Two questions for democrats

1. What does weakening the military and security have to do with helping the american people? I mean you guys are their to make sure we have clean water, bread, shelter, education and healthcare. So tell me what does weakening security and defense have to do with helping the american people?

2. Why would the war on terror be abandoned or be handled in weak way?

1. What we don't spend on heightening our ability to kill people will be used to help the people.

2. The war on terror is a cliche. Terrorist organisations would be stamped out under Kerry whilst building and maintaining relationships with key partners. America is not the only country fighting.

KERRY gives doesnt give squat about the war on terrorism he wants to abandon it.

John Kerry is commited to the war on terror and safeguarding the national security of America.

Nerdling is right, Kerry will fight the war on terrorism, whereas Bush cut funding for rebuilding Afghanistan to pay for his little vendetta war against Saddam.

Kerry could also win the war on terror, because he understands that we can't just use brute force and bombs, we must win the hearts and minds of our enemies.

Blessed Be
~Astral

haha kerry will just use words he will never use bombs

You're questioning the hutzpah of a Vietnam veteran who has killed many in defence of his nation? Are you crazy?

Kerry will not hesitate to kill terrorists, however he'll THINK before acting and take advice from a mature team of advisors.

yeah after he said he didnt want it

kerry is anti war he is not going to do anything even if he does do somthing it's going to be weak. Weak meaning the terrorist got away

Are you a mind reader, do you have a personal relation with Kerry? I didn't think so, kthx.


PS: donde es osama?

[Edited on 11-7-2004 by Lysergic]

ok answer this question with a better answer: what does weaking military and security have to do with helping the american people?

dont say anything about spending money to perfect military machines , perfecting them is mandatory. IF he wanted to help people of america he could just cut the military budget in half 200bil is enough. what he shoudnt do is vote aganst weapon programs and dismiss alot of people from the military. I WANT A STRONG AMERICA I DONT WANT A WEAK LEADER WITH A SOFT WORLD VIEW PEOPLE LIKE THIS MAKE IT EASIER FOR TROUBLE TO HIT US AND HARDER FOR US TO COUNTER IT.

I'd just like to know what a war on terror really is? Can you actually wage a war on terror? I mean i know you can go after groups and individuals, but isn't terrorism or terrorist ideals, just that ideas? By going over there and attacking and invading and killing innocents etc... Aren't you in fact just breeding more terrorists? How do you win a war on terror? Isn't it just like a war on drugs? or a war on obesity? and so many other so called wars that are infact just excuses to waste taxpayer money.
If you are worried about security, homeland security, maybe your government should spend the 80 billion it sent to Iraq on upgrading security on the homefront. Stop invading and tighten up the home ship. Stop funding terrorist organizations like you did Bin Laden when he was fighting the Russians. These men are unstable and they have a tendency of turning against you. I don't think Kerry will be a weak leader, nor will he be weak on security, I mean the way i look at things Bush is merely throwing money at the problem rather thn creating initiatives to change the worlds perpspective on America.

have done a good job of characterizing the Democrats as weak on defense. However, they also did a good job of getting Max Cleland, a Vietnam vet who lost three limbs over there defeated as being anti patriotic.

I would venture a guess that if one checked out the House and Senate one would find more vets on the Democratic side of the aisle.

The difference would be the Dems are intelligent enough to realize that in sending your youth off to war you better have a dang good reason.l

If Bush was really so big on the terrorist thing he would never have pulled resources from Afganistan and the search for Bin Laden(the real deal) to have his little "fun" in Iraq to prove what a "great" leader he was.

On another subject I was a finance clerk in the service, and I knew all along if anyone really wanted to know about Bush's service record his PFR(personal finance record) was the place to check. It would list morning report entries of arrival and departure from units, why and why he didn't get paid, etc. They were "conveniently" destroyed. There is a backup.

What a hero.

Ok, you have just GOT to give some actual data on these superfluous claims....


HOW will weakening our defense allow us to "help the people", and WHO are the "poeple" you would help?

Just HOW, pray tell, will Kerry "stamp out terrorist organizations"? Come on, some REAL info this time, not just your very short opinion.....

Much like when he killed women and children in Vietnam? He did not hesitate then.

Kerry is not committed to fighting the war on terrorism. Anyone who thinks he is has obviously not researched Kerry's stance on the war while he was in Congress.

"Much like when he killed women and children in Vietnam? He did not hesitate then.

Kerry is not committed to fighting the war on terrorism. Anyone who thinks he is has obviously not researched Kerry's stance on the war while he was in Congress. "

The Iraq invasion had nothing to do with the war on terror. Surely all must realize that by now. If not I got some good land in Louisiana right by the bayou that would make one a great homestead.

Surely, all must realize that you are incorrect by now. Let's see, does the name Abu Musab al-Zarqawi have any meaning to you? No? Do some research.....

Guess you were the gullable one for buying that slice of swamp land in the first place, eh? And now you want to pawn it off on someone, just like the drivel above? Try again, please....this time with clarity....

You went down the rabbitt hole....for what? "Black Man 2006" got 16 replies out of this crap without even putting the effort into posting a real subject of discussion. It doesn't matter that a chunk were his/hers. Still, it's easy if you go "linear" : take some resource of data, enter it into a cogent & thought out post, and THEN put it out there for debate.

GEEEZ LOUISE!!

I think you are asking the wrong people. Bush and his incompetent policies have only helped the terrorists he says he wants to fight. It's hard to tell who side he's on. He has made America so weak, it's amazing we Canada doesn't annex us. The entire world is laughing at us, and doesn't take us seriously anymore. We need a strong leader like Kerry to save this country, restore honor and dignity back to the White House, and actually do something that will help America win the war on terrorism. I just hope America actually has a chance to vote to get him out of office. It's apparent he doesn't listen to what Americans want, they don't want him.

Very interesting, time will tell about your (incompetent policies).
Especially about how his policies have helped the terrorists. I would actually (seriously) like to hear how. Please explain. (U2U if you have to)
But how has he made America week. I personally have to disagree with that. And the world is not laughing at us. They are just mad at us because we have 135,000 people willing to do something the rest of the world was never brave enough to do. The freeing of millions of people is nothing for a country to be ashamed of. And if your over 18 you will get your chance to vote Kerry into office. A man who does whatever the people want him to do. Which could be deciphered as a leader in some sense. Just not the sense I want.

But anyway, have fun everyone. Just be nice and respectful to others.