Bush Speech Thread

[Lincoln]

You still do not answer my question. I think (in answer to yours) that he would resign before he would tell a lie of such magnitude for Bush or anyone else.

[Sava]

Perhaps Lincoln... but if the facts are so compelling, how come most of what the Bush admin releases is either fabricated, outdated and plagerized, or missing important facts. I mean, I believe probably has something stashed away somewhere. But why can't the US just lay evidence on the table and say, here it is. Instead, I hear political rhetoric, and like you, I don't trust much of anything politicians say. And frankly, I don't believe Bush's assertion that inspections and sanctions aren't working in the containment of Saddam.

Also, I don't know if I mentioned this or not, but I saw Daschle's little response. This man is a little weasel with nothing relevant or intelligent to say.

EDIT: I understand that insulting 'Poly posters is wrong. I wasn't aware I'm not to insult members of the US government... sorry...

[Lincoln]

Well Sava, at least we agree on Daschle. Did your see Powell's presentation before the UN btw (about a month ago)?

[Sava]

Yes, but I guess I can't comment on Powell anymore.

[SlowwHand]

Oh, stuff it, Sava. You bonehead.

[ThePlagueRat]

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

I did not intend to do so. Nobody should feel hurt or anything. Sorry, but I am just angry at some politicians.
For the dripping of venom, it's nothing dangerous... just a mild blackplague coming.

[Lincoln]

Well don't be dripping any of it around here...

[Ming]

We've pretty much stated that through out the next few weeks, our tolerance for flame wars will be zero.

Personal insults... and posts meant to insight flame wars WILL NOT BE TOLERATED.

Again... you are welcome to your opinion, but you better be pretty damn careful how you say it.

[Sava]

forgive me if this crosses the line Ming...

My opinion is that Powell is a puppet for the Bush admin. I don't mean to start a flame-war with this statement, it's my personal opinion. I apologize in advance if this offends anyone who happens to disagree with me. Hopefully I won't get banned for this.

[Spiffor]

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?

Sometimes a politician has to make a choice between his integrity towards the public and his loyalty to political friends / allies. Most politicians have to say something they deeply disagree with at some time of their career, because they are speakers for an organization they do not fully control.
It is very possible Powell accepted to lie in order to keep the cohesion of the admin.

[ThePlagueRat]

Forgive me too for being a plague sometimes. :

I will never try to incite a flame war.
My opinion is that Washington DC has been the puppet master behind many regimes in which they knew were violating human rights, and that the current hatred against USA can be explained by that foreign policy. I think it's sad, because I wish all people well.

These U.S. involvements is so well documented by neutral sources, but the major TV and Radio stations won't listen to it and buys the Washinton story, and just broadcast mindless info day after day. People got to search like crazy to find the truth...

[Dis]

here's the link to the article that the Iraqis are preparing to surrender.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,81446,00.html

Getting to Bagdhad will be easy. I see no serious opposition. I am a little worried about how the war in the city will go though.

[SlowwHand]

Hey, Rat. The majority of the U.S. doesn't give a royal Sandanavian rat's ass what you think about it.

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Sometimes a politician has to make a choice between his integrity towards the public and his loyalty to political friends / allies. Most politicians have to say something they deeply disagree with at some time of their career, because they are speakers for an organization they do not fully control.
It is very possible Powell accepted to lie in order to keep the cohesion of the admin.

It is also very possible that he told the truth. He has no past history of lying that I know of. And he opposed Bush in the beginning and even stated at one point that he would likely not be a member of his next administration if he is reelected. A change came over him. I think it is because of the evidence that he uncovered. I think the burden of proof is on the people who think he is a liar. Where is your evidence of his past lies?

[Ming]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Hey, Rat. The majority of the U.S. doesn't give a royal Sandanavian rat's ass what you think about it.

And slow... comments like that will have you sitting on the sidelines for the war as well..

BE CIVIL DAMN IT!

[SlowwHand]

[Ned]

Originally posted by ThePlagueRat
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.

ThePlagueRat, I only mentioned the military wars and interventions because that is what you talked about in your post. What the CIA did is not military, in my view.

On the military side, you seemed to approve of American actions.

As to the CIA, I am not sure how much the CIA participated in various civil wars throughout the world. However, I sincerely doubt the CIA was directly involved in attrocities. - This may be propaganda.

It is also the subject of the current movie, The Quiet American. You can check out a thread on that movie here in this forum. But the thesis of that movie is that the CIA arranged a major car bombing in Saigon in '52 in order to blame it on the communists. The problem with this "theory" is that the guy that actually did it admitted to doing it. This was a thug named The that allegedly was being financed by the CIA. Why would the CIA arrange for a carbombing to blame in the communists if the guy who did it wanted to take public credit?

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Ned


What do you mean, "sponsor?"

The history of United States throughout the twentieth century shows that the United States has propped up dictatorships during the Cold War as part of the ideological war against communism.

United States was definitely not promoting democracy.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Ned
This was a thug named The that allegedly was being financed by the CIA. Why would the CIA arrange for a carbombing to blame in the communists if the guy who did it wanted to take public credit?

Maybe he was a double agent sold to the communists and betraying his CIA employers. Or maybe he simply admitted it much later, when the attack had made its effect ?

[Ned]

Originally posted by MrFun


The history of United States throughout the twentieth century shows that the United States has propped up dictatorships during the Cold War as part of the ideological war against communism.

United States was definitely not promoting democracy.

Mr. Fun, you cannot seriously be against the basic principle that the "enemy of my enemy is my friend." After all, we allied with Stalin, Mao and Chang, all in their own way despicable, to defeat a larger menace. Surely you understand this from the WWII context?

Americans are sometime sickened by the company we have to keep. So sickened that in 1975, Senator Church lead the charge to forbid the CIA from using unsavory characters for intelligence. All this did was lead to 9/11 due to lack of human intelligence. In retrospect, what Church did harmed United States.

I don't know what would happen in the world had we not conducted our foreign-policy the way we did. But the fear at the time was that the Communists would take over the entire world and kill us. An overly particular foreign-policy with respect to allies surely would have contributed to a Communist victory.

But simply saying that we supported unsavory characters without placing it fully in context is unfair. But the left could care less about being fair when it comes to United States.

[ravagon]

Originally posted by MrFun

The history of United States throughout the twentieth century shows that the United States has propped up dictatorships during the Cold War as part of the ideological war against communism.

United States was definitely not promoting democracy.

Yes they did prop up anti-commie dictatorships. No they weren't promoting democracy.
They did this because they felt it necessary, not because they wanted to nor because they liked the regimes involved.
Now they don't need to do this any longer and can do something about them, particularly given the incentive.

[NikolajRomanov]

I think the behaviour Bush Administration - Europe
and Bush Administration - Irak
is almost similar to the behaviour of Athen shortly before the Peloponesian War

Bush Administration/Athen - Europe/Attischer Seebund (sry but I don't know it's translation perhaps Attic Alliance)
Bush Administration/Athen - Irak/Sparta

We have the situation that THE MOST POWERFULL democracy of the world wants to fight a war against Irak. But in my point of view Bush's main intention isn't to establish democracy rather than to establish a global domination of the USA. Don't understand me wrong an US domination is MUCH better than a Irak domination but if you dominate the world and there is no real opposition even a democracy can show a evil beviour.
(like the democratic Athen which exploit it's allys)

Russland, Russland über alles !
Für Gott, Zar und Vaterland !

[Harovan]

Iz kakoj dyry ty pojavilsa?

Translation, to appease the mods: Out of what hole did you appear?

[Lord Merciless]

Originally posted by NikolajRomanov
Russland, Russland über alles !
Für Gott, Zar und Vaterland !

If you want to praise mother Russia, at least select a Czar that was not a total loser. Peter the Great would be a better choice.

[muxec]

Vse my pojavilis' iz odnoj i toi zhe 'dyry'.

To alll those who do not understand: "All we are from the same 'hole' "

P.S: I'm not vulgar, it's hole in Ming's banning system

[Harovan]

No offense intended, it's just very amusing to see that offspring of Czarism under a German flag, using past German slogans. Makes me think what we have caught along with Perestroika and Glasnost. Oh well, may be he's just a ... I mean somebody I shouldn't feed .

[SpencerH]

Who was it that brought up the Peloponesian wars on another thread in relation to the current political situation? It could be a coincidence I suppose, but one wonders.

[NikolajRomanov]

@ Sir Ralph: It was intended to be a little bit funny

I like (more or less) funny combinations
My Palpatine[GE] acc @Starcraft is described with :
Imperator Palpatine sagt: "Wenn dir jemand auf die linke Wange schlägt halte auch die rechte hinn"
A free translation is:
Palpatine says: If you are hurt by anyone don't hurt him back.


@ Lord Merciless

If you want to praise mother Russia, at least select a Czar that was not a total loser. Peter the Great would be a better choice.

In fact he was a political looser but I like him because of his personal qualitys. I recommend you to read more about the person Nikolaj II. rather than about the politician (no offend against you in my opinion he was a overall looser to until I have read more about himself)
If I had to choose a Czar who was (more or less) politicaly successfull I would choose Alexander II.

LONG LIVES THE CZAR
Pro Patria et Gloria

[Lincoln]

Well welcome to Apolyton comrad Nikolaj! We can use a different point of view here. The same old arguments become rather boring after a while.

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by MrFun


The history of United States throughout the twentieth century shows that the United States has propped up dictatorships during the Cold War as part of the ideological war against communism.

United States was definitely not promoting democracy.

Oh good. We were running low on malcontents.