It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Romney takes hit over Palestine gaffe

page: 4
13
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 19 2012 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by rocha123
 


They are both idiots.

What it comes down for me is, which is fits my morals and is a christian. Which is Romney, though he is Mormon, which is ... weird, however, I'll take a Mormon over someone who believes Allah is Yahweh and celebrates Ramadan.

Romney, Foreign Affairs idiot. He believes middle class is 250,000 $, however, due to inflation, it may just be what middle class SHOULD be at, which it isnt.

Obama believes we didn't build that, and spending will get us out of debt. Yeah, spending money that we don't own, but is borrowed.

---

So, again, both of them are idiots. It comes down to Morals and Religion.

Obama = New Ager (Allah is a name of a god, but it is not Yahweh, Obama believes all paths lead to heaven.) Loves abortion. Would not want his daughter ' burdened ' with a child.

Romney = Weird Christian and dislikes abortion.

Voting for Romney.
edit on 19-9-2012 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)


Are you a 12 year old or just really poorly educated.

My fourth grader has a deeper understanding of the candidates and the issues of our time than you do.
Pathetic.




posted on Sep, 19 2012 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by daaskapital
 


This is an interesting topic, i must look more into it as soon as i return home to my computer.

Marking this now to remind me later



posted on Sep, 19 2012 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by daaskapital
 


This is an interesting topic, i must look more into it as soon as i return home to my computer.

Marking this now to remind me later



posted on Sep, 19 2012 @ 08:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Flatfish
 


That's what I thought, too.

Romney's foreign policy plan: Hope for Change

Bush tried to say (actually justify his war) that the "the road to Jerusalem runs through Baghdad.” I wonder if a POTUS Romney would kick the can down the road, or justify a new war somewhere, by saying, "the road to Jerusalem runs through [insert name of capital]".



posted on Sep, 19 2012 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by milominderbinder
Really? The Palestinians? Why don't we give that ultimatum to the Israeli's? How about "Dissolve your illegally formed government by next week Wed. or the United States will start carpet bombing your civilians just like we did to the Iraqi's and Afghani's?

Why should Israel get the special treatment here?


You loudly proclaimed Romney is a “warmonger” earlier on in the thread.
Then YOU called for the elimination of Israel.
Then YOU say we should give them an ultimatum, then carpet bomb civilians, “like we did to the Iraqi’s and Afghani’s”
Then all the other stuff you have posted…………….

Dude…. You have pretty much jumped the shark here…. Even for a troll…



posted on Sep, 19 2012 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 


Get real. You right now are saying that every person in Palestine harbors and collaborates with terrorists.
That is an incredibly ignorant statement.


No, the majority do though. Either actively or passively. The situation we are in today is proof I am right. When was the last time civilians dragged a Palestinian terrorist through the streets cheering and then killed him? Thought so.



posted on Sep, 19 2012 @ 11:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
Another "gaffe," which is really just ignorance, from the same speech, Romney illustrates that he doesn't know what a dirty bomb is.

He said:

If I were Iran, if I were Iran—a crazed fanatic, I'd say let's get a little fissile material to Hezbollah, have them carry it to Chicago or some other place, and then if anything goes wrong, or America starts acting up, we'll just say, "Guess what? Unless you stand down, why, we're going to let off a dirty bomb." I mean this is where we have—where America could be held up and blackmailed by Iran, by the mullahs, by crazy people. So we really don't have any option but to keep Iran from having a nuclear weapon.


In an attempt to fear monger over Iran's alleged nuclear weapon program. The thing is. they don't need fissile material for a nuclear weapon. Any nuclear material, like waste from medical material or power plants can be used in a dirty bomb which means if they had intentions to do what he says they could have for the last 30 or so years. They wouldn't need a weapons program (or any nuclear facilities at all) to do such a thing.


So you are saying weapons grade enriched plutonium would not make for a more potent bomb? Risk vs. Reward. Acceptable loss. These are all factors which need to be taken into consideration. Now remove the dirty bomb context, and simply replace with nuclear weapon, is he wrong? Rather than focus on one word how about you focus on the message, the meaning.



posted on Sep, 19 2012 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by Kocag
reply to post by milominderbinder
 

So your saying that Israel should not return fire when rockets land in their cites?


Correct.

I'm also saying that they should dissolve their government and turn the land they unlawfully stole back over to the Palestinians under the threat of massive and severe US military action, should the Israeli's fail to comply.

Preferably by next week.


Thank you for proving everything you say from here on out should be ignored since you are completely without reason or logic. Thanks!



posted on Sep, 19 2012 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by rigel4
Is this Romney person a Jew?
seems like he must be the way he is going on.

By that i mean he seems really pro Israel
edit on 19-9-2012 by rigel4 because: (no reason given)


I think it's less pro Israel and more anti stupid. Also anti lying. It's awesome how everyone bitches about politicians saying only what we want to hear and then they bitch harder when someone tells it like it is.



posted on Sep, 19 2012 @ 11:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Tranny
reply to post by Tw0Sides
 


Logic 101….
Corporations are comprised of groups of people.
Those groups of people have a right to speak individually, or as a group.
Those people have a right to speak as individuals, or as a group.



But not as both and that is what Romney is suggesting should be. I only get one vote, so should everyone in the corporation.



posted on Sep, 19 2012 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Tranny

Originally posted by milominderbinder
Really? The Palestinians? Why don't we give that ultimatum to the Israeli's? How about "Dissolve your illegally formed government by next week Wed. or the United States will start carpet bombing your civilians just like we did to the Iraqi's and Afghani's?

Why should Israel get the special treatment here?


You loudly proclaimed Romney is a “warmonger” earlier on in the thread.
Then YOU called for the elimination of Israel.
Then YOU say we should give them an ultimatum, then carpet bomb civilians, “like we did to the Iraqi’s and Afghani’s”
Then all the other stuff you have posted…………….

Dude…. You have pretty much jumped the shark here…. Even for a troll…


Not at all...It's a literary device called satire. I'm just pointing out the double standard here. I can't count how many people just take for granted that it's the Palestinians responsibility to stop trying to get the land that was stolen from the back. You guys make it sound like the Palestinians are the violent ones.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 


Get real. You right now are saying that every person in Palestine harbors and collaborates with terrorists.
That is an incredibly ignorant statement.


No, the majority do though. Either actively or passively. The situation we are in today is proof I am right. When was the last time civilians dragged a Palestinian terrorist through the streets cheering and then killed him? Thought so.


Good point...the Israeli's usually just leave the dead to rot in the streets or in the concentration camps they starve to death in.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 12:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
Another "gaffe," which is really just ignorance, from the same speech, Romney illustrates that he doesn't know what a dirty bomb is.

He said:

If I were Iran, if I were Iran—a crazed fanatic, I'd say let's get a little fissile material to Hezbollah, have them carry it to Chicago or some other place, and then if anything goes wrong, or America starts acting up, we'll just say, "Guess what? Unless you stand down, why, we're going to let off a dirty bomb." I mean this is where we have—where America could be held up and blackmailed by Iran, by the mullahs, by crazy people. So we really don't have any option but to keep Iran from having a nuclear weapon.


In an attempt to fear monger over Iran's alleged nuclear weapon program. The thing is. they don't need fissile material for a nuclear weapon. Any nuclear material, like waste from medical material or power plants can be used in a dirty bomb which means if they had intentions to do what he says they could have for the last 30 or so years. They wouldn't need a weapons program (or any nuclear facilities at all) to do such a thing.


So you are saying weapons grade enriched plutonium would not make for a more potent bomb? Risk vs. Reward. Acceptable loss. These are all factors which need to be taken into consideration. Now remove the dirty bomb context, and simply replace with nuclear weapon, is he wrong? Rather than focus on one word how about you focus on the message, the meaning.


Fission bombs are more or less obsolete. As we speak there has been something like 10 or 12 HIGH SCHOOL KIDS in the US who have built working nuclear FUSION reactors in their basements with parts from Home Depot and Radio Shack. The youngest was a 13 yr old girl. And yes...that's not a typo...they successfully fused deuterium in their basements and garages.

What are we going to do when the Iranian scientists are finally capable of matching wits with our amateur adolescents...invade iron and confiscate all of their hydrogen atoms so they can't build an H-bomb?

It's beyond idiotic. To date there has not been a single example of a government being able to successfully prevent another government from adopting a technology once it's discovered sooner or later. We might as well wage war on tidal currents or gravity...the eventual outcomes are about as inevitable.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 01:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by wascurious

Originally posted by Mr Tranny
reply to post by Tw0Sides
 


Logic 101….
Corporations are comprised of groups of people.
Those groups of people have a right to speak individually, or as a group.
Those people have a right to speak as individuals, or as a group.



But not as both and that is what Romney is suggesting should be. I only get one vote, so should everyone in the corporation.


Uh…. Hm…… O … MY GOD…..THE STUPID IT BURNS!!!!!!!!!

I just want to cry when I read that….
And the idea that I have to explain this is even more depressing.

Since when in heck did the SCOTUS say that the corporation could go into a voting booth and vote for a candidate?

If you are implying that they would be allowed to speak more than others….
Uh……….. How do I say this…… Freedom of speech isn’t metered. You can speak any way you want to, how ever long you want to, and as many ways as you want to. You don’t go to the government to get a ticket that allows you to speak for 20 minutes.

If a person owns a business, the person can speak as an individual person, and he can order his company to echo the same thing. He has a right to speak via what ever means he has available to him, and as long as he wants to.

..................................
There is people on here that talk about a conspiracy against freedom of speech. I think the people that conspirers against that freedom are already right on this board.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 02:07 AM
link   
reply to post by daaskapital
 


Political suicide...I couldnt believe what he said, even regarding the other comments this guy really doesn't get it, if anything at all.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 02:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by sir_slide
reply to post by daaskapital
 


Political suicide...I couldnt believe what he said, even regarding the other comments this guy really doesn't get it, if anything at all.


Except he is completely right. There will be no peace in the region until someone tells the Palestinians to stop being terrorists.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 03:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flatfish
reply to post by daaskapital
 


This is the part that bothers me; Source article; www.theaustralian.com.au...


"I look at the Palestinians not wanting to see peace anyway, for political purposes, committed to the destruction and elimination of Israel, and these thorny issues, and I say there's just no way," Mr Romney said.

"You move things along the best way you can. You hope for some degree of stability, but you recognise that this is going to remain an unsolved problem -- and we kick the ball down the field and hope that ultimately, somehow, something will happen and resolve it."


Talk about being a man with a plan???? No wonder you can't get him to give any specifics, he doesn't have any! Just punt the ball down-field and hope that someone on your team picks it up and runs with it, now that's what I call a plan.


Romney doesn't know what to do until someone else tells him what to do, period. Bush puppet on steroids!!!


Just food for thought for those against Romney's views to help Israel:

[Former Pres. Bill Clinton's words]

The former U.S. leader, whose energetic efforts to broker an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal collapsed, also urged both sides to end their decades-old conflict, saying they cannot escape their common future.

"We are either going to hurt each other or we are going to help each other," he said of the two foes. "Divorce is not an option."

While president, Clinton had a close personal involvement in Middle East peacemaking. He presided over the signing of the historic first agreement between Israel and the Palestinians in 1993, and seven years later, he brought the two sides closer than ever before to a final deal.

But talks broke down in late 2000, and soon after, tensions ignited into years of deadly fighting.

The former U.S. president remains extremely popular in Israel, however, because he is perceived as being a genuine friend.


www.haaretz.com...

I realize a lot of democrats are waiting to pounce on any thing Romney says but when you have a former Dem. Pres. with very high favorable ratings siding with Israel, I can't help but wonder why no one is bashing Clinton for his support.

Is he, Clinton, a moron too as another poster stated of Romney for supporting Israel???

As I'm one who voted for Obummer in 2008, his Foreign Policies are terrible and needs some serious help.
So how can Romney be any worse when our current president isn't doing to hot himself???

I'm an Independent and do not like our choices for President.
I can not re-elect Obummer .....he has been nothing but a huge disappointment as a leader for our country. IMO.

So, I guess that leaves the "Other Guy"....



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 04:13 AM
link   
reply to post by snarky412
 


You hit the nail on the head. It's only wrong when the other "team" does it.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 05:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Tranny
There is people on here that talk about a conspiracy against freedom of speech. I think the people that conspirers against that freedom are already right on this board.
Could you perhaps try writing your post again but in English this time? After trying to make sense of your made up words and terrible noun/verb agreement I see you are right about one thing. The stupid really does burn. Sorry I have no idea what you are attempting to say to me. I just want to hand you back your post with red ink all over it instead of try and interpret it.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 05:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
Another "gaffe," which is really just ignorance, from the same speech, Romney illustrates that he doesn't know what a dirty bomb is.

He said:

If I were Iran, if I were Iran—a crazed fanatic, I'd say let's get a little fissile material to Hezbollah, have them carry it to Chicago or some other place, and then if anything goes wrong, or America starts acting up, we'll just say, "Guess what? Unless you stand down, why, we're going to let off a dirty bomb." I mean this is where we have—where America could be held up and blackmailed by Iran, by the mullahs, by crazy people. So we really don't have any option but to keep Iran from having a nuclear weapon.


In an attempt to fear monger over Iran's alleged nuclear weapon program. The thing is. they don't need fissile material for a nuclear weapon. Any nuclear material, like waste from medical material or power plants can be used in a dirty bomb which means if they had intentions to do what he says they could have for the last 30 or so years. They wouldn't need a weapons program (or any nuclear facilities at all) to do such a thing.


So you are saying weapons grade enriched plutonium would not make for a more potent bomb? Risk vs. Reward. Acceptable loss. These are all factors which need to be taken into consideration. Now remove the dirty bomb context, and simply replace with nuclear weapon, is he wrong? Rather than focus on one word how about you focus on the message, the meaning.


Fission bombs are more or less obsolete. As we speak there has been something like 10 or 12 HIGH SCHOOL KIDS in the US who have built working nuclear FUSION reactors in their basements with parts from Home Depot and Radio Shack. The youngest was a 13 yr old girl. And yes...that's not a typo...they successfully fused deuterium in their basements and garages.

What are we going to do when the Iranian scientists are finally capable of matching wits with our amateur adolescents...invade iron and confiscate all of their hydrogen atoms so they can't build an H-bomb?

It's beyond idiotic. To date there has not been a single example of a government being able to successfully prevent another government from adopting a technology once it's discovered sooner or later. We might as well wage war on tidal currents or gravity...the eventual outcomes are about as inevitable.


Sweet, now show me where these garage amateurs created WEAPONS GRADE plutonium. Thanks.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join