Aa
Why?
I want to know why it is that when I explain my beliefs about America, politicians, etc. I get called "stupid," "ridiculous," an "extremist" or a "hypocrite" and the list goes on. Just because I tend to have conservative views and I choose to speak out against corruption in our government and do not appreciate the government being involved in my life does not give anyone the right to attack me here on this forum or to send me PMs attacking me either. Every single time I have offered my opinion, I have NEVER called anyone with differing views by names or put them down for their beliefs! I simply state mine but unfortunately I have NOT received the same respect! Perhaps when we are explaining our views we could try to remember that - and be respectful!
At the time of the war with Iraq....I could not believe that Saddam Hussein was as big a threat to us as Osama bin Laden was...I never wanted to go to war with Iraq...I thought we had our thumb on that rat's tail pretty good. If he had WMD, why did he never use them? Once we started bombing his country all over again, I'd of thought we'd have been fair game..and he had opportunity...and he'd already proven that it didn't bother him to hurt his own countrymen... We did not get him for a long time and the man we pulled from his rat hole was not an all powerfull man any more. He could get that way again, I'm sure, but the man on TV was not an immediate threat any more...and from what the Army rangers said....we were so close in Afghanistan....we thought he was already injured and they were ready to go in and clean his clock...That's when we pull the rangers? You don't think that's a bit weird...especially after his whole family was put on a plane and sent home the on 09-12? I think it was questionable.
Oh and Barbarella, I did not intend to offend....to keep father and son separated (instead of saying Mr Bush 1 and Mr Bush 2 or president sr and president jr...I started calling "Dad" Herbert and "son" was "W" but it is said like "dubya" since their names were so similar...I have a lot of die hard republican friends and co-workers and we would get into some interesting conversations, but it was just a thing we did...them as well as me....As for Mr Obama...I'm just not comfortable enough yet with him to give him a pet name, so he is still Mr Obama or President Obama...I have yet to come up with a comfort zone name for him...Yes I know it is correct to say President Obama and President Bush, but sometimes it's just such a mouthfull.....and I'm a very informal person.
Oh and Barbarella, I did not intend to offend....to keep father and son separated (instead of saying Mr Bush 1 and Mr Bush 2 or president sr and president jr...I started calling "Dad" Herbert and "son" was "W" but it is said like "dubya" since their names were so similar...I have a lot of die hard republican friends and co-workers and we would get into some interesting conversations, but it was just a thing we did...them as well as me....As for Mr Obama...I'm just not comfortable enough yet with him to give him a pet name, so he is still Mr Obama or President Obama...I have yet to come up with a comfort zone name for him...Yes I know it is correct to say President Obama and President Bush, but sometimes it's just such a mouthfull.....and I'm a very informal person.
Very well said - thanks!
Thank you for posting that - this just goes along with my gut instincts all along. I knew in my heart that was Saddam's plan - he was evil.
This is another awesome thread and I don't know if I can do it justice, but I want to say to HelpinUtah - I know exactly what you mean about stating your opinion and being attacked and called names. I had the exact same thing happen to me on here yesterday and it was all because I didn't agree with someone's opinion - that thread has now been deleted for some reason.
I am actually a registered democrat, but definitely do NOT vote the party and am actually thinking of changing my affiliation. I am like the poster above who said they were taught to look at the person first, the party second.
Every single President we've ever had, has done things that might not have been the best for the country, but it seemed that way at the time. AND every new President has inherited problems from the previous administration - but often that's mostly because of the differences of opinion on HOW things should/should not be accomplished.
I was appalled at the choices we ended up for President for this past election - we really scraped the bottom of the barrel this time. I did not like McCain as a choice for President either, but like so many, I voted for him as the "lessor of 2 evils". It just so happened that the time was ripe for someone of Obama's caliber to be looked upon as some kind of "savior". I can't remember the particulars, but I read not too long ago that almost 50% of the people who voted for him are now sorry that they did. I have no idea WHO was polled or WHERE they were....... it was just a news article I ran across on the web......
So far, Mr Obama has done nothing to earn my respect and I'm still glad that I voted the way I did; in fact, he continues to make me more fearful every day with his policies of "government involvement" in every aspect of our lives; not to mention his attempts to "spend our way out" of a recession. It just doesn't work that way.
I just read an article this morning about how in spite of the almost $1 trillion bailout, that was supposed to create jobs, etc, etc - unemployment is most likely going to reach double digits sometime this year. That means millions more will be losing jobs AND insurance benefits...... not to mention that those of us who DO still have jobs and insurance may likely be taxed for them so we can help pay for those who do NOT have insurance. Wow - when will it end?? This is scary stuff........ I'm thinkin' that *I* probably won't be able to afford to retire in 3 years like I'd planned/hoped.
Hope4thegoodstuff made some excellent points about not everyone having to agree, or even like each other, but we DO have to respect other people's opinions. We all have our own problems and lives to live and that's going to determine how we think about things and decide what's best for us.
For instance: someone who has lost their job through no fault of their own is most likely hoping for unemployment benefits to be extended; or someone who's lost their medical insurance is probably hoping for some type of program that will insure them adequate medical care.
There are as many ideas and opinions as there are people posting. It's all about respecting each other and our individual ideas and views; as well as being able to debate something without "mud slinging" and name calling.
I am actually a registered democrat, but definitely do NOT vote the party and am actually thinking of changing my affiliation. I am like the poster above who said they were taught to look at the person first, the party second.
Every single President we've ever had, has done things that might not have been the best for the country, but it seemed that way at the time. AND every new President has inherited problems from the previous administration - but often that's mostly because of the differences of opinion on HOW things should/should not be accomplished.
I was appalled at the choices we ended up for President for this past election - we really scraped the bottom of the barrel this time. I did not like McCain as a choice for President either, but like so many, I voted for him as the "lessor of 2 evils". It just so happened that the time was ripe for someone of Obama's caliber to be looked upon as some kind of "savior". I can't remember the particulars, but I read not too long ago that almost 50% of the people who voted for him are now sorry that they did. I have no idea WHO was polled or WHERE they were....... it was just a news article I ran across on the web......
So far, Mr Obama has done nothing to earn my respect and I'm still glad that I voted the way I did; in fact, he continues to make me more fearful every day with his policies of "government involvement" in every aspect of our lives; not to mention his attempts to "spend our way out" of a recession. It just doesn't work that way.
I just read an article this morning about how in spite of the almost $1 trillion bailout, that was supposed to create jobs, etc, etc - unemployment is most likely going to reach double digits sometime this year. That means millions more will be losing jobs AND insurance benefits...... not to mention that those of us who DO still have jobs and insurance may likely be taxed for them so we can help pay for those who do NOT have insurance. Wow - when will it end?? This is scary stuff........ I'm thinkin' that *I* probably won't be able to afford to retire in 3 years like I'd planned/hoped.
Hope4thegoodstuff made some excellent points about not everyone having to agree, or even like each other, but we DO have to respect other people's opinions. We all have our own problems and lives to live and that's going to determine how we think about things and decide what's best for us.
For instance: someone who has lost their job through no fault of their own is most likely hoping for unemployment benefits to be extended; or someone who's lost their medical insurance is probably hoping for some type of program that will insure them adequate medical care.
There are as many ideas and opinions as there are people posting. It's all about respecting each other and our individual ideas and views; as well as being able to debate something without "mud slinging" and name calling.
Goodness Barbarella some facts here Ihad not read about .thank you for making me more aware..
Read this, its from the NY SUN! I and many others believed that all along. Many Europeans in the media have criticized President Bush about WMD's but go over there and start a conservation with the "every day people" about Politics and see the response. The first thing we were told over there in 2006 by a group of Germans in a Restaurant "why are you Americans so stupid and don't realize that the WMD's were shipped to Syria"?? The ones we talked to ALL believed that Saddam DID have WMD's and shipped them out. Read below!
"A former general and friend of Saddam Hussein who defected but maintains close contact with Iraq claims the regime supported al-Qaida with intelligence, finances and munitions and believes weapons of mass destruction are hidden in Syria.
Ali Ibrahim al-Tikriti, southern regional commander for Saddam Hussein's Fedayeen militia in the late 1980s, spoke with Ryan Mauro of WorldThreats.com.
Known as the "Butcher of Basra," al-Tikriti commanded units that dealt with chemical and biological weapons. He defected shortly before the Gulf War in 1991.
Last month, Saddam Hussein's No. 2 Air Force officer, Georges Sada, told the New York Sun Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were moved to Syria six weeks before the war started. Sada claimed two Iraqi Airways Boeing jets converted to cargo planes moved the weapons in a total of 56 flights. They attracted little attention, he said, because they were thought to be civilian flights providing relief from Iraq to Syria, which had suffered a flood after a dam collapse in 2002.
Discussing Saddam's support of terrorism, al-Tikriti said the dictator's regime sponsored Palestinian groups with logistical and material support.
For a time, support for al-Qaida was limited, the former general said, mainly because al-Qaida's aim was to create an Islamic empire while Saddam wanted a secular Arab nationalist empire.
"They only really came to terms in the mid '90s due to the fact that both knew they shared the same short-term enemy," the general said. "Once they came to terms on this, Saddam provided al-Qaida with intelligence support and whatever money or munitions they could provide."
Al-Tikriti said Saddam "had very long-standing contacts in the black market as well as with Moscow and would provide whatever munitions he could through these contacts."
The secular Baathists and radical Islamists certainly are able to put aside their differences to cooperate against the U.S., he insisted.
"If you look in Iraq today, you are witnessing Arab nationalist terrorist organizations and Islamist terrorist organizations working together to fight the United States."
Al-Tikriti dismissed the commonly heard claim that the U.S. helped bring Saddam to power, calling it "absolutely ludicrous."
The Baathist revolution, he said, was backed by the Soviet Union because of the shared socialist ideology.
"I was there helping with the revolution and worked on two occasions with Soviet KGB officials to help train us, much like the United States did with the Taliban during the Soviet campaign in Afghanistan," he said. "The United States never directly gave us any WMDs but rather ingredients. They were not mixed and these 'ingredients' could have been easily used for commercial use but were rather used to build low life chemical weapons."
Al-Tikriti says he knows Saddam's weapons are in Syria because of contingency plans established as far back as the late 1980s, in the event either Damascus or Baghdad were taken over.
"Not to mention, I have discussed this in-depth with various contacts of mine who have confirmed what I already knew," he said.
Saddam, after lying for so many years, knew the U.S. eventually would come for the weapons, he said, and wanted to maintain legitimacy with pan-Arab nationalists.
Also, he had "wanted since he took power to embarrass the West, and this was the perfect opportunity to do so," al-Tikriti said.
"After Saddam denied he had such weapons, why would he use them or leave them readily available to be found?" he said. "That would only legitimize President Bush, who he has a personal grudge against."
What we are witnessing now, he said, "is many who opposed the war to begin with are rallying around Saddam saying we overthrew a sovereign leader based on a lie about WMD. This is exactly what Saddam wanted and predicted."
Al-Tikriti said he turned against the Baath Party after his wife stood up to him and questioned his brutal tactics.
"This really made me think, because no one has ever even considered to question the tactics of myself or any others and lived to tell about it," he said. "This courageous move made me think deep and hard."
Al-Tikriti said he still maintains good sources inside and outside of Iraq.
"Some of Saddam's key scientists are personal friends of mine, as well as other key leaders in the former Iraqi military," he said. "I have helped draw information since my defecting to the United States government voluntarily and with the permission of these contacts. The only difference between many of them and I, is that I had the opportunity to defect and they didn't."
"A former general and friend of Saddam Hussein who defected but maintains close contact with Iraq claims the regime supported al-Qaida with intelligence, finances and munitions and believes weapons of mass destruction are hidden in Syria.
Ali Ibrahim al-Tikriti, southern regional commander for Saddam Hussein's Fedayeen militia in the late 1980s, spoke with Ryan Mauro of WorldThreats.com.
Known as the "Butcher of Basra," al-Tikriti commanded units that dealt with chemical and biological weapons. He defected shortly before the Gulf War in 1991.
Last month, Saddam Hussein's No. 2 Air Force officer, Georges Sada, told the New York Sun Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were moved to Syria six weeks before the war started. Sada claimed two Iraqi Airways Boeing jets converted to cargo planes moved the weapons in a total of 56 flights. They attracted little attention, he said, because they were thought to be civilian flights providing relief from Iraq to Syria, which had suffered a flood after a dam collapse in 2002.
Discussing Saddam's support of terrorism, al-Tikriti said the dictator's regime sponsored Palestinian groups with logistical and material support.
For a time, support for al-Qaida was limited, the former general said, mainly because al-Qaida's aim was to create an Islamic empire while Saddam wanted a secular Arab nationalist empire.
"They only really came to terms in the mid '90s due to the fact that both knew they shared the same short-term enemy," the general said. "Once they came to terms on this, Saddam provided al-Qaida with intelligence support and whatever money or munitions they could provide."
Al-Tikriti said Saddam "had very long-standing contacts in the black market as well as with Moscow and would provide whatever munitions he could through these contacts."
The secular Baathists and radical Islamists certainly are able to put aside their differences to cooperate against the U.S., he insisted.
"If you look in Iraq today, you are witnessing Arab nationalist terrorist organizations and Islamist terrorist organizations working together to fight the United States."
Al-Tikriti dismissed the commonly heard claim that the U.S. helped bring Saddam to power, calling it "absolutely ludicrous."
The Baathist revolution, he said, was backed by the Soviet Union because of the shared socialist ideology.
"I was there helping with the revolution and worked on two occasions with Soviet KGB officials to help train us, much like the United States did with the Taliban during the Soviet campaign in Afghanistan," he said. "The United States never directly gave us any WMDs but rather ingredients. They were not mixed and these 'ingredients' could have been easily used for commercial use but were rather used to build low life chemical weapons."
Al-Tikriti says he knows Saddam's weapons are in Syria because of contingency plans established as far back as the late 1980s, in the event either Damascus or Baghdad were taken over.
"Not to mention, I have discussed this in-depth with various contacts of mine who have confirmed what I already knew," he said.
Saddam, after lying for so many years, knew the U.S. eventually would come for the weapons, he said, and wanted to maintain legitimacy with pan-Arab nationalists.
Also, he had "wanted since he took power to embarrass the West, and this was the perfect opportunity to do so," al-Tikriti said.
"After Saddam denied he had such weapons, why would he use them or leave them readily available to be found?" he said. "That would only legitimize President Bush, who he has a personal grudge against."
What we are witnessing now, he said, "is many who opposed the war to begin with are rallying around Saddam saying we overthrew a sovereign leader based on a lie about WMD. This is exactly what Saddam wanted and predicted."
Al-Tikriti said he turned against the Baath Party after his wife stood up to him and questioned his brutal tactics.
"This really made me think, because no one has ever even considered to question the tactics of myself or any others and lived to tell about it," he said. "This courageous move made me think deep and hard."
Al-Tikriti said he still maintains good sources inside and outside of Iraq.
"Some of Saddam's key scientists are personal friends of mine, as well as other key leaders in the former Iraqi military," he said. "I have helped draw information since my defecting to the United States government voluntarily and with the permission of these contacts. The only difference between many of them and I, is that I had the opportunity to defect and they didn't."
You are reading content posted in the MedHelp Social Community
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
