So why is this fella's work any more acurate than ABC's movie about the events leading to 9/11?

The fact is, the US normally has 4 carriers deployed (sometimes 5), 2 in the yards and the rest doing fleet workups for their next deployment. 2 carriers would be of little use to national defense.

The primary purpose, other than war fighting, of a navy is to secure the sea lanes of communication. Pirates, like all criminal elements, have a tendancy to thrive where there are unarmed citizens and law enforcement only arrive after the fact.

They also provide emergency services beyond the reach of coastal forces.

Still, there is no need for "hundreds" of US naval ships. There are so many right now that you could practically make a bridge out of them all the way to Europe. Just a plain and simple waste of good resources and money. Why not give that money to the people? Why not give that money to the victims of 9/11? Don't they deserve more for the lack of competance of the Bush administration and the military for letting them down and allowing terrorist to attack this country in such a horrible way? This all happened on Bush's watch, not Clinton's.

Yes it happend on Bush's watch however the planning took place long before. As for giving the money to the "people" that is not what the Federal government is for. There is quite a bit of waste in social programs. The Constitution does not provide for handouts. That is up to the States and individuals. I'd rather have my tax dollars spent on the military than on the lazy.

Yet again, another one shows his true colors. What a shame that you view the less fortunate, sick, and family & victims of 9/11 as "lazy".

What a sick sick world we live in! :nope:

I have never tried to hide my colors. The sick are usally provided for and the families of 9/11 have recieved quite a bit. The sickness in this world is with those that would suck us dry through welfare and with those who would protest the war at a fallen serviceman burial. The liberties you enjoy have come at a price. There is no "can't we all just get along" way of preserving that which is dear to us.
Spend my money on the machines necessary to maintain our freedom.

You need to read "Rich Dad, Poor Dad" by Robert Kiyosaki.

He can give you some GOOD economical advice regarding finances. And I agree that neither the Republicans or the Democrats have performed well in this aspect.

However, it is my full and unadulterated belief that Welfare is a CRUTCH for the poor. It is easier to live off of a fixed income and keep the welfare, than to WORK and gain less financially and then lose the welfare because they're trying to support themselves.

And when they lose the welfare, they cry, whine and moan about their place instead of DOING something about it.

Ya ever wonder why the national Credit Card debt has skyrocketed, yet there are people who still depend on welfare? Or whenever the U.S. taxpayer gets their tax-refund back and then goes on a shopping spree or a vacation?

My father is deaf, he is BANNED from working full-time or earning above a certain amount of money unless he wants to risk losing his social security benefits. So the only solution my dad has is to find a teaching position that will outstrip the Social Security benefits. My dad is unemployed right now because American Sign language is STILL not considered a language (which is BS), so it isn't much of a motivation for students to take classes for a language that won't even count on their Credits!! Not only that, but a majority of the Universities/Colleges that my dad has applied to, all think they know how to teach Sign Language better than a deaf man!!

But surprise surprise. Because my dad worked while receiving Social Security Income, they're going back 13 years into our financial history and want our family to cough up 137,000 dollars. So now if Dad wants to work, he'll be stripped of all his money since it'll go to Social Security to pay off the debt, he's STUCK.

137,000 dollars. And ya know what? They say that I, now age 19, owe 37,000 of that. My sister owes 28,000, and she's 15 years old. So now my dad is FORCED to remain un-employed. Lovely, my family and I are already screwed over by the Government Beaureaucracy and I'm not even 30. Social security has already threatened to seize our property to make up the loss if we don't start paying them. Right now we're going through the legal nightmare of trying to fend off this unwarranted attack. Like I'm ever going to be a champion of welfare.

Thankfully, we like animals so my dad decided to start a business under my moms' name. My parents run a small dairy farm in Fort Hall Idaho. My mother makes cheese from Goats' milk, and my dad is in the process of raising a meat-goat herd, at this time we have approximately 36 goats on our farm. We don't have welfare, and right now my mom is the bread-winner while my dad is working on a long-term base of income for our family. Why don't others show the same innovation that we have in trying to support ourselves?

Or take me for example: I'm an un-employed student who is living on savings, and I've got a lock-down on my finances that will carry me around for at least 8 months before I'm out to try and get a loan. But at the same time I'm running up and down the street to get a job as fast as I can. You won't hear me whining about not getting welfare. You'll hear me whining about how difficult it is to get a job (I thought it'd be easier to get a job in the city). I'm practically guaranteed work once I finish school, and even more so if I do well (more motivation to learn here).

I'm competing against the clock, and I know I'm going to win. I'll be in lock-down for awhile, so there's no fun and games until I'm out of the woods. Even then it'll be better for me to continue a lock-down until I have a cushion and stable footing when I'm out of school.

That probably won't help much if taxes are continually raised to cover government expenses. Right now the average tax rate for U.S. citizens is 25%. That's a whopping large amount of money when you consider that American citizens will work from January until mid-May to pay off taxes.

And in regards to government expenses: Far more money has been wasted on Beauracracy, whose sole purpose is self-perpetuation (and will commit an act to justify its' existence, like the ATF) than the trifle amount that has been spent on this war.

http://timchapmanblog.com/category/wasted-tax-dollars/

And the spending of money is, to a degree, a complete waste.

Israel has an average Tax Rate of 22% for the average citizen and she has done an excellent job defending her borders and thwarting terrorist acts, we're doing the same. So what is needed now is not the raising of taxes, but the elimination of Beauracracy, Red-Tape, and the silly notion that America will be safe once we're out of Iraq. We also need to stop pouring so much money into our Beauracracy and put that money to use elsewhere. And you're right, throwing money at the issue will not make it go away. This is why we should send hot lead in that direction instead.

If we're going to win, we need the right technniques, the right equipment, and the ability to do more to protect our borders. We've done an excellent job of conquering a nation with less than what we needed, but it doesn't work the same way when we try to occupy it. And as strange as it may sound to you, enacting a draft would be a good thing since we could clear our prisons, reinforce Iraq, and let the Veterans go home while the raucous teenagers learn how to respect their home country and other people for once. I will go if required, but I will not serve voluntarily until my issues with the government are resolved. As the situation goes currently, and as I have observed numerous times, Uncle Sam is NOT my friend.

Contrary to what you think, I'm not afraid of my own shadow. I may be young, but I have enough experience to hold my own. I'm not invincible, and I know I'm walking a tight-rope. But I'm also prepared to handle surprises. In fact, I would've been serving in Iraq right now had it not been for the fact that Social Security is breathing down my neck.

I also see no reason why I should serve a nation that would order me to war and simultaneously strip me of all my rights. I found it ironic that one would swear to protect, uphold, and preserve the constitution, and then be stripped of all the rights the constitution provides while in service. Lastly, why should I serve a nation that no longer wants me as an individual?

And yes, we DO need a standing army, or would you prefer another world war in which we take on Russias' stance where we're being rolled over until we can stop the enemy, build up our war machine and then fight back? Seeing how fast todays' armies can conquer a country I'd wager we'd be completely overrun before we would even have a chance to get the nation in full gear for another world war.

Besides, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Meaning it's easier to prevent a war with intimidation than to fight one out to the bitter end while at a disadvantage to begin with.

And no, the USMC are not supermen, but they're well-suited to the job they're doing. They're doing far better than the National Guard is in terms of casualty rates. And no, I don't expect Marines to strap explosives to themselves to blow up terrorists.......that's just a waste of money to train a man for a year to strap explosives on himself. It would be an even larger waste of money if we were to retreat from both Afghanistan and Iraq. These terrorists will not go away. There are 1 billion other Mohammedans to replace them.

IF we can instill governments that are capable of standing on their own feet and waging a war on their own without U.S. help, then we have succeeded. We will have created a warzone where the war will stay. All the dumb ones will go there to die, then we only have to look out for the smart ones that are gonna die.

In regards to Social Security: Why in the world did we ever start a program that was based off of an already-failed program in Germany? If it didn't work once, it doesn't mean it'll work the second time. So why don't we take care of our parents anymore?

Regarding Healthcare: Hospitals are in the money-making business now, there are few left that actually care about people. Doctors are sued out of existence for a single mistake, and interns are pushed FAR beyond what they should be while in the medical field. It is also collapsing because free services to Illegal Immigrants are clogging the system and taking priority over legal citizens unless they have health insurance (Health Insurance is by and far one of the largest acts of fraud that has been legalized. Health Insurance companies can legally deny you coverage if they think your bill isn't worth the money you'll pay to them).

Anything else you'd like to comment about? :D

Hell no! I just want you to breath.:doh:

Hmmm. OK I'll go back to your original post and answer your questions.

.......

OK, back

Well, I usually don't like to resort to name calling as that is the lowest common denominator of debate. But I will say that it is very stupid to hamper your own nation in a time of war....since you and your kids have to live there. I think it's stupid to ignore threats and give terrorists time to flourish. I believe it's stupid to put politics ahead of the national security of your country.

No, it's not swell that our guys are dying. But I thank them for their service and sacrifices. And I refuse to spit on their service. The thing is, I don't look at what they're doing as trivial as what you do.

On your last statement on this most recent of your posts (see above), The answer is to give them the resources to do the job. But I'm sure you would prefer unconditional surrender, eh?

And I think it's "stupid" that people actually think that the US is capable of abolishing ALL terrorism from the world. Are we not going to leave Iraq until all forms of terrorism have been completely eradicated? There's even cyber terrorism...Does this mean that all website owners are "harboring" terrorist? Should G.W. send troops to Neals server to blow it up? Perhaps G.W. and his wasteful spending would rather do it with a $1,000,000.00 Tomahawk cruise missle instead just for the extra fireworks display that it would cause? Does this mean that Bill Gates is the head honcho since his operating systems tend to make up the bulk of the worlds Internet servers? Is there proof enough that Bill Gates means to take over the world with his operating systems just in the same manner that Osama Bin Laden means to do it with his bombs and guns?

The fact is terrorism comes in all different shapes and forms, and for Bush to say that he aint gonna leave Iraq until it's been completely destroyed means that the US is gonna be in Iraq for a pretty long damn while apparently. I like how someone else mentioned earlier that the Iraqis' didn't become terrorist until AFTER they had been invaded by American forces. That is the absolute truth!

This whole war is nothing more than another Whitehouse scandal pent up on nothing more than sheer rage against Iraqi people and Sadaam for disrespecting G.W. Bush's dad and threatening his life. Bush knew exactly what to do once Al Queda struck New York (and there's proof that Bush knew that the 9/11 attack was going to happen, yet he did nothing to try and stop it:hmm: ).

I'll bet Bush was thankful about 9/11. This was his BIG chance, his BIG break, to finish off Iraq once and for all. It was time for him to show daddy that he was now a man.

Just the fact that Bush new that 9/11 was or could happen and did nothing about it means that he commited a major derelicition of duty which in some cases is punishable by death. I know all those times that if I had fallen asleep on watch or did nothing to make my shipmates aware that the ship and their lives were in danger from an enemy I could be sentenced to death. It's in the UCMJ, and if the president is the "Commander and Chief" of the military he needs to be tried like every other service member that has done the same thing (dereliction of duty).

Why does the Captain of the USS Cole have to suffer for an enemy attack that happened on his watch, but not Bush? What a double standard in it's purest form. The Cole Captain lost 17 crewmen, Bush lost thousands. The leader of any platform is ALWAYS suppose to be the one to take the blame, ALWAYS! A Captain is suppose to go down with his crew. Bush let those people die on 9/11 and he had the power to try and prevent it, and didn't. He didn't even have an extra cop on duty that day just for minimal extra protection. That is why I can't ever believe a thing the man says, that is why I won't ever believe what the mans says. That is why I don't support him, and that is why I will never support him.

I hope and pray for a Democratic government once again in office. Hillary Clinton would be who I'd vote for! She's got more ballz than Bush and her husband combined!:rock:

You're totally confused. Do you actually listen to what President Bush says, or do you just say what feels good to support your irrational hatred? President Bush has said that we will remain until Iraq is stable and is able to provide it's own security. I really don't think you liberal types are very good listeners.

OK. This sounds like a 12 year old fantasy.

You're correct. Terrorism is going to be around a long time. But yes, Bush is right, it must be confronted. And yeah, we might be in Iraq for a while. It would be nice if Democrats would join us in fighting terrorists rather than fighting against our own nation.

You do realize that many terrorists being killed or captured by U.S. troops in Iraq aren't even Iraqi nationals, right?

:lol: I love watching Democrats push this crap. Al Qaeda thanks you for working for their propaganda machine. I'm sure they'll give you a medal for it. :hmm:

More to the point every time he posts one of these irrational diatrabes, it's like an advertisement to vote Republican.

DEMOCRAT = :up: :up: :up: :up: :up: :up:



republican = :down: :down: :down: :down: :down: :down: