Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bush Speech

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Why does this forum have to attract all 15 of the marxists living america?

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by faded glory
      Why does this forum have to attract all 15 of the marxists living america?
      I know 40
      Eventis is the only refuge of the spammer. Join us now.
      Long live teh paranoia smiley!

      Comment


      • #18
        Ahh I see that we are unfamiliar with sarcasm. I will now withdraw my comments above

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by faded glory
          Ahh I see that we are unfamiliar with sarcasm. I will now withdraw my comments above
          Counter-sarcasm maybe?
          Eventis is the only refuge of the spammer. Join us now.
          Long live teh paranoia smiley!

          Comment


          • #20
            ya somthing like that.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by faded glory
              ya somthing like that.
              I was referring to myseslf

              (btw, this is )
              Eventis is the only refuge of the spammer. Join us now.
              Long live teh paranoia smiley!

              Comment


              • #22
                Saddam has been under the US's thumb for the last decade. We are enforcing no fly zones on a daily basis. What exactly is the threat that he presents? This is a BS ploy by this administration to distract the American people from the real problems of the economy as well as petty revenge for the attempt on Bush I's life. Bush II has been quoted on a couple of occasions stating he wants to avenge his old man. Pretty slim reeds to start a war, methinks.
                "In Italy for 30 years under the Borgias, they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed. But they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love. They had 500 years of democracy and peace. And what did that produce? The cuckoo clock."
                —Orson Welles as Harry Lime

                Comment


                • #23
                  Was anyone watching Rumsfeld during the speech? I'm just curious to know if you could see his lips move.
                  What's so funny 'bout peace, love and understanding?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    First I'm going to say I support the removal of Saddam.

                    So when that's out of the way I also say you can love America, and not want any wars at the same time! Yes, it's possible!
                    You can also love America and dislike Bush. Yes, it IS possible!

                    It is possible to not like Bush AND Saddam at the same time! Yes it IS possible.. and STILL support the US and believe in it, you see, it's not the only country in the world, nor is Iraq.

                    No one can promise a small body count. No one can promise democracy will reach Iraq AND stay there.

                    Afghanistan went pretty ok, but it's not over yet. Explosions every week, people are afraid, it's far from over. Just regime change has happened, Taliban and it's fighters and supporters are still free and they're terrorising the people. Peacekeepers may control Kabul. Do they control outside? The clans are still very alive and in control and fighting each other. So not much has changed, at least yet. I hope it gets better though. This is not about pointing fingers, I'm just saying it's not 'free' country, or liberated, at least not yet. Of course this does not happen fast, it always takes time. Who can say it will work in the future? No one. Who can say it will work in Iraq? No one can promise that. It doesn't mean it shoudln't be a goal and tried.

                    That's all. And Yes, I am for removing Saddam. I am also for taking care of more countries with these problems, Iraq is NOT the only country. Saudi Arabia is concerning, and so is Pakistan. And many others.

                    And remember, wars always starts with Propaganda in both ends. Always. Who really knows what happened, maybe just few. It's just a question of who was less dirty. And that is hard to determine when all you can see is propaganda. We'll just have to wait and hope for the best resolution and little blood.

                    ps. You know, do you guys consider Iraqi soldiers innocent? They are soldiers yes, but what if they don't like Saddam and are forced to fight? Don't say they can always leave and refuse, you should know better.
                    I don't see them bad, as I don't see US soldiers bad if they for example made a surprise attack to Norway. They do what they are ordered to do. They are just pawns.
                    In da butt.
                    "Do not worry if others do not understand you. Instead worry if you do not understand others." - Confucius
                    THE UNDEFEATED SUPERCITIZEN w:4 t:2 l:1 (DON'T ASK!)
                    "God is dead" - Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" - God.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Good one Groucho.
                      "In Italy for 30 years under the Borgias, they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed. But they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love. They had 500 years of democracy and peace. And what did that produce? The cuckoo clock."
                      —Orson Welles as Harry Lime

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Faded Glory and Fez liked the speech WHAT A SHOCKING SURPRISE

                        Bush's speech was 'good'.

                        What does 'good' mean?

                        He was able to, in a coherent way, explain the evidence that, given his preconcieved set of assumptions, explains the need to attack Iraq. For anyone who is undecided and has a. no set assumption of iraq b. has similar sets of assumptions about Iraq the speech will be seen as successful and may convince them of the president's cuase.

                        It did nothing for me, as I fundamentally dsagree with his set of assumptions, assumptions he has never been able to convincingly explain, specialy today:

                        The central one is that 9/11 changed everything. in at least 2 times, he clearly stated that the basic reason to attack was 9/11: that because terrorists attcked us so successfully then we must take any action to stop terrorists (with that definition extended to include Saddam) even without clear threat, period. Thus all his talk about Saddam and terorists (like anyone here, including people not born then, like fez, remember the Achilles Laurel!) and how he could just give weapons of mass destruction to terrorists.

                        Since I utterly disagree with the notion of equating state actor actions with multinational NGO actions, i don't buy the connection. If Saddam hated us so much, and was, as Bush tries to claim, not deterrable, then why hasn't he already given terrorists WMD? What, he couldn't back in 2000 but somehow he can today? Or the notion that he can blakcmail the world with 1 nuke, or even 10... we have 6000+ warhead, all as powerful or more. israel has 200, and Iraq with 10 or less, wih more primitive and less effective delivery methods, will be unble to stop him? China has 20 nukes on ICBM's that can reach the US, and hundreads of more wareads that can reach taiwan: yet we have been able to deter an attack on taiwan for 50 years, 25 against a china with nukes. He has never been able to explain why the same can't work for saddam. Ohh, and the list of attrocities- great rhetorical stiff for your average Middle America person. hardly effective against someone who has taken classes on ehtnic violence and has seen all the nice photos from Rwanda and Cambodia and endless other hellholes.
                        If you don't like reality, change it! me
                        "Oh no! I am bested!" Drake
                        "it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
                        "Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Wats this obsession with making the entire world democratic other than for moral purpose? What grounds do you have for removing Saddam? Has even the administration given firm proof Saddam is dangerous to US?

                          By the way if the answer to first question was moral purpose, sorry to burst the bubble, but unfourtunately world doesnt rally itself for cause of good and justice that do you really think Bush administration think Saddam is threat or perhaps there is a hidden agenda?
                          :-p

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Watching daily show just now, they were talking about this topic... they asked market analyst Mo Rocca, about faltering economy and he simply replies. Well economy is in the dumps because blah blah blah Saddam is to blame for all this. When John stewart keeps asking questions whacky pic of saddams face keeps popping on the screen. When finally he confronts Mo, Mo defends himself by asking Jon, "well you wouln't want to jeopardize our security don't you?" and he reluctantly replies. Well no I wouldn't want that. My summary sucked. But wach it its quite funny and relevant to this topic

                            It would be kinda errie If we do invade Iraq. And if Bush doesn't get re-elected. Since his father lost the election for same reason (slowing economy in 1992).
                            :-p

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by MosesPresley
                              We are enforcing no fly zones on a daily basis.
                              All the no-fly zones are for is to stop the Iraqis flying aircraft in the northern and southern parts of the country. Saddam is perfectly free to drive his army around down there and shoot the locals (as he did a few years ago).
                              'Arguing with anonymous strangers on the internet is a sucker's game because they almost always turn out to be - or to be indistinguishable from - self-righteous sixteen year olds possessing infinite amounts of free time.'
                              - Neal Stephenson, Cryptonomicon

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Although I am still strongly opposed to the war in Iraq, on both moral and philosophical grounds as well as grounds of pragmatism, I will give Bush credit for one of his best speeches. That may not be saying much, given that Bush is hardly a legendary orator, but this may be the last time I say something relatively positive about Bush for years. So take it while ya can.
                                http://monkspider.blogspot.com/

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X