indeed, have sown more anti American sentiment, so now ol' Bin has MORE places to find solace and recruits.

I'm going to compare this to a really bad example, someone find something better, because the only parralel in this is starting one thing before doing another...

If Hitler wouldn't have attacked the USSR and kept on Britian and her allies, he would have won. Technically he did have enough resources to fight both fronts (i.e. we have enough to fight Laden and Saddam and then some). However, we all know the end of that. Going after a whole slew of seperate targets rather than finishing one has never proven to be a good strategy. We are going after terrorists, not dangerous governments. Even if the case was that Saddam could have possibly maybe at somepoint aided the terrorists it still is better to just fight the terrorists, because they are a more immediate threat. We fought a war based on assumptions, when we had definates to attack. And in anycase, if it is not PAINFULLY clear why we were attacking Iraq TO THE MOST INCOMPITENT IDIOT, it is wrong.

It is sad these people are dying, but you have your country invaded, and see if you are full of lolipops and sunshine. It wasn't a liberation, it was an invasion. While the executioners aren't mainstream by any means, they would be hampered greatly if the occupation was supported by the citizens of Iraq.

Kuat--Hitler would not have won. We produced the A-Bomb before they did. If all else failed...Germany would now be a mass of rubble. Not only that, but the Russians really didn't help until almost the end of the war. All they did was manage to lose millions of soldiers in the effort.

if you dont like either, vote for nader at least.

So I should vote for Bush, then, because I don't want Kerry in office?

Wait, wait. I don't want Bush in office. So I should vote for Kerry.

Wait, wait. I don't want either Kerry or Bush in office, so I should vote for a third party that has no chance of winning?

What it boils down to is that, no matter what I do, either Kerry or Bush will be elected into office. So if my actions have no effect on the consequences, why should I bother?

What puss poor attitude. Me-Me-Me-Me...thats all it is.

Um...that's...kinda the point of a democracy. What YOU want.

How many times do I have to say it?

We would be bombed and invaded before we woulda finished if he woulda concentrated on us. And no, the germans suffered a quagmire over in Russia, as well as Russian winter. Suffice to say, we may have been forced to rethink our options if the axis was able to shift it's full bulk twoard us. The nuke wasn't a for sure then.

Point taken.

Yes, that is almost certainly what will happen this election. Get enough support for a third party and they may have a chance next time round.

Over here, most people I know of my mum's generation are sticking with Labour even though they absolutely despise Blair by this point, because they are just so worried about letting the Tories back in. But most people I know of my generation are going Lib Dem, and so hopefully they'll get enough support in the near future to actually create a three party system.

Thanks, just so you know, it wasn't directed only at you. In fact, not even largely at you.

I've said the exact same thing in about 4-5 different threads now *sigh*

Voting is a way of telling the Democratic party "Your candidate sucks, and I'm not going to vote Democrat until you start supplying better ones, so shape up or you're going to be in trouble." Or something along those lines. It won't help right away, but you can but try. :\

You know, billions will die before the end.

too illegible

Discression is the better part of valor. Although your principles are correct and I do agree it is time they stand up as well agenst these people instead of allowing them to continue. Some of the things you just said could be missinturperated(sp) as racism.

wow that definitely made my stomach churn... think what you're about to post before you do it please. -_-

Party store? You have some personal issues or something? Simmer down buddy. Most outspoken muslin was Saddam? I think you should go over your post and maybe think about what you are saying.

guess not

You're right. Saddam used plastic shredders, nerve gas, electrocution and Kalashnikovs. What a profound point you've made.

I just can't read Snoopfighter639's posts.

Meanwhile, the Jews greedily count away the money their banks make daily and lord it over the poor people.

Ah, but they weren't on Americans! Now it's suddenly bad...

Really, people die every day, and it's a shame, but do they really think the american government is going to cripple at the needs of some extremist? More than likelly not.

JediKirby

Ditto



Sine--for some reason, you and I have agreed quite a bit lately.

You insult yourself you know. Apart from the grammar, there is no need for them to stand up against their relegion. The muslim community in the United States is actually quite productive and beneficial, and many are professionals as well. But apart from that case, what do you want them to do? No muslim who lives here is pro beheading innocent civilians, and they have not done anything to show otherwise.

You seem to assume a lot of things. But people are people, and the only reason the Islamic world is unhappy is because of their poor economic situation. They pin this on America because they had meddled with middle eastern politics. This is why they don't attack Japan, Germany, France, ect ect. That and the fact out of all the former countries who did involve themself in the middle east, the US is the last superpower. It's like a person was beat up by a group of thugs. Most of the hate will go to the leader, the most prosperous of the bunch.

I suggest everyone actually read Sine_Nomen's post on the other thread about the Iraq Invasion because he made a good point about all of this. He basically said if the people of the Middle East had jobs they would have something to do, something to live for which would make them less likely to be standing around doing nothing and less likely to join and listen to Al Queda who are telling them to do these violent acts. Forgive me if my summery of it is incorrect or not complete but I suggest everyone take a minute or two and read it. It'll make you think about it a diffrent way if you already were not thinking about it that way.

Ubuu, I understand your point, but such a condition can only exist in a popular vote. Like I said, my vote isn't as powerful as everyone elses' because it is nullified by the electorate college.

It's not all about winning, and it's not all about whether or not your vote will change the course of the entire election. It's the principle.

Even if you think, or should I say, KNOW someone is going to lose the election, if you favor them over the other people, then sure, why not vote for them.

The fact is, pretty much nobody will ever meet a politician they like, or that they truly 100% want in office. All politicians are liars, cheats, thieve's, etc. But you still have the right to choose which one you want, or prefer.

If you have the ability to choose whom you want, and you do nothing about it, then someone you don't want gets elected, you can't really complain because you did nothing. Even if you know it wont turn the tide, you..did...nothing.

If you have the ability to choose whom you want, and you don't really want anyone that is running to be elected, fine, don't vote. You don't HAVE to vote. But whomever gets elected, if you don't like them, but yet again you did nothing to even try to prevent their election....You don't have the right to say a thing. Because you did nothing to prevent it, nothing to contribute to it, n-o-t-h-i-n-g.

If you have the ability to choose whom you want, and you vote for someone. Even if the one you didn't want elected gets elected into office, you can at least turn back and say "Hey, I might not like the decision that the majority voted for, BUT at least I tried to do something with my god-given right to vote and choose, now I can at least complain about it... Because well, hell, I tried to do something instead of sitting on my *** and feeling bad that there was nobody i liked running."

If you have the ability to choose whom you want, yet you don't want anyone that is running, vote for the one you most favor. You don't have to, but remember that when you do nothing to help, contribute, when you have the ability to....That you also forfeit your right to complain about what you did nothing to prevent.

I'm all for freedom of speech and such, but not when it doesn't belong; like from someone not doing something to prevent an event from occurring because they feel helpless to solve the problem....Like, lets say, in a decision which will determine the next leader of your entire country.

EDIT: Actually, I retract my other statement about if you don't want anyone in office. But I still am sketchy, since nobody really ever WANTS a particular person in office....That happens very rarely, especially in our time. But if you don't really want anyone in office...Then sure, don't vote. I can understand that. But all my other statements, stand

quoted for truth.

Looking at the various candidates (wow, Personal Party's running mate is a porn star?), I have to say that Nader's probably going to end with my vote, if anything to get us closer to a three-party system, and the fact that he stood up against the Democrats when they asked him to withdraw because he was taking Gore's votes.

Well, I'm canadian so I don't really follow US politics too much anymore. I haven't really had the interest in this election.

:p