windy1 Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 This may belong in a movie thread but it's not really about the movie. I know it's been discussed before, But i just saw it yesterday and I am angry. I'm a registered democrat. I registered to vote when I turned 18 and have voted in all major elections and most minor ones since. Although I'm a democrat I don't vote along party lines. I vote my concionsous, whether the candidate is republican or democrat. You could also call me fairly conservative, or at least middle of the road. I was seriously considering voting for Bush this year. But since I saw that movie I am so angry. If you consider half of it trumped up propaganada, one quarter straight up lies, that still leaves a lot of stuff to be upset about. That's my opinion anyhow. If I can't see my way clear to vote for Kerry, I just may have to go Nader or Libertarian. Missouri has a pretty big Libertarian party. I don't think I can just not vote at all, but who knows? This requires no reply, I just was angry and wanted to state my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XXX Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 Where was Michael Moore when we bombed Serbia to smithereens - with the blessing of the UN - on behalf of muslim terrorists (i.e. the KLA)? We've been at it for ages, Windy. This isn't the first instance nor the last (regrettably). We're steeped in it now, though. We have a real threat to contend with because it's a full-on guerrilla warfare waged by radical jizzlamic subhumans who have no qualms about destroying their own people's effort to rise above the misery and destruction. Yes, there will be many deaths and innocents will get caught in the crossfire: What revolutionary war isn't smeared with the blood of the innocent? We can't just leave because that will demonstrate our sworn enemies that they still got a hold of us. Al-Sadr and his cronies will reign supreme and thugs like Azarqawi will flex their militant muscle on the populace. I don't know about you or anyone, but I believe they must be exterminated and Kerry isn't the guy who will get things done. A vote for Nader is good enough (Kerry lost another vote right there) because those who support Bush aren't doing it because they hate the other guy as is the case with a lot of supporters Kerry has... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
windy1 Posted October 21, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 It's not the war so much. I'm a patriotic person that supports the troops and the fight against terror. My brother was in Desert Storm, and I fly my flag everyday. I worry that we have another Vietnam on our hands, I lived through that era. I know guys that died and guys who lives were wrecked. But we have to finish what we have started. It's the lies, the political corruption, the belief I have always had that this war is more about oil than freedom. Mostly it's the lies and half truths and evasion. I don't know... I'm not a Michael Moore supporter. I know he spouts propanganda, and twists things to his advantage, But even if just a bit is true it's enough to make me doubt. And like Vietnam, it's the poor kids and the reservists that are fighting this war. People who don't have the advantages of the rich. I guess I have too much Vietnam left to bug me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MuzikTyme Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 Mankind without war is like a millennia without sunshine. Voting in this election is a lot like playing the lottery. You have as much chance winning whether you play or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCyberdemon Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 Voting in this election is a lot like playing the lottery. You have as much chance winning whether you play or not. HD Thoreau. Remember, civil disobediance is still disobediance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MuzikTyme Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 ...civil disobediance is still disobediance. I agree. Good thing I wasn't displaying disobedience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XXX Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 Real civil disobedience would involve refusing to pay federal taxes so as to not have a hand in the funding of the Iraqi invasion and subsequent occupation and killing of its citizens. Thoreau went to prison during the Mexican-American War for this reason because he believed that too was an unjust war primarily aimed at gaining land rather than Mexico posing a real threat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiggsUK Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 I read about Leo Strauss recently, and a lot of what he said seems to be at play here. The need for a 'common enemy' to unite the US population is something the Neo-Conservatives are very good at playing up, irrespective of the facts. Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCyberdemon Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 Hey there Diggs, Remember, England was middle-eastern bashing long before Americas forefathers great grandfathers were born. Crusades anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 Go Daffy! Remember, he can get this country back on quack!! Almost all politicians are corrupt, except Daffy. "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XXX Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 The need for an enemy isn't necessary - they came right at our doorstep. The fellows the US army are fighting now in Iraq are of the same ilk we wanted to headhunt in the first place. If there wasn't a link to Al-Qaeda in Iraq before the occupation, we will get it from the insurgents... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jillianne Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 I can't see my way clear to vote for Kerry I know what you mean.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marko90 Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 someone here said that "there is no need for an enemy" and well I find that to b quite true, I can see both sides here, I know its wrong for Al Queda to bomb the USA, but whats the point of bombing Afganistan and Iraq!? like the addage goes "bombing for peace is like screwing for virginity!!" you get me?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiggsUK Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 CD, you are quite right to bring up the Crusades, after all this was another example of western Christians having a 'willy nilly' go at Muslims, albeit nearly 1000 years ago. There are some fundamental differences though: The Crusades were undertaken by multi-national forces, with no lead from a major power. The Crusades were ok by God, as the participants had to get the blessing of the Pope beforehand. The Crusaders were in the main upper class idiots out on an adventure, together with servants and a few paid troops. Oh, and the earth was flat, women were burned alive for 'witchcraft' and common folk (ie the population of Europe) didn't know what was going on. To call yourself 'civilised' suggests an ability to learn from the mistakes of others. Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MuzikTyme Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 The Crusades were ok by God It is man that wages war, not God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XXX Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 There is nothing man chooses to do that god didn't know beforehand when everything was created and set in its course according to its will: The Crusades and the slaughter done in god's name was and is foreordained by god. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MuzikTyme Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 You have ZERO conception of free will. Man makes the choice. For the one thousandth time, it does not matter if God knows before, presently, or after the fact. We are not determined nor are our personal, private decisions forced. Our destinies are already known by the Almighty, yes. But they are fulfilled by OUR hand, not His. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiggsUK Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 Before we get into this one again MT, what I meant was that God's representative on earth said it was ok to go. As he was supposed to have had a private line to the big man, the Christians of the day naturally accepted him at his word. I was demonstrating a difference between that series of conflicts and the present one. I don't recall his Papalness giving express consent to Mr Bush - but feel free to correct me if he did. Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aunt_Acid Posted October 21, 2004 Report Share Posted October 21, 2004 I'd like to see someone else come up with the answers. Bush is a man. He can't solve all the problems. He isn't capable of perfection. But, he can run this country through one of its worst periods, and he can do a damn fine job of it. If you want change, don't vote for a person whose policy is to be a mouthpiece for opinion polls. Run yourself. Nobody has all the answers. But some people have a hell of a lot more answers than other people, and Bush is one of those people; someone who can pull us through. Electing Kerry is like playing Russian Roulette. How would you have handled the situation? George Bush isn't perfect. You shouldn't expect perfection from anyone except God. When He made man, he made us imperfect for a reason. Not everything runs like clockwork so get used to it. Bush had made good decisions regarding the war. Bush has made good decisions regarding taxes. Bush has also made some bad decisions. Show me a president that makes all good decisions, and I'll show you a comfortable aftershave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiggsUK Posted October 22, 2004 Report Share Posted October 22, 2004 Taking an extreme right wing viewpoint is taking the easy option. Anybody can do that whilst retaining the support of big business and the financially secure sector of the electorate. Really tough decisions are taken by politicians wishing to redistribute wealth and security downwards, to improve the lot of the greater population. Do you in the US have anybody standing brave enough to do this? Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aunt_Acid Posted October 22, 2004 Report Share Posted October 22, 2004 The government should have nothing to do with how much money people make. Since when is it the government's job to "redistribute wealth"? If people want money, they work for it. They don't get it fed to them off of a silver platter by the government. (Well, they do, but they shouldn't). Back to the subject, Michael Moore is a footage editing, taking-things-out-of-contest, manipulating, lying, anti-american, treasonous, communist, unpatriotic bastard. I have no respect for him. I loathe him. If you want to change the way the government runs, then run for office. Don't lie to people so you can maniuplate their feeble and naive minds to get them to vote for your lying, poor excuse for a human being candidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MuzikTyme Posted October 22, 2004 Report Share Posted October 22, 2004 The Crusades were ok by God I knew exactly what you meant, Diggs. Sadly, the above statement is taken literally by millions of people and I thought I'd set the record straight for the confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XXX Posted October 22, 2004 Report Share Posted October 22, 2004 You have ZERO conception of free will. Man makes the choice. For the one thousandth time, it does not matter if God knows before, presently, or after the fact. We are not determined nor are our personal, private decisions forced. Our destinies are already known by the Almighty, yes. But they are fulfilled by OUR hand, not His. Humans don't even have a choice whether to exist or not. God made that decision for them already. The idea of free will requires uncertainty of the future and exercising a choice, but the future decisions are known to god: God knew these things even before they were executed. It's what the plan is all about. It could have been just as easy to not bother creating humans with their inherent decisions. One more time, "Man's destiny is foreordained by god. Man has no say in it, they just execute the plan accordingly." If free will requires a degree of uncertainty of the future, even god can't truly exercise it. The nature of the topic is confusing because theism is replete with confusing ideas that people accept in faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MuzikTyme Posted October 22, 2004 Report Share Posted October 22, 2004 Your concept is very interesting but flawed. I know I cannot make you understand the fact that nothing is planned for us. We make the plan. You're saying that everything we do is decided by God. I'm sorry, but you're wrong. You don't believe so I understand your stand, as well as your delusion so far as the topic of free will. No, you don't know what will happen to you because you've convinced yourself that creation just happened without rhyme or reason. Everything just fell into place like ten bags of scrabble letters being dropped from a step ladder onto ten scrabble boards and making ten complete sentences. Creation without thought is just as likely. But, why don't you believe that a computer was created without thought? Or do you think a computer is greater than the mind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XXX Posted October 22, 2004 Report Share Posted October 22, 2004 God transcends time, right? Time doesn't exist for god. Time exists for us, but to god things don't appear in the same way. Whereas we only have the one three-dimensional view with the usual progression of time according to physical laws, when god created time it created the past, present, and future all at once. Think of this as a painting where if you were to stand back you could see from left to right at the same time. God views things simultaneously, the past and future of humans as they were created. The thoughts, actions, choices humans make are all there on the canvas, set in god's own design. A creation has no say whatsoever on what it will be and what it will (or won't) do, it only does that which it was intended to do: That's us in a theistic perspective. If you can surprise god, then you have something there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now