We should no more Ban Guns, than we should have went to war with Iraq after 9/11

1) We over react in this country.
2) We assign some type of simplistic blame to very complex problems .
3) We do not think it through what our reaction will produce.


For instance, those on the right (and a few on the left) were ready to charge into Iraq after 9/11 despite no evidence that Saddam had anything to do with that attack.

Now there are folks wanting to ban guns when IMHO , it is mental health problems that are the real issue.

And the biggest problem of all from my prospective is that we think we can live in a world with no danger and have unlimited freedom. Those two things are at odds. My economic freedom was put at risk after the overreaction by Bush after 9/11 and now it seems , the right to bear arms is trying to be put at risk with this tragedy.

Folks, Mexico ban guns yet has a huge murder rate. Iraq was a huge mistake, not because they did not have WMD's but because they were not the problem in regards to 9/11, just like guns are not the over riding problem to this tragedy.Remember it is still more dangerous to drive to work or school than to drop your kid off at school or be killed by a terrorist at work, yet nobody has yet to discuss banning cars. Think folks. Do not be a LovingKayla and just react mindlessly to every situation. That should be everyone's goal in life...not to wind up like her!




.

Right outcome, WTF, wrong analysis.

I agree with you on the thread headline; but how you got to that conclusion, not so much.

Right outcome, WTF, wrong analysis.

I agree with you on the thread headline; but how you got to that conclusion, not so much.

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

How so?

Why do you want to promote the idea of a direct connection between 9/11 and Iraq? There was no direct connection. 9/11 was about the actions of one man (Hussein) and his capability and support of terrorism. He was in violation of the treaty he signed following the first Gulf War, he had held an American pilot shot down during the war, he committed mass murder on his own people and it was known that Hussein possessed the precoursers for chemical weapons which he had used on Iran and the Kurds. Afghanistan was about 9/11.

Why do you want to promote the idea of a direct connection between 9/11 and Iraq? There was no direct connection. 9/11 was about the actions of one man (Hussein) and his capability and support of terrorism. He was in violation of the treaty he signed following the first Gulf War, he had held an American pilot shot down during the war, he committed mass murder on his own people and it was known that Hussein possessed the precoursers for chemical weapons which he had used on Iran and the Kurds. Afghanistan was about 9/11. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Without 9/11 there never would have been an Iraq war you moron. Bush linked the two.

Just as the left is trying to link gun control to this school tragedy.

People like you JD , have no trouble never ''wasting a crisis'', when it suits your world view. You just cry foul when others do the same.

I actually wish we had a more reasoned response to these things.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.html

In his prime-time press conference last week, which focused almost solely on Iraq, President Bush mentioned Sept. 11 eight times. He referred to Saddam Hussein many more times than that, often in the same breath with Sept. 11.
Bush never pinned blame for the attacks directly on the Iraqi president. Still, the overall effect was to reinforce an impression that persists among much of the American public: that the Iraqi dictator did play a direct role in the attacks. A New York Times/CBS poll this week shows that 45 percent of Americans believe Mr. Hussein was "personally involved" in Sept. 11, about the same figure as a month ago.
Sources knowledgeable about US intelligence say there is no evidence that Hussein played a role in the Sept. 11 attacks, nor that he has been or is currently aiding Al Qaeda. Yet the White House appears to be encouraging this false impression, as it seeks to maintain American support for a possible war against Iraq and demonstrate seriousness of purpose to Hussein's regime

"For instance, those on the right (and a few on the left) were ready to charge into Iraq after 9/11 despite no evidence that Saddam had anything to do with that attack. "

Most (probably 99.9%) on the right (and middle and left) knew Iraq had nothing to do with the 9/11 attack ! The Iraq invasion was peremptory, against a future 9/11 from an Iraq with WMDs.

"And the biggest problem of all from my prospective is that we think we can live in a world with no danger and have unlimited freedom. "

I don't think people think this; I see no evidence of this. I think people (wrongly) believe we can live in a world with significantly lessened dangers, and are willing to give up certain freedoms in exchange.

Why do you want to promote the idea of a direct connection between 9/11 and Iraq? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Oh - my - fu*kin' - gawd.....

Uh, hey there dumb shit...yeah, YOU, Trendaway, Jr.!

He's not promoting in any way the direct connection.

What he is promoting is our tendency to over react and knee-jerk without having a reasonable debate and thinking things through.

Of course, if you had actually recognized that, then you wouldn't have been able to expose your intelligence level.

Why do you want to promote the idea of a direct connection between 9/11 and Iraq? There was no direct connection. 9/11 was about the actions of one man (Hussein) and his capability and support of terrorism. He was in violation of the treaty he signed following the first Gulf War, he had held an American pilot shot down during the war, he committed mass murder on his own people and it was known that Hussein possessed the precoursers for chemical weapons which he had used on Iran and the Kurds. Afghanistan was about 9/11. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

there is no direct connection between the shooting and abortion either, but do you thik that stops the idiot wingers from linking the two together?

"For instance, those on the right (and a few on the left) were ready to charge into Iraq after 9/11 despite no evidence that Saddam had anything to do with that attack. "

Most (probably 99.9%) on the right (and middle and left) knew Iraq had nothing to do with the 9/11 attack ! The Iraq invasion was peremptory, against a future 9/11 from an Iraq with WMDs.

.

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

From my prior link....

A New York Times/CBS poll this week shows that 45 percent of Americans believe Mr. Hussein was "personally involved" in Sept. 11, about the same figure as a month ago.
Sources knowledgeable about US intelligence say there is no evidence that Hussein played a role in the Sept. 11 attacks, nor that he has been or is currently aiding Al Qaeda. Yet the White House appears to be encouraging this false impression, as it seeks to maintain American support for a possible war against Iraq and demonstrate seriousness of purpose to Hussein's regime

"And the biggest problem of all from my prospective is that we think we can live in a world with no danger and have unlimited freedom. "

I don't think people think this; I see no evidence of this. I think people (wrongly) believe we can live in a world with significantly lessened dangers, and are willing to give up certain freedoms in exchange. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Well some of us were not willing to give up our soldiers lives to go to war with Iraq to make others feel good about their safety. I was willing to take that risk for more freedom. Freedom to look soldiers in the eye and tell them I am not so scared as to send them off to war to die for my unwarranted fears. IMHO that is why so many of you have to kiss every soldiers ass you run across. I harbor no such guilt.

If preemptive is the new standard, I could shoot you under that theory for just walking on the wrong side of the road, being black, reaching for a lighter thinking you had a gun. That is if guns weren't banned! Hey maybe the left has a valid point!

It strikes me as oddly ironic it would be guns that brings us all together. We all agree that a gun has no soul. It will sit on a shelf and rust unless a man pulls the trigger. The evil ways or goodness of the soul that pulls the trigger, decides everything. We need people management, not gun or ammo. How is this so difficult to grasp...


OH and wannabewellendowed sent me a PM. I don't open shit from people I know are mentally damaged. I only have room for me in my fucked up head. So coward, what was it you said in that PM I'll never open? Oh wait you are on the ignore list. haha.


Facebook has a bunch of articles about Obama making this a police state by executive order, "because of the shootings" Anyone verify this? Gosh that sounds oddly familiar to something I just said Friday.

Facebook has a bunch of articles about Obama making this a police state by executive order, "because of the shootings" Anyone verify this? Gosh that sounds oddly familiar to something I just said Friday. Originally Posted by LovingKayla

Shut your whore mouth!

You said Obama or the UN was behind this shooting last Friday. .

Quit trying to rewroite history, just like you were aganist marriage before you were
magically for it (right after Glenn Beck lied about being for it all along).

I was never against gay marriage. Have you taken your meds today whore-monger?


Find me one time I ever said anything negitive about gay marriage. I've always ALWAYS said, they should have the right to be as miserable as everyone else. The only thing I may have said, and if not I'll say it now... Marriage is a religious thing. The christian religion will not marry gay folk because it's against what they believe in. Civil unions are fine, but does anyone really care either way? Do people still actually get married at all? I thought you brilliant thinkers wanted a separation of church and state. Marriage is the very pinnacle of their combination.

You idiots have selective observation and memory. I hear they treat that as a mental disorder nowadays.

Its really too bad I can't post what info floats through the door here. I'm hoping the actual investigators find out the shit no one wants them to know. It will never lead back to the butcher of Benghazi. It was a terror attack. Multiple gun shot wounds is an ear mark of terrorism. How do yall not know this....


But I have the right to say whatever the fuck I want to. Get back to your cadaver.


OH it must be terribly frustrating that I couldn't give a shit less what you ingrates say to me or about me. I have the privilege of working this afternoon, so enjoy throwing insults around that I'll never read. ROTFLMAO!!!!

Come to think of it, my work has exploded since I started posting in here. Oh please run me down, please!!! It's amazing for my pocketbook.

[QUOTE=WTF;1052052990]1) We over react in this country.
2) We assign some type of simplistic blame to very complex problems .
3) We do not think it through what our reaction will produce.


For instance, those on the right (and a few on the left) were ready to charge into Iraq after 9/11 despite no evidence that Saddam had anything to do with that attack.

Now there are folks wanting to ban guns when IMHO , it is mental health problems that are the real issue.

And the biggest problem of all from my prospective is that we think we can live in a world with no danger and have unlimited freedom. Those two things are at odds. My economic freedom was put at risk after the overreaction by Bush after 9/11 and now it seems , the right to bear arms is trying to be put at risk with this tragedy.

Folks, Mexico ban guns yet has a huge murder rate. Iraq was a huge mistake, not because they did not have WMD's but because they were not the problem in regards to 9/11, just like guns are not the over riding problem to this tragedy.Remember it is still more dangerous to drive to work or school than to drop your kid off at school or be killed by a terrorist at work, yet nobody has yet to discuss banning cars. Think folks. Do not be a LovingKayla and just react mindlessly to every situation. That should be everyone's goal in life...not to wind up like her!




. [/QUO


I am not for banning guns I own a few am a hunter,but as far as assault weapons or lookalikes and clips that will hold 30 rounds I can see no reason for them other than a collector.

http://www.eccie.net/attachment.php?...1&d=1355782762

Gosh, don't we all miss the days when Saddam and his two fine Sons were in charge.