Power Rangers...

[jlbetin]

How the same guys who built such a big coalition were a few months later unable to convince their closest allies about the need of a new war?

Because he is not a real politician in the noble sense of term just a Texas Ranger feeded with bible words rather than geopolitical facts.
To resume a stupid Cowboy defining the axe of evil without knowing what evil realy is.

You don't learn that in Texas!! No you get it more in travelling worldwide or fighting.

May be Kerry is the last hope for all of us before this naughty men put fire in the powder room.

Der WanderHateBushAndPrayForDemocratsToComeToPower

 

[JAMiAM]

May be Kerry is the last hope for all of us before this naughty men put fire in the powder room.

Der WanderHateBushAndPrayForDemocratsToComeToPower

Another sad paradox about this whole Iraqi debacle, is that in reality, I fear that the US political landscape may make the Republicans the "best" choice to extricate our forces from Iraq. This is because if a Democratic President oversaw our withdrawal, it would be painted as a shameful retreat, or defeat, by the Republicans. Whereas, the same end result, if performed during a Republican administration would be hailed as a great victory.

It doesn't matter to the powerbrokers like Karl Rove, et al, if Iraq slides into anarchy or a Iran-style theocracy, as long they do it, when convenient for the next election.

It is this short-sightedness of the current administration that is so discouraging.

 

[jlbetin]

It is this short-sightedness of the current administration that is so discouraging.

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:


Der WanderWon'tSayBetter

 

[Menschenfresser]

JL, I grew up in Texas and up until a few years ago, called it my home. There's a lot that's good, decent and wise in Texas. Before Bush was president, he was the gov. of Texas, as we all know. I watched and voted in that race.

If you thought that George W. was groomed for the presidency, you should have seen his election as governor. You should have seen how an entire state-wide machine got behind the man to get him elected as governor. I look back now at his race for the governorship and wonder if his bid for president wasn't already twinkling in the eyes of a few of the republican big-wigs.

The Texas I grew up with is an outspoken, balls-to-the-wall place. It's a place where there's still a notion of frontier in the people who live there. I'll be the first to admit, it's a place full of people with harsh ideas. But one thing Texans would never, ever, not in a billion years advocate, is the imposition of their way of life upon the rest of the world. Maybe it's because they like to think the Texan way of looking at the world is a little different from the rest, but I think it is also because they would never tolerate the reverse...someone imposing something foreign on them. And that is why Bush's foreign policy should not be connected to the state he came from.

It's like the men in the US who grow up their whole lives in the middle of a city and during their 40s or 50s, buy a house in some bedroom community, fill the basement full of hunting rifles and glocks and think they are suddenly country boys. As far as the Bush clan being Texan, that is how I see it.

If you want a different view of Texas politicians...look up Ann Richards. Any one remember her?

I think it was Howard Dean the other day who said in a speech, "Let's send Bush back to Texas." And my response was....

NNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!

 

[jlbetin]

JL, I grew up in Texas and up until a few years ago, called it my home. There's a lot that's good, decent and wise in Texas. Before Bush was president, he was the gov. of Texas, as we all know. I watched and voted in that race.

If you thought that George W. was groomed for the presidency, you should have seen his election as governor. You should have seen how an entire state-wide machine got behind the man to get him elected as governor. I look back now at his race for the governorship and wonder if his bid for president wasn't already twinkling in the eyes of a few of the republican big-wigs.

The Texas I grew up with is an outspoken, balls-to-the-wall place. It's a place where there's still a notion of frontier in the people who live there. I'll be the first to admit, it's a place full of people with harsh ideas. But one thing Texans would never, ever, not in a billion years advocate, is the imposition of their way of life upon the rest of the world. Maybe it's because they like to think the Texan way of looking at the world is a little different from the rest, but I think it is also because they would never tolerate the reverse...someone imposing something foreign on them. And that is why Bush's foreign policy should not be connected to the state he came from.

It's like the men in the US who grow up their whole lives in the middle of a city and during their 40s or 50s, buy a house in some bedroom community, fill the basement full of hunting rifles and glocks and think they are suddenly country boys. As far as the Bush clan being Texan, that is how I see it.

If you want a different view of Texas politicians...look up Ann Richards. Any one remember her?

I think it was Howard Dean the other day who said in a speech, "Let's send Bush back to Texas." And my response was....

NNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!

I would like to appologize for texas people, yes to compare them to HIM could be perceived as an ... INSULT sorry for that.

Especialy that my company has an office open in Austin and all the Austin's people who came to Paris were really nice people.

And most of the US people I meet in Paris were nice too.

So question is GWB a real US citizen and not a Alien Clone that David Vincent tired in a lone road meet many years ago.
Llook at his hand has he a special little finger .....

Der WanderInvaders

 

[Black Moria]

Cheetah772:

You gave gone on and on in this thread about opposing dictators....

Then explain the apparent hypocrisy of the Bush administration's stand on North Korea, Pakistan, Iran, Libya.....to name a few.

If 'bringing down the thunder' of American troops on Saddam is good, for the reason that he was a brutal dictator and may have had WMD, then 'bringing down the thunder' on North Korea, Pakistan, Iran, Libya, Syria, etc should be good also.

Odd that Bush and company seem to think that diplomacy is sufficient for North Korea. Maybe the fact the N. Korea is dirt poor and has no oil for natural resources has something to do with that.

Odd that Bush and company politically jumped into bed with Pakistan and whored themselves......Pakistan has a dictatorship and WMD, yet he must be a 'good' dictator and their WMD must be good, 'cause I don't see the Bush administration falling all over themselves to sell a war against Pakistan.

Odd that the war on terrorism will be prosecuted anywhere terrorist are, unless the terrorists are in countries that are considered 'close' allies of the US, like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.

You never consider that the anti-American sediment you froth about might be justified to a degree - the perception of American arrogance of power, and American hypocrisy in its dealing with other nations.

Remember the proverb - not everyone who speaks ill of you is your enemy and not everyone who speaks well of you is your friend....

 

[Menschenfresser]

So question is GWB a real US citizen and not a Alien Clone

I'm starting to think he might have a little cripple Indian man who gets around on a squeaky dolly living in his poop shoot.

 

[jlbetin]

I'm starting to think he might have a little cripple Indian man who gets around on a squeaky dolly living in his poop shoot.

Yes man you get it all right

Der WanderLOLButReallyLOL

 

[tigersqn]

Slobodan Milosevic didn't have WMDs, yet, much of Europe wanted to get rid of him by using American troops to save Europe a lot of grief and time.

Yet, you demand to see some evidence of WMD threats in Iraq, completely ignoring Saddam's brutal dictatorship! Isn't that hypocritical of you?

Dan

Conflicts in the Balkan region have a huge impact on European security; whereas conflicts in the Middle East have more of an economic impact on Europe.
Saddam did not threaten European security; Milosevic did.

 

[MikeJ]

Anyway, to answer your question bluntly, no. If I knew what was going to happen, I would have done everything in my power to stop the WTC attacks.

As for nuking two Japanese cities, yes, it was worth the price.

Okay, so what makes the difference here? American lives vs someone else's life (a perfectly valid point of view, I'm just curious if you really believe in sacrificing American lives for Iraqi lives or if that's just the happy face you're putting on American prestige/power)? Or is it something else?

 

[Deltapooh]

Cheetah772:

You gave gone on and on in this thread about opposing dictators....

Then explain the apparent hypocrisy of the Bush administration's stand on North Korea, Pakistan, Iran, Libya.....to name a few.

If 'bringing down the thunder' of American troops on Saddam is good, for the reason that he was a brutal dictator and may have had WMD, then 'bringing down the thunder' on North Korea, Pakistan, Iran, Libya, Syria, etc should be good also.

Odd that Bush and company seem to think that diplomacy is sufficient for North Korea. Maybe the fact the N. Korea is dirt poor and has no oil for natural resources has something to do with that.

Odd that Bush and company politically jumped into bed with Pakistan and whored themselves......Pakistan has a dictatorship and WMD, yet he must be a 'good' dictator and their WMD must be good, 'cause I don't see the Bush administration falling all over themselves to sell a war against Pakistan.

Odd that the war on terrorism will be prosecuted anywhere terrorist are, unless the terrorists are in countries that are considered 'close' allies of the US, like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.

You never consider that the anti-American sediment you froth about might be justified to a degree - the perception of American arrogance of power, and American hypocrisy in its dealing with other nations.

Remember the proverb - not everyone who speaks ill of you is your enemy and not everyone who speaks well of you is your friend....

Okay, so you think America should be less discreet in who's *ss we decide to kick? I'm actually pleased with Bush's policies on North Korea and Iran. He isn't backing down and is trying to work with the international community who once again send mixed singles as to their position. Bush has been told by China and Russia they withdraw support if we go before the UN. The EU also pursued a similar strategy in it's support for our effort in Iran. While I see the wisdom in that strategy, it is nonetheless contradictory to the position expressed by the people of these nations.

Americans no longer pursue internationalism with the confidence it once did. Mainly because we don't see it as a win-win situation. As I told Martin, America is years ahead of most of the world. All the talk about internationalism resembles America in the 1950's, before we began to reap what we sowed in places like Vietnam, the Philippines, Iran, and Iraq. Unfortunately, as Martin pointed out, the US is also living somewhere in the past tense, overconfident in it's power.

Oh well, let's enjoy it while it last. I'll go tell Bush to crank up the annoying rants and we'll start the clock to see how long it takes to REALLY piss you all off.

(And if that last part makes little sense, it's because I'm tired and in serious need more Dr. Pepper!)

 

[MikeJ]

Okay, so you think America should be less discreet in who's *ss we decide to kick? I'm actually pleased with Bush's policies on North Korea and Iran. He isn't backing down and is trying to work with the international community who once again send mixed singles as to their position.

You talk about mixed signals a lot. Can you define what you mean by that? What constitutes a mixed signal?

 

[Martin Schenkel]

A benevolent country doesn't usually last that very long in the course of human history.

In reality, one of the most benevolent nations in history (Switzerland) is also the oldest nation state in existence, having maintained its independance for over 700 years. Ironic, how the oldest and most stable nation state DOSEN"T mess around in the affairs of others.

 

[tigersqn]

In reality, one of the most benevolent nations in history (Switzerland) is also the oldest nation state in existence, having maintained its independance for over 700 years. Ironic, how the oldest and most stable nation state DOSEN"T mess around in the affairs of others.

Makes sense.

They don't piss anybody off AND they have an incredible talent at hiding peoples money for them.
With that kind of security, they don't even need an army.

 

[Foggy]

In regards to Switzerland, geography is not a little detail :cheeky:

 

[Dicke Bertha]

What about dropping the nukes on Japan? Was that okay? I mean it probably saved lives and sent a clear message to the USSR not to screw with America. Worth it?

Damn good point. Burn civilians to save the lives (possibly) of GI's. Any other world order would scream in agony and disbelief. Someday America will have to answer to its makings past and present.

Dan, quit the horse** be a mensch.

 

[Dicke Bertha]

Instead, the point I'm trying to establish is we are all benifactors of American foriegn policy. Now that you see it is messy, does little to undermine the neccesary crap we often mold into peace. If you want America to work with through the UN, tell your elected representatives to stop making backroom deals with the US. If you want be truly innocent, let Saddam out of jail, appoint him your president, and let him brutalize your country to the third generation, so the unborn can have clean hands and a dirty mouth directed at those who cared more about the appearance of righteousness than the qualities that define right.

Again, I wish not to offend any country or the sacrifices they've made.

Deltapooh your're a sensible guy. I have been drinking tonight but what the mighty hell is this. How the heck am I a benefictor of American goodity, I have no wish fot a Saddamite president. Finally all you damnos yanks get off it it is not with us or against us; many true friends of America are really really scared and lost now about the ways of the US. Get that. The US simply is not hte provider of good anymore as it might have been seen o decade ago. Read Jamiams post, with the review, right on spot. Europe is a US allied, if you will let us be, as differnet as we are (we Europeans)

 

[Cheetah772]

Okay, so what makes the difference here? American lives vs someone else's life (a perfectly valid point of view, I'm just curious if you really believe in sacrificing American lives for Iraqi lives or if that's just the happy face you're putting on American prestige/power)? Or is it something else?

Don't you think if I am going to scarifice American lives, it would be for the greater goodness of America rather than the world? In other words, it is about American interests, not the world's.

We invaded Iraq for one primary reason: to stop any kind of WMD programs Saddam may have hidden. The liberation of Iraqis is also another objective if in the long run, it will do America alot good, like for example, providing ourselves a base in Middle East, and sowing the seeds of democratic movements that are long overdue over there as well. All of this was and is done in America's national interests.

Dan

 

[Cheetah772]

Damn good point. Burn civilians to save the lives (possibly) of GI's. Any other world order would scream in agony and disbelief. Someday America will have to answer to its makings past and present.

Dan, quit the horse** be a mensch.

And how brave of you to decry the American invasion and more than willing to let thousands of American lives, both civilians and soldiers perish just so you can have your little world order full of dictatorships with WMDs going about with little or no consequences.

Yeah, you would rather to have America stopped than to allow her to act out in her own self-defense against Saddam's Iraq. I guess you would rather have 100,000 Americans to lose their lives before the Europe or the rest of world allow America to defend herself.

Yes sir, you're very brave, now, aren't you?

Dan

 

[Cheetah772]

In reality, one of the most benevolent nations in history (Switzerland) is also the oldest nation state in existence, having maintained its independance for over 700 years. Ironic, how the oldest and most stable nation state DOSEN"T mess around in the affairs of others.

And it is not a world power.

I was talking about a supposedly benevolent world power with real capacity to do good or evil.

If Switzerland were to be a superpower, I doubt she is going to be very benevolent. No one with that much power could ever stay benevolent.

That is my point.

Dan