Bush Speech Thread - Page 9

ThePlagueRat · March 18, 2003, 18:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Joseph
We did it to stop a war. Your boy Stalin and Hitler did it for the fun of it (mass genocide).

Ok, intentions were all right.

The war was ended,
but it was still a nuke, and then the Geneva convention came.
This means USA should now disarm themself of nukes,
or face sanctions from the civilized world. It was a warcrime.
And I don't blame no american citizen for it, I just blame the generals and the prez.

Don't you guys see?!
Your administration do the same as Saddam is doing.
Did they really manage to brainwash the US population too?

-<>-<::>-<::>-<:::>-<:::::>-<:::>-<::>-<::>-<>-

Chemical Ollie · March 18, 2003, 18:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Sinapus

So basically, if someone disagrees with you then he's not "educated" or "thinking"? How convenient. Does this mean I should comment quite praisingly on the majesty of your imperial vestments as well to further prove that I'm "educated" and "thinking"?

Disagreement with me is a matter of opinion rather than education. Disagreement with a politician's lies is another thing. Educated or "thinking" people have a higher probability to disagree with a leader than others who just absorb all the bullsh!t. It's harder to convince thinking people by using lies. Do you mean that you actually believed every word Bush said? Iraq/Al-Queda links and all?

By the way, call my uneducated if you want, but who are you poetically referring to as "the majesty of my imperial vestments"?

Ned · March 18, 2003, 18:45

Quote:

Originally posted by ThePlagueRat

Ok, intentions were all right.

The war was ended,
but it was still a nuke, and then the Geneva convention came.
This means USA should now disarm themself of nukes,
or face sanctions from the civilized world. It was a warcrime.
And I don't blame no american citizen for it, I just blame the generals and the prez.

Don't you guys see?!
Your administration do the same as Saddam is doing.
Did they really manage to brainwash the US population too?

-<>-<::>-<::>-<:::>-<:::::>-<:::>-<::>-<::>-<>-

TPR, there is a treaty on point. It is called the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The treaty distinguishes between those powers that have nuclear weapons from those that do not. It calls for the IAEA to supervise compliance with respect to those countries that do not have nuclear weapons. With respect to countries that do have nuclear weapons, such as the United States, France, Great Britain, Russia and China, the treaty calls for a gradual reduction of the the nuclear weapons to zero by mutually negotiated treaties.

The United States and countries directly threatened by nukes seem to be among the only countries concerned about further proliferation. For example: only the United States, the UK, Bulgaria and Spain seemed to be truly concerned about the disarming Saddam Hussein. The whole world is looking to the United States to solve the problem of North Korea. Also, no one seems to be truly concerned about Iran, that is, except for Israel.

Regarding the United States own nuclear weapons, surely you know, that United States has been negotiating significant reductions of its own nuclear stockpile in coordination with Russia. We just signed a treaty that would reduce our own stockpile by a one third, IIRC.

So get off your high horse on this issue. United States is abiding by its treaty obligations. I wish you would ask why countries other than the US, the UK and a few others are not concerned about proliferation. They may be willing to mouth platitudes about disarmament; but they are signularly unwilling to do anything about it.

raghar · March 18, 2003, 18:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Lord Merciless

What are you talking about? The truth is s that we delivered 2 bombs into Khadafi's bedrooms, and he has been quiet since then.

Poor girl she was just adopted.

Quote:

Iraqis had even more your Russian made SAMs back in 1991, we mopped floor with them.

There was some order about not attacking Migs 29. isn't it... Well, IR from ground did good job.

Quote:

And T72s, supposedly advanced Russian MBTs, were blewn to pieces like target practices. We didn't lose a single M1.

So you compare old Russian tanks in Arabians hands on open terain with attacking tanks with gun stabilization?
M1 vs tank launched anti tank missiles would be more intersting in 1991. Russians tanks have more advantages than being simple specialized mobile gun

Quote:

Finally, you guys struggled so badly and are still struggling against the pathetic Chechens. You need to check your own past military records before bragging about how "great" Russia's military is.

I'd reccomend do not speak about Chechens less you know some of them personaly and visited Chechnia. There is different view of them depends on how far are you from them. Ask some people from Daghestan.

If you would visit Chechnia I hope you'd not kidnaped for too long.

{ oup my fault. I responded and didn't read this thread to the end. Some point was possibly done twice. ]

Ned · March 18, 2003, 18:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Olaf Hårfagre

Disagreement with me is a matter of opinion rather than education. Disagreement with a politician's lies is another thing. Educated or "thinking" people have a higher probability to disagree with a leader than others who just absorb all the bullsh!t. It's harder to convince thinking people by using lies. Do you mean that you actually believed every word Bush said? Iraq/Al-Queda links and all?

Bush was not lying.

Bush seems the most honest president we've had very, very long time.

If you think he's lying on any particular point, please, direct us to facts that disprove what he said. If the issue is not about "facts," but instead about "intentions," of course all politicians cannot tell you the entire truth, can they?

Spiffor · March 18, 2003, 18:58

How come your administration promised super-duper proofs that Iraq had WoMD, and ended up showing two elements : a tape supposedly between two high-end officers and some pics among which pics from 10 years ago ?
Was it the terrible set of proof which clearly shown how Saddam had WoMD and the ways to deliver them ?

I don't accuse Bush of lying more than the others. Actually, his team's arrogance has the merit to be less hypocritical and less liar than others. But Bush still clearly lies on his intentions. No one wages a war, spends billions and risks lives to remove a dictator. I wonder who buys that.

Sinapus · March 18, 2003, 19:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Spiffor

Sinapus : do you really believe your administration will dramatically increase its military budget and deficit (which is also yours), throw billions out of the window and risk American lives to save foreign people for a dictatorship ? Do you really believe the Hawks that rule the White House are that altruistic ?

My remark:

Quote:

by SinapusSo basically, if someone disagrees with you then he's not "educated" or "thinking"? How convenient.

snipped part directed at Olaf

Are you saying that anyone who supports the war must believe as you describe above?

Sinapus · March 18, 2003, 19:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Olaf Hårfagre

Disagreement with me is a matter of opinion rather than education. Disagreement with a politician's lies is another thing.

Especially if it's your views about a politician.

Quote:

Educated or "thinking" people have a higher probability to disagree with a leader than others who just absorb all the bullsh!t. It's harder to convince thinking people by using lies. Do you mean that you actually believed every word Bush said? Iraq/Al-Queda links and all?

Did I say that?

Quote:

By the way, call my uneducated if you want, but who are you poetically referring to as "the majesty of my imperial vestments"?

"The Emperor's New Clothes"

Maybe you should avoid calling people who don't follow your viewpoint "trailer-park trash" in the future. You look rather naked.

raghar · March 18, 2003, 19:31

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava
DL

do the DL party!

No dual login. Just DiaL up / pay per minute. Well kazaa is killer and I overdid my kredit a little. So lets party next mounth.

And if you'd think that my posts are strange well posts of Dark fantasy writer should be strange. "I'm not troll I'm dark elven

"

To be honest I'm lost without a corrector.

Sava · March 18, 2003, 19:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned

Bush was not lying.

Bush seems the most honest president we've had very, very long time.

OMG it hurts...

Chemical Ollie · March 18, 2003, 19:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned

Bush was not lying.

Bush seems the most honest president we've had very, very long time.

If you think he's lying on any particular point, please, direct us to facts that disprove what he said. If the issue is not about "facts," but instead about "intentions," of course all politicians cannot tell you the entire truth, can they?

The most obvious lie was to link Saddam and Al-Queda. Another was to claim that there is a massive international support for the war. Only about 30 countries out of about 200 are for it.

More examples could be read in Spiffor's post above.

Spiffor · March 18, 2003, 19:43

In answer to sinapus.
Summary :

- Olaf : "Educated, thinking Americans and the rest of the world will not believe the lies he told to motivate the war."

- Sinapus : "So basically, if someone disagrees with you then he's not "educated" or "thinking"? How convenient."

- Spiffor : "do you really believe your administration will dramatically increase its military budget and deficit (which is also yours), throw billions out of the window and risk American lives to save foreign people for a dictatorship ? Do you really believe the Hawks that rule the White House are that altruistic ?"

Sorry, I thought you were believing the "lies [Bush] told to motivate the war". I don't think pro-war people are ignorant, even though a fair share of them has many misconceptions (especially about comparing him with Hitler). But I do think it is a feat of ignorance or brainwashing to believe this war is an altruistic feat to save people, as Bush would like to make us believe.

Chemical Ollie · March 18, 2003, 19:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Sinapus

Especially if it's your views about a politician.

Exactly

Quote:

Did I say that?

No

Quote:

"The Emperor's New Clothes"

Maybe you should avoid calling people who don't follow your viewpoint "trailer-park trash" in the future. You look rather naked.

Did I say that? Apolytoners don't frequently belong to above mentioned category. However, millions of the addressees of Bush's speech do.

ThePlagueRat · March 18, 2003, 20:08

The truth is, if you dare to hear it...
All these grotesque military operations U.S. were involved throughout this world the last 50 years has made a world of anger and hatred which is today pointing at U.S.
Historians have warned about this policy for almost 30 years.

The media, who don't bother to go into important issues, fills us with fear and the image of an arabic enemy far away who are after our 'way of life' , or whatever. Yeah, there is madmen all over this world and most of them are in the U.S.
TV-companies are not touching the reasons beyond this whole scheme. No one is required to think! Instead we get loaded with BS.

The american population have been told so many lies and mislead so cunningly by these politicians, that they really are in fear not knowing that just those politicians caused their fear and terror through their own foreign policy. Luckily, some americans are intelligent enough to discover this extreme form of manipulation and uncover the facts of history.

Sinapus · March 18, 2003, 20:14

Re: trailer-park trash

Quote:

Originally posted by Olaf Hårfagre
Apolytoners don't frequently belong to above mentioned category. However, millions of the addressees of Bush's speech do.

Ah, ethnic slurs. Nice of you to dehumanize your opponents to prove your superiority.

Ned · March 18, 2003, 20:28

Alright, ThePlagueRat, what "military operations" throughout the world over the last 50 years have caused such anger. All I can think of are the following:

Korea (1950)(Defend SK against communist aggression)
Lebanon (1958) (restore order)
Vietnam (1962-1973)(Defend South Vietnam against communist aggression)
Dominican Republic (1966) (restore order)
Lebanon (1982) (peacekeeping)
Grenada (1984?) (Restore order)
Gulf War (1991) (defend Kuwait against Saddam's aggression)
Somalia (1993) (peacekeeping)
Bosnia (1996?) (Stop war)
Haiti (1997?) (Restore order)
Kosovo (1998?) (Stop genocide)

Have I missed anything?

These are grotesque?

This is a legacy that inspires hate?

Unbelievable!

Lincoln · March 18, 2003, 20:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Olaf Hårfagre

Do you mean that you actually believed every word Bush said? Iraq/Al-Queda links and all?

I for one believe very little that any politician says. But the alternative that you tacitly suggest is that Saddam is believable and both Bush and secretary Powell are liers. There is no evidence that I am aware of that sugests that Colin Powel is anything but a man of integrity. Do you believe Saddam over his word?

Lincoln · March 18, 2003, 20:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Olaf Hårfagre

Did I say that? Apolytoners don't frequently belong to above mentioned category. However, millions of the addressees of Bush's speech do.

You are living in a fantasy. Bill Clinton and company liked to refer to their opponants as "trailer park trash". Do you believe everything that convicted liar told you? I thought you socialists loved the poor? Or are you too "educated" to lower yourself to their level? We call people of your ilk here in the South -- oh never mind, you wouldn't get it...

Chemical Ollie · March 18, 2003, 20:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Sinapus
Re: trailer-park trash

Ah, ethnic slurs. Nice of you to dehumanize your opponents to prove your superiority.

My opponents are not the TPT because they are rarely here on Apolyton. My opponents are you educated people who can think of your own and don't let your politicians do the thinking for you.

News broadcasts and of course political speaches (duh) are more or less biased so you have to try too look behind the screen to understand what's really going on.

Journalists go to the trailer park or more frequently to the shopping mall and ask the man in the street, and surely they will find a lot of morons who reply "Nuke the bastards!" without really thinking what they just said. Similar to those Palestinians who were celebrating in the refugee camp after 9/11. We have to think twice to make an opinion if they just picked out the 5 morons they met in a whole day or if all "TPT" thinks like that.

Sorry if I don't reply soon again. I have a meeting at my job in six hours from now and I have to get some sleep before that.

KrazyHorse · March 18, 2003, 20:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
Alright, ThePlagueRat, what "military operations" throughout the world over the last 50 years have caused such anger. All I can think of are the following:

Korea (1950)(Defend SK against communist aggression)
Lebanon (1958) (restore order)
Vietnam (1962-1973)(Defend South Vietnam against communist aggression)
Dominican Republic (1966) (restore order)
Lebanon (1982) (peacekeeping)
Grenada (1984?) (Restore order)
Gulf War (1991) (defend Kuwait against Saddam's aggression)
Somalia (1993) (peacekeeping)
Bosnia (1996?) (Stop war)
Haiti (1997?) (Restore order)
Kosovo (1998?) (Stop genocide)

Have I missed anything?

These are grotesque?

This is a legacy that inspires hate?

Unbelievable!

(Restore order)

In other words, get rid of the guy you don't like.

You forgot your bombing of Guatemala in 1954. Must have been restoring order and democracy. Wait. They had order and democracy prior to the bombing, but not for the next 40 years afterwards.

And what about the Bay of Pigs? Or bombing Libya? Or ****ing up half a dozen SE Asian countries in an undeclared war peripheral to Viet Nam so badly that they're still recovering?

Or bankrolling dozens of terrorist organisations in South America? Mining harbours in Nicaragua?

Need I go on?

Chemical Ollie · March 18, 2003, 20:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Lincoln

I thought you socialists loved the poor?

What makes you think I'm a socialist? I have voted conservative all my life. I have been taking the US side in all wars until now.

But it is too obvious that this war is more about uniting the American people against a common enemy to win the next election. The whole world agree that Saddam is a local catastrophy, but he has never been a treath to United States.

ThePlagueRat · March 18, 2003, 20:54

You didn't mention all the CIA operations and the funding of the 'Contras' slaughter-milita in Latin american, the coup of Allende and the insertion of dicator Pinochet, it all had US support.

Did I forget to mention CIA training of Osama and their support for Israel. (1950 and 1980 massacres of Palestinians were cleverly covered up and dodged) US involvement with Israel is probably what caused the most hatred in the middle east.

If they helped the Palestinian building a state instead of funding
war criminals like Sharon, USA could have a far better position today as a peacekeeper.

Ned mentioned some wars...
Kosovo was a NATO operation and it had a UN mandate, which naturally involved USA, and the Korea war had a UN mandate I guess. (but it was a long time ago, and I was not born then)
UN approved the Gulfwar1, and that was NATO operation with a US overweight of troops. Ok, today the situation is different.

I might serve as a soldier for NATO myself one day.
And then I don't want to get sacrificed for dirty rotten US foreign politicians. Could be about time to cancel this 'alliance' ?!

So it is an important issue for us, since we are in NATO.

Chemical Ollie · March 18, 2003, 21:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Lincoln

I for one believe very little that any politician says. But the alternative that you tacitly suggest is that Saddam is believable and both Bush and secretary Powell are liers. There is no evidence that I am aware of that sugests that Colin Powel is anything but a man of integrity. Do you believe Saddam over his word?

"If you are not with us, you are against us", huh?

Powell is a loyal politican who will do what his boss tells him. He has integrity allright, but not enough to risk his job by expressing a second opinion in public. Nobody believes Saddam, that is something we can agree on.

Lincoln · March 18, 2003, 21:03

So you think he has integrity but he is a liar? He made his statements before the UN. Did he lie to the world because he is loyal to Bush while also being a liar?

Ming · March 18, 2003, 21:05

ThePlagueRat... You better TONE IT DOWN. Nobody has a problem with you saying your opinions, but I have a problem when the venom is dripping from your lips as you try to insite a flame war...

So chill... or be chilled... there will be no additional warnings.

Lincoln · March 18, 2003, 21:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Olaf Hårfagre

What makes you think I'm a socialist?

Sorry

I saw that you were from Sweden.

Lincoln · March 18, 2003, 21:16

I think you've got him wrong Sava. You may remember he was very outspoken against Bush. He saw the evidence that we don't see. He was converted by the facts. He is no one's fool.

Chemical Ollie · March 18, 2003, 21:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Lincoln
So you think he has integrity but he is a liar? He made his statements before the UN. Did he lie to the world because he is loyal to Bush while also being a liar?

What would be his options? To resign?

Ming · March 18, 2003, 21:19

Quote:

Originally posted by Lincoln
I think you've got him wrong Sava. You may remember he was very outspoken against Bush. He saw the evidence that we don't see. He was converted by the facts. He is no one's patsy.

Lincolns post is refering to a deleted post by Sava..

And the next time I see that kind of post from you Sava... you WILL be sitting out this war.

You got that!

Alexander's Horse · March 18, 2003, 21:19

Quote:

Originally posted by Ming

venom is dripping from your lips as you try to insite a flame war...