|
Title: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Phoenix on 2004-10-06, 23:25 http://www.thelouisvillechannel.com/politi...582/detail.html (http://www.thelouisvillechannel.com/politics/3786582/detail.html)
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,134546,00.html (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,134546,00.html) http://www.bet.com/News/draftbill.htm?wbc_...77E4249C5FB7%7D (http://www.bet.com/News/draftbill.htm?wbc_purpose=Basic&WBCMODE=PresentationUnpublished&Referrer=%7B03CE5360-2620-42CB-AD7E-77E4249C5FB7%7D) http://usmilitary.about.com/b/a/2004_10_06.htm (http://usmilitary.about.com/b/a/2004_10_06.htm) As you can see, the "Big Bad Republicans" aren't going to draft anyone. Besides that, the bill was introduced by two Democrats, and Rangel, the Democrat who created it in the first place, even voted against it. I'm hoping everyone can see this was nothing but an election year political stunt. I said it would be DOA and so it is. Now everyone go tell their anti-war friends that a largely Republican congress voted it down, nobody's getting drafted, and not to worry about it. :thumb: Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Woodsman on 2004-10-07, 15:45 Anyone who follows politics and actually knows what they are talking about knew this was a crock. I think alot of people knew it was a crock too it was just politically convenient for then to claim the evil republicans were conspiring to bring back the draft. (its a good way to get ignorant but idealistic youthes to vote democrat)
Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: shambler on 2004-10-07, 15:58 you have some fun over there.
hey, I hear you even have weapns of mass distruction. Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Phoenix on 2004-10-07, 17:33 Quote from: Woodsman Anyone who follows politics and actually knows what they are talking about knew this was a crock. Well the problem is a lot of people DON'T follow up on stuff they hear. While you and I have known full well this bill would die in the House, all they hear is "They're bringing back the Draft!" from their friends, or via some email chainletter, and they get all panic stricken and angry. Besides the college students and other younglings, think of all the "Soccer Moms" out there who get and send chainletters, worrying about their kids getting plucked up and shipped off overseas, and you can see how this sort of thing snowballs.shambler: I AM a weapon of mass destruction! Fear me! :rules: Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: shambler on 2004-10-07, 20:45 :thumb:
Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Tabun on 2004-10-07, 21:18 Quote Well the problem is a lot of people DON'T follow up on stuff they hear. The real problem, I think, is that a lot of people don't follow up on stuff they hear, unless it's about <political group/race/brand/nationality>. It's a one-sided deal usually. Pope-lovers will believe M. Jackson is the devil, but they'll never believe someone accusing the pope to be senile. The sad part is that even though this is a very logical and common thing, hardly anyone admits their guilt. So, just for a change (and to give this thread some varying content), I will stand up for common sense once more. If it was a nation, and had a flag, I would have been waving it here, or something proud and ceremonial like that. I, C. Zimmerman, AKA A. Tabun, am biased and automatically doubt everything that opposes the convictions that have lodged/wedged in my brain and daily patterns of thought. I promise to keep fighting against it, and to keep an open mind and shall eventually free myself from the shackles of single-mindedness, ignorance and bias, or die trying. There. I've said it. Guilty as charged. Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Phoenix on 2004-10-08, 03:54 Quote from: Tabun Pope-lovers will believe When I read this I had to re-read it, as the way that's worded gramatically it's ambiguous as to whether you're saying that the people who were accusing the pope (of something ) were senile persons, or that the pope could be senile and those accusing him of senility were not believed by those who love the pontiff. Wonderful thing, that English language. <3M. Jackson is the devil, but they'll never believe someone accusing the pope to be senile. Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Tabun on 2004-10-08, 12:57 Hehe, well oh dear, you got me! :]
I'll assume the point, which is valid, understood - even in the light of this grammar-1on1. Btw, don't mistake this for sincere melodrama, I just like to 'rant' in style every once and again. But then again, whatever could I say to convince anyone, eh? It'd be like trying to convince Makou that I actually did chatkill him by accident :] Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Woodsman on 2004-10-08, 17:54 This was supposed to be about me gloating to the whiney lefitists conspiracy theorists and you ruined it with your jibberish tab! DAMN YOU!! :biggun:
Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Tabun on 2004-10-08, 19:07 Thanks for stressing my point, Woods :] :shifty:
Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Phoenix on 2004-10-08, 20:22 Tab: Referring to your reference to the IRC conversation last night, I understood it to be humorous/satirical melodrama, as opposed to the "woe is me" form of melodrama. When people speak of ranting it usually brings to mind the LeeMon "serious rant" style of ranting. :smirk:
Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Tabun on 2004-10-09, 13:30 Understood - come to think of it, the first word that pops in mind when reading 'rant' is 'Lee' :]
Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Woolie Wool on 2004-10-26, 00:24 Quote from: shambler you have some fun over there. We've had them since 1945. We also haven't done anything but lock them away in underground silos since 1945. And the two times we did use them it was because it was the only way to defeat Japan without losing millions of lives on both sides.hey, I hear you even have weapns of mass distruction. Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Woolie Wool on 2004-10-26, 00:26 Quote from: Phoenix Quote from: Tabun Pope-lovers will believe <font color=#FFFF00>When I read this I had to re-read it, as the way that's worded gramatically it's ambiguous as to whether you're saying that the people who were accusing the pope (of something ) were senile persons, or that the pope could be senile and those accusing him of senility were not believed by those who love the pontiff. Wonderful thing, that English language. <3 M. Jackson is the devil, but they'll never believe someone accusing the pope to be senile. Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Phoenix on 2004-10-26, 07:15 Careful there. You'll have to grow old someday, and you just might be senile when you do.
Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Tabun on 2004-10-26, 12:25 Woah. I can't believe someone in here just tried to justify the use of nuclear weaponry and insult the pope.
Pick one of the two, they don't go well together :P And Pho, the big difference (I hope, anyway!), is that Woolie won't be making futile attempts to remain respectable as a religious leader, whilst being driven around in bulletproof pope-mobiles. ;) An admirable attempt though, very much so indeed. Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Woodsman on 2004-10-26, 14:11 okay lets get this out of the way.The pope has not lost his mind or his memory hes just very weak and old. He also did not ride around in the bullet proof pope mobile until somebody shot him.
PS: anybody with any vauge knowledge of the situation in Japan in 1945 knows an invasion of Japan would have cost far far more lives any debate of that is just stupid. :offtopic: Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: shambler on 2004-10-26, 16:01 Religion is a weapon of mass destruction
Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Woodsman on 2004-10-26, 16:17 based on the actions of the soviet union and the peoples republic of china i could say the same thing about atheism. Any belief structure can be a weapon of mass destruction if properly exploited.
Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Tabun on 2004-10-26, 17:21 Atheism, yes, perhaps. But there's no way it'd work for Agnostics. If it would, they wouldn't be, simple as that.
P.S. I did not make any comment about the pope's presumed senility, but weak and old goes without saying. Nor do I care much for the reasons why he uses the mobile, my point was merely that it is hard to take the good man seriously this way. P.P.S. See, Woolie? Woodsman shows one can either agree on only one, or none of those statements ;] Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Woodsman on 2004-10-26, 18:07 He got shot! thats a damn good reason to have a bullet proof car!
Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Tabun on 2004-10-26, 21:37 Not only did I just indicate that I don't really care what the reason was, but I also disagree with that.
Normal situation: - Event: Metallica sues Napster. - Fan's reaction: Tosses albums in the garbage. Justified situation in comparison with the Pope's mobile: - Event: Metallica sues Napster - Fan's reaction: Places albums in a brown paper bag, ties a huge purple decorative frog to the bag, then tosses the whole package in the garbage. Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Phoenix on 2004-10-27, 00:55 To get back to facts, there has not been a single world war since the development and initial deployment of the atomic bomb. Since the initual two were detonated on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, no nuclear weapon has since been verifiably used in a combat role in ANY conflict to date. Compare that to two world wars beginning within 25 years of each other in the first half of the twentieth century. If anything you could say nuclear weapons have been an effective deterrant to world wars, at least, up until this point in history. Who knows what the future will bring.
As for religion being a weapon of mass destruction, I think this would depend on which religion is in question and what it's primary teachings instruct its believers to do. Now consider combining nuclear weapons with religious fanaticism, and yes, then you could call religion a weapon of mass destruction. Now in regards to the Pope, perhaps he is old and weak, but despite his suffering and illness he doesn't give up. If anything I'd say that's setting a good example to his followers to persevere against all odds. He's done a good job of taking up his cross. What harm is there in that? Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Tabun on 2004-10-27, 11:09 As I stated, it's an impressive feat for the old chap to even stand up straight, so yes - I'd say he's giving it the best he's got, and yes, that's certainly worth something.
I just generally disagree with the 'word of god' being spread by man, in any form, whether it be in writing, or by a single religious figure (supported by vatican masterminds). 'Don't use birth-control, people!' - the masses sometimes need to be protected against themselves. Oh dear, before this turns into some kind of religious debate/war (esp. with the 'it's a weapon' argument thrown in here already), I'll just go ahead and admit that religions (and for me, mostly and specifically those of asian origin) make a lot of sense. I just think that any mass opinion or conviction, from 'thou shalt not kill' to 'he's a filthy jew' to 'winning is all important!' is dangerous from the moment the masses stop thinking. Agnostics are generally blamed to be apathetic, but I think nothing's closer to apathy than giving up on wondering and questioning things, accepting someone's word for something so personal as one's own beliefs. Anyone doing their own thinking does not belong in that group, and whether they be muslim, buddhist, christian or satanist, IMO they've got the bull by the horns. Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: games keeper on 2004-11-02, 17:44 Quote there has not been a single world war since the development and initial deployment of the atomic bomb there hasn't been a world war in 5000 years since the egyptians build the piramids either . Title: Re: Draft Bill Dead Post by: Woodsman on 2004-11-02, 17:55 Gameskeeper: what the hell are you talking about?
|