If that's the case, the more Bush tweaked "cannon fodder" the better!
Good ****** riddence!
2007-01-17 07:31:24 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
no!
2007-01-17 07:33:20 · answer #1 · answered by Michael 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In a word, yes. There is absolutely no comparison between poverty in the United States (or any other First World nation) and poverty in Third World countries like Haiti and most of Africa. In the US, there are government social programs, state and federal assistance, charity groups, housing assistance, every citizen and resident gets free education through the 12th grade, basic healthcare (no hospital will turn anyone away based upon the ability to pay), a police force, etc. In Third World countries, there is none of that. If you can't manage to feed yourself, you starve. If you get sick and can't afford a doctor, you either get better or you die. If you can't afford an education or even a school uniform, you stay illiterate and uneducated. If you happen to get attacked, assaulted and killed by a group of bandits, nobody is there to protect you. So yes, in your situation, it's less tragic to be a drug addicted prostitute in the US than a drug addicted prostitute in a third world country. The former has options and opportunities that the latter never will have. ETA: LT: I'm not belittling your experiences. I'm sure it sucked and I'll admit, though I've been poor in my life, I was never homeless. But my point is, even in the slums of NYC there are more opportunities than in the slums of Monrovia. I also recall one of the regulars saying something to the effect that orphanages in Africa should have running water, because running water isn't unheard of in Africa. It's just another example of not having any real comprehension of Third World Country poverty. There really is no comparasion.
2016-05-24 00:54:57 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Less young Republicans maybe but it will seem like a lot more crazed drug addicts because all that would leave is a higher proportion of Democrats. I can see them now sitting on park benches leaned over at about a 45 degree angle with a string of snot hanging from their noses....much like they look in Congress.
2007-01-17 08:21:44 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
So you think all of our military are young, Christian, Republican drug-addicts?
People like you aren't worthy of the freedoms we have in this country. Lots of young, Christian Republicans have died over the past 230 years so that you can sit behind your keyboard and spew ignorant hatred.
Practice birth control!!
2007-01-17 07:35:57 · answer #4 · answered by Jadis 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Count me as against troop escelation, but against your argument as well.
If anything is as bad as the so called "extreme fundamentalist right" it's the "clueless monkey-see monkey-do atheist teenager fanboy."
2007-01-17 07:35:29 · answer #5 · answered by Plaxico Domingo 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
"No" stop be stupid, people make mistake but some time in cause problem Christian people, who care if there are Christian or not you don't have the Right to say; what **** you is your problem with Christian.
2007-01-17 07:43:45 · answer #6 · answered by A37 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
AAaah, yes. Liberals, always the more "tolerant" group.
2007-01-17 13:33:31 · answer #7 · answered by karen p 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I could say many vulgar things about you atheistic liberals, but I will refrain.
If you have something to say that has no significance, just keep it to yourself.
2007-01-17 07:35:08 · answer #8 · answered by Defcon6 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I don't now and never did support this bogus war in Iraq, but you are a repulsive "American."
2007-01-17 07:37:14 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
you are so ffuucckkiinn' retarded.......unbelievable the amount of stupidity you display
2007-01-17 07:39:30 · answer #10 · answered by s_h_a_r_k_k_y 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, those types don't enlist.
2007-01-17 07:42:38 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋