Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: What's your opinion?
His support will hurt him. 25 89.29%
His support won't hurt him. 3 10.71%
Voters: 28. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-08-2008, 11:29 PM
 
Location: San Diego
2,979 posts, read 1,565,458 times
Reputation: 2220

Advertisements

Surveys now show that Republicans support our military involvement in Iraq by about a two to one margin, however when all Americans are polled it is opposed by about a two to one margin instead. While John McCain may not support torturing detainees, having been subjected to torture as a POW in Vietnam, aside from that he has been a major figure in initiating this war, has consistantly supported it, and has recently said "a hundred years in Iraq would be fine with me".

Do you think that this issue will be a big factor with voters in November?

VoteVets.org
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-09-2008, 12:45 AM
 
607 posts, read 923,011 times
Reputation: 144
Whether or not it is a major factor (we will see, 9 months away), the "100 years" comment was just meant to be that we would have some sort of occupation there, like we do in 130 other countries. I don't support that either, but when people make it sound like he wants a 100 year war, I get a little fired up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2008, 12:55 AM
 
9,725 posts, read 15,171,221 times
Reputation: 3346
Like most people, I'd like to see us out as soon as possible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2008, 01:08 AM
 
Location: On my way to FLA baby !!
1,999 posts, read 1,662,969 times
Reputation: 357
See I told you guys so.

Yesterday the flip flopping freako libs loved McCain and today I called it right dead on, they would be back to the Iraq War bull.

Here they go again, changing issues like the wind.

Libs couldnt get enough Iraq, then when the surge showed success and the looney lib media hid all of the good information, the libs went right after Romeny and was for McCain. Now that Romney is gone, here they go again.

Now attacking McCain for supporting the war !!

I knew you guys would do this.

Both Billary and Oboma voted to send troops into Iraq, guess that only leaves Huckabee was the only non war monger.

McCain is no different then Oboma or Billary at all, other then he has a military background.


Who of the three McCain, Clinton or Obama is best suited to protect you from a terrorist attack?????

Easy -- McCain

You libs never give up do ya?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2008, 03:02 AM
 
9,725 posts, read 15,171,221 times
Reputation: 3346
I don't think McCain is better than Clinton in protecting us in a terrorist attack. My issue with McCain is that he wants to leave troops in Iraq a LOT longer than I think is neccesary. Why can't he pull out like Clinton would?

I'll admit, if it gets down to Obama versus McCain, I'm going to like McCain because he has experience. This War thing really bogs it down though. I don't want to see us staying in Iraq FOREVER which it appears McCain would like to do.

I think McCain and Clinton are even on National Security. I think Obama is soft on it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2008, 03:08 AM
 
9,725 posts, read 15,171,221 times
Reputation: 3346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floridabound09 View Post
Who of the three McCain, Clinton or Obama is best suited to protect you from a terrorist attack?????
If a terrorist was going to come into your house and you could pick one of the three to protect you, who would you pick??!!

CLINTON!!!! You know dam well she would beat the cwap out of them!!!! Terrorists would be running like scared little boys!

You can't count on McCain because he's tough but OLD! And you can't count on Obama because he's FLAKEY -- BUT HILLARY HAS YOUR BACK!!!

If you gave her a gun, I have no qualms that she wouldn't take Chuck Norris out too. That's probably why New York advocates gun control... ahem...

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2008, 03:35 AM
 
Location: North Carolina
799 posts, read 1,445,248 times
Reputation: 230
Quote:
Originally Posted by UB50 View Post
I don't think McCain is better than Clinton in protecting us in a terrorist attack. My issue with McCain is that he wants to leave troops in Iraq a LOT longer than I think is neccesary. Why can't he pull out like Clinton would?

I'll admit, if it gets down to Obama versus McCain, I'm going to like McCain because he has experience. This War thing really bogs it down though. I don't want to see us staying in Iraq FOREVER which it appears McCain would like to do.

I think McCain and Clinton are even on National Security. I think Obama is soft on it.

McCain is soft on national security but strong on international security. McCain enjoys beating on the hornets nest because he is retarded. Pissing off Arabs doesn't make us any safer here in the U.S. or overseas. Obama and Clinton are much better for National Security because they will make more friends than enemies. Why is everyone supporting McCain if most our soldiers hate him? Most soldiers supported Paul for a stronger national defense but everyone decided to vote against them. When McCain is nominated to represent the GOP you will see most of our troops back the Democrat. It's not my opinion, it's a fact.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2008, 11:08 AM
 
Location: San Diego
2,979 posts, read 1,565,458 times
Reputation: 2220
I think most people have figured out that you can't export our values to other cultures by force. You have several fanatic factons in that part of the world who have held grudges and have had territorial disputes with each other for thousands of years. The surge is only working because residents have fled their homes to avoid the violence and destruction, so their are less people remaining to be targets. If we had leaders that kept their eye on the ball and focused on ridding Osama bin Laden instead of taking a permanent detour into Iraq, that would be more of a deterent to other's considering attacks on American soil.

What McCain's "Straight Talk Express" doesn't tell you is that our occupation in that region is about oil and money for defense contractors, and when they get the opportunity, Iran is next. If we used our resources to develop alternative sources of energy, and fuel efficient vehicles we'd be in much better shape now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2008, 11:20 AM
 
Location: Grand Rapids Metro
8,882 posts, read 19,854,193 times
Reputation: 3920
Quote:
Originally Posted by benshaton View Post
I think most people have figured out that you can't export our values to other cultures by force. You have several fanatic factons in that part of the world who have held grudges and have had territorial disputes with each other for thousands of years. The surge is only working because residents have fled their homes to avoid the violence and destruction, so their are less people remaining to be targets. If we had leaders that kept their eye on the ball and focused on ridding Osama bin Laden instead of taking a permanent detour into Iraq, that would be more of a deterent to other's considering attacks on American soil.

What McCain's "Straight Talk Express" doesn't tell you is that our occupation in that region is about oil and money for defense contractors, and when they get the opportunity, Iran is next. If we used our resources to develop alternative sources of energy, and fuel efficient vehicles we'd be in much better shape now.
Wow, imagine a world where we didn't rely on Middle Eastern oil AT ALL! Then the Middle East's problems would be more like Africa's to us. Sure, it would pull at our heart strings and maybe people would "Adopt an Iraqi Child", but we wouldn't have oil-supported leaders feeling like they needed to invade countries, brokering peace agreements, and force Christian-centered democracy on the world, all while jeopardizing our national security. Beautiful!

I'm guessing the jihadists wouldn't give two hoots about us then either. Just a theory...

That's the one aspect of McCain I don't like. Otherwise, he's probably getting my vote if Hillary gets the nomination. No more Bushes or Clintons, thanks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2008, 11:27 AM
 
Location: southern california
61,288 posts, read 87,420,711 times
Reputation: 55562
DOD is back on the map. they got sent to their room for awhile
but they are back.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top