• I think Kerry kicked butt all the way. What do you think?


  • I think Kerry kicked butt all the way. What do you think?

    I was gonna say it was a draw, but ill say Bush just to cancel you out 😛 .

    You probably want to add draw to the poll, though.


  • Rats. I did not think of draw. Sorry. If a mod wants to add that option cool. I can’t.


  • Ah well, no huge biggy, Maybe youll force people to make up their minds 😄 .


  • I don’t think that one can “win” a debate. You can only lose. In this case, both had his high’s and low’s. However, Kerry laid down a better case. Bush only seemed to be gaining some momentum near the end.

    Doesn’t matter really. Whoever wins the election “won” the debate.


  • According to this author the debate was rigged…
    SOURCE :
    http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/9/30/223850.shtml

    However, viewing the debate as it was and…
    considering the fact that Kerry had to overcome…

    1. an orange tan,
    2. waffling,
    3. stiffness,
    4. low expectations,
    5. always mentioning his time in Vietnam…

    I’d say JFK won.
    He…

    1. had a reasonable makeup job(still had dark spots under his cheeks),
    2. didn’t waffle much,
    3. relaxed more as the debate got going,
    4. exceeded expectations, and
    5. only mentioned his service time twice(once early on and once right at the end.

    4 out of 5 ain’t bad!

    USA Today/Gallup, ABC, cBS and FoxNewsChannel all said Kerry won.

    So it’s good for the 'conomy cuz it’s a horse race agin.


  • Kerrys good at debating, W isnt bottom line. Kerrys been preparing to run for president for 40 years, naturally he did better than a presidnet that is to busy making sure a dirty bomb doesnt go off in my backyard, or even yours lizard.


  • if you think bush won that debate, you are a complete moron. no way did he win it.


  • Worked out 40 pages detailing the conditions for this debate including room temperature and they forgot to make sure the questions were balanced?
    To my information it was Bush’s choice to cover the Iraq war in the first debate.


  • Neither one did particularly good, and if there were a draw on the poll I’d vote for it. But given how Kerry constantly said “I can do better then the President,” and then failed to explain just exactly what he’d do, I’d say Bush held a slight edge. Still, there were several points Bush didn’t bring up, that I wished he had.

    Of course, everyone here is going to say his candidate did better ;).


  • Maybe NYT just presented the highlights (or lowlights as it were). It looked like Bush either outright lied or bent the truth an awful lot. Either that or the guy is just TOO STUPID (or believes that the American people are).


  • To Jefe, the notion that the questions your author thought should be asked of Kerry is laughable. You know fair and balanced means both sides get the same treatment. By your guy’s reasoning Bush should’ve been asked why he dodged vietnam, why he lied about it, why he did cocaine and was an alcoholic, why he didn’t even fulfill the military service that kept him out of vietnam, and why he chooses to protect his dads friends in Saudi Arabia/Jordan rather than fight the war on terror. And this is just a short list of tough questions Bush should get if Kerry were to get the ones your author suggests. However, Bush has made a career out of dodging tough issues and tough questions. Hopefully it won’t work for Tricky Dick II and him this time.


  • Something that keeps getting glossed over bugs me. Everyone (both sides) keep saying we could not trust weapons inspections to disarm Sadam. What we are forgetting is, it turns out we went to war because Sadam was a bad record keeper. He could not prove he got rid of the WMD. He did do it though. They are G O N E. He DID disarm.
    He’s still a scum sucking pig, but he did what we asked him to do. Had he been able to provide whatever documentation we required, and I don’t pretend to know if it was reasonable or not, we would not have gone to war.
    Do I want Sadam back? Nope. Do we have to make this a win? Yes, pretty much at any cost. Still, as people keep looking back at why we went to war, the irony keeps sticking in my throat. A good accountant would have been able to avoid the whole thing. Unless Bush was going to war no matter what. 😉


  • One thing Kerry kept saying during the debates, is that Bush didn’t exhaust all the diplomatic means available, and “rushed” to war. Well, we had a UN resolution saying that if Saddam didn’t show he had disarmed (and he didn’t), we were authorized to invade. Saddam was given a certain amount of time to do this, and he exceed the time limit; should we have just said “oh well, let’s issue another resolution, and maybe he’ll pay attention to this one”? No. We should have done what we did. Invade. That’s one of the things I wish Bush had brought up.


  • I am pro-Bush, but during that debate, Bush acted sorta like a baby. He just argued with everything Kerry said and didnt really debate. Did any see Bush’s face during that, he was pissed, Kerry just seemed cooler and he also did a better debating job…

    I AM STILL VOTING BUSH THOUGH!!!


  • Wargaming,
    What mattered? That Sadam could provide good documentation, or that he give up all his WMD? Do we invade for either reason? History shows what we did BTW. That is gonna go in the books. Maybe not in America, but pretty much everywhere else. We invaded Iraq for WMD. They did not have em. Ops.
    I would prefer to have had another resolution to that little snipit. That’s my take if asked in the way you phrased the question. Does that make me weak? I don’t think so. I think my way makes us 100,000 troops stronger. I think it puts 120 billion dollors into defense that will be spent instead shoring up Iraq. We have lost over 1000 men, 120 billion dollars (so far) so we could look tough. Great. In Diplomacy sometimes you just rattle the saber.
    We had just invaded Afganistan, VERY sucessfully. We did not need to prove we meant what we said. Now we have nuthing left to give. We are not a threat to any other nations. We are pullig troops out of deployments all over the world. Is that the the act of a strong nation? Does that make us more scary to our enemies? To be a Diplomat you need to understand that everything, even American might has a limit. Once you reach that limit your threats become empty. Now ask yourself, “Why is Iran making nukes now?”. “Why is N. Korea making nukes now?” “What are other counrties gonna do while we are hamstrung, so we could appear resolute?”

    In this instance a waffle would have been better. Call me names, dove etc. It does not change the truth. There are no WMD in Iraq, but there damn sure are in other countries and we can’t do Jack about it.


  • @Wargaming_nut:

    One thing Kerry kept saying during the debates, is that Bush didn’t exhaust all the diplomatic means available, and “rushed” to war. Well, we had a UN resolution saying that if Saddam didn’t show he had disarmed (and he didn’t), we were authorized to invade. Saddam was given a certain amount of time to do this, and he exceed the time limit; should we have just said “oh well, let’s issue another resolution, and maybe he’ll pay attention to this one”? No. We should have done what we did. Invade. That’s one of the things I wish Bush had brought up.

    i’m sorry - what was that 5000-odd paged document that Saddam had given up (that the US had taken and no-one had ever heard of since)?
    I had understood that this was to be documentation that showed that he disarmed.


  • I really don’t want to get into another argument about this, so I’ll reply to these comments, and not to any later ones.

    What mattered? That Sadam could provide good documentation, or that he give up all his WMD?

    But since he failed to provide the documentation showing he had disarmed, we were authorized, and justified, in attacking, and making sure he did.

    I would prefer to have had another resolution to that little snipit.

    That would send a great message to the world; “it’s ok folks, neither the UN nor us mean what we say the first time, and we’ll give you several chances after the first ultimatum. Take your time.”

    We did not need to prove we meant what we said.

    We didn’t invade to prove we were strong enough to do it; we invaded to force Saddam to comply with the UN resolution. Ever heard of the Munich Agreement? Giving insane dictators chance after chance is not a good strategy.

    We are pullig troops out of deployments all over the world. Is that the the act of a strong nation?

    That is the act of a smart nation. We don’t need to leave those troops in Europe, so why keep them there? Interesting too that Kerry not too long ago was in favor of pulling the troops out of Europe, but now that Bush is doing it, Kerry doesn’t like it. Oops; another flip-flop :roll: .

    i’m sorry - what was that 5000-odd paged document that Saddam had given up (that the US had taken and no-one had ever heard of since)?
    I had understood that this was to be documentation that showed that he disarmed.

    I’m sorry, I have no idea what you’re talking about. I’m not saying you’re making that up, but then since neither of us know what was in that document (assuming it existed) it’s pointless to bring it up.


  • @Wargaming_nut:

    I’m sorry, I have no idea what you’re talking about. I’m not saying you’re making that up, but then since neither of us know what was in that document (assuming it existed) it’s pointless to bring it up.

    It is SOOOOO not pointless to bring it up.
    Approximately a week before the US invaded Iraq, Saddam had made every overture to mollify the US. The one that he did not agree to was the demand that he step down.
    To prove that he had destroyed the WMD’s, he provided a massive document that was generated by Iraqi scientists to (i think) the weapons inspectors. The Americans held on to the document.
    For some reason, this document has been forgotten about (conveniently) - particularly interesting given the fact that there are STILL NO WMD’s. Oddly enough exactly what Saddam had said that he would do, and had done, he did. My question is why Bush chose to ignore this, as well as the evidence that attempts at acheiving WMD’s were hoaxes.
    Why? Because: He is a deceitful, warmongering, hubristic idiot.


  • Kerry won, solidly, but it won’t affect the election just yet.

    Its more important that Kerry is solid in all the debates.


  • From what I saw, Kerry definitely won.


  • not a big fan of this columnist, but i thought this kind of funny . . .

    http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/WinnipegSun/News/2004/10/02/652445.html


  • Wargamming,
    CC is correct. Sadam did give us documentation that he said proved he disarmed. The US did take it and refused to share it until we had a chance to view it. The UN was not pleased by this. We decided that it proved nuthing and attacked. Now I have not seen the docs, from what I gather not many people have. Those that did see it said it was junk. Maybe it was. That was my point. If Sadam had a good Accountant, we would not have invaded. He failed to PROVE he disarmed. He did disarm.
    The history books will show we invaded because Sadam failed to prove to our satisfaction that he had indeed disarmed. So we get to look… steadfast and resolute.

    "That would send a great message to the world; “it’s ok folks, neither the UN nor us mean what we say the first time, and we’ll give you several chances after the first ultimatum. Take your time.”

    I would prefer that to sending the message that America will attack you no matter what the truth might be. Personally I am shocked that Bush did not plant some WMD after the war. Poor planning is all I can think. It’s certainly not that he minds manufactoring evidence.


  • how do YOU know that he disarmed, if he couldnt prove so to the US and the UN, or whoever else saw the documents?


  • how do YOU know that he disarmed, if he couldnt prove so to the US and the UN, or whoever else saw the documents?

    How do you know he didn’t disarm.

    Remember this arguement?

    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3619

    Now your flip flopping 😉

Suggested Topics

  • 1
  • 4
  • 25
  • 4
  • 6
  • 9
  • 2
  • 1
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

74
Online

15.3k
Users

36.5k
Topics

1.5m
Posts