When any 93 year old dies, everyone should give a shit regardless of who it is. How many 93 year olds were useful for the last xx years? His legacy is there and because he was one of the most charismatic and loved presidents of the USA ever. When a nation's favorite leader dies, it's sad and that's why there is reason for mourning. Nobody expects someone dutch to mourn his death, of course...it's a national thing.

When someone lived to be 93, I see no reason to be sad cause that person lived a very long life and it's about bloody time he/she died :D

Also, I find it strange how people mourn for somebody they probably never even met and who didnt have the slighest influence in their lifes at the moment they died. With Reagan dead, the lifes of 99.99999999% of the americans will be exactly the same, so I still don't get why people care =]

naventus

United States1339 Posts

June 06 2004 04:21 GMT

#143

Yes it is. Because it is only an opinion, you shouldn't force others to do what your opinions tells you (in this case, Reagan was good we should mourn him). I'm not going to tell him that he shouldn't mourn Reagan- it's his choice, but there's no reason to attack/force others to do so.

Arbiter[frolix]

United Kingdom2674 Posts

June 06 2004 05:48 GMT

#144

Reagan waged war not only on communism, but on terrorism, most visibly in 1986 when he sent jets to bomb Libya in retaliation for the death of Americans in a Berlin dance club.

Libya was not behind the Berlin bomb attack.

Tien

Russian Federation4447 Posts

June 06 2004 06:34 GMT

#145

I think Hoover was the worst president ever. When the economy was inflating too much he adopted the policy of "do nothing about it" and that ultimately led to the depression.

StoneR

Spain1252 Posts

June 06 2004 07:19 GMT

#146

This old post is unavailable due to an encoding issue. Please contact an admin if you would like this post restored for historical reasons.

XG3

United States544 Posts

June 06 2004 07:43 GMT

#147

On June 06 2004 13:17 JaeIsGod wrote:

Show nested quote +

Because when somebody dies, it's sad regardless of who it is. The people mourning this are the people who admired him during his presidency, not the youth. I was born during his presidency and don't remember him at all, so I'm not exactly "mourning" as in crying about it..but I still respect him as a great president and thus am sad that he died. In conclusion it's sad when anyone dies, especially someone you've seen and admired for decades.

Fucking Europeans i swear...have to make everything more complicated than it is.

StoneR

Spain1252 Posts

June 06 2004 08:04 GMT

#148

relax man~

STIMEY d okgm fish

Canada6140 Posts

June 06 2004 08:10 GMT

#149

On June 06 2004 09:54 Countdown wrote:

Show nested quote +

I wasn't commenting to your post. I was letting you know that I couldn't read what you wrote. Durr...

saying u cant read it is a comment u conservative. its a part of your constant propaganda campaign to say that i cant write anything intelligble. dont act like u dont know the context you fucking troll. ddrop dead

Clutch3

United States1344 Posts

June 06 2004 08:15 GMT

#150

On June 05 2004 19:40 Capt. Moroni wrote:

SDI: Reagan's much derided "Star Wars program" not only helped convince the Soviets that they couldn't compete with America, but the missile defense system we're going to have working (at least in a rudimentary form) possibly as early as 2004, is an outgrowth of the program Reagan promoted.

Oh dear. The missile defense shield is a $130 billion (and counting) boondoggle. It's ridiculously expensive, doesn't work, is de-stabilizing, and doesn't address any of the major security threats to anyone.

You'd have thought that after 9/11 showed us how the new war on terrorism is going to be fought (at least from their side), that Republicans would consider taking some of this money and using it to beef up homeland security, but no, the missile-shield-that-doesn't-work continues apace.

Why aren't people outraged about this?! You don't think a "rogue nation" with the capability of launching an ICBM at us can also smuggle a nuke (or Ebola??) into the country in a suitcase? Am I missing something here? And the thing doesn't even work! They had to put a GPS transponder in their "mock warhead" as recently as two years ago to make it work even for a single test!! What a load of crap!

You can argue the politics, but the thing doesn't work. And it's cost us about $450 per American citizen already. Isn't there a better way to spend that money if you want to fight terrorism?

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_security/missile_defense/page.cfm?pageID=600

Prev 1 6 7 8 All

Please or register to reply.

Live Events Refresh