Bush Speech Thread - Page 4

Imran Siddiqui · March 17, 2003, 22:45

Quote:

I am certain that Bush would eventually invade sometime down the line, possibly in a few months. Likely for reasons of so-called "Al Queda infiltration" or something equally Orwellian.

Why? Because you hate Bush so much that you think he's gonna kill everyone if he has the chance?

What is the 'new' country he is going to invade, btw?

Inverse Icarus · March 17, 2003, 22:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava
PUT YOUR HANDS UP, GET OUT OF THE CAR!!

i'm suprised anti-war posters havent been brandishing some of the other lyrics in their sigs

Felch · March 17, 2003, 22:46

There's a difference between constructive free speech ("Hey, we need to improve schools.") and worthless pandering-to-the-braindead free speech ("You're all Nazis.") Please recognize the difference. One is a civic responsibility, the other is just being a ****.

Sava · March 17, 2003, 22:47

Well, I don't mean to beat up on Tass... I love the guy

... but the whole "America SuckS!!" thing gets old real quick. And despite your politics, we're still one country. And even if Bush becomes an evil dictator (not likely) I'll still never burn an American flag. IMO there's a line between bashing the president, bashing Republicans, being against war... and being anti-American. I just want Tass to recognize that so we can go back to bashing Bush.

sleeperservice · March 17, 2003, 22:47

I hope that Sadam does not destroy Iraq oil wells .

Drake Tungsten · March 17, 2003, 22:48

Quote:

The US would be imposing its will on the territory and people of Iraq, given that they would not reasonably be able to set up a legitimate government in the time between exile and entrance of US forces.

No they wouldn't. They would be keeping things stable while the Iraqis set up their own new government. Since when is peacekeeping a form of conquest?

MichaeltheGreat · March 17, 2003, 22:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Lincoln

The people who live in Iraq.

And they don't really have as much of a concept of nationhood as we expect. The Kurds don't want to be part of Iraq, they want an independent Kurdistan, and they'll be screwed silly by everyone, as usual. Otherwise, a good portion of Iraq will be overrun by the Turks.

The Shiite majority is a real problem for us, with a near-nuclear Iran. An Iran-Iraq alliance with a WMD capable Iran knocks the regional balance of power in the gulf all to hell. Tip: Invest in oil futures.

Quote:

And I hope we don't give them anything.

Unfortunately, occupying powers have real precisely defined responsibilities under international law, and unless somebody sets up something that passes as a functional form of government, we're either going to be military rulers like the Romans in Judea, or else there's going to be a nice combination of anarchy, power vacuums, all that loose WMD hardware and capability, and a humanitarian crisis to boot. Not an easy situation for anyone.

Quote:

The oppressive sanctions will be lifted though, no doubt, and they will have a new chance to screw up their country again if they like. I say, a change can be as good as a rest. Let's see what happens next.

The peace is far higher risk than the war - we know the outcome of the war with virtual certainty.

Felch · March 17, 2003, 22:49

Quote:

Originally posted by monkspider
Tass never said that he hated Americans, he implied that he could no longer support the actions of his country, and as a result, he has been told in no uncertain terms to go back to the motherland, by left-leaners no less.

If Tass gave a reasoned argument, people would have no problem. Instead he talks **** about our country every chance he gets, praises Russia, calls us Nazis, and trolls, trolls, trolls.

It's one thing to be proud of Russia, and to hate Utah. It's another thing to start flinging around epithets like Nazi just to get attention. That's when it pisses people off.

notyoueither · March 17, 2003, 22:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Frogger

I'm not arguing about the necessity of this; I just find it fairly strange that several people here think that the US would pack up and leave if Saddam exiled himself, when their own Secretary of State has said the exact opposite.

I'm not arguing with you, either. I agree with you. Doesn't it make you feel dirty?

Inverse Icarus · March 17, 2003, 22:50

Quote:

Originally posted by sleeperservice
I hope that Sadam does not destroy Iraq oil wells .

i concur.

sure, you know we're going to take a cut, or make a deal after all is said and done, but what bush said tonight, that the oil belongs to the iraqi people, is true. that oil will be sold around the world to rebuild iraq.

Sava · March 17, 2003, 22:51

Drake, Iraq is more likely to become unstable like the former Yugoslav region with this military action. But I agree, this isn't conquest.

Grandpa Troll · March 17, 2003, 22:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava
Then hate the Republicans, not Americans... there's a difference between supporting the war and supporting the troops overseas. I'm probably the biggest Bush-hater around, but I've also got two buddies in the Marines. I'll fly my American flag high, despite the fact some dumbass president is tarnishing it.

I have a lot of Brothers-In -Christ whom are United States Marines, I work aboard several Marine Corps Bases, am in charge of supplying Ready Mix Concrete aboard The Largest Amphibious Training Base in the World [Camp LeJeune] for 80% that is used. I am proud to be a legitimate contractor and even prouder to be personal friends with many Marines, Officers (including Generals and former Generals) as well as enlisted.

I am proud to be a veteran and also extremely proud to be an American Citizen.

I am even more proud to call President Bush my Commander-In-Chief, not a dumb@$$ President. He is very intelligent and also has an extremely tough job, protecting our nation.

I pray that all U S Citizens get behind him, after all, we dont want more attacks of terrorism. I wouldnt want to wear his shoes, I can only imagine the anguish and turmoil he must be going through, trying to protect our Great Nation, from Threats, both Foreign and Domestic

~sigh~

I wonder how many people would support his actions, if we were again attacked in the magnitude of 9-1-1?

Shame that actions of terrorists dictate the actions and reactions of our Great Leadership, I say shame because we could offer much more, than War. But terrorists started on us and I honest believe in my heart President Bush needs to be strong and unwavering in his resolve to protect our nation!

Peace

Grandpa Troll

Joseph · March 17, 2003, 22:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

I am certain that Bush would eventually invade sometime down the line, possibly in a few months. Likely for reasons of so-called "Al Queda infiltration" or something equally Orwellian.

Why? Because you hate Bush so much that you think he's gonna kill everyone if he has the chance?

What is the 'new' country he is going to invade, btw?

I saw John McLaughlin one on one last night and he had these two ladies that are on congressional committees and they said Iran next.
It look like the axis of evil one at a time. If by July or Aug it is Iran, North Korea may just start shooting first.

Sava · March 17, 2003, 22:55

Well, let's be honest here Troll, the terrorists hate us for legitimate reasons, despite the fact they are d1ckless 4ssholes. In conjuction with eliminating terrorist threats and increasing security, we should seek to stop the practices that inflamed these fanatics in the first place.

faded glory · March 17, 2003, 22:55

Troll the pinheads here are so gonna call you a fascist/flag-waver/ignorant.

Felch · March 17, 2003, 22:55

For after the war

If America doesn't claim Iraq's oil, will the leftists who claimed it was all for oil admit that they were full of ****?

And if America does go back on its promise, will the hawk do likewise?

I think this is important. People have said a lot of things, and I'm tired of folks forgetting all the nasty horrible things they said once they were proven wrong. I remember a lot of doves were saying that Afghanistan would be a bloodbath for the Americans, and were wrong. Did they ever admit it?

Inverse Icarus · March 17, 2003, 22:56

America wont just take the oil. they'll set up a deal with the new Iraqi regime.

That oil will do more for their country than any aid package we set up.

Sava · March 17, 2003, 22:56

For the record, I wasn't against the military action in Afghanistan.

faded glory · March 17, 2003, 22:56

"Well, let's be honest here Troll, the terrorists hate us for legitimate reasons, despite the fact they are d1ckless 4ssholes"

Werent you one of those retards who thought Bush had something to do with 9/11 ?

Lincoln · March 17, 2003, 22:57

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat

The peace is far higher risk than the war...

Well at least we agree on that part. I wouldn't want to try and manage the mess. Of course I wouldn't want Saddam to manage it either so therein lies the dilemma. I'll wait and see what happens. I make no predictions here.

Sava · March 17, 2003, 22:58

Quote:

Werent you one of those retards who thought Bush had something to do with 9/11 ?

mmm not quite... I thought that there were good amounts of data indicating such a terror attack, but the intelligence failure was on a massive scale. Bush wasn't responsible. In fact, I've been one of the people pointing out how retard said people are.

If you're going to stereotype me, at least get it right

monkspider · March 17, 2003, 22:59

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

I am certain that Bush would eventually invade sometime down the line, possibly in a few months. Likely for reasons of so-called "Al Queda infiltration" or something equally Orwellian.

Why? Because you hate Bush so much that you think he's gonna kill everyone if he has the chance?

What is the 'new' country he is going to invade, btw?

I have come to the conclusion that this war has nothing to do with terror, and everything to do with hegemonic assertion. So Sadaam has little to do with the equation, other than to provide a conveinant demon to rally the American people around. If you disagree, then I'm afraid we have simply reached an impasse my friend.

Also, I do not hate Bush at all. I don't think that he himself is an intrinsically evil man as perhaps some do, I think he is a rather simple man who has been unfortunately misled. That is really one of the great tragedies of all of this. I don't think that Bush means to throw the world into a great cataclysm, and in fact, I am fairly certain that Bush himself is probably well-meaning in many of his actions. I cannot say the same of all the members of his staff, but I digress. Bush is a human being just like any other, and as such, is as deserving of love and forgiveness as any other. However, that said, I do greatly fear what his actions will bring upon the world.

Ming · March 17, 2003, 23:00

Quote:

Originally posted by faded glory
Werent you one of those retards who thought Bush had something to do with 9/11 ?

You are one insult away from also sitting out the war.

JCG · March 17, 2003, 23:00

Saddam won't be there in 48 hours....IF he has anything ressembling a brain, which I think he does.

Sadly, the rest of the population of Iraq will still be there

KrazyHorse · March 17, 2003, 23:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Quote:

The US would be imposing its will on the territory and people of Iraq, given that they would not reasonably be able to set up a legitimate government in the time between exile and entrance of US forces.

No they wouldn't. They would be keeping things stable while the Iraqis set up their own new government. Since when is peacekeeping a form of conquest?

Since when is peacekeeping accomplished without the consent of those who have the peacekeepers watching over them?

That's peacemaking and is a form of conquest, in that arms (or the threat of arms) are used to impose your will on others.

Jesus. Is English your first language, Drake?

If the Iraqi government invited them in and then defected en masse, or if the opposition was somehow able to miraculously put forth a credible government "in 30 minutes or it's free", then it would be peacekeeping. Otherwise it's invasion and peacemaking...followed by peacekeeping.

Imran Siddiqui · March 17, 2003, 23:01

Quote:

I have come to the conclusion that this war has nothing to do with terror, and everything to do with hegemonic assertion. So Sadaam has little to do with the equation, other than to provide a conveinant demon to rally the American people around. If you disagree, then I'm afraid we have simply reached an impasse my friend.

I disagree 100% and think you've missed the boat. I believe this war has to do with US interests, but hegemonic assertion isn't it.

Grandpa Troll · March 17, 2003, 23:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava
Well, let's be honest here Troll, the terrorists hate us for legitimate reasons, despite the fact they are d1ckless 4ssholes. In conjuction with eliminating terrorist threats and increasing security, we should seek to stop the practices that inflamed these fanatics in the first place.

I dont necessarliy agree. Perhaps some do, but predjudice is not a justified or legitimate reason. My name is Bruce Karl Cronkite. I have never personally harmed any "terrorists" But they would have no problem attacking me and my family. I dont rape and torture fellow Americans such as some of the Iraq goverment officials are doing.

I dont build weapons of mass destruction or try to attack Middle Eastern citizens.

Terrorists do attack American and International Citizens.

As for Practices that "Inflame", we could debate that over and over, we support Govt. "X" who is against this terrorist Regime or Organization.

I, nor you, have all the answers. I agree that the U S has engaged in some "questionable" practices. But we still dont do what terrorists do, engage in cowardly unprovoked attacks.

Shame, but an aggressive act such as President Bush is leading, is exactly what the Terrorists need to show them that we are NOT lying down and taken it anymore!

Peace

Grandpa Troll

faded glory · March 17, 2003, 23:03

"You are one insult away from also sitting out the war."

You wouldnt!?

You made me sit out the last two in balkans and afghanistan!

Ming · March 17, 2003, 23:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Frogger
Jesus. Is English your first language, Drake?

Discuss the issues... NOT THE POSTERS.

Sava · March 17, 2003, 23:04

IMO: this war is mostly about Bush and a vendetta against Saddam. It has little to do with freeing people and instituting Democracy. Some of our "allies" are just as oppressive as Iraq.