| Author |
George W. Bush;s Resume (C.V) |
maddav
Joined: Dec 01, 2002
Posts: 356
From: Nottingham, UK
PM |
Just a question, has anyone seen Farenheit 9/11, views?
I thought it was interesting for the first half, then it kind of lost it's way toward the end.
Interesting though,, very interesting.
| |
|
methylated_spirit
Joined: Jul 07, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Bonnie Scotland
PM |
Aww, he's a wee sausage and he's doing the best he can. Leave him alone, a man can only do his best!
Hello, Scroto!
U.G.L.Y. You ain't got no alibi, you ugly! |
Sammy_boy
Joined: Mar 31, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Staffordshire, United Kingdom
PM, WWW
|
@axxxr- very worrying, that document, you'll get no argument from me!
US Government supressing scientific reports? I'm not quite so sure about 'the land of the free'!
Kerry may have his faults, but l'd prefer him to bush any day!!
"All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke
|
axxxr
Joined: Mar 21, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Londinium
PM, WWW
|
Quote:
|
On 2004-07-28 14:18:00, Sammy_boy wrote:
@axxxr- very worrying, that document, you'll get no argument from me!
US Government supressing scientific reports? I'm not quite so sure about 'the land of the free'!
Kerry may have his faults, but l'd prefer him to bush any day!!
|
|
This is just another fact revealed about the lies and deceit of the bush administration.America is not the land of the free at all,its just an illusion they feed the world.The second you are critical of america or its policys you are branded as traitor and unpatriotic.Thats why many americans are fearful and will not speak out in case of retaliation.A few brave people do dare to speak and reveal the truth such as Michael moore.and he has been branded as Anti-american.Boy am i proud to be British and don't live in america.At least to we don't have to wave our flags around to prove we are patriotic.
Its true to say that Kerry is not by any means perfect but he is a far far better choice than Bush.
[addsig] |
Patrick-in-CA
Joined: Jul 21, 2004
Posts: 0
From: Sourhern Oregon, USA
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2004-07-28 14:35:36, axxxr wrote:
This is just another fact revealed about the lies and deceit of the bush administration.America is not the land of the free at all,its just an illusion they feed the world.The second you are critical of america or its policys you are branded as traitor and unpatriotic.Thats why many americans are fearful and will not speak out in case of retaliation.A few brave people do dare to speak and reveal the truth such as Michael moore.and he has been branded as Anti-american.Boy am i proud to be British and don't live in america.At least to we don't have to wave our flags around to prove we are patriotic.
Its true to say that Kerry is not by any means perfect but he is a far far better choice than Bush. |
|
There is only one thing I cannot agree with ... and that is the notion that there is an air of silence in the US about the war or Bush. Right now, as we speak, the Democratic National Convention is going full blast in Boston. See MSNBC. See the DNC.org website.
All along there have been protests, meetings, publications, press releases ... well ... the sound of dissent has been rather loud actually. Americans, as usual, are not afraid to express their opinions - now more than ever. And contrary to popular belief - there is NO Bush Gulag snatching up people who have the temerity to disagree with the war in Iraq. If there were ... about 35 to 40 percent of California would have been "disappeared" within the first few months of the war.
For exaple:
See MoveOn.org
See Democracy Now
See Anti War.com
See Chicago's Anti-War Resolution
Many major cities passed Anti-War Resolutions.
Here's a little site advocating the impeachment of Bush
Hey, this is a little list. Without much time or effort I was able to pull these sites showing that there is dissent in the US. I hasten to point you to print news media like USA Today, or The New York Times, or The Los Angeles Times, or The Chicago Tribune, and so many others - that have run not only news articles that are critical of Bush but print daily opinion sections full of people who are against Bush and the War. This doesn't even count television news or channels like MTV. And if we throw in talk-radio, which is predominately pro-Bush but not totally, like Air America.
My point - there is no lack of anti-War opinion here in the US. It just so happens that I disagree with them, but they ARE there.
By the way ... who claimed that the US feeds the world and what does that have to do with anything?
And one more thing Axxxr ... you've said that Americans are cowards because they will not fight North Korea. Well - not that I think the Brits are cowards - but where are they when it comes to fighting the North Korean menace? Why is it you always look to the US to do the fighting? If they allowed for a "North Korea only Army" would you sign up to serve? I know I wouldn't - but I never called anyone a coward about it.
Thanks for taking the time to read my post. |
axxxr
Joined: Mar 21, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Londinium
PM, WWW
|
Quote:
| And one more thing Axxxr ... you've said that Americans are cowards because they will not fight North Korea. Well - not that I think the Brits are cowards - but where are they when it comes to fighting the North Korean menace? Why is it you always look to the US to do the fighting? If they allowed for a "North Korea only Army" would you sign up to serve? I know I wouldn't - but I never called anyone a coward about it. |
|
The Americans are cowards because they won't stand up against a power equal to them instead they go around picking on the weak!.Go try and invade china-North Korea and see how much of bloody nose america gets.Patrick you are intelligent enough to know that Great Britain and the U.S have a long standing tradition of standing side by side when it comes to war and other international policys.Britain does'nt go around actively seeking wars the way the u.s does,but when american does decide for war it is always the brits that back your country.It may not be what the british public want but its something our leaders think they have to do.There's no denying the fact that the u.s is the most powerful country on the planet.So when it comes to decisions of war by the u.k and u.s it always america who takes the lead and coz they have most of the firepower.
But the fact remains that the U.S govt are cowards when it comes to faceing a real enemy.Unless they prove otherwise which im pretty sure aint gonna happen.So lets see if bush wins this november which poor country he will invade my bet is on Syria or Iran.
[addsig] |
Patrick-in-CA
Joined: Jul 21, 2004
Posts: 0
From: Sourhern Oregon, USA
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2004-07-28 14:18:00, Sammy_boy wrote:
@axxxr- very worrying, that document, you'll get no argument from me!
US Government supressing scientific reports? I'm not quite so sure about 'the land of the free'!
Kerry may have his faults, but l'd prefer him to bush any day!!
|
|
Please see this recent post. There you can read about the official response to the accusations that the administration is manipulating the scientific community.
You know - the citizens of the US are proud of our freedoms. You can ask any one of us ... and we'll tell you that, while things aren't perfect, and that we worry about the right to be free, we think we have a pretty good thing going here. I'm hearing some people who are not US Citizens try to use the phrase "Land of the Free" to criticize us. While I have no problem with anyone expressing their opinion - I don't think it is necessary for me to sit silent as ugly things are said about the US. All I ask is that if you're going to say the US isn't the land of the free - just keep in mind that no government is perfect, and, despite its flaws, I still believe the US Republic to be pretty damn good when stacked up with the rest of the world (now or in the past). I mean, can you honestly tell me that the UK is without blemish when it comes to "freedoms"? I think it is right up there with the US ... maybe even a little better in some regards. But just because one group makes an accusation against the government doesn't mean freedom has suddenly disappeared.
A lot of people throw around some facts that seem to lead to the truth. But, unfortunately, the truth isn't always that clear. It takes time to look at the facts to come up with the real truth. Unlike others in this thread, I do not claim to be the exclusive holder of the real truth. But I do feel it is important to take in as much as you can before you decide what the truth is. Some have asked why people would go through so much trouble to make up things about Bush. Why can't people just take the surface facts as presented to come up with the direct and easy conclusion that Bush is ... well ... Hitler re-incarnated and that the United States is an evil country full of liars and cowards. There is an ideology war going on ... and it is between those who are Liberal vs. those who are Conservative. Between those who are for a more socialistic system of governance and those for a more capitalistic. Between those who believe in pure democracy and those who believe in individual rights over the will of the majority. If you wish to learn the truth - you must know that the extreme elements of each side will do what it can to distort and slander the other side.
As one who is more conservative, capitalistic, and pro-republic ... I say Question Everything! Look for both sides of the issue. This doesn't mean that both sides are right. But don't let the real truth be dictated to you without looking for yourself. You may be surprised to learn that those around you aren't as evil and inhuman as they have been accused of being.
Thank you Sammy-boy for continuing to "Question Everything". Our discussions to date have been very entertaining and enlightening. I have a lot more to learn so keep it up.
Thanks for taking the time to read my post. |
Patrick-in-CA
Joined: Jul 21, 2004
Posts: 0
From: Sourhern Oregon, USA
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2004-07-28 16:23:37, axxxr wrote:
The Americans are cowards because they won't stand up against a power equal to them instead they go around picking on the weak!. |
|
Picking on the weak? A lot of things go through my head as I contemplate this. Yes, Iraq was indeed much weaker than the US. So is North Korea though. Even China is militarily weaker. I think the UK has a stronger military than North Korea - no? Please correct me here if I'm wrong.
But is it about picking on the weak as you suggest? Iraq had over a decade to comply with the UN and the terms of its surrender from the 1st Gulf War. After 9/11 - the United States is in no mood to play games any more. You may criticize the police who break into a known drug house and find no drugs ... but keep in mind the occupant was a drug offense parolee and had agreed to allow the police to inspect any part of his house at any time - then slammed the doors shut and stayed shut in for over 10 years. Who made the US the world's police ... as you say later in this post ... it's always the US that takes the lead because of our superior firepower.
Quote:
| Go try and invade china-North Korea and see how much of bloody nose america gets. |
|
If we did that now, we would get a bloody nose. I'm so sorry to see that you'd advocate such a war. I'd like to see if any other options exist. You see - foreign policy isn't that easy though. First, even though the Communist regime in China uses strong rhetoric against the US, they haven't seemed to want to pose any threat. As for N. Korea - they use insane threats and rhetoric. Do they have nukes - they likely have enough to do some real damage to S. Korea, Japan, or possibly the US. But one shot and it's over. It doesn't take much to know that the policy of MAD (mutually assured destruction) in a lighter version can help to ensure that N. Korea doesn't get too stupid before other alternatives can be explored. But if push comes to shove the US will defend itself and its allies - and in an extreme - N. Korea may not exist after that - even if we come out wounded. God forbid that ever happen.
But - once again - I assert that people do what they can about what they think is important based on their capabilities. We may be the world's only superpower at the moment but we don't want to provoke all out nuclear war (as you seem to want to do). Just because one doesn't go blindly and stupidly fighting each and everything thought to be a threat all at one time doesn't make one a coward. Heck, to do so would make one stupid. You may disagree with the wisdom of taking on Iraq - but I wonder just how critical history would of been about Bush if Iraq had WMD and did share it with terrorists and another 2,500+ (or more) innocent civilians where targeted and slaughtered while we waited another few years to see if Saddam would cooperate with inspectors finally. Hindsight is 20/20.
Quote:
| Patrick you are intelligent enough to know that Great Britain and the U.S have a long standing tradition of standing side by side when it comes to war and other international policys. |
|
Yet we don't always agree, nor are you expected to do what we do all the time nor are you prevented from acting independently if you think it is important enough.
Quote:
| Britain does'nt go around actively seeking wars the way the u.s does,but when american does decide for war it is always the brits that back your country. ... So when it comes to decisions of war by the u.k and u.s it always america who takes the lead and coz they have most of the firepower. |
|
The us goes around actively seeking wars? Just another ugly slur. It's hard to keep reason and patience with this kind of slander.
Please take a look at the circumstances of WW1. The US was (painfully) slow to go to war.
Please take a look at the circumstances of WW2. While not as slow - still, it took a lot of time and a real bloody nose for the US to get involved.
Please take a look at the circumstances of Korea. After WW2 the Soviets occupied N. Korea and the US occupied S. Korea. With the cold war beginning in earnest - full war broke out in 1950. Could this be construed as actively seeking a war?
Please take a look at Vietnam. Kennedy got involved in 1962 under pressure from advisor's and the western world as a part of the containment policy. This after France had lost the war and Vietnam to communists. The world looked to the US to act. Kennedy is well known as a person who didn't want to involve the US in more war. LBJ intensified out involvement - but lost his war on poverty as a consequence. Nobody wanted that war.
The 1st Gulf War - As I recall, Iraq invaded Kuwait. The UN (not that it matters) backed action against Iraq to liberate Kuwait.
Other military action - name a conflict and we can discuss just how the US got involved to see if we were just scanning the globe spoiling for a fight.
And is it always the Brits that back the US, or the other way around? And what does this have to do with the independence and sovereignty of the UK. I may be wrong on this, but I cannot seem to find documentation to show that England or GB was involved in the Vietnam war? I think Australia had some involvement. How was the US involved in the Falklands war? Are you honestly trying to argue that the UK cannot engage in military conflict without the US?
Quote:
| But the fact remains that the U.S govt are cowards when it comes to faceing a real enemy.Unless they prove otherwise which im pretty sure aint gonna happen. |
|
Fact? More like just another unsubstantiated opinion again.
If history is an indicator of anything, I'd say we put a lot on the line when fighting WW2.
And, since you remain unconvinced, what exactly could the US do to prove it's non-cowardice to you? Start an armed conflict with N. Korea? I hope that's not what you're considering.
Maybe what you're actually trying to do is accuse the US of being cowards because we are engaged in an action you disagree with but you don't know how else to criticize us for it? Maybe instead of citing actual facts (citing means linking us to documentation or giving us references we can look up independently - by the way) you can only dish out your opinions and assert them as facts?
Quote:
| So lets see if bush wins this november which poor country he will invade my bet is on Syria or Iran. |
|
As a hawkish kind of US citizen I personally hope that the threat of such military action against them, as well as the example of our resolve regarding Iraq, will compel Syria and Iran to change their activities regarding supporting terrorism and progression of WMD programs. I hope that goes for N. Korea as well. But if not, the cowards here in the US will do what is necessary to protect ourselves and our allies - including invading and occupying if necessary.
Thanks for taking the time to read my post. |
Sammy_boy
Joined: Mar 31, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Staffordshire, United Kingdom
PM, WWW
|
One thought - despite the handover of power in Iraq to an Iraqi administration, why are there still bombings going on? I've just heard that another suicide bomber has blown up a car bomb in a queue of people wanting to join the Iraqi security services - killing 68, including 21 on a passing bus.
Iraq my be free, but are things really better there? There's no doubting that Saddam was evil, mind. @patrick and @axxxr, over to you.....
"All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke
|
Patrick-in-CA
Joined: Jul 21, 2004
Posts: 0
From: Sourhern Oregon, USA
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2004-07-28 19:01:56, Sammy_boy wrote:
One thought - despite the handover of power in Iraq to an Iraqi administration, why are there still bombings going on? I've just heard that another suicide bomber has blown up a car bomb in a queue of people wanting to join the Iraqi security services - killing 68, including 21 on a passing bus.
Iraq my be free, but are things really better there? There's no doubting that Saddam was evil, mind. @patrick and @axxxr, over to you.....
|
|
Just a thought but what would terrorists want with a democratically elected government in Iraq? They have everything to loose if stability takes hold. They have everything to gain if civil war breaks out in Iraq. If I'm not mistaken, they would want total control under a theocracy.
And as for Iraq being better off? I say yes. Even though the terrorists are attacking indiscriminately, without regard for who they kill, as evidenced by todays attack, how many mas graves have been uncovered to date? You know, the ones filled up by Saddam and his henchmen. Hey - real political change isn't easy or quick. I think things are moving toward the better at a very fast pace. Just compare how long it took to restore stability to Japan or Germany after WWII.
Oh, and I want to thank you for your thoughtful and relevant question. Seriously, no sarcasm. I know you don't like Bush, but you're a complete pleasure to engage in conversation with.
Thanks for taking the time to read my post. |
Sammy_boy
Joined: Mar 31, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Staffordshire, United Kingdom
PM, WWW
|
Thanks for your reply. I'm finding these Bush/Gulf threads interesting and informative - posts from both sides of the argument.
I need to try harder though to disuade you not to vote for Bush though!! 
"All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke
|
Patrick-in-CA
Joined: Jul 21, 2004
Posts: 0
From: Sourhern Oregon, USA
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2004-07-28 19:50:58, Sammy_boy wrote:
Thanks for your reply. I'm finding these Bush/Gulf threads interesting and informative - posts from both sides of the argument.
I need to try harder though to disuade you not to vote for Bush though!!
|
|
It may not be easy to do ... but I honestly want you to try. What good are my opinions and beliefs if they cannot stand up to some decent questioning? Fire away!
Thanks for taking the time to read my post. |
kimcheeboi
Joined: Dec 19, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Abducted by hot blondes to Les
PM |
since there are so many 'fight threads' and i do not really wish to participate in them, i think i'll just post here.
@patrick-we all know Iraq is the big issue of this election, but what are your idea on some of the smaller issues? Can we discuss, say, gay marriage and abortion?
[addsig] |
Patrick-in-CA
Joined: Jul 21, 2004
Posts: 0
From: Sourhern Oregon, USA
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2004-07-29 00:33:00, KiMcHeEbOi wrote:
since there are so many 'fight threads' and i do not really wish to participate in them, i think i'll just post here.
@patrick-we all know Iraq is the big issue of this election, but what are your idea on some of the smaller issues? Can we discuss, say, gay marriage and abortion?
|
|
I don't mind. And the thread seems to be about the re-election of Bush and ALL it's many facets. I'll go there.
Thanks for taking the time to read my post. |
maddav
Joined: Dec 01, 2002
Posts: 356
From: Nottingham, UK
PM |
@Patrik-in-Ca:
Just a slightly different question, you probably have heard of the big scandal in the UK, about intelligence, that was taken as truth, but under close scrutiny, turned out to be untrue, about the alleged range of missiles, that seemed to spark an awful lot of the momentum against Iraq. Also what about all the UN inspectors, and Hans Blix, coming to the conclusion, that there was no WMD, i find it very hard to believe that George Bush, and for that matter Tony Blair, could be taking that into account through their actions. Just a nice quote...
"They put exclamation marks where there had been question marks and I think that is hyping." ~ Hans Blix
_________________
David
[ This Message was edited by: maddav on 2004-07-29 10:06 ] | |
|
Access the forum with a mobile phone via esato.mobi
|
Posted: 2004-07-28 13:58
