sandy2

Thank you.

I misspoke. They werent accusations. They were comments. Not accusations. I apologize. That does not invalidate my point about the soldiers not being paid to die. When i say attack the USA i classify any sort of pre-emptive attack as an attack on the USA. I agree that civilians should not needlessly die.

gotcha. So it's ok to kill as many people as we want as long as it's not our OWN soldiers. Thanks for clarifying, I was confused and thought you had a moral opposition to war or something. I have no moral opposition to a war that we must fight in self defence. I have an oposition to fight a war based on

Haha. sorry i missinterpreted you. cwarsh- solving the root problem is not the easiest way to solve the problem. Keeping assult guns and all guns out of the hands of criminals is easier. Locking up people involved in a gun crime for life is easier. And I know that there is no good way for me to put this, so I will be blunt. There are some people who are poor because they are of the type of people who would be involved in a violent crime. Maki

Muggaz your accusations are absurd. First of all, Iran would not attack the united states. My previous posts were to support the idea of not provoking Iran. However, the fact remains that we could and would crush Iran and any other country that dared to attack us. No country would be that stupid. We wouldn't be able to use nukes, but we have other bombs. We have fighter jets. We have allies. And we would win. The failure that occured in Iraq would NOT

Good suggestions. The budget has to be cut, true. However revenues need to be increased to fund social security. Also, the ammendment to prevent congress from using federal funds on projects that help only a specific geographic region is an excelent idea, although it would never pass congress. To ammend the constitution would require a huge majority to support the bill. The united states needs to have federal reserves also available so that we can ente

Deference- Once again I am not promoting a ban on guns. No, rather I am supporting a ban on a select few dangerous weapons.

You are suggesting that the value of a dollar would sky rocket if taxes were reduced? I beg to differ, though I respect your view. The point of my post however was that gun legistlation in the past has worked. I also don't think that the way to solve gun crimes is to make sure there are no poor.

As a direct consequence, businesses that used to operate in Asia could now afford to employ in the US - WRONG. if laborers in the united states were willing to work for 1 dollar a day, then yes they could move to the USA. So since rope and wire can be used to murder someone, lets ban it! How about your butcher knife in the kitchen? A good frie

Ok here is my reasoning. In the near future social security will become a major expense of the country. It will not be able to afford the expense of social security and medicare without further cutting expenses. Further, according to http://www.cbpp.org/10-21-03tax.htm, we have never collected less in income tax when compared with the GDP. Even further, this website goes on to show that we are spending less then ever compared to the GDP. Also, we are d

Also, I would like to point out the source of the article from the begining. Aljazeera. Can someone confirm this news story by a more reputable news source?

I agree somewhat. If you are going to enter a war you must do a complete job. We should never entered the war, but now that we have lets finish it and make sure Iraq doesnt give us any more trouble.

But what if the helicopter or airplane is the thing that is attacking you? give me the name of one person in this country who has been attacked by a helicopter. I understand that the basis of your argument is that we as americans need to have the right to have weapons so we can defend ourselves against attack by foreign countries. I don't know about you, but if I'm being attacked by another country, I expect the military and the nation

if you want to take it farther, what if i think church should be discourage, because its just sitting. we have a huge obesity problem in the US, so everyone from 8-12 on sunday has to play youth sports? oh wait, no thats idioitic Hahahha.. excelent way to show the insanity of such a law as was proposed

Below I will outline why I believe that tax reform is needed. If there is any intrest in the discussion I will put together a posible plan for doing so. :

I disagree with your analasys of social security. Though I do think that it is flawed, it is not a scam for the government to steal money. The truth is, social security is underfunded. Also, the retirment age is too low. People are living longer than ever and theres no reason you can't work at 70. Also, you should be required to pay taxes on your social security income. Further, the structure of social security should be changed. Right now, other gover

Exactly softballchicky. So are you people suggesting that if someone is holding up a bank with a rocket launcher then the only way for me to stop this person is by having a rocket launcher of my own? I'm not sure I would safely be able to use that rocket launcher. So maybe we need mandatory classes teaching everyone how to operate all sorts of different weaponry. That should surley make this country safer. <TABLE cellpadding=8 width="95%" align=center

I will not dispute the fact that it may have been a bad idea, as I am not aware with all the details of the bosnian conflict as it was a while back. I do know that the basis of the war was not a lie, and that is what makes it different. And if you think that Saddam didn't support terrorism, and then remember he publicly

Who may I ask do you think you are?

Exactly. We need to protect our people and our country. Let the UN be the world's police man.

Who are the enimes of your state, and doesn't the police department and the national gaurd protect your state?

I will not debate with you when you inflict religion or god into your arguments. That is what the terrorists did to justify what they did. I will simply not discus this with you until you choose to drop that reasoning.

Going by super-liberal logic, World War 2 was a "wanted to" You can call it super-liberal logic, but I call it flawed logic. We attacked germany because they were allied with Japan, and further this was in no way pre-emptive, as Germany had already begun to attack our allies. Show me where Iraq had atta

it is a blatant violation of seperation of church and state Yes it is. You want quiet time? I respect that. You can have quiet time in your house. What do you have to say to that?

* Lose i meant