Watch Bush's Address Last Night ?

SlowwHand · May 2, 2003, 17:48

Did you listen?
Did you happen to hear what the man said?

I don't want it to end up shocking a lot of you at some point way down the road.

Drogue · May 2, 2003, 17:50

Nope, didn't get it here. What did he say?

SlowwHand · May 2, 2003, 17:52

The same thing he said before.
Terrorists, and those who give them sanctuary and/or aid.
It isn't over.

Not that any logically-thinking person thought it was over.

Guynemer · May 2, 2003, 17:55

Of course, logically-thinking people may wonder just what in the hell Saddam Hussein and Iraq have to do with Osama bin Laden...

Gee, remember Osama? Those were the days, going after the guy who killed 3,000 innocents... whatever happened to him, anyway?

GePap · May 2, 2003, 18:00

As I said earlier, no. Nothing original was planned to be said, nothing memorable was said (I haven;t hear any 'famous' phrases come out of it in the papers, like axis of evil with us or with the terrorist), and the little stunt about holding it on the USS Lincoln...well, just more fluff for the news channels to cover ("President's Historic Landing", news at 3pm....

)

Hueij · May 2, 2003, 18:07

Quote:

Gee, remember Osama? Those were the days, going after the guy who killed 3,000 innocents... whatever happened to him, anyway?

Now that you mention it, anyone knows where Saddam is?

The Templar · May 2, 2003, 18:14

Nothing like watching a draft-dodging chickhawk hop out of a plane wearing a military get-up.

King George W just should have just showed up for his guard duty if he want to fly in military planes.

Sad thing is, we US taxpayers paid for that little photo-op.

PLATO · May 2, 2003, 18:21

I know I'll get ripped for this, but...

It was an appropriate setting and an effective speech.

It is fitting for the Commander in Chief to welcome troops coming home from battle. Welcoming them before they made port allows no distraction to reuniting families. Using that platform augmented a speech that signifies the end of a phase of a much larger war. The might of the US Military standing behind a determined President warning rouge nations not to harbour terrorist. Quite an effective message I believe.

SlowwHand · May 3, 2003, 00:47

I agree, Plato.

I couldn't care less about "Quotes For The Ages".
What I have always liked, and like to this day about Bush is simple.
He says it straight out, briefly and to the point.

Evidently though, some people prefer rhetoric from a career politician, where they have to scratch their ass and say "Huh?', while waiting for the latest Radical Liberal rag to tell them what THEY have decided the interpretation is to be.

Don't need that with Bush.
What he says,is what they'll get.

SlowwHand · May 3, 2003, 00:48

Note that Radical Liberal is not a Democrat by definition.
Extremists.

The Mad Monk · May 3, 2003, 01:27

I've said it before, I'll say it again. Our war with Iraq had more to do wth Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia than it did with Iraq.

orange · May 3, 2003, 01:38

Quote:

I've said it before, I'll say it again. Our war with Iraq had more to do wth Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia than it did with Iraq.

Oh ok, well that makes everything all right then.

Clear Skies · May 3, 2003, 07:05

Sloww...the mere fact that Pat Buchanan has admitted that the liberal bias in the American media is purely a lie shouls surely be enough for you...

Kropotkin · May 3, 2003, 07:34

Bush gotta keep up this war on [whatever] for some time more to be sure to win the next election. Not repeating his dads misstake by ending a 'popular' conflict long before the elections.

Jac de Molay · May 3, 2003, 09:16

Quote:

Nothing like watching a draft-dodging chickhawk hop out of a plane wearing a military get-up.

As much as I dislike the man's policies, I have to admit that was kinda cool

SlowwHand · May 3, 2003, 09:50

There were various legitimate reasons for ousting Hussein.

Since it's a done deal, no need to waste my time arguing with people that refuse to acknowledge.

My point is, the terrorist hunt isn't over.
He said it.
You need to get your mind right.

Guynemer · May 3, 2003, 10:02

My point is, what the hell did Saddam have to do with the terrorist hunt?

Urban Ranger · May 3, 2003, 10:26

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowwHand
There were various legitimate reasons for ousting Hussein.

"Legitimate" in what sense?

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Since it's a done deal, no need to waste my time arguing with people that refuse to acknowledge.

Lets see. NBC weapons, where? Terrorist links, what? What else is there? Ah, oil. Yes, but of course.

Menlas · May 3, 2003, 11:01

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowwHand
My point is, the terrorist hunt isn't over.

Right. Ben Laden and Saddam Hussein are still running after all.

Az · May 3, 2003, 11:03

Quote:

My point is, what the hell did Saddam have to do with the terrorist hunt?

Well, it's not like The US' entire foreign policy is the battle against terror. There is also the international supremacy to maintain. Seriously.

Drogue · May 3, 2003, 12:57

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowwHand
There were various legitimate reasons for ousting Hussein.

Much as I despise the war, that is correct IMHO. Ignoring all the unproven stuff about WMDs, Saddam did massacre many people. That I think has been established. While I would rather see him tried before execution, and while I do not think it justified a war (at least try to arrest him, and then if he resists, go and get him) it is a legitmate reason.

The way I saw it, taking out all the rumours and possibilities, it is a choice of pros and cons. Do you think removing an 'evil' dictator is worth going to war, violating national sovereignty, and defying the UN? (admittedly not in practice, but they knew the UN would vote against, and so didn't table it). That is just how I see it, and I would answer no, but I can see the justification for either belief.

SlowwHand · May 3, 2003, 13:02

Thank you for your honesty, Drogue.

I have no problem with people who wish things were different.
Bush said war was the last choice.
Anyone with any clarity of mind would feel that way.
Unfortunately, sometimes people must be dealt with, who are lacking clarity of mind .
Ref: Bin Laden, Hussein, etc.

cinch · May 3, 2003, 13:37

Quote:

Nothing like watching a draft-dodging chickhawk hop out of a plane wearing a military get-up.

No kidding! What an insult to servicemen everywhere... It's hard to fathom that a real hero, like McCain, could get railroaded right out of his chance at the White House, and an AWOL UnPatriot like Bush is seen as a valiant soldier.

And

to Drogue.

MichaeltheGreat · May 3, 2003, 14:20

Did he mention the fact that USAID is issuing RFPs for consultants to carry out the privatization of Iraqi oil assets and other industries?

I'm not a fan of socialism by any means, but the US has absolutely no legal authority to effectively confiscate and redistribute property.

The US will hire the consultants, who will determine who is qualified to bid, and evaluate those bids to "buy" Iraq's assets. Gee, I wonder if politics will come into play? Meanwhile, the nationalized industry paid for education, health care, and other social benefits the majority of Iraqis had no means of paying for. So do those now become fee based systems, that most Iraqis can't pay for? Or do they remain government systems, paid for by taxes that most Iraqis can't pay, with a tax system we'll design for our colonials?

Who gets to be the next set of billionaires? Iraqis? American companies? French companies?

Ask USAID, your friendly colonial administrators.

The Templar · May 3, 2003, 14:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Lets see. NBC weapons, where? Terrorist links, what? What else is there? Ah, oil. Yes, but of course.

Exactly. The war with Iraq is just that "new guy in high school" tactic. Grab a guy you can easily take and beat him so bad that others fall in line. Great, US leaders are trying to run the world like a high school

I think King George sent a message loud and clear. He told the world that they had better build WMDs or the US will pimp-slap you. North Korea seems to have gotten the message.

I also question the consistency of war supporters who buy into this Iraqi freedom nonsense King George has been saying. Since we're now in the business of liberating the oppressed, when are we going to free Tibet from China? Are Tibetans less deserving of liberty than Iraqis? Or do business connections with China count more than Tibetan freedom? Or is King George just too chickensh** to attack a country capable of resistance?

Oh, as for those free Iraqis, they don't seem to have the right to assemble and petition for a redress of grievances without getting shot by US troops. Yes, yes somone may have shot at the troops first. (I hardly think the troops' self-serving accusation can be taken at face value.) But, the troops are acting in a police capacity. And certainly no legitimate police force in the world would fire a machinegun indiscriminately into a crowd to get a lone assailant using the crowd as cover. Imagine if the NYPD or LAPD did that in their cities. Got that image in your head? Feel that outrage? Well, thats how those protesters feel.

Then again, we know how King George feels about protests.

PLATO · May 3, 2003, 14:30

Quote:

but the US has absolutely no legal authority to effectively confiscate and redistribute property.

Sieze it from whom? The Iraqi government? Last I looked they were nowhere to be found. Are you proposing that we just shut things down until a functioning Iraqi government is up and running?

IMO, the new government will have its hands full with plenty of things other than running an oil business. They will, however, have the power to allocate revenue through taxation so that the flow of cash to the treasury should not be significantly impaired. Further, I would say that with privitization and a profit motive in place, the revenue could actually increase due to increased efficiencies.

WRT who gets to let the bids and award contracts, the only other available option is the UN and that is just a laugher.

It's easy to criticize every plan coming down the path, but not all of them are bad MTG.

Dude2000 · May 3, 2003, 17:02

DUH! How come everyone forgets that Al-Qaeda training camps were found in northern Iraq! Oh, maybe it's because the socialist-controlled media forget to report it.

TCO · May 3, 2003, 17:13

I watched it and I think he has every right to congratulate the servicemen and to rejoice in the victory himself. He pushed this through when there was lots of doubt. Remember all the worry about how we didn't have enough forces, etc.

I know all the boo-birds would be out in force if we had lost or if there had been large casualties. We certainly saw them overreacting to the minor rollercoaster of events. So, I think he's got every right to give that speech. And I think that the servicemembers reaction was pretty enthusiastic and genuine. I didn't see anyone forcing them to clap that hard.

TCO · May 3, 2003, 17:17

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Did he mention the fact that USAID is issuing RFPs for consultants to carry out the privatization of Iraqi oil assets and other industries?

I'm not a fan of socialism by any means, but the US has absolutely no legal authority to effectively confiscate and redistribute property.

The US will hire the consultants, who will determine who is qualified to bid, and evaluate those bids to "buy" Iraq's assets. Gee, I wonder if politics will come into play? Meanwhile, the nationalized industry paid for education, health care, and other social benefits the majority of Iraqis had no means of paying for. So do those now become fee based systems, that most Iraqis can't pay for? Or do they remain government systems, paid for by taxes that most Iraqis can't pay, with a tax system we'll design for our colonials?

Who gets to be the next set of billionaires? Iraqis? American companies? French companies?

Ask USAID, your friendly colonial administrators.

And if we take too long, we will get criticized for that. And if we screw this up, we will get criticized for that also. I think it is pretty cagey and smart to keep this stuff out of the hands of people that had previous strong relations with Saddam and the Baath. Things are still pretty insettled there with a million ways things can go wrong. And we likely can have better control over a US firm than a French or German one. This thing is not like building widgets for the lowest price in a settled political area.

Az · May 3, 2003, 17:39

Quote:

DUH! How come everyone forgets that Al-Qaeda training camps were found in northern Iraq! Oh, maybe it's because the socialist-controlled media forget to report it.

ROTFLMAO