Why does Bush do this?
taranaki
02-24-2003, 02:06 AM
Yet again,Bush has issued another 'final warning' to the U.N. to fallin behind the U.S. or become irrelevant.
Well,the U.N. isn't going to.Because if it allowed itself to be dictated to by a single nation,it would become irrelevant overnight.The fact that Mr.Bush has repeated his threat several times and been ignored at every turn shows hope for a civilised world.Everybody else wants a peaceful solution for this conflict.and is prepared to exhaust all such avenues before considering a military solution.Mr Bush is a small man in a position of great responsibility.He appears to be totally clueless,or worse,indifferent as to the potential consequenses of his actions ,yet totally reliant on the 'worst case scenario' of what may happen if he doesn't meddle in the Middle East.
The only scenario that I can see for Iraqi terrorist attacks on U.S. targets is when the U.S. fires first.Bush should be concetrating on the criminals who masterminded and perpetrated the WTC bombings,not abusing his position to go on a witch hunt against a small and relatively benign foe from the past.
Well,the U.N. isn't going to.Because if it allowed itself to be dictated to by a single nation,it would become irrelevant overnight.The fact that Mr.Bush has repeated his threat several times and been ignored at every turn shows hope for a civilised world.Everybody else wants a peaceful solution for this conflict.and is prepared to exhaust all such avenues before considering a military solution.Mr Bush is a small man in a position of great responsibility.He appears to be totally clueless,or worse,indifferent as to the potential consequenses of his actions ,yet totally reliant on the 'worst case scenario' of what may happen if he doesn't meddle in the Middle East.
The only scenario that I can see for Iraqi terrorist attacks on U.S. targets is when the U.S. fires first.Bush should be concetrating on the criminals who masterminded and perpetrated the WTC bombings,not abusing his position to go on a witch hunt against a small and relatively benign foe from the past.
Monkey-Magic-S15-R
02-24-2003, 03:03 AM
he doesn't want to look like a tyrannt
............ last night on the bafta's a Producer of some sort of relavance in the film industry in America made a huge speach which incorporated politics and he condemned the fiasco behind the Presidential Election and then he took a stab at George Bush. He pointed out that George Bush was gaining to much power.
............ last night on the bafta's a Producer of some sort of relavance in the film industry in America made a huge speach which incorporated politics and he condemned the fiasco behind the Presidential Election and then he took a stab at George Bush. He pointed out that George Bush was gaining to much power.
YogsVR4
02-24-2003, 07:59 AM
I agree. He should do anything like a "final warning" to the UN. They are already an irrelevant organization. No more effort or money should be spent on it.
taranaki
02-24-2003, 10:52 AM
Originally posted by YogsVR4
I agree. He should do anything like a "final warning" to the UN. They are already an irrelevant organization. No more effort or money should be spent on it.
If they were irrelevant,Bush would have started his war already.The U.N. has so far successsfully prevented an a full scale war in Iraq.That is the objective of the U.N.,and they are doing a good and effective job against a poor and defective President.
If ever the U.S. needed a change of leadership,now is not soon enough.
I agree. He should do anything like a "final warning" to the UN. They are already an irrelevant organization. No more effort or money should be spent on it.
If they were irrelevant,Bush would have started his war already.The U.N. has so far successsfully prevented an a full scale war in Iraq.That is the objective of the U.N.,and they are doing a good and effective job against a poor and defective President.
If ever the U.S. needed a change of leadership,now is not soon enough.
Cbass
02-24-2003, 02:40 PM
Originally posted by Monkey-Magic-S15-R
he doesn't want to look like a tyrannt
It's a little late for that, after he seized power by having his cronies manipulate the Florida election system to bar thousands of black registered voters, on the grounds that they had names SIMILAR to those of convicts. Was it 564 votes he "won" by, or was it 546... I honestly don't remember. Insignificant compared to the estimated 10,000 legal, registered voters, 90% of whom polled Democrat, by the way, who were stripped of their right to vote by Jeb Bush, and Katherine Harris.
He has systematically stripped his people of their rights and freedoms, in the name of fighting "terrorism" which is Bushese for anyone who may pose a hurdle for US foreign interests.
Now he's going to invade ANOTHER sovereign nation, and this time, he doesn't even have proof there is any credible threat. At least in Afghanistan, he had Al Qaeda, whom he had already blamed for the September 11 attacks, even though there was no proof of this(oh, except the proof that they do have, but they just can't show us), to attack, and their "ally" the Taliban.
On Iraq, Bush doesn't have a political leg to stand on. At least when Hitler invaded Poland, it was just to get at the Russians.
he doesn't want to look like a tyrannt
It's a little late for that, after he seized power by having his cronies manipulate the Florida election system to bar thousands of black registered voters, on the grounds that they had names SIMILAR to those of convicts. Was it 564 votes he "won" by, or was it 546... I honestly don't remember. Insignificant compared to the estimated 10,000 legal, registered voters, 90% of whom polled Democrat, by the way, who were stripped of their right to vote by Jeb Bush, and Katherine Harris.
He has systematically stripped his people of their rights and freedoms, in the name of fighting "terrorism" which is Bushese for anyone who may pose a hurdle for US foreign interests.
Now he's going to invade ANOTHER sovereign nation, and this time, he doesn't even have proof there is any credible threat. At least in Afghanistan, he had Al Qaeda, whom he had already blamed for the September 11 attacks, even though there was no proof of this(oh, except the proof that they do have, but they just can't show us), to attack, and their "ally" the Taliban.
On Iraq, Bush doesn't have a political leg to stand on. At least when Hitler invaded Poland, it was just to get at the Russians.
jon@af
02-24-2003, 03:14 PM
Originally posted by taranaki
If they were irrelevant,Bush would have started his war already.The U.N. has so far successsfully prevented an a full scale war in Iraq.That is the objective of the U.N.,and they are doing a good and effective job against a poor and defective President.
If ever the U.S. needed a change of leadership,now is not soon enough.
I agree, I would by no means call the UN worthless, because indeed war would be at hand, should they not exist. I only hope that with the election year coming upon the US that the voters will have some sense to not vote for Bush again.
If they were irrelevant,Bush would have started his war already.The U.N. has so far successsfully prevented an a full scale war in Iraq.That is the objective of the U.N.,and they are doing a good and effective job against a poor and defective President.
If ever the U.S. needed a change of leadership,now is not soon enough.
I agree, I would by no means call the UN worthless, because indeed war would be at hand, should they not exist. I only hope that with the election year coming upon the US that the voters will have some sense to not vote for Bush again.
dolla_bill0913
02-26-2003, 07:38 PM
Do you guys even relize what is going on over there. Here is an example> U.S. planes are patroling the NO FLY ZONE, and other areas over Iraq, making sure Iraq doesnt make any attempt to attack any surrounding countries, and they are being shot at by Iraq ground to air missles, and I am not talking about a 1 time incident. I think that is an act of war, and Bush has every right to want to attack Iraq. Thats only an example, I could go on and on. Everyone wants peace and the only way to get it is to eliminate the threats against peace. Iraq doesnt listion to talk, they only understand war, dont we all remember the war with them only a couple years ago. Bush has given them plenty of time and if all the UN countries, like france, germany,etc. are afraid of Iraq, well then we dont need them. Grow some balls like the US and the Brits and dont get pushed around by terrorists. :finger:
Darth Cypher
02-26-2003, 10:24 PM
Exactly! That is why we have a "no negotiation" policy with terrorists. Because if you give them what they want you open yourself up to further terrorist attacks because other groups will see that they can win in your country. saddam has bullshitted us for a long time and is using the same excuses. He got his way with the UN before and he is playing the same game again.
Cbass
02-27-2003, 12:07 AM
Saddam Hussein is not a terrorist, and he has absolutely no links to terrorism. That's a rumour they run on CNN every hour, because if you hear it often enough, you believe it.
As for the No Fly Zones, they are not UN sanctioned, they are an act of war by the US and Britain. Every time they fly, that's an act of war. So actually, Saddam has every excuse to fire missles at them. Those "patrols" are the same planes that bomb Iraqi power and water plants, in a deliberate plan to kill Iraqi civilians and weaken the country.
As for the No Fly Zones, they are not UN sanctioned, they are an act of war by the US and Britain. Every time they fly, that's an act of war. So actually, Saddam has every excuse to fire missles at them. Those "patrols" are the same planes that bomb Iraqi power and water plants, in a deliberate plan to kill Iraqi civilians and weaken the country.
taranaki
02-27-2003, 12:42 AM
Originally posted by dolla_bill0913
Do you guys even relize what is going on over there. Here is an example> U.S. planes are patroling the NO FLY ZONE, and other areas over Iraq, making sure Iraq doesnt make any attempt to attack any surrounding countries, and they are being shot at by Iraq ground to air missles, and I am not talking about a 1 time incident. I think that is an act of war, and Bush has every right to want to attack Iraq. Thats only an example, I could go on and on. Everyone wants peace and the only way to get it is to eliminate the threats against peace. Iraq doesnt listion to talk, they only understand war, dont we all remember the war with them only a couple years ago. Bush has given them plenty of time and if all the UN countries, like france, germany,etc. are afraid of Iraq, well then we dont need them. Grow some balls like the US and the Brits and dont get pushed around by terrorists. :finger:
so....if the Iraqis started flying sorties across America,just to ensure that the U.S. didn't attack anyone, and dropped a few live ones onto America's arms manufacturers,missile installations,nuclear facilities and supply lines,that would be o.k. by you,would it?
The U.S. war against Iraq has been continuing under the flimsy veil of 'peacekeeping' and 'sanctions' for over ten years.I can't say that I blame the Iraqis for hating the U.S.More than ever before, the U.S. military machine looks to be out of control.Perhaps if Bush and his cohorts had seen action in a war themselves,they would not be so eager to inflict it on others,but most of the president's key people are draft dodgers.
Do you guys even relize what is going on over there. Here is an example> U.S. planes are patroling the NO FLY ZONE, and other areas over Iraq, making sure Iraq doesnt make any attempt to attack any surrounding countries, and they are being shot at by Iraq ground to air missles, and I am not talking about a 1 time incident. I think that is an act of war, and Bush has every right to want to attack Iraq. Thats only an example, I could go on and on. Everyone wants peace and the only way to get it is to eliminate the threats against peace. Iraq doesnt listion to talk, they only understand war, dont we all remember the war with them only a couple years ago. Bush has given them plenty of time and if all the UN countries, like france, germany,etc. are afraid of Iraq, well then we dont need them. Grow some balls like the US and the Brits and dont get pushed around by terrorists. :finger:
so....if the Iraqis started flying sorties across America,just to ensure that the U.S. didn't attack anyone, and dropped a few live ones onto America's arms manufacturers,missile installations,nuclear facilities and supply lines,that would be o.k. by you,would it?
The U.S. war against Iraq has been continuing under the flimsy veil of 'peacekeeping' and 'sanctions' for over ten years.I can't say that I blame the Iraqis for hating the U.S.More than ever before, the U.S. military machine looks to be out of control.Perhaps if Bush and his cohorts had seen action in a war themselves,they would not be so eager to inflict it on others,but most of the president's key people are draft dodgers.
dolla_bill0913
02-27-2003, 04:50 PM
Originally posted by Cbass
Saddam Hussein is not a terrorist, and he has absolutely no links to terrorism. That's a rumour they run on CNN every hour, because if you hear it often enough, you believe it.
As for the No Fly Zones, they are not UN sanctioned, they are an act of war by the US and Britain. Every time they fly, that's an act of war. So actually, Saddam has every excuse to fire missles at them. Those "patrols" are the same planes that bomb Iraqi power and water plants, in a deliberate plan to kill Iraqi civilians and weaken the country. Do you even remember the last war? To help you here is how it started, and as far as what you are saying, I sure would like some facts, because you dont have a clue, at the bottom you will see some statements about the NO FLY ZONE!
Starting JULY 1990 * Internal Look, a U.S. war game, shows Saudi Arabia could be defended against
Iraqi invaders, but at terrible cost.
August 2
Iraq invades Kuwait.
August 5
President Bush declares invasion "will not stand."
August 6
King Fahd meets with Richard Cheney, requests U.S. military assistance.
August 8
Initial U.S. Air force fighter planes arrive in Saudi Arabia.
August 10
John Warden first meets with Schwarzkopf in Tampa to outline proposed air
campaign.
August 28
Secret Israeli delegation flies to Washington to stress likelihood of Iraqi attack on
Israel if war begins.
September
18
Schwarzkopf asks four Army planners to begin work on ground offensive.
October 10
CENTCOM's One Corps Concept unveiled at White House.
October 21
Colin Powell flies to Riyadh to discuss offensive plans.
October 31
Bush decides to double U.S. forces in Saudi Arabia; decision kept secret until
November 8.
November
29
UN Security Council authorizes use of "all means necessary" to eject Iraq from
Kuwait.
December 6
First ship carrying VII Corps equipment arrives in Saudi Arabia from Germany.
January 9
James Baker meets Tariq Aziz in Geneva in unsuccessful effort to find a peaceful
solution.
January 12
Congress authorizes use of force.
January 15
UN deadline for Iraqi withdrawal. Schwarzkopf accuses Air Force of ignoring orders
by not including Republican Guard in initial bombing sorties.
January 17
Allied attack begins at 2:38am
AND AS FOR THE NO FLY ZONE:
The United States and Britain carry out patrols of no-fly zones set
up after the 1991 Gulf War in northern and southern Iraq with the
stated intention of protecting Kurds in the north and Shiite
Muslims in the south from the Iraqi military.
Iraqi officials insist that the zones violate the country's
sovereignty and territorial integrity, and they refuse to recognize
them.
U.S. officials have cited U.N. Resolution 1441 -- the latest
disarmament resolution -- to back up the no-fly zones and
coalition response to hostile activity from the Iraqis threats against coalition aircraft monitoring compliance of the No Fly Zone.
United Nations Security Council set up the NO FLY ZONES, so what do you have to say now?
Saddam Hussein is not a terrorist, and he has absolutely no links to terrorism. That's a rumour they run on CNN every hour, because if you hear it often enough, you believe it.
As for the No Fly Zones, they are not UN sanctioned, they are an act of war by the US and Britain. Every time they fly, that's an act of war. So actually, Saddam has every excuse to fire missles at them. Those "patrols" are the same planes that bomb Iraqi power and water plants, in a deliberate plan to kill Iraqi civilians and weaken the country. Do you even remember the last war? To help you here is how it started, and as far as what you are saying, I sure would like some facts, because you dont have a clue, at the bottom you will see some statements about the NO FLY ZONE!
Starting JULY 1990 * Internal Look, a U.S. war game, shows Saudi Arabia could be defended against
Iraqi invaders, but at terrible cost.
August 2
Iraq invades Kuwait.
August 5
President Bush declares invasion "will not stand."
August 6
King Fahd meets with Richard Cheney, requests U.S. military assistance.
August 8
Initial U.S. Air force fighter planes arrive in Saudi Arabia.
August 10
John Warden first meets with Schwarzkopf in Tampa to outline proposed air
campaign.
August 28
Secret Israeli delegation flies to Washington to stress likelihood of Iraqi attack on
Israel if war begins.
September
18
Schwarzkopf asks four Army planners to begin work on ground offensive.
October 10
CENTCOM's One Corps Concept unveiled at White House.
October 21
Colin Powell flies to Riyadh to discuss offensive plans.
October 31
Bush decides to double U.S. forces in Saudi Arabia; decision kept secret until
November 8.
November
29
UN Security Council authorizes use of "all means necessary" to eject Iraq from
Kuwait.
December 6
First ship carrying VII Corps equipment arrives in Saudi Arabia from Germany.
January 9
James Baker meets Tariq Aziz in Geneva in unsuccessful effort to find a peaceful
solution.
January 12
Congress authorizes use of force.
January 15
UN deadline for Iraqi withdrawal. Schwarzkopf accuses Air Force of ignoring orders
by not including Republican Guard in initial bombing sorties.
January 17
Allied attack begins at 2:38am
AND AS FOR THE NO FLY ZONE:
The United States and Britain carry out patrols of no-fly zones set
up after the 1991 Gulf War in northern and southern Iraq with the
stated intention of protecting Kurds in the north and Shiite
Muslims in the south from the Iraqi military.
Iraqi officials insist that the zones violate the country's
sovereignty and territorial integrity, and they refuse to recognize
them.
U.S. officials have cited U.N. Resolution 1441 -- the latest
disarmament resolution -- to back up the no-fly zones and
coalition response to hostile activity from the Iraqis threats against coalition aircraft monitoring compliance of the No Fly Zone.
United Nations Security Council set up the NO FLY ZONES, so what do you have to say now?
dolla_bill0913
02-27-2003, 04:57 PM
Originally posted by taranaki
so....if the Iraqis started flying sorties across America,just to ensure that the U.S. didn't attack anyone, and dropped a few live ones onto America's arms manufacturers,missile installations,nuclear facilities and supply lines,that would be o.k. by you,would it?
The U.S. war against Iraq has been continuing under the flimsy veil of 'peacekeeping' and 'sanctions' for over ten years.I can't say that I blame the Iraqis for hating the U.S.More than ever before, the U.S. military machine looks to be out of control.Perhaps if Bush and his cohorts had seen action in a war themselves,they would not be so eager to inflict it on others,but most of the president's key people are draft dodgers. I dont remember The United Statea attacking any other countries, they usually aid other countries. As for Iraq we all know why planes patrol the air space over Iraq or did you forget about the Golf War? More Opinions with no facts!
so....if the Iraqis started flying sorties across America,just to ensure that the U.S. didn't attack anyone, and dropped a few live ones onto America's arms manufacturers,missile installations,nuclear facilities and supply lines,that would be o.k. by you,would it?
The U.S. war against Iraq has been continuing under the flimsy veil of 'peacekeeping' and 'sanctions' for over ten years.I can't say that I blame the Iraqis for hating the U.S.More than ever before, the U.S. military machine looks to be out of control.Perhaps if Bush and his cohorts had seen action in a war themselves,they would not be so eager to inflict it on others,but most of the president's key people are draft dodgers. I dont remember The United Statea attacking any other countries, they usually aid other countries. As for Iraq we all know why planes patrol the air space over Iraq or did you forget about the Golf War? More Opinions with no facts!
YogsVR4
02-27-2003, 05:46 PM
Originally posted by dolla_bill0913
I dont remember The United Statea attacking any other countries, they usually aid other countries. As for Iraq we all know why planes patrol the air space over Iraq or did you forget about the Golf War? More Opinions with no facts!
You'll notice that kind of thing floated out by a few around here.
Originally posted by dolla_bill0913
If they were irrelevant,Bush would have started his war already.The U.N. has so far successsfully prevented an a full scale war in Iraq.That is the objective of the U.N.,and they are doing a good and effective job against a poor and defective President.
They are irrelevant. Its only being done (most likely) because Blair asked for it. The UN is doing a shitty job of holding up to their own requirement on Iraq. 12 years that they've played footsie with him.
As for our leadership. I am glad Bush is in charge. I'll be voting for him again, and you can expect another term. Makes me feel going knowing that.
I dont remember The United Statea attacking any other countries, they usually aid other countries. As for Iraq we all know why planes patrol the air space over Iraq or did you forget about the Golf War? More Opinions with no facts!
You'll notice that kind of thing floated out by a few around here.
Originally posted by dolla_bill0913
If they were irrelevant,Bush would have started his war already.The U.N. has so far successsfully prevented an a full scale war in Iraq.That is the objective of the U.N.,and they are doing a good and effective job against a poor and defective President.
They are irrelevant. Its only being done (most likely) because Blair asked for it. The UN is doing a shitty job of holding up to their own requirement on Iraq. 12 years that they've played footsie with him.
As for our leadership. I am glad Bush is in charge. I'll be voting for him again, and you can expect another term. Makes me feel going knowing that.
Darth Cypher
02-27-2003, 06:05 PM
I don't blame Iraq for firing on our aircraft. At least not in the scenario that you provided, taranaki. However, that is not the scenario that played out. We didn't surrender in a war, Iraq did. We (even the UN) put those no-fly zones there to protect the Kurds and Shiites.
saddam is very known for horboring international terrorists in the past. That is FACT. It was part of our deal with him in the Iraq/Iran war. To fight Iran (our mutual enemy) and to stop harboring international terrorists. Hell, we knew that a terrorist we were after was in Iraq (can't remember his name). This was not on CNN, this was on several educational shows.
I wasn't saying that saddam is a terrorist either, though he does support terrorism. I was saying that negotiating with terrorists (or dictators) can be a bad thing and show weakness.
Now I don't mean to start a fight or anything but I'm getting a little fucking tired about this bullshit (yeah BULLSHIT) about how the military is blatantly targeting civilian facilities and civilians themselves to "weaken a country". That is a full out insult to normal American civilians who serve (which you are claiming to have no problem with). Yes, accidents happen but we definitely don't do it on purpose. Come on!
Like I said, I'm not starting a fight and hope to have intelligent debates but I feel I have to put my foot down on that one comment.
saddam is very known for horboring international terrorists in the past. That is FACT. It was part of our deal with him in the Iraq/Iran war. To fight Iran (our mutual enemy) and to stop harboring international terrorists. Hell, we knew that a terrorist we were after was in Iraq (can't remember his name). This was not on CNN, this was on several educational shows.
I wasn't saying that saddam is a terrorist either, though he does support terrorism. I was saying that negotiating with terrorists (or dictators) can be a bad thing and show weakness.
Now I don't mean to start a fight or anything but I'm getting a little fucking tired about this bullshit (yeah BULLSHIT) about how the military is blatantly targeting civilian facilities and civilians themselves to "weaken a country". That is a full out insult to normal American civilians who serve (which you are claiming to have no problem with). Yes, accidents happen but we definitely don't do it on purpose. Come on!
Like I said, I'm not starting a fight and hope to have intelligent debates but I feel I have to put my foot down on that one comment.
dolla_bill0913
02-27-2003, 06:06 PM
YogsVR4 why are you quoting me when I didnt say it. Taranaki said that 2nd quote, not me. I would never say that.
GTStang
02-28-2003, 01:40 AM
As far as the UN it is only relevant cause the US makes it so. The whole UN military forcew/o US does not come close to the US military force alone. The UN is just so other countries feel like thay have control and say. The US doesn't need the UN the UN needs the US. The US will always work with the UN because we are not the bullies and villians a lot of people like to make us out to be.
I don't agree with Bush and I can't wait till he is voted out. But I just said what I did above so you realize that but just playing ball with the UN we are fair
I don't agree with Bush and I can't wait till he is voted out. But I just said what I did above so you realize that but just playing ball with the UN we are fair
GTi-VR6_A3
02-28-2003, 01:55 AM
Mr T. answer me this. if the UN inspectors decide finally that iraq is not in compliance. will you then support un action to amke iraq into compliance? because if you dont then the un will be useless...
and also what does everyone have to say about Jaque Shirac (SP?) being close firends with Saddam and totalfinelfaqua... etc whatever that company is called now getting most of its oil supply from iraq and that they are french. who is to say that france's anti war postion isnt for oil...
and the german president FYI was a big supporter of eastern germany. so i dunno about these guys. anyone have their ideas?
-GTi-VR6_A3
and also what does everyone have to say about Jaque Shirac (SP?) being close firends with Saddam and totalfinelfaqua... etc whatever that company is called now getting most of its oil supply from iraq and that they are french. who is to say that france's anti war postion isnt for oil...
and the german president FYI was a big supporter of eastern germany. so i dunno about these guys. anyone have their ideas?
-GTi-VR6_A3
Darth Cypher
02-28-2003, 02:09 AM
Obviously the French and Germans have thier agenda. But only the US does "evil things" in the name of oil nowadays.
Darth Cypher
02-28-2003, 02:10 AM
And yes, I was being scarcastic in the second sentence of my last post.
GTi-VR6_A3
02-28-2003, 02:26 AM
Originally posted by Darth Cypher
And yes, I was being scarcastic in the second sentence of my last post.
WHAT?!?!?!?!?! that was sarcasm. yeah seriously htough. we all know that the U.S. has totally evil agenda's and this is all for us. and when i say us i mean the us. just kuz im from here doesnt mean i support everything that this country does. and if anyin wants ot start sterotyping i can go off on evry culture there is including all of mine.
-GTi-VR6_A3
And yes, I was being scarcastic in the second sentence of my last post.
WHAT?!?!?!?!?! that was sarcasm. yeah seriously htough. we all know that the U.S. has totally evil agenda's and this is all for us. and when i say us i mean the us. just kuz im from here doesnt mean i support everything that this country does. and if anyin wants ot start sterotyping i can go off on evry culture there is including all of mine.
-GTi-VR6_A3
taranaki
02-28-2003, 03:53 AM
Originally posted by GTi-VR6_A3
Mr T. answer me this. if the UN inspectors decide finally that iraq is not in compliance. will you then support un action to amke iraq into compliance?
-GTi-VR6_A3
HALLELUJAH! AT LAST ! a Bush supporter who gets it!
IF the U.N. is allowed to do its job without the constant threats of war from the imbecile in the White House,and comes to the conclusion that the situation in Iraq is an imminent threat to world peace,then I would wholeheartedly support a PEACEKEEPING mission.What I find to be morally bankrupt is George Bush's continual assertions that he has some kind of divine authority to invade unilaterally and jack up whatever puppet government he sees fit.
Peacekeeping is what the U.N. exists for.Bush should just shut the fuck up and put his resources into supporting the process instead ofcorrupting it.
Mr T. answer me this. if the UN inspectors decide finally that iraq is not in compliance. will you then support un action to amke iraq into compliance?
-GTi-VR6_A3
HALLELUJAH! AT LAST ! a Bush supporter who gets it!
IF the U.N. is allowed to do its job without the constant threats of war from the imbecile in the White House,and comes to the conclusion that the situation in Iraq is an imminent threat to world peace,then I would wholeheartedly support a PEACEKEEPING mission.What I find to be morally bankrupt is George Bush's continual assertions that he has some kind of divine authority to invade unilaterally and jack up whatever puppet government he sees fit.
Peacekeeping is what the U.N. exists for.Bush should just shut the fuck up and put his resources into supporting the process instead ofcorrupting it.
Darth Cypher
02-28-2003, 03:59 AM
And I never said that we did no wrong either.
GTi-VR6_A3
02-28-2003, 12:10 PM
Originally posted by taranaki
HALLELUJAH! AT LAST ! a Bush supporter who gets it!
i owuldnt go so far as to say a bush supporter. but i am not exactly anti bush. he has his good points but if you want to get to internal politics, this little crusade of his is costing for the american people. he is cutting taxes then planning on spending $$$ :eek: :eek: :bloated: :eek: :bloated:
that i do not get. but thats a whole other story for another day. i support un action in Iraq. and i do believe that a govnt change wouldnt be that bad. probably good. but at the moment the leader of jordan has been asked to take over afterwards from what i remember which is absurd. we should handle afghanistan and iraq and whatever other countries we enter ever in any time in the future the way we handled japan and germany. to stay and help build a self sufficient govnt. you can not argue that that did not work out well.
-GTi-VR6_A3
HALLELUJAH! AT LAST ! a Bush supporter who gets it!
i owuldnt go so far as to say a bush supporter. but i am not exactly anti bush. he has his good points but if you want to get to internal politics, this little crusade of his is costing for the american people. he is cutting taxes then planning on spending $$$ :eek: :eek: :bloated: :eek: :bloated:
that i do not get. but thats a whole other story for another day. i support un action in Iraq. and i do believe that a govnt change wouldnt be that bad. probably good. but at the moment the leader of jordan has been asked to take over afterwards from what i remember which is absurd. we should handle afghanistan and iraq and whatever other countries we enter ever in any time in the future the way we handled japan and germany. to stay and help build a self sufficient govnt. you can not argue that that did not work out well.
-GTi-VR6_A3
1985_BMW318i
03-05-2003, 09:17 PM
First off he won the election. It was proven months after the fact. Second off its not Mr Bush. Its President Bush. Third he is not a tyrant. I've met the man, Have you? I seriously doubt it. He's a good ole Texas boy with alot of common sense and I respect him for that. I'd like to know how many here have served in the US military with a democrat in office? The US is the Sole Superpower on this planet right now. Why do France, Germany and the Russia want to prevent a war? Because they are chicken,yellow and have no stomach for what needs to be done, Have they paid us back for the loans that we've lended them? NO they have not. They lack the interest or backbone to stand against a true tyrant like Saddam. But I guess its ok with you for him to gas his own people, mutilate others that disagree with him. Get the facts straight before you start calling someone a tyrant that was legally and democratically elected
jon@af
03-05-2003, 09:30 PM
Originally posted by 1985_BMW318i
...He's a good ole Texas boy with alot of common sense and I respect him for that...
Indeed he is a respected man. Not once while in office did Clinton receive a soldiers salute which deemed him respectable. President Bush receives them each time he is given a salute. As BMW may know, the soldiers salute is when the soldiers attending do not stand at ease until the President is out of site, that is, for those of you who dont understand, they keep the arm rested at attention above their brow until he is no longer visible.
...He's a good ole Texas boy with alot of common sense and I respect him for that...
Indeed he is a respected man. Not once while in office did Clinton receive a soldiers salute which deemed him respectable. President Bush receives them each time he is given a salute. As BMW may know, the soldiers salute is when the soldiers attending do not stand at ease until the President is out of site, that is, for those of you who dont understand, they keep the arm rested at attention above their brow until he is no longer visible.
1985_BMW318i
03-05-2003, 09:39 PM
Yes I do in fact understand. I was in the USAF while Ronald Reagan was President. I even had the chance to be in formation flying while he was visiting our base. Now that was truly a great President. He promised us what we needed to do our jobs and we got it. The good old days :)
TexasF355F1
03-05-2003, 11:28 PM
First off he won the election. It was proven months after the fact. Second off its not Mr Bush. Its President Bush. Third he is not a tyrant. I've met the man, Have you? I seriously doubt it. He's a good ole Texas boy with alot of common sense and I respect him for that. I'd like to know how many here have served in the US military with a democrat in office? The US is the Sole Superpower on this planet right now. Why do France, Germany and the Russia want to prevent a war? Because they are chicken,yellow and have no stomach for what needs to be done, Have they paid us back for the loans that we've lended them? NO they have not. They lack the interest or backbone to stand against a true tyrant like Saddam. But I guess its ok with you for him to gas his own people, mutilate others that disagree with him. Get the facts straight before you start calling someone a tyrant that was legally and democratically elected
Thank you for stating this. My dad and other relatives and friends who have served in the army continually tell me that unless you are in the army and see the true side of things and what's really going on, and not this biased one sided story, you begin to think a lot differently about your political views.
Thank you for stating this. My dad and other relatives and friends who have served in the army continually tell me that unless you are in the army and see the true side of things and what's really going on, and not this biased one sided story, you begin to think a lot differently about your political views.
Jimster
03-06-2003, 12:16 AM
Originally posted by 1985_BMW318i
First off he won the election. It was proven months after the fact. Second off its not Mr Bush. Its President Bush. Third he is not a tyrant. I've met the man, Have you? I seriously doubt it. He's a good ole Texas boy with alot of common sense and I respect him for that. I'd like to know how many here have served in the US military with a democrat in office? The US is the Sole Superpower on this planet right now. Why do France, Germany and the Russia want to prevent a war? Because they are chicken,yellow and have no stomach for what needs to be done, Have they paid us back for the loans that we've lended them? NO they have not. They lack the interest or backbone to stand against a true tyrant like Saddam. But I guess its ok with you for him to gas his own people, mutilate others that disagree with him. Get the facts straight before you start calling someone a tyrant that was legally and democratically elected
It's Mr Bush I'll call hi that if I like- what's he going to do abot it? Bomb me? :rolleyes:
Commonsense and George Bush don't go hand in hand- in fact they are Oxymorons..
The case against a war is simple- basically the US is going into Iraq on NO legitamite grounds- the best Bush has come up with is that Saddam is evil- and what business of that is Bushes???
Bush is a tyrant just like all his other little slaves at the top of the big companies :rolleyes:
First off he won the election. It was proven months after the fact. Second off its not Mr Bush. Its President Bush. Third he is not a tyrant. I've met the man, Have you? I seriously doubt it. He's a good ole Texas boy with alot of common sense and I respect him for that. I'd like to know how many here have served in the US military with a democrat in office? The US is the Sole Superpower on this planet right now. Why do France, Germany and the Russia want to prevent a war? Because they are chicken,yellow and have no stomach for what needs to be done, Have they paid us back for the loans that we've lended them? NO they have not. They lack the interest or backbone to stand against a true tyrant like Saddam. But I guess its ok with you for him to gas his own people, mutilate others that disagree with him. Get the facts straight before you start calling someone a tyrant that was legally and democratically elected
It's Mr Bush I'll call hi that if I like- what's he going to do abot it? Bomb me? :rolleyes:
Commonsense and George Bush don't go hand in hand- in fact they are Oxymorons..
The case against a war is simple- basically the US is going into Iraq on NO legitamite grounds- the best Bush has come up with is that Saddam is evil- and what business of that is Bushes???
Bush is a tyrant just like all his other little slaves at the top of the big companies :rolleyes:
GTi-VR6_A3
03-06-2003, 12:35 AM
im in the middle of writing an essay for political science class right now and just so you guys know there are both arguments for and against going to war with iraq from both the classical liberal point of view and the classical conservative one. so really its not so black and white like you are all trying to make it seem. saying there is not legitimate grounds is stupid and saying that we have gotta do it we have to have to have to is stupid too
-GTi-VR6_A3
ps if anyone wants to read my essay for the class i chose why to go to war from the liberal view fyi. but we could choose any of the 4. i oculd have written those too but this one worked best for writing it the night before it was due. they are not my views fyi while i may agree with some aspects.
-GTi-VR6_A3
ps if anyone wants to read my essay for the class i chose why to go to war from the liberal view fyi. but we could choose any of the 4. i oculd have written those too but this one worked best for writing it the night before it was due. they are not my views fyi while i may agree with some aspects.
Cbass
03-06-2003, 10:04 AM
Originally posted by TexasF355F1
Thank you for stating this. My dad and other relatives and friends who have served in the army continually tell me that unless you are in the army and see the true side of things and what's really going on, and not this biased one sided story, you begin to think a lot differently about your political views.
Of coursse, it certainly makes sense that once you've made it through a sytem that is engineered to have you blindy respect authority and take orders without question, you're going to have a better understanding of "the true side of things".
I think the biased one sided story is the one that comes from the US propaganda mill, that churns out the shit I hear spewed forth in this forum all too often. You may buy into this stuff, but please don't ask me to, I'm far too intelligent for that.
Of course, Mr. Dubya is a hero, just like how he valiantly stood in the Air National Guard, and stood firm in his commitment to protect his beloved Texas from the aggression and threats of neighbouring Oklahoma, instead of going to Vietnam where he could have been shot at. Then how he deserted that post in time of war to work on a political campaign, and after the campaign was finished, didn't bother returning.
Thank you for stating this. My dad and other relatives and friends who have served in the army continually tell me that unless you are in the army and see the true side of things and what's really going on, and not this biased one sided story, you begin to think a lot differently about your political views.
Of coursse, it certainly makes sense that once you've made it through a sytem that is engineered to have you blindy respect authority and take orders without question, you're going to have a better understanding of "the true side of things".
I think the biased one sided story is the one that comes from the US propaganda mill, that churns out the shit I hear spewed forth in this forum all too often. You may buy into this stuff, but please don't ask me to, I'm far too intelligent for that.
Of course, Mr. Dubya is a hero, just like how he valiantly stood in the Air National Guard, and stood firm in his commitment to protect his beloved Texas from the aggression and threats of neighbouring Oklahoma, instead of going to Vietnam where he could have been shot at. Then how he deserted that post in time of war to work on a political campaign, and after the campaign was finished, didn't bother returning.
Cbass
03-06-2003, 10:21 AM
Originally posted by 1985_BMW318i
First off he won the election. It was proven months after the fact. Second off its not Mr Bush. Its President Bush. Third he is not a tyrant.
Actually, nothing was ever proven, the whole issue was just swept under the carpet, and it is accepted even by republicans that if the 10,000 mostly black voters who were barred from voting due to Katherine Harris actually voted, Bush would have lost the Florida election. That election was stolen, and it's an insult to everyone who voted to pretend it wasn't.
I don't even give him the respect of calling him Mr. When Dubya does something that warrants respect, rather than my disdain, I may elevate him to that status. Instead however, he stands in front of the camera, and lies to further his agenda, and expects me to believe it?
Yes, Bush is a tyrant, and he used 9/11 to push through every political piece of work he knew would never make it through before or long after 9/11.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/46852_helen16.shtml
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0139/hentoff.php
Originally posted by 1985_BMW318i
Why do France, Germany and the Russia want to prevent a war? Because they are chicken,yellow and have no stomach for what needs to be done, Have they paid us back for the loans that we've lended them? NO they have not. They lack the interest or backbone to stand against a true tyrant like Saddam. But I guess its ok with you for him to gas his own people, mutilate others that disagree with him. Get the facts straight before you start calling someone a tyrant that was legally and democratically elected
France, Germany, Russia and China aren't "chicken or yellow", they don't want to deal with the consequences of this war, namely the coming collapse of the world oil market, and a destablized world economy because of it. Of course, Dubya won't mind, because he'll have vast amounts of cheap oil for his oil company buddies.
If you want to get into loans, then you are ignorant. The US debt far outweighs the debt of all 3 of those nations combined. I think it's at $6,500,000,000,000 right now, and steadily climbing. If you work it out, every man, woman and child in the US owes more than $22,000.
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
Also, I'm sure you wouldn't have objected if the US used gas in those caves in Afghanistan, would you?
First off he won the election. It was proven months after the fact. Second off its not Mr Bush. Its President Bush. Third he is not a tyrant.
Actually, nothing was ever proven, the whole issue was just swept under the carpet, and it is accepted even by republicans that if the 10,000 mostly black voters who were barred from voting due to Katherine Harris actually voted, Bush would have lost the Florida election. That election was stolen, and it's an insult to everyone who voted to pretend it wasn't.
I don't even give him the respect of calling him Mr. When Dubya does something that warrants respect, rather than my disdain, I may elevate him to that status. Instead however, he stands in front of the camera, and lies to further his agenda, and expects me to believe it?
Yes, Bush is a tyrant, and he used 9/11 to push through every political piece of work he knew would never make it through before or long after 9/11.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/46852_helen16.shtml
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0139/hentoff.php
Originally posted by 1985_BMW318i
Why do France, Germany and the Russia want to prevent a war? Because they are chicken,yellow and have no stomach for what needs to be done, Have they paid us back for the loans that we've lended them? NO they have not. They lack the interest or backbone to stand against a true tyrant like Saddam. But I guess its ok with you for him to gas his own people, mutilate others that disagree with him. Get the facts straight before you start calling someone a tyrant that was legally and democratically elected
France, Germany, Russia and China aren't "chicken or yellow", they don't want to deal with the consequences of this war, namely the coming collapse of the world oil market, and a destablized world economy because of it. Of course, Dubya won't mind, because he'll have vast amounts of cheap oil for his oil company buddies.
If you want to get into loans, then you are ignorant. The US debt far outweighs the debt of all 3 of those nations combined. I think it's at $6,500,000,000,000 right now, and steadily climbing. If you work it out, every man, woman and child in the US owes more than $22,000.
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
Also, I'm sure you wouldn't have objected if the US used gas in those caves in Afghanistan, would you?
dolla_bill0913
03-06-2003, 06:21 PM
Yes, Bush is a tyrant, and he used 9/11 to push through every political piece of work he knew would never make it through before or long after 9/11. <Cbass why would you post this sentance, use fact not opinion.
Use 9/11, noone uses 9/11. 9/11 changed everything, it proved that the US is a battlefeild and until all of the enemys of the US are destroyed, there could be more attacks, and more loss of life. If you think Bush is a tyrant then fine back it up with facts, dont use 9/11 to back up your opinion.
Use 9/11, noone uses 9/11. 9/11 changed everything, it proved that the US is a battlefeild and until all of the enemys of the US are destroyed, there could be more attacks, and more loss of life. If you think Bush is a tyrant then fine back it up with facts, dont use 9/11 to back up your opinion.
1985_BMW318i
03-06-2003, 11:07 PM
The only problem that has happened with the US is we had (thats past tense for those that cannot understand) become complacent and counted on our own soil as being safe. We were attacked! and now we're on the defensive. We took the battle back to those who attacked us and we're not stopping there. Admiral Yamamoto ( forgive my spelling) said it best during WW2, We've wakened a sleeping giant!. The US along with the only true Allie we have Great Britain will stop at nothing to rid this planet of tyrants. dictators and the like. Dislike the US you may but do not think we don't have the resolve. We have the military might and the will to fulfill our mission. No longer will the US sit back and allow the slightest possibility of being attacked again or allowing our true allied being attacked. More US servicemen have perished for a democratic way of life for alot of countries other then the US but are forgotten. Seems some in NZ really could care less.
taranaki
03-07-2003, 01:12 AM
Originally posted by 1985_BMW318i
The only problem that has happened with the US is we had (thats past tense for those that cannot understand) become complacent and counted on our own soil as being safe. We were attacked! and now we're on the defensive. We took the battle back to those who attacked us and we're not stopping there. Admiral Yamamoto ( forgive my spelling) said it best during WW2, We've wakened a sleeping giant!. The US along with the only true Allie we have Great Britain will stop at nothing to rid this planet of tyrants. dictators and the like. Dislike the US you may but do not think we don't have the resolve. We have the military might and the will to fulfill our mission. No longer will the US sit back and allow the slightest possibility of being attacked again or allowing our true allied being attacked. More US servicemen have perished for a democratic way of life for alot of countries other then the US but are forgotten. Seems some in NZ really could care less.
The U.S. was attacked by Al Queda.Not Afghanistan,not Iraq,nor any of the other unfriendly nations that Bush wants rid of.There's no disputing that Sept11th was an outrage,but in terms of numbers killed,it was a small blip in the statistics.Thousands die every year,thanks to the U.S. insistence on retaining outdated and discredited gun laws.Perhaps Bush should get his own countries' affairs in order before meddling in the affairs of others under the false smokescreen of anti-terrorism.
The only problem that has happened with the US is we had (thats past tense for those that cannot understand) become complacent and counted on our own soil as being safe. We were attacked! and now we're on the defensive. We took the battle back to those who attacked us and we're not stopping there. Admiral Yamamoto ( forgive my spelling) said it best during WW2, We've wakened a sleeping giant!. The US along with the only true Allie we have Great Britain will stop at nothing to rid this planet of tyrants. dictators and the like. Dislike the US you may but do not think we don't have the resolve. We have the military might and the will to fulfill our mission. No longer will the US sit back and allow the slightest possibility of being attacked again or allowing our true allied being attacked. More US servicemen have perished for a democratic way of life for alot of countries other then the US but are forgotten. Seems some in NZ really could care less.
The U.S. was attacked by Al Queda.Not Afghanistan,not Iraq,nor any of the other unfriendly nations that Bush wants rid of.There's no disputing that Sept11th was an outrage,but in terms of numbers killed,it was a small blip in the statistics.Thousands die every year,thanks to the U.S. insistence on retaining outdated and discredited gun laws.Perhaps Bush should get his own countries' affairs in order before meddling in the affairs of others under the false smokescreen of anti-terrorism.
GTi-VR6_A3
03-07-2003, 02:15 AM
Originally posted by taranaki
The U.S. was attacked by Al Queda.Not Afghanistan,not Iraq,nor any of the other unfriendly nations that Bush wants rid of.There's no disputing that Sept11th was an outrage,but in terms of numbers killed,it was a small blip in the statistics.Thousands die every year,thanks to the U.S. insistence on retaining outdated and discredited gun laws.Perhaps Bush should get his own countries' affairs in order before meddling in the affairs of others under the false smokescreen of anti-terrorism.
id liek both to happen at once. btu Naki it is easy to criticise form outside the country. i will admit to doing it too...
-GTi-VR6_A3
The U.S. was attacked by Al Queda.Not Afghanistan,not Iraq,nor any of the other unfriendly nations that Bush wants rid of.There's no disputing that Sept11th was an outrage,but in terms of numbers killed,it was a small blip in the statistics.Thousands die every year,thanks to the U.S. insistence on retaining outdated and discredited gun laws.Perhaps Bush should get his own countries' affairs in order before meddling in the affairs of others under the false smokescreen of anti-terrorism.
id liek both to happen at once. btu Naki it is easy to criticise form outside the country. i will admit to doing it too...
-GTi-VR6_A3
Darth Cypher
03-07-2003, 06:04 AM
No, if anyone was in the military they would know that you do not have to "blindly follow" anything. If you are given an unlawful order then you have the right to not follow that order. After all, you can relieve your own commander of command if the situation deems it. But it is pointless to explain such things to some civilians.
There are plenty of one sided stories made up from these "independant sources" too.
Bush served his country a hell of a lot better than clinton did (a known draft dodger). Used ROTC (Reserve Officers Training Corps) to skimp out of the draft. Which he then did not sign up for any military service or any sort. But nobody complains about that. Hmmmm.
As I recall about the election fiasco. gore was the one doing all the "whining". He didn't want the absentee votes to count and I believe those were more than the black community of one state. Hell, the absentee ballots would include some black people if I am not mistaken. But "nothing was proven" so let's quit this election b.s. Bush won fair and square. The Electoral College votes for the President, not the people. We are more like a Republic than a true Democracy. It says so even in our Pledge of Allegiance.
Going into Iraq under "NO legitimate" grounds?! The number of grounds is closing to 20 and only the "coalition of the willing" are the ones that are wanting to stop the endless charade. It's kind of funny how the UN voted 15-0 that Iraq should disarm with FULL co-operation. It's not up to us to prove that Iraq has disarmed. It's Iraq's responsibility to prove it to us. And if he is ONLY NOW starting to disarm those missles what does that tell you?
France is a bunch of pansies (you have to be asleep if you have to ask for the proof of that one). I don't think Germany or China are chicken. However, I do believe that France, Germany and Russia have a lot to lose if this war happens seeing as though they have opened trade with Iraq AGAINST previous UN sanctions. I wonder what nationality that Iraq's weaponry will fall under in this war (like the Gulf War). It certainly rorists. We are trying to protect our nation (even some of yours too) from terrorists (speaking of them in general). So in a bigger picture, saddam is a threat to the US in that he can easily supply terrorists with bio/chem weapons.
Yeah, al-quada attacked the US. The al-quada/taliban are in Afganistan. Afganistan/taliban is harboring al-quada. So naturally we go to Afganistan to fight the terrorists responsible for Sept. 11. Note: we fighting the al-quada in other countries than Afganistan. They have cells all over the world, but coverage (what little there is now) is focused on Afganistan because that is where the bulk of them are.
The "Axis of Evil" nations have been a problem for the US for a looooong time. It's about time someone started to take the initiative to deal with them.
There are plenty of one sided stories made up from these "independant sources" too.
Bush served his country a hell of a lot better than clinton did (a known draft dodger). Used ROTC (Reserve Officers Training Corps) to skimp out of the draft. Which he then did not sign up for any military service or any sort. But nobody complains about that. Hmmmm.
As I recall about the election fiasco. gore was the one doing all the "whining". He didn't want the absentee votes to count and I believe those were more than the black community of one state. Hell, the absentee ballots would include some black people if I am not mistaken. But "nothing was proven" so let's quit this election b.s. Bush won fair and square. The Electoral College votes for the President, not the people. We are more like a Republic than a true Democracy. It says so even in our Pledge of Allegiance.
Going into Iraq under "NO legitimate" grounds?! The number of grounds is closing to 20 and only the "coalition of the willing" are the ones that are wanting to stop the endless charade. It's kind of funny how the UN voted 15-0 that Iraq should disarm with FULL co-operation. It's not up to us to prove that Iraq has disarmed. It's Iraq's responsibility to prove it to us. And if he is ONLY NOW starting to disarm those missles what does that tell you?
France is a bunch of pansies (you have to be asleep if you have to ask for the proof of that one). I don't think Germany or China are chicken. However, I do believe that France, Germany and Russia have a lot to lose if this war happens seeing as though they have opened trade with Iraq AGAINST previous UN sanctions. I wonder what nationality that Iraq's weaponry will fall under in this war (like the Gulf War). It certainly rorists. We are trying to protect our nation (even some of yours too) from terrorists (speaking of them in general). So in a bigger picture, saddam is a threat to the US in that he can easily supply terrorists with bio/chem weapons.
Yeah, al-quada attacked the US. The al-quada/taliban are in Afganistan. Afganistan/taliban is harboring al-quada. So naturally we go to Afganistan to fight the terrorists responsible for Sept. 11. Note: we fighting the al-quada in other countries than Afganistan. They have cells all over the world, but coverage (what little there is now) is focused on Afganistan because that is where the bulk of them are.
The "Axis of Evil" nations have been a problem for the US for a looooong time. It's about time someone started to take the initiative to deal with them.
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2026