Best President of the 20th Century

[Dark Vigilante]

Not sure if theres been a poll like this, but I figured it might be entertaining to take a break from the current presidential race and look back at the presidents of the last century and decide who out of all of them accomplished the most in their term of office.

I'm voting JFK. While he was only in office 1000 days, what he did in his short term not only turned the tide of the Cold War, it changed the face of America. He was able to keep peace when he was being urged not to; when war meant certain apocolypse. His economic programs launched the most sustained expansion of the American economy since World War I. He was the fist president to seriously support the Civil Rights movement, and he would've ended our involvement in the Vietnam War in 1965. If he had lived and stayed in office until 1968, it can be certain we would be living in a much different America.

[Fran]

FDR, no doubt. Got us out of the depression, put us into WWII when we needed to.

Served three full terms, was serving his fourth when he died. I think that alone proves he was an amazing person and a great President.

[The Chairman]

JFK, Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, or Reagan. Nixon may have had a chance if it had not been for Watergate.

[Byrd Man]

Regan. He defeated the Russians with imaginary lasers.

[PhotoJones]

FDR, no doubt. Got us out of the depression, put us into WWII when we needed to.

Served three full terms, was serving his fourth when he died. I think that alone proves he was an amazing person and a great President.

damn straight. :up:

[Addendum]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/19/President_Theodore_Roosevelt%2C_1904.jpg/454px-President_Theodore_Roosevelt%2C_1904.jpg

[Matt]

FDR. not even a question. Hell, FDR isn't only the best of the 20th century. He is the best in US history.

[Fran]

FDR. not even a question. Hell, FDR isn't only the best of the 20th century. He is the best in US history.

That's what I said, and I completely agree.

[Tyrinus]

FDR.
JFK is overrated, he's put on a pedestal because he was young and his head blew up on film, not to say he didn't do anything of value. Just overrated.

[The Chairman]

FDR. not even a question. Hell, FDR isn't only the best of the 20th century. He is the best in US history.

I'd rank him second to Lincoln.

[hippie_hunter]

1. Franklin D. Roosevelt
2. Ronald Reagan
3. Theodore Roosevelt
4. Bill Clinton

- Nixon would be right up there if he weren't such a paranoid crook and JFK doesn't even deserve to be on the list of greatest Presidents, he's #1 as the most overrated President and the only reason why he even has a legacy, is because his head got blown off.

- Sun Down reminded me that Clinton deserves to be on the list. I may not care for his foreign policy too much, but he did one hell of a job domestically which is what matters the most.

[Sun_Down]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v47/sun_down/Canidate20Governor20Bill20Clinton-w.jpg

:up:

[Dark Vigilante]

1. Franklin D. Roosevelt
2. Ronald Reagan
3. Theodore Roosevelt

- Nixon would be right up there if he weren't such a paranoid crook and JFK doesn't even deserve to be on the list of greatest Presidents, he's #1 as the most overrated President and the only reason why he even has a legacy, is because his head got blown off.

He is definitely overrated due to his assassination, but there is no doubt that he deserves to be up there on a greatest president list. What he accomplished in only two years is pretty damn impressive, and it can only atest to what he could've accomplished in eight years.

[StorminNorman]

FDR was an incredibly overrated President whose legacy is only as great as it is because he was in the right place at the right time.

Truman was a far superior President. Teddy Roosevelt, however, was one of the greatest Presidents, period.

[PhotoJones]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v47/sun_down/Canidate20Governor20Bill20Clinton-w.jpg

:up:

god bless you, but i hope you're ready to face the wrath of the neo-cons on this board.

[StorminNorman]

1. Teddy
2. Truman
3. Eisenhower

[PhotoJones]

FDR was an incredibly overrated President whose legacy is only as great as it is because he was in the right place at the right time.

Truman was a far superior President. Teddy Roosevelt, however, was one of the greatest Presidents, period.

and i just called you smart in another thread. :cwink:

[Matt]

1. Franklin D. Roosevelt
2. Ronald Reagan
3. Theodore Roosevelt

- Nixon would be right up there if he weren't such a paranoid crook and JFK doesn't even deserve to be on the list of greatest Presidents, he's #1 as the most overrated President and the only reason why he even has a legacy, is because his head got blown off.

Reagan doesn't deserve to be so far up. In fact, Wilson, Teddy, Johnson, Truman, and Eisenhower would all come before Reagan. Reaganomics are incredibly shortsighted, like most of his policies which we are now feeling the effects of today (loss of any form of manufacturing/blue collar jobs, the Middle East being as militant as it is, and oh yeah...Osama Bin Laden).

The only accomplishment of Reagan was the defeat of the Soviets and that wasn't so much an accomplishment as it was luck. Reagan or Mondale, it wouldn't have mattered. They destroyed themselves. If the Soviets had a more stable economy, Reagan's policies would've brought on a whole new era of tension in the cold war. Reagan threw fuel in the fire when it was starting to die down.

Hell, Nixon is better than Reagan, at least his policies were. Nixon wasn't a bad president by any means.

[Dark Vigilante]

FDR was an incredibly overrated President whose legacy is only as great as it is because he was in the right place at the right time.

Truman was a far superior President. Teddy Roosevelt, however, was one of the greatest Presidents, period.

I've got to agree. I think FDR did what any semi-intelligent person would've done if they were in office when it comes to the Depression. And our entry into World War II was inevitable. He had some really good economists in his administration, and the incrediblly skilled leaders of the military during World War II (Marshall, Eisenhower, MacArthur, Bradley, Patton, etc.) would've carried the country to victory no matter who was president at the time.\

And yes, Teddy is up there. It's really thanks to him the United States became a super power.

[The Chairman]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v47/sun_down/Canidate20Governor20Bill20Clinton-w.jpg

:up:

Are you joking? Dude, Clinton was good, and I respect the man, but no way is he among the best. The man ignored the Rwanda, lied under oath (and for the record, I do blieve that too big a deal was made out of that whole ordeal in the first place, but he still lied nonetheless), and yes, to an extent, his actions and policies did somewhat play a part in the events of 9 / 11.

[Arkady Rossovich]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/19/President_Theodore_Roosevelt%2C_1904.jpg/454px-President_Theodore_Roosevelt%2C_1904.jpg

I voted for the same person.From what i read,he did the most for the country and people.

[Matt]

FDR was an incredibly overrated President whose legacy is only as great as it is because he was in the right place at the right time.

Truman was a far superior President. Teddy Roosevelt, however, was one of the greatest Presidents, period.

That could be the case, but the fact is, it was Roosevelt's policies that stopped the depression and won WWII. Who knows how things would've turned out with a lesser man at the wheel.

[StorminNorman]

FDR, no doubt. Got us out of the depression, put us into WWII when we needed to.

Served three full terms, was serving his fourth when he died. I think that alone proves he was an amazing person and a great President.

World War II got us out of the Depression.

FDR also was a big reason China became Communist, and he refused to accept Soviet Union as the threat it was.

I also am against most of his New Deal policies, which was basically were basically socialist programs that did little to help us in the Depression, but increased National Government, not to mention bring us farther into debt.

[StorminNorman]

That could be the case, but the fact is, it was Roosevelt's policies that stopped the depression and won WWII. Who knows how things would've turned out with a lesser man at the wheel.

No, World War II stopped the Depression. The war stimulated the American economy into overdrive, pulling us out.

The credit for victory in WWII had little to do with Roosevelt and had more to do with the outstanding military and foreign relations experts he had around him.

[hippie_hunter]

He is definitely overrated due to his assassination, but there is no doubt that he deserves to be up there on a greatest president list. What he accomplished in only two years is pretty damn impressive, and it can only atest to what he could've accomplished in eight years.

Kennedy did nothing as President. He did a great job with the Cuban Missile Crisis, but the concept of MAD deserves most of the credit there.

- Kennedy had a Republican Congress that refused to work with him.

- He got us more involved in Vietnam.

- Bay of Pigs.

- Anyone could have created the Peace Corps.

- There was chaos in the South due to the Civil Rights Movement due to racist bastards attacking harmless demonstrators and Malcolm X.

Most of his programs eventually went through because Johnson knew how to milk his death.

[Matt]

World War II got us out of the Depression.

FDR also was a big reason China became Communist, and he refused to accept Soviet Union as the threat it was.

It isn't his failure to accept them as a threat, it was setting priorities straight. Germany and Japan were the bigger threats and the enemy of my enemy is my friend. FDR was perfectly aware of the Soviet threat, however at the time we needed the Soviets.


I also am against most of his New Deal policies, which was basically were basically socialist programs that did little to help us in the Depression, but increased National Government, not to mention bring us farther into debt.

At the time they were necessary. They shouldn't have been carried on as long as they were, but they were needed. And federal debt was not what needed relief, individual debt was.

[StorminNorman]

Are you joking? Dude, Clinton was good, and I respect the man

I just cant respect a man who cheats on his wife. Its a moral issue with me.

[The Chairman]

Kennedy did nothing as President. He did a great job with the Cuban Missile Crisis, but the concept of MAD deserves most of the credit there.

- Kennedy had a Republican Congress that refused to work with him.

- He got us more involved in Vietnam.

- Bay of Pigs.

- Anyone could have created the Peace Corps.

- There was chaos in the South due to the Civil Rights Movement due to racist bastards attacking harmless demonstrators and Malcolm X.

Most of his programs eventually went through because Johnson knew how to milk his death.

Have you ever seen the movie JFK. If not you should, it might sway your opinion in the opposite direction.

[blind_fury]

FDR, no contest.

[Matt]

No, World War II stopped the Depression. The war stimulated the American economy into overdrive, pulling us out.

And FDR was the biggest advocate for entering the war.


The credit for victory in WWII had little to do with Roosevelt and had more to do with the outstanding military and foreign relations experts he had around him.

That can be said of any president.

[ComicChick]

just about everyone on that list is better than the one we have now

my vote was for FDR.

looking at that list, the country was in pretty good hands from 1933-1961 (fdr, truman, eisenhower)

others on my list were Wilson and Clinton. Clinton's personal affairs aside, he did do good things for USA. but i think i may be partial to presidents who take care of their homeland first and foremost.

i'll stay out of the jfk argument cuz i dont' have a strong opinion either way

[Dark Vigilante]

Reagan doesn't deserve to be so far up. In fact, Wilson, Teddy, Johnson, Truman, and Eisenhower would all come before Reagan. Reaganomics are incredibly shortsighted, like most of his policies which we are now feeling the effects of today (loss of any form of manufacturing/blue collar jobs, the Middle East being as militant as it is, and oh yeah...Osama Bin Laden).

The only accomplishment of Reagan was the defeat of the Soviets and that wasn't so much an accomplishment as it was luck. Reagan or Mondale, it wouldn't have mattered. They destroyed themselves. If the Soviets had a more stable economy, Reagan's policies would've brought on a whole new era of tension in the cold war. Reagan threw fuel in the fire when it was starting to die down.

Hell, Nixon is better than Reagan, at least his policies were. Nixon wasn't a bad president by any means.

If anyone is overrated on that list, it's Reagan.

The Soviet Union was goind to collapse, no matter who was president. He just threw in some extra macho talk as they were going down in the end just to make himself sound more involved in their collapse then he really was. That, on top of all the other things Matt mentioned, makes Reagan a bit less then a great president.

Nixon was definitely a better President in regards to international affairs. But he was a bit lacking in upholding the law he is sworn to protect.

[PhotoJones]

Are you joking? Dude, Clinton was good, and I respect the man, but no way is he among the best. The man ignored the Rwanda, lied under oath (and for the record, I do blieve that too big a deal was made out of that whole ordeal in the first place, but he still lied nonetheless), and yes, to an extent, his actions and policies did somewhat play a part in the events of 9 / 11.

that last part is something i do not agree with. that man tried to kill osama. he failed, and he'll be the first to admit that (something many politicians will not do), but he at least tried, something the bush administration gave up on long ago.

[hippie_hunter]

I voted for the same person.From what i read,he did the most for the country and people.

I figured that you would hate him on account that he is basically responsible for turning the United States into the full fledged expansionalist power that it is today :dry:

[The Chairman]

I just cant respect a man who cheats on his wife. Its a moral issue with me.

I agree, but I give Clinton credit because he's the perfect example of the American Dream. He rose from nothing to get where he is. He didn't rely on family connections or money. He came from a poor household with little to no opportunity for him and wound up leadign the Free World (for better or worse, of course), and for that I give him a lot credit.

[hippie_hunter]

Have you ever seen the movie JFK. If not you should, it might sway your opinion in the opposite direction.
Can't say that I have, I'll check it out sometime.

[PhotoJones]

I just cant respect a man who cheats on his wife. Its a moral issue with me.

but you can repsect a man that lies to the american public on a daily basis?

[Dark Vigilante]

Kennedy did nothing as President. He did a great job with the Cuban Missile Crisis, but the concept of MAD deserves most of the credit there.

- Kennedy had a Republican Congress that refused to work with him.

- He got us more involved in Vietnam.

- Bay of Pigs.

- Anyone could have created the Peace Corps.

- There was chaos in the South due to the Civil Rights Movement due to racist bastards attacking harmless demonstrators and Malcolm X.

Most of his programs eventually went through because Johnson knew how to milk his death.

Nope. Your wrong on most points, except for maybe the Peace Corps.

I posted this the other day in another thread, and I'm gonna post it again. Hopefully more people will get the chance to read it:

The Bay of Pigs was ordered by President Eisenhower, and planned by Allen Dulles and the CIA. The CIA had concluded before the invasion was launched that it would most likely fail without U.S. military involvement. That information was never given to Kennedy when he approved the operation in '61. Thusly, when the CIA urged him to use our military, he refused believing he was being misled. He took public responsibility after the fiasco and then fired Allen Dulles and many other high ranking officials in the CIA.

Kennedy would've ended the Vietnam War by Christmas of 1965. At a SecDef conference held in Honolulu, November 20-21, 1962, plans for withdrawl were laid out. The training and equiping of South Vietnamese forces were to be accelerated and 1000 U.S. military advisors were to be withdrawn by December of 1963. Kennedy would've waited until after the election of 1964 to withdraw all U.S. forces from Vietnam, fearing that if he did so before the election, he would be blamed for losing the war. Kennedy privately thought we could not win the war in Vietnam, but he had to publically remain optimistic about it in order to justify its handing over to the South Vietnamese and the withdrawl of American forces. I'm sure people will demand proof, so here it is:

http://bostonreview.net/BR28.5/galbraith.html

http://www.history-matters.com/vietnam1963.htm

And the actual 8th SecDef Conference on Vietnam report declassified by the Congressional Assassinations Records Review Board in 1997, in which a timetable for withdrawl was planned out:

http://www.history-matters.com/archi...def8_0001a.htm

President Eisenhower had to send the 101st Airbourne to Little Rock, Arkansas in 1957 to enforce the Supreme Court's Brown decision when the Governor of Arkansas refused to allow black children into the Little Rock Central High School. Kennedy had to federalize Alabama's national guard when their Governor, George C. Wallace refused a black student entry to the University of Alabama. He drafted the Civil Rights Act, which was passed by President Johnson after Kennedy's assasination. Check out Kennedy's "Moral Crisis" speech (http://www.americanrhetoric.com/spee...ivilrights.htm) and you can see what type of agenda he had when it came to Civil Rights. I cannot understand how Kennedy can be criticized when he was the first president to address the Civil Rights crisis with legislation.

[The Chairman]

that last part is something i do not agree with. that man tried to kill osama. he failed, and he'll be the first to admit that (something many politicians will not do), but he at least tried, something the bush administration gave up on long ago.

I still say his actions are somewhat responsible. But hey, that's just me.

[PhotoJones]

Have you ever seen the movie JFK. If not you should, it might sway your opinion in the opposite direction.

uh...basing your political beliefs on an oliver stone film?

scary.

[The Chairman]

Can't say that I have, I'll check it out sometime.

It's one of the best films ever made. If you're wary abotu the government now, you'll completely lose faith after seeing the film. Great cast, too.

[Spiderine]

FDR, definitely. During the most challenging times of the 20th century.

[Matt]

No love for Woodrow Wilson :(. The League of Nations may have been executed poorly...but all in all he was a pretty decent president

[StorminNorman]

It isn't his failure to accept them as a threat, it was setting priorities straight. Germany and Japan were the bigger threats and the enemy of my enemy is my friend. FDR was perfectly aware of the Soviet threat, however at the time we needed the Soviets.



At the time they were necessary. They shouldn't have been carried on as long as they were, but they were needed. And federal debt was not what needed relief, individual debt was.

He called Stalin 'Uncle Joe' and he argued with his foreign affairs experts (such as George Kenan and the other Wise Men) about the threat the Soviet Union was, and could be in the future.

A short term inaction of those policies would of been a good move, however that wasn't what FDR wanted and he would of probably wanted to further similar programs if he had the chance. Elenore Roosevelt was a strong advocate for more "New Deal" programs and was heavily opposed to Truman because he did not continue FDR's social policies - even though America's economy was stable again.

[PhotoJones]

I still say his actions are somewhat responsible. But hey, that's just me.

can you give examples?

some of your comments sound like blanket statements that you heard through soundbytes or something. i'm not trying to be mean, i'm giving you an example to explain yourself.

[The Chairman]

uh...basing your political beliefs on an oliver stone film?

scary.

Stone based it on another person's beliefs, and Stone portrayed them accurately enough for the film to be a legit basis for developing an opinion on JFK, the government, Vietnam, etc. At least I think so.

[Matt]

I'm staying out of the Kennedy debate. It is foolish to call him either great or mediocre. He died not even half way through his term. We have no way of knowing what kind of president he would've become.

[mwm1331]

Reagan easy.
I cant forgive Roosevelt for "New deal"
Clinton - a man whose own wife can't trust him can't be trusted by anyone.
Kennedy - likewise an adulterer, and on drugs to boot. (though to be fair he might not have known "Dr. Feelgood" was shooting him up with amphetamines) Not to mention the whole Bay of Pigs fiasco. )allthough he did cut taxes pretty heavily)
Truth is if it wasn't for Reagan, wed be in as much trouble economically now as france is.

[The Chairman]

can you give examples?

some of your comments sound like blanket statements that you heard through soundbytes or something. i'm not trying to be mean, i'm giving you an example to explain yourself.

Well, I personally believe that the actions of previous adminstrations affect the succeeding ones. I wish I could make my statements less blanketed, but I do think that Clinton may have been responsible in some ways. I'm sorry I can't give examples, but I do think putting the blame solely on Bush is a bit naive.

[blind_fury]

FDR was an incredibly overrated President whose legacy is only as great as it is because he was in the right place at the right time.

Truman was a far superior President. Teddy Roosevelt, however, was one of the greatest Presidents, period.

Overrated? Something tells me if FDR was republican you would be bragging how he ended the depression and defeated Hitler. :whatever:

[StorminNorman]

No love for Woodrow Wilson :(. The League of Nations may have been executed poorly...but all in all he was a pretty decent president

He was also extremely racist (loved the film "Birth Of A Nation".

Another reason Truman was great: proposed the first Civil Rights legislation (something FDR refused to do) - it was shot down, but Truman had the guts to do it, because he thought it was right.

[PhotoJones]

Stone based it on another person's beliefs, and Stone portrayed them accurately enough for the film to be a legit basis for developing an opinion on JFK, the government, Vietnam, etc. At least I think so.

i like the movie as much as the next guy, and i can agree with a lot the stuff represented in the movie.

but you have to do your homework. there's a LOT in the movie that's not based on anything more than hollywood drama. you have to able to pick out the fact from the fiction.

but again, that movie kicks ass. :up:

[The Chairman]

i like the movie as much as the next guy, and i can agree with a lot the stuff represented in the movie.

but you have to do your homework. there's a LOT in the movie that's not based on anything more than hollywood drama. you have to able to pick out the fact from the fiction.

but again, that movie kicks ass. :up:

That it does. Pesci is especially great in it.

[StorminNorman]

Overrated? Something tells me if FDR was republican you would be bragging how he ended the depression and defeated Hitler. :whatever:

Hey! Yea, you - idiot. Did you see the second part of the post? I said Truman was a great President. What was Truman? A Democrat.

Brilliant Deduction :up:

[Matt]

He called Stalin 'Uncle Joe' and he argued with his foreign affairs experts (such as George Kenan and the other Wise Men) about the threat the Soviet Union was, and could be in the future.

A more peaceful relationship with the Soviets could've turned out ok. Just because they were idealogically different from us does not make them bad. The 'threat' of the Soviet Union was greatly over exaggerated and a peaceful co-exisitence would've been preferable to 40 years of cold war.


A short term inaction of those policies would of been a good move, however that wasn't what FDR wanted and he would of probably wanted to further similar programs if he had the chance. Elenore Roosevelt was a strong advocate for more "New Deal" programs and was heavily opposed to Truman because he did not continue FDR's social policies - even though America's economy was stable again.

Maybe he did, none the less...his policies were good for the time of his presidency which is when he implemented them.

[mwm1331]

Also FDR didn't "end" the depression, if anything he extended it unwittingly.
Freidman pretty much proved this back in the 70's for christsakes.

[Matt]

He was also extremely racist (loved the film "Birth Of A Nation".



Yeah, I've read his quote about Birth of a Nation being the most historically accurate film ever. Still, he grew up in a different era. It is unfair to judge people like that based on those times. That is like judging Jefferson for having slaves. It was a different time. It was the norm. Was it right? No. But..well, they didn't know better.

[StorminNorman]

And FDR was the biggest advocate for entering the war.

That can be said of any president.

Yes, but to simply say that FDR was a Great President because of WWII means that Bush was a great President because of the Gulf War. Or Wilson was a great President for WWI.

[PhotoJones]

Well, I personally believe that the actions of previous adminstrations affect the succeeding ones. I wish I could make my statements less blanketed, but I do think that Clinton may have been responsible in some ways. I'm sorry I can't give examples, but I do think putting the blame solely on Bush is a bit naive.

any president's actions affect the next president's agenda. everyone can agree on that.

what i'm asking is like, for one example of something clinton did that helped 9/11 on it's way. that's all.

[blind_fury]

Yes, but to simply say that FDR was a Great President because of WWII means that Bush was a great President because of the Gulf War. Or Wilson was a great President for WWI.

Are you comparing the gulf war to WW2? :wow:

[mwm1331]

A more peaceful relationship with the Soviets could've turned out ok. Just because they were idealogically different from us does not make them bad. The 'threat' of the Soviet Union was greatly over exaggerated and a peaceful co-exisitence would've been preferable to 40 years of cold war.

The way they attained power, and what they did with it did.
Furthermore thier "ideology" wasn't just different, it was in direct opposition to ours.


Maybe he did, none the less...his policies were good for the time of his presidency which is when he implemented them.

No actually they weren't.
The great depression was a monetary phenomonon cuased by excess liquidity among other things. If anything FDR extended the great depression.

[StorminNorman]

Yeah, I've read his quote about Birth of a Nation being the most historically accurate film ever. Still, he grew up in a different era. It is unfair to judge people like that based on those times. That is like judging Jefferson for having slaves. It was a different time. It was the norm. Was it right? No. But..well, they didn't know better.

I do judge Jefferson, because he wrote the line "All Men Shall Be Created Equal" and there were still high ranking founding fathers that opposed Slavery (including Alexander Hamilton). Plus Jefferson is often seen as a great, enlightened person - he was suppose to be ABOVE the norm of common thinking.

Yes, I am not a fan of FDR or Jefferson. :(

Boy do I love Alexander Hamilton though :heart:

[The Chairman]

any president's actions affect the next president's agenda. everyone can agree on that.

what i'm asking is like, for one example of something clinton did that helped 9/11 on it's way. that's all.

Well, after the 1993 WTC bombing, Clinton never allowed The CIA to follow up on the apprehension of the prepetrators of the attack. His attitude was basically, "Okay we've caught them, no need to take this any further."

[Dark Vigilante]

The way they attained power, and what they did with it did.
Furthermore thier "ideology" wasn't just different, it was in direct opposition to ours.
Good point. Confrontation with the Soviets was inevitable. If you've ever read any Marxist stuff, you know why.

[StorminNorman]

Are you comparing the gulf war to WW2? :wow:

they were both wars, but no, I am not really. I am saying that if you are going to call a President great only because the people around him executed a military operation effectively, you open the door to a lot of people.

Wilson is a much better comparison.

[Matt]

The way they attained power, and what they did with it did.
Furthermore thier "ideology" wasn't just different, it was in direct opposition to ours.

GASP! GOD FORBID SOMEONE BELIEVE THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT WE DO! Bet you want to kill those goddamn Muslims too for having the balls to believe in a different God. The nerve of some people!


No actually they weren't.
The great depression was a monetary phenomonon cuased by excess liquidity among other things. If anything FDR extended the great depression.

Your point is arguable. I am not an economist, neither are you. We can pull out millions of contradictory articles that we find on Google all night. It would be pointless.

[Matt]

I do judge Jefferson, because he wrote the line "All Men Shall Be Created Equal" and there were still high ranking founding fathers that opposed Slavery (including Alexander Hamilton). Plus Jefferson is often seen as a great, enlightened person - he was suppose to be ABOVE the norm of common thinking.

Yes, I am not a fan of FDR or Jefferson. :(

Boy do I love Alexander Hamilton though :heart:

Just out of curiousity, and not to be a smart ass here...but are you aware that Hamilton had a desire to overthrow the U.S. government because he could not be president due to his foreign birth?

[Dark Vigilante]

GASP! GOD FORBID SOMEONE BELIEVE THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT WE DO! Bet you want to kill those goddamn Muslims too for having the balls to believe in a different God. The nerve of some people!

Yes, but Islam doesnt designate Christians or Jews as their enemy.

Communism designates all forms of capitalism as it's enemy, an enemy that must be overthrown and abolished by revolutionary force. America is the flagship of capitalism.

[StorminNorman]

A more peaceful relationship with the Soviets could've turned out ok. Just because they were idealogically different from us does not make them bad. The 'threat' of the Soviet Union was greatly over exaggerated and a peaceful co-exisitence would've been preferable to 40 years of cold war.



Maybe he did, none the less...his policies were good for the time of his presidency which is when he implemented them.

A peaceful relationship with the Soviets would of led to Soviets taking over Europe. That was their goal - to continue to expand. That was why Containment was so crucial. George Kennan, W.A. Harrimon, Dean Acheson and the rest of the foreign affairs experts of the day understood the threat and led to the policies of Truman.

If we went peacefully, Thaiwon would of been Communist, Korea would be a united communist state, Greece and Turkey would of fallen, as would of Germany probably. You say that we could of had peace with the Communist, though it was the Soviet Union that started the first acts of aggression by closing down Berlin.

[Matt]

Yes, but Islam doesnt designate Christians or Jews as their enemy.

Communism designates all forms of capitalism as it's enemy, an enemy that must be overthrown and abolished by revolutionary force. America is the flagship of capitalism.

The Soviets were not really communists. They were closer to socialists. Peaceful co-exisitence could've been possible with a little more diplomacy and less of a "My gun is bigger than your gun" attitude.

[Memphis Slim]

FDR, no doubt. Got us out of the depression, put us into WWII when we needed to.

Served three full terms, was serving his fourth when he died. I think that alone proves he was an amazing person and a great President.



Without a doubt FDR. He got this country thru 2 major situations....the Depression and the War.......

And he had polio while he did it!!


Next, I'd say LBJ....only because he actually sign Civil Rights legislation into law!!!

[Taiwarriorz21]

PResiDenT Bush= #1.....Good man! Very successful in Iraq and Afghanstan, even though many many lives were lost to protect America. Saddam....well LoL Everybody know he couldn't keep his head in the game. Bin Laden....IDK He needs to get a bullet in him....Overall, I like Bush. I've met him in person when he visited my church during hurricane katrina. I mean you have your opinion I have mine....Nothing going to change that, so might as well respect it even though you might not agree...I'm not Liberal! I really can't stand people with loose morals and lifes style, but I'm tolerant and dont go beatin the crap out of them....well maybe a few. LoL Just Kiddin1

[PhotoJones]

Well, after the 1993 WTC bombing, Clinton never allowed The CIA to follow up on the apprehension of the prepetrators of the attack. His attitude was basically, "Okay we've caught them, no need to take this any further."

sweet. thank you. now you don't sound like a generalising idiot.

i was actually thinking that that might be the case you were bring up. you should read richard clarke's book "against all enemies".

if you do, you'll probably come away with a huge respect for clinton when it comes to anti-terrorism.

[mwm1331]

GASP! GOD FORBID SOMEONE BELIEVE THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT WE DO! Bet you want to kill those goddamn Muslims too for having the balls to believe in a different God. The nerve of some people!


When they want to expand, and thier intention is to force us to live under thier system as well?
Damn skippy.
As to muslims, They seriously need an enlightenment and reformation. BTW have you ever been to a Musliom country? I have, its also the only place I have ever seen an actual slave market.


Your point is arguable. I am not an economist, neither are you. We can pull out millions of contradictory articles that we find on Google all night. It would be pointless.
Actually thats exactly what i am. Well halfway there anyway.

[Matt]

A peaceful relationship with the Soviets would of led to Soviets taking over Europe. That was their goal - to continue to expand. That was why Containment was so crucial. George Kennan, W.A. Harrimon, Dean Acheson and the rest of the foreign affairs experts of the day understood the threat and led to the policies of Truman.

If we went peacefully, Thaiwon would of been Communist, Korea would be a united communist state, Greece and Turkey would of fallen, as would of Germany probably. You say that we could of had peace with the Communist, though it was the Soviet Union that started the first acts of aggression by closing down Berlin.

I agree we couldn't have let them get away with everything...however both parties took unneccessary agressive steps towards each other. Even with Berlin and Korea being divided, the Soviets and Americans could've had a peaceful co-existence...but alas, this is the realm of what-ifs we are entering, which is utterly pointless.

[The Chairman]

sweet. thank you. now you don't sound like a generalising idiot.

i was actually thinking that that might be the case you were bring up. you should read richard clarke's book "against all enemies".

if you do, you'll probably come away with a huge respect for clinton when it comes to anti-terrorism.

I might check it out, thoguh my dad will have a problem with me reading a book that's pro-Clinton in any way.

Anyway, i have to got to bed. I'll gladly continue this discussion tomorrow, though.

[StorminNorman]

Just out of curiousity, and not to be a smart ass here...but are you aware that Hamilton had a desire to overthrow the U.S. government because he could not be president due to his foreign birth?

I was not aware that he wanted to overthrow the U.S. Government, but I know that he strongly disagreed with many aspects of it. He was not a big fan of democracy and believed that we needed a monarchy.

I do not believe with all of his views, especially involving government - though he was a brilliant economist and had was crucial to the development and sustainment of the U.S. Government. Without Hamilton, the Constitution would of never survived, and not just because of the Federalist papers. Without Hamilton's economic policies, it is likely America's economy would of never been given birth.

Hamilton was flawed, though he always stood by his principals. Something Jefferson can not say.

[Addendum]

PResiDenT Bush= #1.....Good man! Very successful in Iraq and Afghanstan, even though many many lives were lost to protect America. Saddam....well LoL Everybody know he couldn't keep his head in the game. Bin Laden....IDK He needs to get a bullet in him....Overall, I like Bush. I've met him in person when he visited my church during hurricane katrina. I mean you have your opinion I have mine....Nothing going to change that, so might as well respect it even though you might not agree...I'm not Liberal! I really can't stand people with loose morals and lifes style, but I'm tolerant and dont go beatin the crap out of them....well maybe a few. LoL Just Kiddin1Dude, this is about presidents from the 20th century, not the 21st century

[Matt]

When they want to expand, and thier intention is to force us to live under thier system as well?
Damn skippy.
As to muslims, They seriously need an enlightenment and reformation. BTW have you ever been to a Musliom country? I have, its also the only place I have ever seen an actual slave market.

Really? South American countries have them as well, and they are 100 % Christian. Gaaaasp!


Actually thats exactly what i am.

Somehow I doubt that. Perhaps it is the fact that you have the mannerism of a 12 year old. I bet if I said "Neither of us are lawyers," you would be that.

[mwm1331]

The Soviets were not really communists. They were closer to socialists. Peaceful co-exisitence could've been possible with a little more diplomacy and less of a "My gun is bigger than your gun" attitude.

I cant believe that allmost 20 years later they still have apologists.

[Kritish]

FDR was good no doubt, but Teddy Roosevelt was just plain cool. He went on a safari to get a bear skin rug for every room in the white house. He also built the Panama Canal and was quite the conservationist.

[Matt]

I was not aware that he wanted to overthrow the U.S. Government, but I know that he strongly disagreed with many aspects of it. He was not a big fan of democracy and believed that we needed a monarchy.

Live and learn. I read it in one of those obscure trivia books (which I adore). He was apparently very upset over his inability to be president and unsuccessfully tried to put together a resistance. There was a source cited in the book. Don't remember what.


I do not believe with all of his views, especially involving government - though he was a brilliant economist and had was crucial to the development and sustainment of the U.S. Government. Without Hamilton, the Constitution would of never survived, and not just because of the Federalist papers. Without Hamilton's economic policies, it is likely America's economy would of never been given birth.

Hamilton was flawed, though he always stood by his principals. Something Jefferson can not say.

No doubt he was a genius and great man.

[Matt]

I cant believe that allmost 20 years later they still have apologists.

I can't believe someone who claimed to be an economist (which to find work in a position like that in such a limited market for the field you would have to at least have a master's degree) cannot use proper English.

[Addendum]

I cant believe that allmost 20 years later they still have apologists.

Because being a soviet is "illegal" in the states, despite no laws against it.

[PhotoJones]

FDR was good no doubt, but Teddy Roosevelt was just plain cool. He went on a safari to get a bear skin rug for every room in the white house. He also built the Panama Canal and was quite the conservationist.

he was also a little bit nuts.

which makes him pretty cool in my book.

[Memphis Slim]

Yes, but Islam doesnt designate Christians or Jews as their enemy.


Oh really?? :dry:

Sura 5:51 commands Muslims not to take Jews and Christians as friends.
Sura 9:29 commands Muslims to fight against Jews and Christians until they either submit to Allah or else agree to pay a special tax.
Sura 2:65-66 and Sura 5:60 contain references to Jews as “apes and swine to be despised and rejected.” (Think of that! You can be sure that such a statement did not come from the true God of this universe who selected the Jews to be His Chosen People.)Jews and Christians were not the only ones who rejected Muhammad’s new revelations. The people of his own tribe, the Quraysh, also rejected him. In response, Muhammad succumbed to the temptation to appease his tribe by announcing that it would be okay for them to worship the three daughters of Allah — named Al-Lat, Al-Uzza, and Ma­nat.
This declaration led to the infamous “Satanic verses” of the Koran which were later deleted when Muhammad reverted back to monotheism. Muslims have tried ever since to cover-up this diversion from the faith. You may remember that in 1989 an Indian writer by the name of Salman Rushdie brought up this taboo topic when he wrote a novel entitled, The Satanic Verses. The Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran condemned him and called for his assassination. A three million dollar bounty was placed on his head, and he has been in hiding ever since.





Communism designates all forms of capitalism as it's enemy, an enemy that must be overthrown and abolished by revolutionary force. America is the flagship of capitalism.


That much I agree with.

[StorminNorman]

I agree we couldn't have let them get away with everything...however both parties took unneccessary agressive steps towards each other. Even with Berlin and Korea being divided, the Soviets and Americans could've had a peaceful co-existence...but alas, this is the realm of what-ifs we are entering, which is utterly pointless.

It wasnt that Berlin was divided, but that Russia stopped anything from moving into Western Berlin - thus starving out the people of western Berlin. American's had to airlift food and supplies or those people would of starved.

Korea divided was fine - but North Korea (with the insisting of the U.S.S.R. and China) INVADED South Korea. A Communist Korea would of caused further problems in an already problematic region (again, Thai won would also be Communist and Japan would of been high up on the list as well)

[mwm1331]

Really? South American countries have them as well, and they are 100 % Christian. Gaaaasp!


Like I said "only place I have ever seen one"
and BTW Im not christian.

Somehow I doubt that. Perhaps it is the fact that you have the mannerism of a 12 year old. I bet if I said "Neither of us are lawyers," you would be that.
No My father is a lawyer. I am studying economics, and I have spent almost a decade working in VC. At the moment I work for a start up tech firm, I used to fund.
And really, the opinions of a communist aoplogist matter little to me, as you clearly have never met my good friend "reality"
Let me tell you something. I lived in a fromerly communist country for 4 years, my wife grew up in one. If you weren't such a sheltered little snot, you might understand what they really were.

[Matt]

It wasnt that Berlin was divided, but that Russia stopped anything from moving into Western Berlin - thus starving out the people of western Berlin. American's had to airlift food and supplies or those people would of starved.

Korea divided was fine - but North Korea (with the insisting of the U.S.S.R. and China) INVADED South Korea. A Communist Korea would of caused further problems in an already problematic region (again, Thai won would also be Communist and Japan would of been high up on the list as well)

Like I said, both sides could've taken different steps. However BOTH sides took an aggressive stance towards each other.

[StorminNorman]

Live and learn. I read it in one of those obscure trivia books (which I adore). He was apparently very upset over his inability to be president and unsuccessfully tried to put together a resistance. There was a source cited in the book. Don't remember what.



No doubt he was a genius and great man.

I find that very out of character with Hamilton. Hamilton had many many problems with American government, however he was always loyal to the country. I don't think he cared that much about being President, BECAUSE his views differed that much from the American government. He was a patriot who didn't fit in with the government he played a major role in supporting.

[mwm1331]

I can't believe someone who claimed to be an economist (which to find work in a position like that in such a limited market for the field you would have to at least have a master's degree) cannot use proper English.
When it matters enough to spend time worrying about that kind of **** yes.
On a friking comic book message board, you get my first draft.

[Matt]

Like I said "only place I have ever seen one"
and BTW Im not christian.

No My father is a lawyer. I am studying economics, and I have spent almost a decade working in VC. At the moment I work for a start up tech firm, I used to fund.
And really, the opinions of a communist aoplogist matter little to me, as you clearly have never met my good friend "reality"
Let me tell you something. I lived in a fromerkly communist country for 4 years, my wife grew up in one. If you weren't such a sheltered little snot, you might understand what they really were.

Ah, your father is the lawyer, is your mother the doctor? Or is that your brother? You're full of it.

[Matt]

When it matters enough to spend time worrying about that kind of **** yes.
On a friking comic book message board, you get my first draft.

Can't spell fricking either.

[StorminNorman]

Like I said, both sides could've taken different steps. However BOTH sides took an aggressive stance towards each other.

Yes. Was Peaceful existence possible? Yes. However it would of meant a different set of actions by BOTH parties. America was not the lone irritant.

[Addendum]

Ah, your father is the lawyer, is your mother the doctor? Or is that your brother? You're full of it.

Hey, his credibility is just as good as the minister who sent in $35 to an ad in the back of a magazine and 2 weeks later became an ordained minister.

[hippie_hunter]

PResiDenT Bush= #1.....Good man! Very successful in Iraq and Afghanstan, even though many many lives were lost to protect America. Saddam....well LoL Everybody know he couldn't keep his head in the game. Bin Laden....IDK He needs to get a bullet in him....Overall, I like Bush. I've met him in person when he visited my church during hurricane katrina. I mean you have your opinion I have mine....Nothing going to change that, so might as well respect it even though you might not agree...I'm not Liberal! I really can't stand people with loose morals and lifes style, but I'm tolerant and dont go beatin the crap out of them....well maybe a few. LoL Just Kiddin1

Great President...or the greatest!

[Matt]

Yes. Was Peaceful existence possible? Yes. However it would of meant a different set of actions by BOTH parties. America was not the lone irritant.

Never said it was. I just think Stalin and FDR's mutual respect/friendship/whatever it was, could've been a positive step for both parties.

[mwm1331]

wrong thread, got my tabs confused.

[Addendum]

Yes. Was Peaceful existence possible? Yes. However it would of meant a different set of actions by BOTH parties. America was not the lone irritant.

Matt never said that the States was the lone irritant. He basically said what you said first.

[StorminNorman]

Never said it was. I just think Stalin and FDR's mutual respect/friendship/whatever it was, could've been a positive step for both parties.

Things probably would of been different, but the Russian goal of expansion was one that has been apart of Russian culture for centuries. It wasn't going to end simply based on this friendship.

[hippie_hunter]

FDR was good no doubt, but Teddy Roosevelt was just plain cool. He went on a safari to get a bear skin rug for every room in the white house. He also built the Panama Canal and was quite the conservationist.

Word :word:

[mwm1331]

Ah, your father is the lawyer, is your mother the doctor? Or is that your brother? You're full of it.

Dental hygenist actually. Worked her way through school as a waitress at pizza hut while my dad was off getting his career launched no less.

[Matt]

Hippy I can't agree with you on abortion. Iys immoral and barbaric.
We can, as reasonable people, debate whether or not a fetus is a person, and entailed to the rights of one.
But its a biological fact that life starts at conception.
And I can't support the slaughter of true innocents for convenience.

"You see, I'm also a Obsterician in my spare time, so I know exactly when life starts for a child."

[Kritish]

Yes, but Islam doesnt designate Christians or Jews as their enemy.



Seriously, if I hear another person claim that Islam is a religon of peace and puppy winks I'm going to rip my hair out. That's like claiming the Old Testament is peaceful as you ignore the "kill homosexuals" in Leviticus 20:13.

As to muslims, They seriously need an enlightenment and reformation. BTW have you ever been to a Musliom country? I have, its also the only place I have ever seen an actual slave market.

Actually thats exactly what i am. Well halfway there anyway.

The Muslims nations were pretty advanced (they invented quite a few things) until Genghis Khan whiped out their kingdoms and sent them into the dark ages. Just like what happend in Europe after the fall of Rome, the difference is that those nations haven't gotten out. Turkey is pretty advanced for a Muslim nation.

[StorminNorman]

Matt never said that the States was the lone irritant. He basically said what you said first.

I know, but I got caught up in the moment :(

[Sun_Down]

I just cant respect a man who cheats on his wife. Its a moral issue with me.

I love how people never fail to bring that up. What did that have to do with his actual actions as president, really? I won't argue that he was a slimeball for cheating on his wife...repeatedly, but people need to stop looking at that and screaming, "He is bad man, so...er-uh, he must be bad prezudent!"

Honestly, the dude gets impeached for lying about getting a hummer, yet our current president lies to the American people in order to start a war which has cost thousands of lives, racks up a record-setting debt and basically does everything possible to turn the most volitile world leaders against us, but he doesn't? Give me a damn break.

I post Clinton's picture partly because it riles people up and partly because he was a great president, regardless of his moral decisions. Say what you will, but I'm looking at America in 1998 vs. America in 2007 and we've fallen a long, long way.

and yes, to an extent, his actions and policies did somewhat play a part in the events of 9 / 11.

I'd really like to see your proof for that statement.

[mwm1331]

"You see, I'm also a Obsterician in my spare time, so I know exactly when life starts for a child."

Anyone who has gone through 10th grade biology knows this if they are being honest with themselves.
The moment the egg becomes fertilised it is a seperate living organism.

[StorminNorman]

I love how people never fail to bring that up. What did that have to do with his actual actions as president, really? I won't argue that he was a slimeball for cheating on his wife...repeatedly, but people need to stop looking at that and screaming, "He is bad man, so...er-uh, he must be bad prezudent!"

Honestly, the dude gets impeached for lying about getting a hummer, yet our current president lies to the American people in order to start a war which has cost thousands of lives, racks up a record-setting debt and basically does everything possible to turn the most volitile world leaders against us, but he doesn't? Give me a damn break.

I post Clinton's picture partly because it riles people up and partly because he was a great president, regardless of his moral decisions. Say what you will, but I'm looking at America in 1998 vs. America in 2007 and we've fallen a long, long way.

Did I say it had anything to do with his Presidentcy? No. Someone said "I respect the man" and I said I can't respect the man because - blah blah blah.

Infidelity is another reason I dislike FDR (when he died he was on a trip with a mistress) though I didn't bring it up because it has no showing on his Presidentcy.

[Dark Vigilante]

The Soviets were not really communists. They were closer to socialists. Peaceful co-exisitence could've been possible with a little more diplomacy and less of a "My gun is bigger than your gun" attitude.

The Soviets were communists, not socialists. Socialism is defined as having a government that provides for the basic needs of all it's people. Communism on the other hand is having a government in which all ownership is given to the community, or the state. The Soviets had a failed Communist government. At a certain point, their Marxist revolution was hijacked by Lenin, and then the possibility of completing that revolution was crushed by Stalin.

The revolution of communism works like this:

1. It starts out with a dictatorship of the borgeoisie, or the rich. (In Russia's case, the Czar, his government, the royal family, the Russian Orthodox Church, essentially the "haves" of Russia.)

2. Violent revolution and overthrow of the borgeoisie by the proletariat, or the poor. (Lenin and his communist Bolsheviks, who were the "people's party" overthrow the Russian government in 1917)

3. Dictatorship of the proletariat. For a short while, the proletariat must wield ultimate power in order to elminate the remaining bourgeoise and their system. (This is where the true idea of Communism in the Soviet Union stalled. After the Russian Civil War, and the Communist Red's victory in 1921, Lenin became a dictator. Instead of holding free elections, like the next step of communist revolution calls for, he held on to his power. After his death, Stalin strenghtened that power and instead of continuing in the Marxist revolution, he warped it's ideals and used it to his own paranoid advantage in order to stay in power and turn Russia into a global super power.)

4. True Communism (no private property, no classes, democratic)


The Soviet Union was on the way to becoming a true communist society when it was hijacked by dictators. However, that did not mean the Soviets didnt stay true to the part of Marxism that abolishes private property. Nor the idea that a sucessful communist regime should ignite other communist revolts in other parts of the world and remain openly hostile to all forms of capitalism. Hence China, Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, etc. Therefore, the Soviet form of communism was a direct threat to America and capitalism at large.

[Addendum]

Abortion is a non-issue for me.

And who gives a damn about it anyway? This isn't even an abortion thread.

[mwm1331]

Did I say it had anything to do with his Presidentcy? No. Someone said "I respect the man" and I said I can't respect the man because - blah blah blah.

Infidelity is another reason I dislike FDR (when he died he was on a trip with a mistress) though I didn't bring it up because it has no showing on his Presidentcy.


For all his faults Clinton was a better speaker on camera, or in person, than any one else, by a large margin.
I still watch some of his old speeches before a big presentation.

[Kritish]

Anyone who has gone through 10th grade biology knows this if they are being honest with themselves.
The moment the egg becomes fertilised it is a seperate living organism.

Oh really, if at that point it's a seperate living organism that deserves human rights why does it have no nervous system and why can it feel its mothers pain? Pro-life advocates merely take an emotional response on the topic.

Now, answer this question above all... does a parasitic twin deserve to live?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitic_twin

[Kritish]

How sweet, this thread has turned into an abortion, infidelity and communism thread all morphed together in some kind of internet abomination.

[ShadowBoxing]

FDR was good no doubt, but Teddy Roosevelt was just plain cool. He went on a safari to get a bear skin rug for every room in the white house. He also built the Panama Canal and was quite the conservationist.
Teddy Roosevelt kicked ass. He was Chuck Norris before Chuck Norris was ever invented...plus he was President to top it off. Anyone who can get shot, get up, finish his speach and then drive himself to the hospital deserves props.

[mwm1331]

Abortion is a non-issue for me.

And who gives a damn about it anyway? This isn't even an abortion thread.
I posted in the wrong thread by mistake.

[Dark Vigilante]

Seriously, if I hear another person claim that Islam is a religon of peace and puppy winks I'm going to rip my hair out. That's like claiming the Old Testament is peaceful as you ignore the "kill homosexuals" in Leviticus 20:13.

Taken out of context. I didn't say that Islam was a peaceful religion. I was simply saying that Islam doesn't designate Christianity and Judaism as it's sworn enemy. Islam is not the exact opposite of those relgions.

Capitalism is the sworn enemy of Communism, and it is also the exact opposite. I was just using Islam as counter-example to Matt's example.

[StorminNorman]

Teddy Roosevelt kicked ass. He was Chuck Norris before Chuck Norris was ever invented...plus he was President to top it off. Anyone who can get shot, get up, finish his speach and then drive himself to the hospital deserves props.

I would vote for the zombified corpse of Teddy Roosevelt over anyone any party can put on the ticket.

[ShadowBoxing]

Dude, this is about presidents from the 20th century, not the 21st century
Haha...owned.

[Dark Vigilante]

How sweet, this thread has turned into an abortion, infidelity and communism thread all morphed together in some kind of internet abomination.


Lol. It's pretty funny that any slightly political thread on the Hype usually disintegrates into a big orgy of those topics.

Thats going into the signature.

[PhotoJones]

Lol. It's pretty funny that any slightly political thread on the Hype usually disintegrates into a big orgy of those topics.

welcome to wedge issue america.

[WTFimVENOM]

lol Id like to see somebody vote for TAFT.....

[Ben Urich]

William J. Clinton. :o:up:

[ShadowBoxing]

Great President...or the greatest!Or President from the wrong century.

[Dark Vigilante]

Ike's not getting any love :(

[Kritish]

lol Id like to see somebody vote for TAFT.....

The only thing that Taft did was to be the fattest president ever.

[StorminNorman]

lol Id like to see somebody vote for TAFT.....

Taft wasn't horrible, just huge.

[PhotoJones]

Taft wasn't horrible, just huge.

i live in ohio. the name "taft" will be forever tarnished.

[hippie_hunter]

Teddy Roosevelt kicked ass. He was Chuck Norris before Chuck Norris was ever invented...plus he was President to top it off. Anyone who can get shot, get up, finish his speach and then drive himself to the hospital deserves props.

No that honor goes to George Washington

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pc9y5ayeeb4

[StorminNorman]

i live in ohio. the name "taft" will be forever tarnished.

Just think, his son could of easily been President :(

[Dark Vigilante]

No that honor goes to George Washington

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pc9y5ayeeb4

Ahahahahahaha.

That was excellent.

[Dark Vigilante]

Just think, his son could of easily been President :(
His son would've been a spectacular President. Unshaking morals.

[Sun_Down]

Did I say it had anything to do with his Presidentcy? No. Someone said "I respect the man" and I said I can't respect the man because - blah blah blah.

Infidelity is another reason I dislike FDR (when he died he was on a trip with a mistress) though I didn't bring it up because it has no showing on his Presidentcy.

I really didn't mean to call you out specifically, you just happened to make that comment. I was really addressing those who would use his infidelity against him as a president. I agree that it does reflect poorly on his personal life, but just not as a president.

But I say we end all this and agree with Lewis Black's idea of electing a dead president. He suggests Reagan and I agree. "He scares the **** out of any country, dead or alive!"

[Honey Vibe]

My vote goes to Lyndon Johnson, for all the social, scientific, and artistic advances this country saw in the 1960s.
...But it goes hesitantly. I do believe Lyndon Johnson was involved in the assassination of President Kennedy.

There ought to be more votes for Jimmy Carter :down

[mwm1331]

I really didn't mean to call you out specifically, you just happened to make that comment. I was really addressing those who would use his infidelity against him as a president. I agree that it does reflect poorly on his personal life, but just not as a president.


I honestly don't understand this view. If his wife, who he made a oath to in front of friends and family, can't trust him how can you expect him to honor any other oaths, including the oath of office?
Not to mentionn the fact that he was etting his rocks off while in the oval office, and one at least one accoasion while on the phone with a legislator?
I mean how seriously could he have possibly taken his duties?

[Speedball]

Herbert Hoover
No...For reals...FDR has to be one of the Greatest President's this country has every had. He should be the Fifth face on Mount Rushmore.

[Addendum]

Not to mentionn the fact that he was etting his rocks off while in the oval office, and one at least one accoasion while on the phone with a legislator?
I mean how seriously could he have possibly taken his duties?

Now see, I like that.

It shows 2 things- Clinton must be one hell of a poker player since that congressman had no clue the prez was getting a blowjob, and secondly that if you can get your dick sucked while doing your job, then it isn't all it's cracked up to be

[WTFimVENOM]

The only thing that Taft did was to be the fattest president ever.
yup lol

[StorminNorman]

Herbert Hoover
No...For reals...FDR has to be one of the Greatest President's this country has every had. He should be the Fifth face on Mount Rushmore.

He wasn't even the best leader in the White House in his last term.

Truman Damn It!

[StorminNorman]

My vote goes to Lyndon Johnson, for all the social, scientific, and artistic advances this country saw in the 1960s.
...But it goes hesitantly. I do believe Lyndon Johnson was involved in the assassination of President Kennedy.

There ought to be more votes for Jimmy Carter :down

But Jimmy Carter was a failure....:dry:

[StorminNorman]

His son would've been a spectacular President. Unshaking morals.

He was a moral man that stood by his principals - but he was also an Isolationist in a time where we could not afford it.

[CConn]

I voted Reagan to piss off the libs.

[Sun_Down]

I honestly don't understand this view. If his wife, who he made a oath to in front of friends and family, can't trust him how can you expect him to honor any other oaths, including the oath of office?
Not to mentionn the fact that he was etting his rocks off while in the oval office, and one at least one accoasion while on the phone with a legislator?
I mean how seriously could he have possibly taken his duties?

Washington owned slaves. Lincoln was a racist. GW did blow and got multiple DUI's. Personal life =/= professional life

[PhotoJones]

Washington owned slaves. Lincoln was a racist. GW did blow and got multiple DUI's. Personal life =/= professional life

word to your mother.

[Kritish]

Washington owned slaves. Lincoln was a racist. GW did blow and got multiple DUI's. Personal life =/= professional life

That isn't fair, everyone owned slaves back then.

[PhotoJones]

I voted Reagan to piss off the libs.

then who's the other douchebag that voted for reagan?

[Speedball]

I voted Reagan to piss off the libs.
Those damn Libs:cmad:
With their clean air, salad eating, and the such.:cmad:

[Kritish]

Those damn Libs:cmad:
With their clean air, salad eating, and the such.:cmad:

I heard that liberals don't want to kill gays with unlicensed uzis!

Damn them! :cmad:

[hippie_hunter]

I heard that liberals don't want to kill gays with unlicensed uzis!

Damn them! :cmad:

I heard that they enjoy killing babies, and then eat them :cmad:

[Speedball]

I heard that liberals don't want to kill gays with unlicensed uzis!

Damn them! :cmad:
Why would anyone kill a person for their sexual preference:huh:

[PhotoJones]

I heard that they enjoy killing babies, and then eat them :cmad:

we only do that on the sabbath.

[Kritish]

Why would anyone kill a person for their sexual preference:huh:

I wish more men were gay, it means more women for me. :up:

[Kritish]

we only do that on the sabbath.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d0/BlackSabbath1970a.jpg

[Mr Sparkle]

I voted Reagan to piss off the libs.

or...you know.
smart people.

[hippie_hunter]

we only do that on the sabbath.

But I hear you people hate the idea of church and state as one :cmad:

You godless heathens :cmad:

[Speedball]

I wish more men were gay, it means more women for me. :up:
HAHAHA!!!
You have a point there...
I'm gonna go steal some of your women then.:cmad:

[Mr Sparkle]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d0/BlackSabbath1970a.jpg

those are some badass 'staches.

[Kritish]

or...you know.
smart people.

He's better than Nixon because he killed the Soviet Union, he was still a neo-con ass.

[Kritish]

those are some badass 'staches.

Facial hair was so much better then. :(

[hippie_hunter]

Facial hair was so much better then. :(

Tell me about it :csad:

http://i128.photobucket.com/albums/p186/hippie_hunter/Picture002.jpg?t=1171605877

[Mr Sparkle]

He's better than Nixon because he killed the Soviet Union, he was still a neo-con ass.

actually The Soviet Union did a far better job of killing the Soviet Union.
but he was in "bedtime for Bonzo"so bonus, I gues :up:

[Mr Sparkle]

Tell me about it :csad:

http://i128.photobucket.com/albums/p186/hippie_hunter/Picture002.jpg?t=1171605877


are you growing a stealth bomber on your face?:huh:

http://www.fas.org/irp/mystery/b2.jpg

[PhotoJones]

Tell me about it :csad:

http://i128.photobucket.com/albums/p186/hippie_hunter/Picture002.jpg?t=1171605877

whoever that is, that man is a child molester.

[hippie_hunter]

actually The Soviet Union did a far better job of killing the Soviet Union.
but he was in "bedtime for Bonzo"so bonus, I gues :up:

I already explained it in the Al Franken thread:

The Soviet Union's collapse was inevitable since 1964 when the United States obtained half of the Philosopher's Legacy and the Soviet Union could no longer afford their massive military spending. The pain of lacking the Legacy was further increased when Ocelot (who turned out to have the other half), stole the remaining half of the Legacy from the CIA and helped form the Patriots, the true rulers of the United States. The Patriots and their puppet "President" Ronald Reagan, were able to afford the massive military spending through the Legacy, which was worth over $100,000,000,000.00 in 1964 and has increased since then. The Soviets, who were without the Legacy, tried to keep up but just couldn't. Their massive military spending, along with the failures of their command economy, caused the Soviet Union to collapse.

[hippie_hunter]

whoever that is, that man is a child molester.

That's....that's me :csad:

[hippie_hunter]

are you growing a stealth bomber on your face?:huh:

http://www.fas.org/irp/mystery/b2.jpg

I shaved it off a while ago :o

I wish I could grow a stash as cool as Black Sabbath :csad:

[Kritish]

That's....that's me :csad:

I'm sure you've been called worse on this site...

[hippie_hunter]

I'm sure you've been called worse on this site...

ETM implied that I was gay in the Hype Survivor thread. That's about it.

[PhotoJones]

That's....that's me :csad:

oops. sorry. :woot:

[Kritish]

Ugh, this thread is giving me hemorrhoids, I'm going to bed.

[CConn]

or...you know.
smart people.
I was being factious. Which "smart people" could tell. :up:

[Mr Sparkle]

I was being factious. Which "smart people" could tell. :up:

smart people are often familiar with humor as well.

I hear.

[CConn]

smart people are often familiar with humor as well.

I hear.
But retarded people can't hear. :(

[Mr Sparkle]

But retarded people can't hear. :(

Morg's gonna ban you for that :csad:
good bye :heart:

[CConn]

It's not mutually exclusive. :o

Stephen Hawkings is a genius and he can't hear.

[Mr Sparkle]

I'd say good save.
but it wasn't.
I have a hard time being dishonest.

[mwm1331]

CConn, dont waste your time, sparkle boy isn't worth reading, much less responding to.

[Mr Sparkle]

LMAO for those playing the home version I pissed off mwm1331 so much he put me on ignore after 3 posts.
so, again, for those playing the home version the answer is

A. "what a pussy"
not
B. "who's mwm1331? :confused:"

[hippie_hunter]

CConn, dont waste your time, sparkle boy isn't worth reading, much less responding to.

I like reading Mr Sparkle's opinions.

[Mr Sparkle]

ha ha! In your face mwm1331!!!! :cmad:

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Tell me about it :csad:

http://i128.photobucket.com/albums/p186/hippie_hunter/Picture002.jpg?t=1171605877


Is that a hospice for people with terminal illnesses?
That's BLEAK.

[PhotoJones]

Is that a hospice for people with terminal illnesses?
That's BLEAK.

no, it's a child molester.

[hippie_hunter]

Is that a hospice for people with terminal illnesses?
That's BLEAK.

We just bought the house that year and we are doing some major remodeling. We had to tear down the walls, etc. It's a lot better looking now.

[Assassin]

Mr. KENNEDY! Ken aaaaa Dey!

[CConn]

Hmm. I'm sensing mwm1331 is Mr. Sparkle's doppleganger.

I'll hate them both just to be safe.

[hippie_hunter]

no, it's a child molester.

No this is a child molester

http://www.tonyrogers.com/humor/images/brian_peppers1.jpg

[Mr Sparkle]

Hmm. I'm sensing mwm1331 is Mr. Sparkle's doppleganger.

I'll hate them both just to be safe.

you hate me?
but ...but I love you :heart::csad:
now go restock the shelves last time I went to target they were out of venture brothers and that pissed me off :cmad:

[Speedball]

you hate me?
but ...but I love you :heart::csad:
now go restock the shelves last time I went to target they were out of venture brothers and that pissed me off :cmad:
I'm sorry...I bought the last copy.
I'll sell it to you, for...$1 Billion.

[Mr Sparkle]

I'll just download them.

legally of course......yeah, that's the ticket, yeah.

[NewYorkSpider]

Fdr.

[ScottyBBadd]

FDR, no doubt. Got us out of the depression, put us into WWII when we needed to.

Served three full terms, was serving his fourth when he died. I think that alone proves he was an amazing person and a great President.

Well there was no Presidential term limit at the time. Bill Clinton may have easily won a third or fourth term. Having said that FDR is the bet for the reasons you said.

[Ahura Mazda]

One thing is FDR did not get The US out of depression...the war got the US out of depression

[Fried Gold]

Clinton was the only one who appeared human.

[Matt]

I would vote for the zombified corpse of Teddy Roosevelt over anyone any party can put on the ticket.

Amen to that. He could have a platform of wanting to eat my brains and I'd still vote for him :up:

[Fran]

CConn, dont waste your time, sparkle boy isn't worth reading, much less responding to.

Ironic.

LMAO for those playing the home version I pissed off mwm1331 so much he put me on ignore after 3 posts.
so, again, for those playing the home version the answer is

A. "what a pussy"
not
B. "who's mwm1331? :confused:"

:up: That mwm person just loves making enemies, but makes himself look like a total ass in the process.

[mwm1331]

I like reading Mr Sparkle's opinions.
Funny, you don't seem to be masochist

[mwm1331]

Ironic.



:up: That mwm person just loves making enemies, but makes himself look like a total ass in the process.

A man is judged by his enemies, and thanks to guys like you I look like a god.

[mwm1331]

Well there was no Presidential term limit at the time. Bill Clinton may have easily won a third or fourth term. Having said that FDR is the bet for the reasons you said.


I actually think most of the interest in Hillary is people wanting Bill back in the WH.

[Fran]

Use multi-quote. Not that hard!

:whatever:

[Selene]

Without getting into a huge long reason why I chose who I chose, I will just say Bill Clinton.
:cwink:

[raybia]

This is a no brainer.

FDR

[Cinemaman]

Franklin Delano Roosevelt :up:

[mwm1331]

Use multi-quote. Not that hard!

:whatever:

get a life.
Not that hard!

[hippie_hunter]

Funny, you don't seem to be masochist
How does liking to read other people's opinions make me a masochist?

[DV8]

ya know . . . we can quotre history until we're blue in the face, but the truth is we don't TRULY know how great most of these presidents were cuz most of us weren't even alive . . . I'd go FDR though . . .

[tomahawk53]

actually The Soviet Union did a far better job of killing the Soviet Union.
but he was in "bedtime for Bonzo"so bonus, I gues :up:

Nah it would have held on for a much longer time had it not been for the arms race.

But bedtime for Bonzo was a great career choice. :cwink:

[Matt]

Nah it would have held on for a much longer time had it not been for the arms race.

But bedtime for Bonzo was a great career choice. :cwink:

Not really. It was on a road to destruction. In fact, if the Soviets managed to turn their economy around, we would still be in a very tense cold war today because of Reagan's actions. They lacked any foresight.

Then again, the people voting Clinton are just as partisan as those voting Reagan.

[StorminNorman]

The fact that President Clinton has as many votes as Teddy Roosevelt is horrible.

The fact that President Clinton has more votes than President Truman is appalling.

[hippie_hunter]

The fact that President Clinton has as many votes as Teddy Roosevelt is horrible.

The fact that President Clinton has more votes than President Truman is appalling.

Truman didn't even win re-election :o

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/28/Deweytruman12.jpg

[PhotoJones]

The fact that President Clinton has as many votes as Teddy Roosevelt is horrible.

The fact that President Clinton has more votes than President Truman is appalling.

truman definitely gets some negative points for the usage of atomic bombs. :up:

[StorminNorman]

truman definitely gets some negative points for the usage of atomic bombs. :up:

It was either Nuke Japan, or prolong WWII, costing the lives of thousands of more American soldiers. It was lose-lose either way.

A better debate would be should Truman of followed the advice of General MacArthur and bombed North Korea and drove the communist out of North Korea all together?

[Mr Sparkle]

It was either Nuke Japan, or prolong WWII, costing the lives of thousands of more American soldiers. It was lose-lose either way.



http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v731/mistaspakara/emot-911.gifI've heard that argument. it seems odd since they bombed villages and not military bases. well, maybe they were bases.

[PhotoJones]

It was either Nuke Japan, or prolong WWII, costing the lives of thousands of more American soldiers. It was lose-lose either way.

A better debate would be should Truman of followed the advice of General MacArthur and bombed North Korea and drove the communist out of North Korea all together?

oh, so we had to use the nukes? were they about to expire or something?

[Superman79]

Teddy edges the younger Roosevelt just because he could kick anyones ass...:D

Reagan, Eisenhouer, and JFK follow as a close second...

[StorminNorman]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v731/mistaspakara/emot-911.gifI've heard that argument. it seems odd since they bombed villages and not military bases. well, maybe they were bases.

Regardless of where they bombed, it ended the war.

[Dwarf lord]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/19/President_Theodore_Roosevelt%2C_1904.jpg/454px-President_Theodore_Roosevelt%2C_1904.jpg

For everyone who complains about party politics, here's your man. He was a Republican, but he was an advocate for the little guy, the environment, ect. FDR was great, solving the Depression and all. It takes a good man to do great things under pressure, but it takes an astounding person to promote great change, with little pressure.

[StorminNorman]

oh, so we had to use the nukes? were they about to expire or something?

If we didn't use Nukes, the war would of continued for a few months, maybe another year and more American soldiers would of died.

Did thousands of innocent Japanese people because of the nukes? Yes, but an American president has to put the lives of American's as the first priority and everyone else second.

[StorminNorman]

For everyone who complains about party politics, here's your man. He was a Republican, but he was an advocate for the little guy, the environment, ect. FDR was great, solving the Depression and all. It takes a good man to do great things under pressure, but it takes an astounding person to promote great change, with little pressure.

World War II solved the depression damn it :csad:

[PhotoJones]

If we didn't use Nukes, the war would of continued for a few months, maybe another year and more American soldiers would of died.

Did thousands of innocent Japanese people because of the nukes? Yes, but an American president has to put the lives of American's as the first priority and everyone else second.

that's the worst argument, ever.

why does no one ever answer the question of why we couldn't bomb military bases with regular, non-nuke bombs?

the bombing of those two cities is like using a grenade to kill a fly.

[Mr Sparkle]

of course, it must be added that both arguments have a heavy amount of conjecture.

[PhotoJones]

World War II solved the depression damn it :csad:

i'll never understand that argument, either.

if the war was so beneficial to the economy, then why couldn't the government pay back people for their warbonds?

[Mr Sparkle]

World War II solved the depression damn it :csad:

that, there is a FACT.
I just hope that in the future no US president uses war to bring his country out of an economic.......



:dry:

[StorminNorman]

that's the worst argument, ever.

why does no one ever answer the question of why we couldn't bomb military bases with regular, non-nuke bombs?

the bombing of those two cities is like using a grenade to kill a fly.


Hiroshima was chosen because it was a large city and it was also an important military depot. The goal of using the Atomic Bomb was to cause enough damage that Japan's will would be broken and they would have to surrender. To simply attack a small area with military importance would not of created the psychological effect the U.S. Military felt was needed to force surrender. Thus both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were chosen because of their size and location.

[StorminNorman]

i'll never understand that argument, either.

if the war was so beneficial to the economy, then why couldn't the government pay back people for their warbonds?

The War stimulated the economy by stimulated the jobs and factory work. Our men needed food and guns and tanks and planes and clothes and ammo and so on and so forth - this created a huge job market. That is what cured the depression.

The money wasn't directly funneled into the government though, and the national debt was made deeper by FDR's New Deal policies - furthering the problem of paying back warbonds. The more warbonds the government sold, the more the government owed - it wasn't until the government got out of the national debt that it could start looking to pay back the bonds.

[Warhammer]

I'd choose between Teddy Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan.

[PhotoJones]

Hiroshima was chosen because it was a large city and it was also an important military depot. The goal of using the Atomic Bomb was to cause enough damage that Japan's will would be broken and they would have to surrender. To simply attack a small area with military importance would not of created the psychological effect the U.S. Military felt was needed to force surrender. Thus both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were chosen because of their size and location.

thank you, mr. high school textbook.

i know why truman did it. i don't think it's justified or warranted. i'm of the opinion that a civilian's life should never be intentionally taken.

[StorminNorman]

thank you, mr. high school textbook.

i know why truman did it. i don't think it's justified or warranted. i'm of the opinion that a civilian's life should never be intentionally taken.

If a President has a choice between the life of civilians of another country or the life of his own people - he has to pick to save the latter.

[PhotoJones]

If a President has a choice between the life of civilians of another country or the life of his own people - he has to pick to save the latter.


i think destroying the military bases would've weakened their tiny little nation just as good as "pyschological" methods.

of course, i'm no expert.

[Spidey-Bat]

The civillians killed form the a-bombs would be dwarfed in comparison to the casualties both sides would have faced had the US attempted to invade Japan. It would have liked dragged the war on for several more months.


I think FDR is a bit overrated. He was a great president but the fact that he was in office during WWII really inflates his greatness. I'd go with TR as the best of the 20th century. Before his presidency, the government was pretty much a tool of big businesses.

[Gonking]

Franklin Delano Roosevelt :up:

[Gonking]

9 votes Theodore Roosevelt?

why would anybody vote for this f**** who intervened in almost all latinamerica and invaded half of the caribbean countries ?

[Memphis Slim]

truman definitely gets some negative points for the usage of atomic bombs. :up:


You're kidding right????

[Memphis Slim]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v47/sun_down/Canidate20Governor20Bill20Clinton-w.jpg

:up:

http://www.davidstuff.com/political/flowers.jpghttp://content.answers.com/main/content/img/webpics/Monica_Lewinsky.jpghttp://www.americanpolitics.com/jonesbeast.jpg

:woot: :dry:

[hippie_hunter]

So what. His affairs don't have any affect on his job performance.

Though for a Governor/President, you'd think he'd have a better choice in women.

[Gonking]

http://www.davidstuff.com/political/flowers.jpghttp://content.answers.com/main/content/img/webpics/Monica_Lewinsky.jpghttp://www.americanpolitics.com/jonesbeast.jpg

:woot: :dry:

Who cares about his mistresses?

The important thing is what he did in government not in bed

[Addendum]

9 votes Theodore Roosevelt?

why would anybody vote for this f**** who intervened in almost all latinamerica and invaded half of the caribbean countries ?
I voted for him because I agree with his Progressivism, the importance he placed on conservation, the Pure Food and Drug Act and Meat Inspection Act, and the railroad regulations he placed.

I don't care about latin america

[Gonking]

I don't care about latin america

That's why the world hate your country :up:

[Arkady Rossovich]

Its sort of shocking to see people voting for certain Presidents.But then again,its understandable.

[Spidey-Bat]

9 votes Theodore Roosevelt?

why would anybody vote for this f**** who intervened in almost all latinamerica and invaded half of the caribbean countries ?

Look up what he did on the domestic front.

[Addendum]

That's why the world hate your country :up:

:dry:Oh noes! The world hate my country! Whatever will I do:dry:

[Hobgoblin]

Theodore Roosevelt has always been my favorite. He did a lot fo good during his 8 years: fought the trusts, set up the National Park System, had the Panama Canal finished (even if he went about it illegally:o ), etc.

FDR is a close second, maybe even first, by TR is still my favorite.

[PhotoJones]

i guess we just should be happy that no one voted for bush...yet.

[The Chairman]

i guess we just should be happy that no one voted for bush...yet.

Bush Sr. actually was a pretty solid president compared to his son, at least from my understanding. Flawed, yes, but far superior to his son...which really isn't saying much.

[mwm1331]

that's the worst argument, ever.

why does no one ever answer the question of why we couldn't bomb military bases with regular, non-nuke bombs?

the bombing of those two cities is like using a grenade to kill a fly.

Becasue the people og japan had been so brainwashed by japanese propaganda that women were prepared to kill thier own children so our marines wouldn't "eat them" In the When we liberated islands off the japanese coast the civilians were throwing thier children off cliffs and jumpin in after them. The will of the people had to be broken, just as we had doen to the germans. In eevry war the will of the people has to be broken, when it isn't, when you try to "win hearts and minds" you end up with the situation we have in Iraq. War isn't nice, civilians always die, and the innocent always suffer. The best you can fo is be brutal enough to break the populace fast, so that more don't die.

[PhotoJones]

Bush Sr. actually was a pretty solid president compared to his son, at least from my understanding. Flawed, yes, but far superior to his son...which really isn't saying much.

yes.

[PhotoJones]

Becasue the people og japan had been so brainwashed by japanese propaganda that women were prepared to kill thier own children so our marines wouldn't "eat them" In the When we liberated islands off the japanese coast the civilians were throwing thier children off cliffs and jumpin in after them. The will of the people had to be broken, just as we had doen to the germans. In eevry war the will of the people has to be broken, when it isn't, when you try to "win hearts and minds" you end up with the situation we have in Iraq. War isn't nice, civilians always die, and the innocent always suffer. The best you can fo is be brutal enough to break the populace fast, so that more don't die.

yeah if you believe THAT kind of propaganda.

and i swear i'm going to kill the next person that uses the term "liberate" in reference to america invading a country.

[mwm1331]

yeah if you believe THAT kind of propaganda.

and i swear i'm going to kill the next person that uses the term "liberate" in reference to america invading a country.


Its not propaganda. it simple history. Unless you break the will of a people to fight, they will fight, and more will be killed in the process. And I still maintain we liberated Iraq, As well as Afghanistan.

[Addendum]

The U.S. was liberating countries in the Pacific during World War 2.

Study Imperial Japan and what it was doing in China, and in the island nations of the Pacific. K?

As for now, Afghanistan was necessary since their then-government was in league with al-Qaeda.

Iraq was unnecessary

[PhotoJones]

Its not propaganda. it simple history. Unless you break the will of a people to fight, they will fight, and more will be killed in the process. And I still maintain we liberated Iraq, As well as Afghanistan.

kill your tv, man. or least cut back on the fox"news".

and no hannity or rush for a week. you're grounded. :cmad:

[Gonking]

and i swear i'm going to kill the next person that uses the term "liberate" in reference to america invading a country.

Yes, it's the same term that terrorism uses. Ironic.

[mwm1331]

kill your tv, man. or least cut back on the fox"news".

and no hannity or rush for a week. you're grounded. :cmad:

I love how predictable you are. If someone doesn't take your "wisdom" as gospel then obviously they must liten to fox news. (Im actually surprised you didn't refer to it as faux news) try reading the art of war, the prince, von clauswitz, any of the great millitary thinkers. The same theme runs through all thier writings.
Or better yet look at what happened in WW2, The firebombing of dresden, the blitz, the constant bombing raids on london. Both sides recognised this central concept. Both put it to practise, only we did it better. Thats why we won.
If the morale of the people can not be sustained the war itself can not be sustained.
But hey don't let a little thing like reality bother you, it doesn't seem to have ever intruded upon your thoughts before.