Does anyone still believe this guy?

[QUOTE=Demowipper]Hmmmm safer than ever??? From what? Your country has the highest kills due to guns in the world.... on top of that what are you safe from??? Someone running a plane into the white house? I doubt it there are still so many flaws that could be exploited easily (one example being the fact that sure the airport security is beefed up inside USA but take a look at flights coming into the USA there is crap all there). I (being in Canada) feel no more safer then I did 7 years ago and if anything I feel less safe now that my government has the ability to tap my phone lines at any point, can raid my house, and if they really wanted to they could team up with the USA making up crap that I am a terrorist and deport me to seria where I get beaten and tortured for 6 months (proof of this look up whats his face it's mayor ahar or something he is currently taking the USA government to court for deporting him to Seria where he was tortured and beaten for some time). Now tell me how can you feel safe??? I am not worried about some crazy ass arab running a plane into me... I never was in the first place... I am more worried about the fact that you can litterally buy a damn gun from the corner stores!!!! (this I do realize is a sterotype that I Have never had a encounter with in the states but belive to be true)[/QUOTE]

The issue of gun control is not Bush's fault. Gun deaths are not due to Bush being in office - yes, it's a problem, but as i said, i am not going to necessarily defend America here, only the integrity of the President. I feel he has done a great job leading this nation.

Nos.

ah well my point with that whole little rant was that there is more worse things to worry about than terror in my opinnion

I think your rant just show's that there can be more than one form of terror :/

[QUOTE=Nostalgia]Our homeland is safer than it has ever been...[/QUOTE]

I just want to question this. No sense taking on every point. Plus I fear looking like the Nazi Canadian I'm made out to be. Funny enough, this isn't an attack on Bush either.

How can this be true? Since this new Homeland Security, you have never been below Yellow (Elevated) and quite frequently have been raised to Red (High) on your Terror Threat Level? How is this safe? I know you have a multitude of agents, law enforcement personelle & government officials on the job, but someone is obviously mad at you.

Before this new system the threat levels were obviously still there, but how many attacks have actually occured on US soil from an outside source? I don't know many specifically, but two major ones come to mind (Pearl Harbour, 9/11) and the third one is the War of 1812. So in 225 years previous to 9/11 you only had two attacks on US soil (please correct the numbers if they significantly affect my point) and that has a 129 year span between them. Now, since and including 9/11, you have had the most deadly of attacks on US soil, and with your elevated Terror Status, they fear more are coming. Let's also not forget US embassies all over the world which are targets, nor the American tourists that also get targeted. Maybe we do want to forget about the attempted shoe bomber, Bin Ladens first attempt on the WTC and all the other recent "in house" operations. They don't boad well for your statement.

Why on earth do you think that in 220+ years as a nation, you are suddenly a prime target of terror? Terror has obviously been a threat for a long time, but there is no denying the elavated status of it. Do you think that it may be because ever since the World Wars, America has started to put its nose in everyones business (justified or not) and ever since then, paranoia has swept the nation. Nazis, Communists, Terrorists etc... But before all this war and aggresion, before the USA felt obligated to rescue the Earth, do you think they were a target? I don't imagine so. (I do know the importance of WWII and a few other key military involvements that I agreed with).

So tell me again how your homeland is safer then ever? Is it your big army and CIA, FBI, and whatever else agents you have? One might say yes. But one might also say they even though they are the biggest, strongest person in the world with the biggest baddest weapons in the world, they don't feel too safe because they always have to be armed and always have to be prepare, just in case. Me personally, safety is knowing no one is out there trying to blow me up. I wouldn't feel safe however knowing someone out there was trying to, no matter how easy it would be to stop them.

So tell me again how your homeland is safer then ever? Is it your big army and CIA, FBI, and whatever else agents you have? One might say yes. But one might also say they even though they are the biggest, strongest person in the world with the biggest baddest weapons in the world, they don't feel too safe because they always have to be armed and always have to be prepare, just in case. Me personally, safety is knowing no one is out there trying to blow me up. I wouldn't feel safe however knowing someone out there was trying to, no matter how easy it would be to stop them.

I am sorry, but the english language is not relative. It is an exact science, and safety does not mean that absolutely no one is out to get you, it means that you are indeed sheltered from whatever may befall.

I'll give you the fact that there are people out to get us, though. I feel safe, regardless, as odd as that may seem.

Nos.

Safer then ever is what you said though. So you are indicating that in the history of American history, this is the safest. It's not really about how YOU feel, but the country in general. Plus, you have no idea how it felt to live in a different time.

hey, everybody's favorite tree hugger here, with another link for another lesson in why to educate yourself before you cast your vote in 2004... Food for thought, if you will.

I donate to some environmental causes, and tonight I got some info and a petition in the mail, I wanted to relay some of the info...

Why? Because, I want to let you know that, despite our President's current infatuation with other planets, oil countries and killing the middle-to-lower class American elderly by means of raising medical prices through the roof - there are some other issues that fly under the radar.

abbreviated from a flyer from the Wilderness Society :

The Bush administration has so far...

1. Encouraged Oil Companies to drill in the most ecological sensitive areas of the Arctic Wildlife Refuge.

2. Threatened to weaken USA's clean air regulations.

3. Unilaterally withdrawn from the Kyoto global warming treaty.

4. Proposed new forest management regulations, tossing out 25 yrs of environmental regulations.

5. Targeted over 58 million acres of National Forests for Timber, Oil and Coal mining

I'm not going to read any more of your links, graphicsguy, until you tell me you visited over half of the conservative links I posted!!!

:D

Whilest I believe in proper conservation, don't you think there's an OBVIOUS reason for this

1. Encouraged Oil Companies to drill in the most ecological sensitive areas of the Arctic Wildlife Refuge.

2. Threatened to weaken USA's clean air regulations.

3. Unilaterally withdrawn from the Kyoto global warming treaty.

4. Proposed new forest management regulations, tossing out 25 yrs of environmental regulations.

5. Targeted over 58 million acres of National Forests for Timber, Oil and Coal mining

...i.e., the overwhelming unrest in the Middle East, the uncertainty of flow of oil from Iraq and neighbooring countries, and trying to reduce US dependancy on foriegn oil? Oh, no, wait--it's just self serving... he's from Texas. He's trying line his own pockets--damn the country!!! No, I don't think so. Our dependency on foriegn oil makes us weaker and more succeptible to terror. And Nos... don't get too comfortable and feeling safe. That makes us forget and get complacent. And Spectra--quit arguing semantics, it makes you sound childish.

Don't you just hate it when you're on one side of an argument and then theres someone on the same side and you hope that they will be able to argue quite well but then they say some really stupid things and totally disprove any valid point you had to begin with?

No offense, nostalgia, and I am on your side here, but you have made some very uninformed and ignorant arguments. You maintain that Finland is invisible? That the US president has nothing to do with the way Finland operates? That it shouldnt matter to Finns what the US does? You're completely wrong on all of those points, and in most of the cases, you're only weakening your points. Sorry.

So paavo (and everyone else on the 'other' side in this thread): Im sure its not necessary, but Id like to apologize on behalf of nostalgia, and make sure you all are aware that basically this whole thread has been you arguing with him, who of course only represents the opinion of 1 person in the US. I can assure you that its not only yourselves who think that at least some of his posts were somewhat ignorant and in some cases insulting.

And once again - please don't take offense, anyone. :D

[QUOTE=malibu]And Spectra--quit arguing semantics, it makes you sound childish.[/QUOTE]

Are you kidding me??? :mad: