The War Hero lets slip

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
He's gonna hunt them down & KILL THEM by God. KILL THEM. Not let tehm get away. He will respond to any attack swiftly & fearlessly (assuming Jaques supports his actions).

Ok, that's what he said.

This is also what he said
NY Times said:
'We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance'...

Excuse me Senator...I believe that gnats at a picnic are a nuisance...terrorists are a danger.

Dipshit.
 
Kerry is determined to keep tightening that noose he has around
his neck. Now he says he wants to get back to the good ol' Clinton days of ignoring terrorism and hoping it will go away.

This coming from the man by his own admission couldn't think for 40 minutes following the attacks of 9-11.

JOHN KERRY SAYS SEPTEMBER 11 DIDN'T CHANGE HIM MUCH AT ALL: "'It accelerated -- ' He paused. 'I mean, it didn't change me much at all.'" (Matt Bai, "Kerry's Undeclared War," The New York Times Magazine, 10/10/04)

http://www.rnc.org/RNCResearch/Read.aspx?ID=4832

9/11 didn't really affect him? It didn't strengthen his resolve to fight terrorism? It didn't even make him angry?

We can go about our lives without worrying constantly about terrorism because we have the security of knowing our President is doing what can be done to protect us.

That Kerry would even think this country can get back to the point when terrorists could be considered a "nuisance" shows how out of touch he is and how he doesn't have an understanding of what terror and terrorists are.
He is simply an empty suited elitist who will say anything to try to get elected. Earth to Kerry: 9-11 changed the game. Everything is different now. The sunny days and moonlit nights you speak of are over. We will never have a world where those who commit terror are only a "nuisance."

A nuisance doesn't fly planes into buildings and murder 3000 people.

A nuisance doesn't murder school children.

A nuisance doesn't blow themselves and others up.

A nuisance doesn't actively seek and destroy.

Kerry's definition of winning the war on terror is to reduce terrorists to a "nuisance" in our everyday life and thinking. The real place we need to get to is where we KILL them until ALL terrorists are DEAD! A dead terrorist is a nuisance to no-one.

JOHN KERRY COMPARES TERRORISTS TO PROSTITUTION AND GAMBLING: "When I asked Kerry what it would take for Americans to feel safe again, he displayed a much less apocalyptic worldview. 'We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance,' Kerry said. 'As a former law-enforcement person, I know we're never going to end prostitution. We're never going to end illegal gambling. But we're going to reduce it, organized crime, to a level where it isn't on the rise. It isn't threatening people's lives every day, and fundamentally, it's something that you continue to fight, but it's not threatening the fabric of your life.'" (Matt Bai, "Kerry's Undeclared War," The New York Times Magazine, 10/10/04)

http://www.rnc.org/RNCResearch/Read.aspx?ID=4832


Here's Kerry's nuisance in action once again:

Suddenly the speaker drew a knife from his belt, and three of the others grabbed Bigley, who pivoted to his left. The men shoved Bigley to the floor and cut of his head, which the killer then lifted for viewers to see.


Senator Kerry:
'We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance'...


President GW Bush:
"The best way to defeat them [the terrorists] is to never waver, to be strong, to use every asset at our disposal, is to constantly stay on the offensive and, at the same time, spread liberty."
 
Kerry's definition of winning the war on terror is to reduce terrorists to a "nuisance" in our everyday life and thinking. The real place we need to get to is where we KILL them until ALL terrorists are DEAD! A dead terrorist is a nuisance to no-one.
and just how exactly do you feel that this is gonna be accomplished?
JOHN KERRY COMPARES TERRORISTS TO PROSTITUTION AND GAMBLING: "When I asked Kerry what it would take for Americans to feel safe again, he displayed a much less apocalyptic worldview. 'We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance,' Kerry said. 'As a former law-enforcement person, I know we're never going to end prostitution. We're never going to end illegal gambling. But we're going to reduce it, organized crime, to a level where it isn't on the rise. It isn't threatening people's lives every day, and fundamentally, it's something that you continue to fight, but it's not threatening the fabric of your life.'" (Matt Bai, "Kerry's Undeclared War," The New York Times Magazine, 10/10/04)

http://www.rnc.org/RNCResearch/Read.aspx?ID=4832
I absolutely agree with this sentiment.
 
ResearchMonkey said:
prostitution is legal in some places, so what does that mean.
It means that regardless of all the bombs and guns and laws and brutality and projected 'power', some things will continue to happen whether they're legal or not, or popular or not. There are some things humanity is just helpless about, and all that can be done is preventative maintenance and damage control. :shrug:
 
Leslie said:
and just how exactly do you feel that this is gonna be accomplished? I absolutely agree with this sentiment.


Are you speaking as a Canadian who truly does see terrorism as a "nuisance" and won't think of it as a deadly threat to your life until it comes up and bites you on your ass?

In my opinion the only good terrorist is a dead terrorist. "How" it happens is not important--only "that" it happens. The ends justify the means.

Another victim of the religion of peace:
R.I.P Kenneth Bigley
 
here are some 15000 more. I know, I know, you don't have to tell me, the two year olds were heinous and needed to be eradicated immediately.
I'm speaking as someone (yes, Canadian), who is resigned to the fact that there are bogeymen in the world, all over in fact, some more spoken of than others depending on the political climate of the day. All are likely equally threatening to my life and the lives of my children, but...it can't be helped...so...that's it. We can try and get along, and stop what we can within reason, and that's it.

How exactly do you think it's gonna happen that every terrorist is gonna be wiped off the earth? It's a nice pipe dream but laughable at best.
 
Leslie said:
I'm speaking as someone (yes, Canadian), who is resigned to the fact that there are bogeymen in the world, all over in fact, some more spoken of than others depending on the political climate of the day. All are likely equally threatening to my life and the lives of my children, but...it can't be helped...so...that's it. We can try and get along, and stop what we can within reason, and that's it.

How exactly do you think it's gonna happen that every terrorist is gonna be wiped off the earth? It's a nice pipe dream but laughable at best.

nice to hear the occasional voice of reason :D
 
Whatr matters is that their resourses and number are reduced as much as possible.

If we went after pimps/pros like we are going after the terrorist, 95% of those girls would be outta werk.
 
As sad as it may be, before 9/11 a "nuisance" is what many considered
terrorism to be. I've always differed, but there are many that don't.

I do think if the Bush campaign pushes this too much, it will probably
hurt rather than help.
 
The problem with comparing terrorism with prostitution and illegal gambling is that I've never heard of terrorism that doesn't involve murder.
 
ResearchMonkey said:
Whatr matters is that their resourses and number are reduced as much as possible.

Yes, but not at any cost. That should be one of the things that makes us better than them, there should be things that we won't do.
 
chcr said:
Yes, but not at any cost. That should be one of the things that makes us better than them, there should be things that we won't do.
there are still mud huts standing, the desert hasn't been turned into glass has it? that would have been the far more simple soultion wouldn't.

Ever hear of the Tora-Bora plains?

BoP,

damn straight, the few surviving ones would would be hiding the best the could. they work, we kill em', it would just be a matter of time.
 
ResearchMonkey said:
there are still mud huts standing, the desert hasn't been turned into glass has it? that would have been the far more simple soultion wouldn't.
Your right RM, I was still making the "the ends justify the means" point. Sometimes the ends justify the means, sometimes the means is unjustifiable. The whole "kill 'em all, let god sort 'em out" mentality scares me because I don't think we're as far from doing it as some seem to.
 
chcr said:
Your right RM, I was still making the "the ends justify the means" point. Sometimes the ends justify the means, sometimes the means is unjustifiable. The whole "kill 'em all, let god sort 'em out" mentality scares me because I don't think we're as far from doing it as some seem to.

Read this urban legend. I actually posted something like this earlier, and I apologize for doing so. My research proved me wrong, and this link is to show how badly things can go if you do not check your sources.

As for the ends justifying the means, and the 'kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out' that you posted, revenge would be so much easier than what we're doing now. We could've carpet-bombed Mecca, but we didn't. We could've nuked Baghdad, but we didn't. We don't even enter mosques in the region out of respect for their religion. If you can't see how far we are from doing what you think, then you need to step back and look deeper at your own way of thinking.
 
Kerry: "(I) Will Hunt and Kill the Terrorists Wherever They Are."(First Presidential Debate, Miami, FL, 9/30/04)

You may have heard Kerry fought in Viet Nam. Well, now it seems he's prepared to fight again.

Wait, that was a couple of weeks ago. Now he's saying:

Terrorists,

Bookies,

Hookers,

They're all the same. Fighting terrorism is a law enforcement issue.
 
ResearchMonkey said:
prostitution is legal in some places, so what does that mean.


Come on man...winning and argument for the sake of winning is weak.

You know your reply held no reason and the general question was retarded at best.
 
Back
Top