Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

I Has a Bucket: Preventing bucket theft on Bleeding Hollow | FUBU: A better BH Forum
It is currently Thu Jul 10, 2025 4:23 pm



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 65 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN
PostPosted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:01 am  
User avatar

Old Conservative Faggot
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 12:19 am
Posts: 4308
Location: Winchester Virginia
Offline

Mns wrote:
Is it considered a troll post if it wasn't made to piss people off? I think this is just you being an idiot.


That puts me in pretty good company, Mr. Just-Kidding:
Image

HIGH-FIVE!!!

Your Pal,
Jubber


AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN
PostPosted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:06 am  
User avatar

MegaFaggot 5000
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 11:39 pm
Posts: 4804
Location: Cinci, OH
Offline

Whenever you run out of breath, I'll help you get out of this massive hole you're digging.


RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN
PostPosted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:07 am  
User avatar

Old Conservative Faggot
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 12:19 am
Posts: 4308
Location: Winchester Virginia
Offline

Says the man holding the shovel.

Your Pal,
Jubber


AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN
PostPosted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:08 pm  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 6:59 pm
Posts: 2569
Location: In your dreams.
Offline

HERP DERP DERP DERP DERRRRRRRRP


anyway.


Quote:
In what circumstances, if any, would the president have constitutional authority to bomb Iran without seeking a use-of-force authorization from Congress? (Specifically, what about the strategic bombing of suspected nuclear sites -- a situation that does not involve stopping an IMMINENT threat?)

Barack Obama:The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.
[remainder of response snipped]

Hillary Clinton:
The President has the solemn duty to defend our Nation. If the country is under truly imminent threat of attack, of course the President must take appropriate action to defend us. At the same time, the Constitution requires Congress to authorize war. I do not believe that the President can take military action – including any kind of strategic bombing – against Iran without congressional authorization.
[remainder of response snipped]

John Edwards:
As I've said many times, we do not need a march to war with Iran. I strongly oppose George Bush's doctrine of "preventive war" and believe that force always should be an option of last resort. I opposed the recent Kyl-Lieberman bill declaring Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization, which I believed was the first step on the administration attacking Iran. I believe that the 2002 bill authorizing force in Iraq does not in any way authorize the use of force in Iran.

Bill Richardson:
The Constitution assigns to Congress, not to the President, the power to declare war. However, in the case of an imminent threat, when there is no time to go to Congress, the Commander in Chief may, and indeed must, act to protect the United States. Given that the Iranian nuclear program does not pose such an imminent threat, if the President believed it was in the US national interest to attack Iranian nuclear sites, he should seek prior authorization from Congress.

Christopher Dodd:
Only in the case of an imminent threat to the national security of the United States or the national security of its allies would the President have the right to act militarily without Congressional approval. However, he would be bound by provisions of the War Powers Act to notify Congress and get retroactive approval to continue any military action.

Joseph Biden:
[...]
The Founding Fathers were, as in most things, profoundly right. Thus, the President has no authority to use force in Iran unless Iran attacks the United States, or there is an imminent threat of such an attack. The Constitution is clear: except in response to an attack or the imminent threat of attack, only Congress may authorize war and the use of force.

John McCain:
Well he doesn't. But if there is an imminent threat, the president has to act in America's security interest. ... He should [go to Congress] absent an imminent threat.
[remainder of response snipped]

Mitt Romney:
A President must always act in the best interests of the United States to protect us against a potential threat, including a nuclear Iran. Naturally, it is always preferable to seek agreement of all – leadership of our government as well as our friends around the world – where those circumstances are available.

Ron Paul:
None.

Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson declined to answer.


http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-15292.html Dated 01-18-2008, 03:43 PM.

That's why he let France go first.


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN
PostPosted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:37 pm  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 3:18 pm
Posts: 7047
Offline

good thing libya has oil, else gadhafi would be bombing his own people unopposed


oh wait. that wasnt true in iraq and it isnt true here.


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN
PostPosted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:02 pm  
Blathering Buffoon
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 7:12 am
Posts: 1152
Offline

Usdk wrote:
good thing libya has oil, else gadhafi would be bombing his own people unopposed


oh wait. that wasnt true in iraq and it isnt true here.


Sir I have a Darfur on line one, said they would like to speak to you.


Dvergar /
Quisling
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN
PostPosted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:30 pm  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 3:18 pm
Posts: 7047
Offline

Ok, so say we're only getting involved in iraq and libya for their oil.


where are all the "no war for oil" protesters now?

oh wait, their man is in the office.


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN
PostPosted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 10:51 pm  
User avatar

French Faggot
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:15 pm
Posts: 5227
Location: New Jersey
Offline

I'd say there's a bit of a difference between supporting a popular uprising and rushing in guns blazing without provocation.

Also, what Synth said. You don't want the French to look more decisive than you, do you?


If destruction exists, we must destroy everything.
Shuruppak Yuratuhl
Slaad Shrpk Breizh
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN
PostPosted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 10:51 pm  
Malodorous Moron
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 5:59 pm
Posts: 736
Location: Montreal, QC
Offline

I do.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN
PostPosted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:10 pm  
User avatar

Malodorous Moron
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:09 am
Posts: 747
Offline

Usdk wrote:
good thing libya has oil, else gadhafi would be bombing his own people unopposed

oh wait. that wasnt true in iraq and it isnt true here.


I think a lot of "conservatives" woke up from the Bush era. I was a libertarian in 2000 and fell for Bush's rhetoric "we want a humble foreign policy, no nation building, smaller government" and he did the exact opposite and I learned from this. As much as the "Tea Party" folks get hate from the left, a lot of them simply held corrupt conservatives responsible and replaced who they could, mostly with better public servants.

I would hope that the "left" can do the same, and will see that Obama also didn't keep his promises/did the opposite (lied) about "bringing our troops home immediately, ending the patriot act and unlawful privacy infringement, and a balanced budget." They have a few decent folks in Congress, and I hope a lot of them will "wake up" like a lot of (but not all) the republicans did.


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN
PostPosted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:27 pm  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 6:59 pm
Posts: 2569
Location: In your dreams.
Offline

Yuratuhl wrote:
I'd say there's a bit of a difference between supporting a popular uprising and rushing in guns blazing without provocation.

Also, what Synth said. You don't want the French to look more decisive than you, do you?


Image


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN
PostPosted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:33 pm  
User avatar

Stupid Schlemiel
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 4:53 pm
Posts: 1808
Offline

I believe in change

Loonies and Toonies!


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN
PostPosted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:42 pm  
Malodorous Moron
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 5:59 pm
Posts: 736
Location: Montreal, QC
Offline

Tehra wrote:
Yuratuhl wrote:
I'd say there's a bit of a difference between supporting a popular uprising and rushing in guns blazing without provocation.

Also, what Synth said. You don't want the French to look more decisive than you, do you?


Image


#1
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN
PostPosted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 12:12 am  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 6:59 pm
Posts: 2569
Location: In your dreams.
Offline

Jushiro wrote:
I believe in change

Loonies and Toonies!


I believe you should change your looney tunes sig.

Holy clusterfuck, batman.


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN
PostPosted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 12:54 am  
User avatar

MegaFaggot 5000
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 11:39 pm
Posts: 4804
Location: Cinci, OH
Offline

Rathmoon wrote:
I would hope that the "left" can do the same, and will see that Obama also didn't keep his promises/did the opposite (lied) about "bringing our troops home immediately, ending the patriot act and unlawful privacy infringement, and a balanced budget." They have a few decent folks in Congress, and I hope a lot of them will "wake up" like a lot of (but not all) the republicans did.

Even if the left does, it does absolutely dick for the country because due to our two party system, voting for a third party is basically shooting your guy in the foot (ex. Perot in '96, Nader in '00, etc) and with the bigwigs in other camp catering to the tea party, the idea of a moderate republican is dead, considering those that were up for re-election got the boot.

I think you underestimate the staggering ability the public has of voting just so the other guy doesn't win.

EDIT:
Quote:
You don't want the French to look more decisive than you, do you?

Didn't the French fuck up Libya in the first place or was that someone else?


RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 65 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

World of Warcraft phpBB template "WoWMoonclaw" created by MAËVAH (ex-MOONCLAW) (v3.0.8.0) - wowcr.net : World of Warcraft styles & videos
© World of Warcraft and Blizzard Entertainment are trademarks or registered trademarks of Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. in the U.S. and/or other countries. wowcr.net is in no way associated with Blizzard Entertainment.
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group