I got the inside scoop :: Ultimate MMORPG Gaming Community & Trading Zone

khrath
RealPoor Master of Posts

Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 8750

Posted: 09/09/04 - 12:26 Post subject: I got the inside scoop

The republicans are purposely losing the election, and at the same time f***g shit up, so that the after effects will highlight the new president, a democrat. Him being involved in these things will guarantee the republicans the next election, which they will win by running the anti-christ for president in their ultimate bid to once and for all rid the world of the democrats. irl, this is all true, they're about to fk sudan up, so kerry will have to manage troops in even more middle east countries, which he will f**k up no matter what, and every bad thing that happens will get blamed on him, because he wont be allowed to just rip them all back home, they wont let him. CRAPS BABY SEVEN ELEVEN!

Back to top

Frehya
RealPoor Guru

Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 2398

Posted: 09/09/04 - 12:48 Post subject:

no no you have it all wrong. The demos are f***g up the election using Kerry as their pawn, giving Bush for more years to really s*w up the republican party, thus clearing the way for Hillary in 2008. Its a left right conspiracy. Or is that right left.. I never remember the right order on this stuff.

Back to top

Confused
RealPoor Master of Posts

Joined: 08 Feb 2004
Posts: 6730

Posted: 09/09/04 - 12:49 Post subject:

Frehya wrote:

no no you have it all wrong. The demos are f*****g up the election using Kerry as their pawn, giving Bush for more years to really s***w up the republican party, thus clearing the way for Hillary in 2008.

Its a left right conspiracy. Or is that right left.. I never remember the right order on this stuff.

"vast right-wing conspiracy"

Back to top

Ashley
Toomuchtimeonhands

Joined: 13 Mar 2003
Posts: 907
Location: Amfek.org

Posted: 09/10/04 - 00:40 Post subject: Re: I got the inside scoop

Khrath wrote:

The republicans are purposely losing the election, and at the same time f*****g shit up, so that the after effects will highlight the new president, a democrat. Him being involved in these things will guarantee the republicans the next election, which they will win by running the anti-christ for president in their ultimate bid to once and for all rid the world of the democrats.

irl, this is all true, they're about to f**k sudan up, so kerry will have to manage troops in even more middle east countries, which he will f**k up no matter what, and every bad thing that happens will get blamed on him, because he wont be allowed to just rip them all back home, they wont let him.

CRAPS BABY SEVEN ELEVEN!

are they going to send troops to Sudan for sure then? I really hope so, i would fully support military action there- the entire international community *knows* that there is proven genoicide taking place and no one is doing anything! (can you say Rwanda except a little farther north?) We all know that the UN Security Council probably wont do shit, and other countries will not take the initiative on their own of going in- I think it comes down to the US and/or NATO stepping in... and at this point it is absolutely necessary, not for our own safety or to benefit our country in any way, shape, or form- but for just plain human decency.

Back to top

Conqueso
Luke Warm

Joined: 25 Jun 2003
Posts: 388

Posted: 09/10/04 - 00:48 Post subject:

In the committee speech given by Powell, he had said that there was still some leverage left in political channels via the UN. Powell said this was due to different factions in the Sudan government. He stated that he seriously doubts the UN will commit troops and that the US can not commit troops, however, African nations in the region will commit forces to protect monitors. (NATO can not commit troops unless a NATO ally is under threat. Sudan has not attacked a NATO member and is not a NATO member.) Currently there are only 300 troops in Sudan from other African nations. I am not sure what the increase will be. The US has provided $211M in humanitarian aid and allocated another $250M today.

Back to top

Ashley
Toomuchtimeonhands

Joined: 13 Mar 2003
Posts: 907
Location: Amfek.org

Posted: 09/10/04 - 16:37 Post subject:

Conqueso wrote:

In the committee speech given by Powell, he had said that there was still some leverage left in political channels via the UN. Powell said this was due to different factions in the Sudan government. He stated that he seriously doubts the UN will commit troops and that the US can not commit troops, however, African nations in the region will commit forces to protect monitors. (NATO can not commit troops unless a NATO ally is under threat. Sudan has not attacked a NATO member and is not a NATO member.) Currently there are only 300 troops in Sudan from other African nations. I am not sure what the increase will be. The US has provided $211M in humanitarian aid and allocated another $250M today.

I hate hearing about it and feeling like no one is doing anything- Its terrible.

Back to top