Sep 25, 2003 1:54 AM
|no WMD's - Bush lied
no international support for US adventure in Iraq
job not finished in Afghanistan
where's OBL? where's SH? human rights abuses at Gitmo - poor US economy - WTO unilateralism - steel tariff harming US interests - Global warning cover-up - Kyoto head in sand approach - US sponsoring terror in Colombia - barring birth control US funded African clinics - SUV's
...and Bush is still a laughing stock who has no legal right to his office
I could go on and on and on
|Please go on...||Softrider|
Sep 25, 2003 4:37 AM
|Preferably somewhere far away from here!
This crap really gets old.
|it does get old||MJ|
Sep 25, 2003 6:37 AM
|but everytime I look at a mainstream paper there you are - are you suggesting I just ignore it? that's thge kind of crap that gets really old|
|You're an a$$!! Who asked your opinion on .....||Live Steam|
Sep 25, 2003 4:43 AM
|American affairs, anyway? Most everything you posted is dribble from the left - especially the stuff on the Kyoto protocol. You sound like the rest of the ingrateful fu%#@ that want our money and support of our troops when it suits your needs, but then want to tell us where to get off when you can no longer "use" us. I say I'll tell you where to get off.
As for the rest of your BS, I'll put money on the prospects of finding Saddam or Bin Laden or both prior to the next election. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they are being held somewhere now. SURPRISE!!!!!!!!!!!
|You're an a$$!! Who asked your opinion on .....||MJ|
Sep 25, 2003 6:36 AM
|yes the Washington Post is lefty dribble and I've made up all those things linked above... nobody else is thinking them either - it's just me
not really sure how I need "your" troops and/or money - perhaps you could explain
great X-files conspiracy theory about OBL and SH
|Yeah, American troops have never had to defend Europe (nm)||TJeanloz|
Sep 25, 2003 7:10 AM
|Or never had to clean up the messes they started (nm)||Live Steam|
Sep 25, 2003 7:20 AM
|don't confuse history||MJ|
Sep 25, 2003 7:20 AM
|with current events - which would you like to discuss|
|When does a current event become history?||TJeanloz|
Sep 25, 2003 7:36 AM
|We're still in Kosovo. Last I checked, we still have thousands of troops in Germany. I think we're still most of the muscle behind NATO.
I'd say that defending Europe is still a priority for the US military.
|You're an a$$!! Who asked your opinion on .....||bboc|
Sep 25, 2003 9:51 AM
|If OBL and SH (if you correct LS) are in US custody, then I see a clear case of the Bush administration keeping it a secret to keep the US population in a state of fear. If you follow that up with a well timed announcement of their capture just in time for elections, then the American Public should call for the blood of everyone involved in that kind of nasty cover up.
Or do you see that as innocent Steam? Or maybe it is in our best intrest, Bwahahahahaha!
Sep 26, 2003 1:22 AM
|If anyone needs and example of why the US is screwed up, and viewed with complete hate and derision by so much of the world, just look no further.
You are an utter disgrace to the nation.
|re: US clusterf%&k||BikeViking|
Sep 25, 2003 7:12 AM
|General WORLD consensus PRIOR to GWB was that SH had them...for him to continue in that belief is not suprising. Accusing him of lying about this "previously accepted as true" information isn't fair. Info exists that SH MAY have purposely misled everyone to believe that he had them.
The hunt for OBL and SH are continuing. Trying to find someone is a foreign land when those persons are being helped (in varying degrees) by the local populace is EXTREMELY difficult. This is not a 60 crime drama where the whole "mystery" is neatly wrapped up in 55 minutes. Patience will yield results, like it did with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
What human rights abuses are you talking about? I haven't heard about any of them except the "no lawyers" rule. Undr the circumstances, these guys living conditions are improving and they are not being tortured.
Poor US economy...CBO stated it began official downturn started in March 2000 BEFOER the election.
Steel tariff...you're right on this one...no argument from me.
Global warming/Kyoto...we have beat that horse quite well...no minds will be changin on that one.
Sponsoring terror in Colombia? Had not heard about that one.
When people hold beliefs that abortion is wrong and they don't want their money used to support that activity, you can't force them to give up the money. It's a difference of opinion.
The Supreme Court stated that ANY recount would have to be complete recount, not just in the Gore-friendly counties like the Dems wanted. There have been NUMEROUS independant recounts since November 2000 and NOT ONE has said that Al Gore one. You really need to let that one go...
|OK, I'll bite ...||HouseMoney|
Sep 25, 2003 7:22 AM
|"...and Bush is still a laughing stock who has no legal right to his office"
If only there wasn't a certain document called the U.S. Constitution, huh?
You keep referencing the NY Times (all the news that's fit to fabricate), the Washington Post, and CNN. I believe you've forgotten BBC and Al Jazeera.
Poor US economy? It began in the spring/summer of 2000. Who was the President then? Oh, right.
To respond to your remarks below about Wesley Clark. Did you happen to hear what Gen. Hugh Shelton (Ret.), former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs under Clinton (and the one who removed Clark from his command), had to say about your hero?
"I've known Wes for a long time. I will tell you the reason he came out of Europe early had to do with integrity and character issues, things that are very near and dear to my heart. I'm not going to say whether I'm a Republican or a Democrat. I'll just say Wes won't get my vote."
"integrity and character issues"? No wonder the Clintons like this guy!
I could go on and on and on ... responding to each one of your liberal bleatings with facts, but I've already wasted too much of my time on you.
|You've finally cracked them||Spoiler|
Sep 25, 2003 9:46 AM
|Well, it had to happen eventually. With each passing week more and more facts come out showing how Bush's policies are falling down around him.
His supporters are really on edge. They're afraid to read the papers now. At the beginning of the war, they flaunted their own twisted polls showing support for the war. Now that that polls aren't reflecting what they want, they'll be talking about how bias polls are.
Basically, from now till November 2004, and a good time after, Bush supporters will be displaying symptoms of PMS. Please show some patience and understanding when dealing with them.
|Looking from the outside in...||Jon Billheimer|
Sep 25, 2003 11:50 AM
|...I can't think of one major policy initiative from Bush that has worked as advertised, with the possible exception of co-ordinated, continental border security. In the absence of further successful attacks we can assume that it's working.
Neither his foreign policies nor his domestic policies from my vantage point, at least, have had their advertised effects. Foreign policies in my opinion have had the absolute reverse effect with respect to alliances, mideast stability, etc. Moreover, his policies and behaviours have brought the U.S. into disrepute with most people around the world, if international surveys are any indication. And that to me is very sad, because the reality of the American way of life and the positive aspects of American leadership historically deserve a way better rap.
|Now you're blowin' smoke up our skirts!||Live Steam|
Sep 25, 2003 1:21 PM
|"And that to me is very sad, because the reality of the American way of life and the positive aspects of American leadership historically deserve a way better rap."
Come on Jon. It has been decades since the rest of the world has looked at us that way. I mean before WW2.
As for Bush's policies working or not, it will also be years before that is determinable. One cannot go on popular opinion for that answer just yet. I would also hope that he wasn't governing based on popular opinion either. I want him to do what is right, though that may not be readily apparent at this time. I don't want him governing for the sake of being re-elected.
You guys call us knee jerk reactionaries on the right. I say many of you on the left are just that. You expect instant gratification or it isn't working. I don't see it that way. He has made tough decisions and stuck with them. I see our economy turning around. The signs abound.
Yes many nations are looking at us differently, but I don't see that as a bad thing. I believe thay won't take us for fools any more. JMO and thinking from my gray matter :O)
|No I'm Not.||Jon Billheimer|
Sep 25, 2003 1:51 PM
|Remember, I was born and raised in the American midwest and come from an extremely patriotic family. Now I'm fully aware that American behaviour and American ideology have often differed, but I truly believe that most of the things about America have been and are good. I also do not believe that most of the world has either disliked, hated, or scorned America to the extent that they do now.
The foreign policy behaviour of the U.S. since Eisenhower has in my opinion become more and more conflicted, and often times reprehensible in the extreme. This to me has been extremely disillusioning. Beyond self-defense I think America should stand for what is right, for fairness, international co-operation, peace, all the things that Bush mouths, but in reality betrays. America has become seduced by its own power and hubris in my opinion and most of its international behaviours currently are about hegemony and empire. Which is why I so despise the current neocon thinking and manifesto.
Soooo....that's my Friday afternoon rant. Idealistic and naive, I know.
Sep 25, 2003 1:53 PM
|I KNOW it's only Thurs.! See...now you've really got me flustered. Sheesh!:)-|
|Maybe you should read this ...||HouseMoney|
Sep 25, 2003 3:27 PM
It's by a Federal Judge who "was" against the war in Iraq.
Were our actions "reprehensible in the extreme"? Did we not "stand for what is right"? President Bush may not be perfect. But a true leader does what he thinks is right, in the face of opposition and meaningless polls. President Clinton rarely acted without first sticking a wet finger in the air (no pun intended) to see which way the wind was blowing.
And speaking of polls, a Gallup poll buried on page A16 of the NY Times said that 67% of Iraqis believe the removal of Saddam was worth it, despite any current hardships. Only 8% disagreed (and these were probably the remaining Saddam loyalists).
|Maybe you should read this ...||Jon Billheimer|
Sep 25, 2003 5:25 PM
|In my opinion if the U.S. government were simply concerned about doing the right thing and unilaterally intervening in the affairs of other nations in order to alleviate suffering and stop brutality it would have acted in Africa years and years ago. The moral argument masks the geopolitical reality that the U.S. violated longstanding international law and precedent by attacking a nation which did not pose an imminent threat to it. This is the basis of Kofi Annan's remarks in the U.N. a couple of days ago. If you would care to read the neocon manifesto at the New American Century you will clearly see that the purpose of invading Iraq--which was a matter of Bush's doctrine prior to his entering the White House--is to establish American hegemony in the middleast. The consequences flowing from this activity were supposed to be a "domino" effect throughout the middleast resulting in the cessation of belligerent and/or terrorist activities arising from neighbouring jurisdictions and the orderly if not voluntary democratization of neighbouring despotic regimes. Take a look around. See any of these effects emerging? I think not. They're a figment of the stupidly arrogant neocon imagination.|
|sure, they're glad he's gone.||rufus|
Sep 26, 2003 7:38 AM
|and they didn't have to do the hard work themselves to remove him. but do they like an occupying western military any better? that's the big question.|
|sure, they're glad he's gone.||Live Steam|
Sep 26, 2003 11:48 AM
|I know it is not a formal poll, but "By my sample, 90 percent of Iraqis are glad we came and the majority don't want us to leave for some time to come." Didn't you read the article?|
|how representative is his sample? nm||rufus|
Sep 26, 2003 2:30 PM