Let's get the controversey going again, I'll start! - Page 4
DBAsupport.com Forums - Powered by vBulletin
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 54

Thread: Let's get the controversey going again, I'll start!

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    3,131
    Originally posted by gandolf989
    Ok then when do we invade North Korea?
    There is no worse dictator today then Kim Jung Il.

    They are next on the hit list quiz kid!!

    THAT IS WHY YOU MUST ALL VOTE FOR BUSH!!!
    4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!4 more years!
    I remember when this place was cool.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    4,001
    Originally posted by Mr.Hanky
    They are next on the hit list quiz kid!!

    THAT IS WHY YOU MUST NOT VOTE FOR BUSH!!!
    NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!NO more years!
    If we were to invade countries based on which countries are more dangerous, we should have invaded North Korea first. If the list is based on what the Bushies think that they can get away with, the I can understand why Iraq was at the top of their list.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Geneva Switzerland
    Posts
    3,142
    Originally posted by gandolf989
    If we were to invade countries based on which countries are more dangerous, . . .
    . . . based on this criterion, I'm starting a coalition to take on the USA.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    3,131
    Originally posted by gandolf989
    If we were to invade countries based on which countries are more dangerous, we should have invaded North Korea first. If the list is based on what the Bushies think that they can get away with, the I can understand why Iraq was at the top of their list.
    Brilliant, absolutely stunningly BRILLIANT!!
    I canít figure out why you are not president.


    I remember when this place was cool.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    4,001
    Originally posted by Mr.Hanky
    Brilliant, absolutely stunningly BRILLIANT!!
    I canít figure out why you are not president.

    I really appreciate you write in vote for President.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    4,001
    Originally posted by DaPi
    . . . based on this criterion, I'm starting a coalition to take on the USA.
    We really do have the most weapons of mass destruction.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    5,253
    Originally posted by Mr.Hanky
    Cruser, please stop the cliche's, do you think liberating 25 million people from a ruthless, murdering, raping, torturing dictator that used chemical weapons ON HIS OWN PEOPLE was perhaps a good thing?
    Let me ask a simple question then ... how much would you have been willing to spend personally on seeing the Iraqi people liberated? Let's have a simple number of dollars from you.
    David Aldridge,
    "The Oracle Sponge"

    Senior Manager, Business Intelligence Development
    XM Satellite Radio
    Washington, DC

    Oracle ACE

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    3,131
    $1, but I'd pay ten to see the whole place nuked to the high heavens.
    $20, if you throw in Afghanistan.
    $30, if you had all the liberals protesting there at the same time.
    I remember when this place was cool.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    5,253
    Originally posted by Mr.Hanky
    $1, but I'd pay ten to see the whole place nuked to the high heavens.
    $20, if you throw in Afghanistan.
    $30, if you had all the liberals protesting there at the same time.
    Hmm, well you paid about $800, dividing $200 billion by 250 million people. Of course, if you just divide it by tax payers you can easily double that. Still think it was worth it?
    David Aldridge,
    "The Oracle Sponge"

    Senior Manager, Business Intelligence Development
    XM Satellite Radio
    Washington, DC

    Oracle ACE

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    greenwich.ct.us
    Posts
    9,092
    Originally posted by slimdave
    Hmm, well you paid about $800, dividing $200 billion by 250 million people. Of course, if you just divide it by tax payers you can easily double that. Still think it was worth it?
    There you go again, using false numbers to support your claim. $200 billion is way off. 250 million people is way off. Using your math, the cost is $400 over two budget years, or $200/yr. Care to do the math on things like Welfare, Social Security (welfare for old people) and any other social entitlement programs? Just because it's "not worth it" to you doesn't mean it's "not worth it" for the general population of the country.

    I wonder if the 3000 families from 9/11 think it's a good deal?
    Jeff Hunter
    marist89@yahoo.com
    http://marist89.blogspot.com/
    Get Firefox!
    "I pledge to stop eating sharks fin soup and will not do so under any circumstances."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  



Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width