@Rick - in your response to mama_kaz, you destroy your own argument completely. It is the only thing I think most other people believe and are saying also, and I quote you here: "Do you honestly believe I'm worried about nations like Russia or China launching nuclear weapons on the United States? No. I am not. The reason? Because they understand the consequences of such an attack. We would then launch a counter-attack. None of us really have to worry about another country launching their weapons on the United States."
Sooo, you are saying that if the US did NOT have nuclear weapons, there would be NO threat of any retaliation response, therefore making them aa absolute necessary evil to have. That is all anyone else is saying. It lookks like we agree. :D
War is war Olivia, and in the course of war it is always expected of a soldier or sailor that they may never come back, but they defend our nation with the greatest of honors and many times with the expectation that they may in fact give their life in order for the rest of us to remain free from the tyranny of men like Hitler, Hussein, and Kim Jong Il. Many wars have been fought without the technology of weapons of mass destruction, and yet we not only prevailed in most of them the clear victor, but without the use of a nuclear warhead. The death of just one innocent civilian is without doubt inexcusable. My grandfather served in the United States Air Force during World War II in the Pacific. He was stationed at Pearl Harbor only two years after the bombing. He and I never agree on much as he is a staunch conservative, but we both agree on this particular matter. I remember him telling me after he had heard about the first bombing he’d have rather stormed the beaches of Japan and killed thousands of Japanese soldiers than for one innocent civilian to have been killed. He used to say that he understood the sacrifice he was willing to make, those poor people never stood a chance. It was like shooting an unarmed man in the back. I always admired him as a grandfather and a soldier for such bravery and honesty. I have to agree with him. It was an act of barbarism on our part, and God willing, we will never choose such a cowardly way again.
Nothing in your former statement makes any sense. Not to mention the fact that it contradicts every thing you've ever said about me, who you love to call arrogant all the time. In previous arguments you have stated that I am arrogant. In addition I have been told by you and your little fan club that perhaps I am too open minded. So which is it? Would it be possible for you to get your story straight at some point?
I can not and will not abide by ignorance of any kind. Whereas my supposed arrogance is what most would consider to be a personality trait formed not by choice, but instead by years of interaction with others, ignorance is unfortunately a choice. I can no more change how I interact with others than I can the beating of my own heart. I can however choose not to be ignorant of a certain subject or circumstance. One can always choose to read or understand something they never really understood before. If one chooses to be ignorant of something then that is their own fault, and I refuse to feel sorry for that person, or grant them any kind of leeway for the dumb decisions they may make in their life. I could more easily tolerate someone who is genuinely stupid than someone who is ignorant. At least someone who is stupid has an excuse for not understanding a particular subject or idea. It is simply beyond their comprehension despite their attempt to understand it, while those who are ignorant are so simply because they are too lazy to try to understand. When you have the ability to understand, but yet you do not try, then you are nothing more than a complete waste of time, air, and space. Arrogance is amusing. Stupidity is forgivable. Ignorance is intolerable.
Although I agree that corruption in government has always taken place I'd love to hear you prove in any way, shape, or form that President Obama had anything to do with Rod Blagojevich's scandal. Please. Anyone. I'd love to see it proven.
I hardly know where to begin with your statements. First of all Obama is certainly not the first President to have used "language" on camera or elsewhere in public view, and he certainly won't be the last. "a president should show more restraint." Really? I can't honestly think of a single President since the invention of the television that hasn't either boldly used language in front of the t.v. screen or been caught by accident doing so. I'm afraid this is just another case of naivete once again on your part, and just another reason to bad mouth President Obama.
Somebody seems to have their boxers in a wad. The people at NOAA jumped all over global warming for some reason. They must have gotten something out of it or they were just wrong. When a tornado occurs they go out and give their human OPINION about the strength of the tornado based on what they see. That is not straight fact, but rather how they see it. Two people can look at the same damage and come up with two very different opinions. And, once again Rick, you have no problem voicing your opinions but you continue to put down everyone else for voicing theirs. That's a sign of a small mind in case you don't know that. So is dismissing everyone who disagrees with you as being an idiot and making fun of people like a first grader. You're the only person who thinks you're right all the time.
Once again he has demonstrated his lack of maturity and self control. I don't care what the circumstances are, a president should show more restraint. I have heard him say much worse things but I still don't like it.
If he is a citizen then why doesn't he prove it by producing a birth certificate as the rest of us have to just to get a drivers license. If you are born in the US a record of your birth can be obtained without too much effort.
Ignorance is easier for me to tolerate because these people just don't know any better. Arrogance makes it difficult to keep a dialogue going because it can't coexist with an open mind. People who are ignorant are usually that way because they don't think for themselves and don't bother to research anything that's going on in the world around them. It doesn't mean they are stupid or close minded, just uninformed.
Sooo, you are saying that if the US did NOT have nuclear weapons, there would be NO threat of any retaliation response, therefore making them aa absolute necessary evil to have. That is all anyone else is saying. It lookks like we agree. :D
I can not and will not abide by ignorance of any kind. Whereas my supposed arrogance is what most would consider to be a personality trait formed not by choice, but instead by years of interaction with others, ignorance is unfortunately a choice. I can no more change how I interact with others than I can the beating of my own heart. I can however choose not to be ignorant of a certain subject or circumstance. One can always choose to read or understand something they never really understood before. If one chooses to be ignorant of something then that is their own fault, and I refuse to feel sorry for that person, or grant them any kind of leeway for the dumb decisions they may make in their life. I could more easily tolerate someone who is genuinely stupid than someone who is ignorant. At least someone who is stupid has an excuse for not understanding a particular subject or idea. It is simply beyond their comprehension despite their attempt to understand it, while those who are ignorant are so simply because they are too lazy to try to understand. When you have the ability to understand, but yet you do not try, then you are nothing more than a complete waste of time, air, and space. Arrogance is amusing. Stupidity is forgivable. Ignorance is intolerable.