Well, Kelly, come on out to Lubbock...I'll hook ya up! HAHA!

I'm not going for wholesome anymore... I've decided to be completely superficial and date guys based only on their looks. :)

JD, shut up! SHUT UP! I actually know some of these people and you don't. I know what these guys are like. You don't. SHUT UP! By the way, thanks for your help last night Arthur...really appreciate you guys.

man, what the fuck is that smell that's floating around over by CPE every damn morning? my god...at first i thought it was the gallons of bird shit all over the sidewalk, but there's no way bird poop can smell that bad.

and Kelly, you can always get a wang attached if you want to fight, but that'd be pretty desperate. it might also decrease your chances of finding a nice, wholesome male counterpart.

I sort of agree with Kelly in that I think war should be a tactic of last resort. But unfortunately in this case with Iraq, I don't see another way around it. Iraq has been defying UN sanctions since the day the Gulf War ended, and in the rare instances that weapons inspectors are allowed into Iraq, they are "escorted" around and are barred from inspecting certain areas. Hmmm. Not to mention the fact that there are ties to Al Qaeda in Iraq...and that Saddam has used chemical weapons on his own people...and that his former top nuclear weapons official has told us that he has been pursuing nuclear weapons since 1998...it just all adds up.

I certainly agree that non-violent negotiation is preferred in situations where neither country has attacked the other. This was not the case with our war in Afghanistan, when we had been attacked and were retaliating to dismantle the regime that supported the attackers. I have some problems with just going in and attacking Iraq, because Iraqi soldiers have not landed on the shores of Virginia and attacked us, and because Iraq presents no clear and present danger to our homeland.

But, that being said...a pre-emptive strike is justified, in my opinion, if Saddam is developing nuclear weapons. Why? Because he has shown he will use weapons of mass destruction not only on his own people, but on Israel as well. He sent scud missiles to Tel Aviv numerous times during the Gulf War. If he develops a nuclear weapon, God knows what he would do with it. The world would be held hostage by a madman, so to speak. We wouldn't be able to then attack Iraq because we would face the possibility of a nuclear strike against our soldiers and against neighboring countries. So I guess the benefits of a pre-emptive strike outweigh the moral and ethical costs.

In other news....fuck Nebraska, fuck Iowa State, and GO BUFFALOES

Man, I'd just like to apologize for how bad some of the students at Tech make us look on here. You know, I'll defend Tech, but I'm not going to come on here flaming other people I don't even know. I apologize for those few that do.

And I'm sorry--because it was all my doing that I have breasts instead of a dick, therefore rendering me ineligible for combat. However, speaking as the daughter of a Marine who spent more time overseas getting shot at than you could comprehend, I'd say I have a fairly good grasp of both sides of the situation. And if there was a way for me to fight, I'd do it--but even if they'd send women, I'd be medically ineligible for military service. Jackass.

I've never heard the term "tool" used to describe a female, but I'll go with it.

And I'm not a left wing tool. I just prefer a non-violent solution whenver possible, and I'm not convinced that war is the only solution in this situation. Show me the facts that there's no way around it, and I'll say "OK then, that's the right thing to do." And don't start the "UT students are all pot smoking liberal hippies" shit again. I know A&M students who voted for Gore, dammit.

were it not for this board, i would hardly know about this war. i think Norman might've mentioned it a couple times during class, but that's pretty much it. i'm so out of touch with everything going on. 'cept the weather.

It's not just "left wing tools" who have concerns about the war, dipshit.

Jesus, the more liberal UT bullshit I hear from left wing tools like Kelly, the more I slowly begin to like A&M.................. scary, very scary. Oh ya, and you can whine about a possible war just as soon as you have to fight in it, otherwise, shut your hole.

Ok thanks for the heads up, Kelly.

Also, I want to stress that the reason I am pissed about the SG is not because they passed a resolution AGAINST the war, but because the resolution was introduced and voted on AT ALL. If they had passed a resolution supporting war, I would have been equally annoyed because it is just not SG's duty to pass such resolutions. As a libertarian, I am not exactly a huge supporter of a pre-emptive strike against Iraq unless there is no other option. But then again, think of how many millions of lives may have been saved if someone had pre-emptively taken out Hitler before 1939 when he was building up the Third Reich...

Hey Bluto--

Just so you know (because I guess not many people are aware of this) every SG meeting is an open one--All on Tues. night at 7 in the SSB basement. Seriously--I'm not trying to be snotty, just trying to let you know.

If 20 people in SG want to oppose the war in Iraq, then fine, they are entitled to their opinion, and they can go protest or write letters to the editor until they are blue in the face. But they shouldn't misuse their elected position to shuttle through a resolution that, in effect, forces 50,000 other students to impliedly advocate their liberal viewpoint. Theoretically, the decisions of the SG are the decisions of all 50,000 of us.

The mission of SG is not to pass resolutions concerning US foreign policy. It's mission is to act as a voice for the student body in matters dealing with the administration. So unless President Faulkner is planning to lead troops into Iraq in the near future, this resolution was a complete waste of fucking time.

As for why I didn't show up to argue...number one, I was at work...number two, I didn't even know about this meeting until the last minute...and number three, I had friends there who I thought did a good job of representing my feelings on the matter. I expect a lot of other people were busy or didn't know about the open meeting, which is why they didn't show up.

And I admit that only 5% of the student body elected these jokers and we all have to live with them. I guess it's like if only 5% of America elected our Congressional representatives, we all still have to abide their decisions. But then again, Congress makes decisions on things within the scope of their power...unlike the SG. The SG passing a resolution on foreign policy makes about as much sense as Congress passing a resolution on the best way to bake cookies.

Uh, keep trying Pace...your abilities at insult and humor are that of a 6-year old on the short bus.

Chivas, buddy, only you would know what a cock holster is. And Wheatables, I think YOUR post qualifies as 'worst of all time'! WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT!?!?!?

http://64.191.15.97/timothy/blog/kids.html

I'm gonna bomb them fuckers back to the stone age, and then go out for some lunch on the oil rigs!

AHHHHHHHH....Politics! Punishable by catapult.

I will, but I'm not going to waste space doing it on here. One thing I've learned, though apparently not well enough to remember it here, is that debating politics any way other than in person is dangerous. Things can be misconstrued when you're looking at another person. Taking away face to face communication is a surefire way to piss people off and give the wrong idea.

That, and I have a 2:00 meeting I just remembered. Glad I didnt' take that nap.

"I think the investigations that were spawned as a result of Sept. 11 were a glorious violation of Constitutional rights"

Huh? Someone, somewhere organized, planned and executed an attack on our country that cost the lives of almost 3,000 Americans. That's a pretty damn big loss of "constitutional rights" for the 3000, dontch'a think?

Kelly, I'm genuinely interested - what would you have had Bush do in response to Sept 11th?

I am a Republican, so we'll just have to agree to disagree on that issue.

I did vote in the SG election, and I didn't intend on having those people tell the world that the opinion of 20 student assembly members is the opinion of the entire university community, especially when they didn't even bother to question students on the issue until after the resolution was passed. I respect anyone's views on the issue of war in Iraq, but I do not respect those SG members who think it's okay to pawn off their views on everyone else. I don't even think a resolution of this nature is necessary, regardless of whether or not SG is for or against war. But if they insist on it, the way to go about it is to gauge student opinion first, so that when they make their blanketing claims, there is actually some truth to them.

And on the subject of the man we elected to lead this country--I'm going to play the "You may have elected him, but I sure as hell didn't" card. I did not vote for Bush; therefore, I did not elect him. I don't support the proposed war in Iraq, I think the investigations that were spawned as a result of Sept. 11 were a glorious violation of Constitutional rights, and I am a liberal Democrat. Of course I'm going to support an SG assembly action such as this one.

None of the representatives said that. A freshman attending the meeting, who had no bearing whatsoever on the outcome of the vote, made that statement.