Bush...I can't believe how idotic he is.

[CougTek]

What an sore liar this guy is. I sit, more than half an hour, in from of my TV, listening to his garbage and he makes me sick. He doesn't answer any question about why so many foreign governments disagree with him, he just re-ass the same gabage all the time. He's clearly lying on all the motives that push him to war and he's even poor at it.

He said something like "Right now, there might be weapons of mass destructions [insinuating from Iraq] pointing towards the home of US citizens" UTTER BULLSHIT. The most powerful missiles found in Iraq would barely make it to Israel. And this sub-ape is telling us that Saddam could target them to the States!?! Sore imbecile. His parents beated him too often with a shovel when he was young. If you're American and you believe this shit, you are hopeless.

Want to go to war because Saddam has weapons of mass destructions...I have evidences (that convinced no one but the Brit.) that he his a treat to people from peace-loving countries...price to pay for inaction is worst than the one of going to war (in what, oil barrels?)..blablabla.

And North Korea? It's obvious they have far more advanced weapons than Iraq. Nuclear weapons more over. Than why doesn't he do anything about it and concentrates on Iraq? OIL!!! Oil, my American friends. This guy is running into war because your oil supplies are starting to be depleted. Instead of working on developping new replacement technologies, this oil millionaire is encouraging your country to consume even more fossile fuel and all his moves share one goal and one goal only : getting control over more oil. There was the very important oil pipeline in Afghanistan and important oil resserves in Iraq. Your young soldiers won't die for the freedom and safety of your people, they will die (and many many more civil citizen from the targeted countries) just to keep increasing the wealth of the world's worst poluers and most influent people in America.

Sure, kicking Saddam won't be a bad thing. Except your government helped his rise to power in 1979 (or late 70's, anyway) and that his current foolish actions are caused by no other than yourselves (well, your rulers). Now is a tad late for rectifying the situation, isn't it? Same thing happened in Afghanistan with the Talibans. When will you finally get it that YOUR freaking government is mainly responsible for most of the major threats against the Unites States? If the goal of the current conflict was to free Iraqi citizen and disarm Saddam, well it should have been done in '91, not now.

Can someone tells me why you shoot guys like Kennedy but let this danderous fool governing peacefully? I'm totally enraged against this complete imbecile. And so should you all.

 

[zx]

Totally agree with you. This guy is trying to find every excuse to go to war. I mean in 91, Irak had actually invaded his neighbour. Now? A preventive war you say? Yes, as it will prevent the US from running out of oil!

 

[Mercutio]

I noticed the same thing, Coug. It's not just you.

As for why we don't shoot him, well, I personally think he's too stupid to die.

 

[Howell]

Coug, When you watched TV did you listen in english or listen to a translation? Just, curious.

 

[CougTek]

In English. Translations get on my nerves.

 

[Jake the Dog]

that is truly sad... our 'leader' here in in Oz is saying the same idiotic type things. despite the fact that every opinion poll done in the last month, consistantly saying that the people would approve of UN sactioned military action ONLY, Howard yesterday came out with the comment that he's not convinced that Australians believe we shouldn't war along-side the US and UK, despite UN dissaproval.

a few months ago he was telling us that despite having deployed special milltary forces to the region, he had no intention of going to war without UN approval.

I don't know who's more the fool, us or Blair/Bush/Howard...

 

[CougTek]

In any case Jake (Tim, whatever), the situation is pathetic. You probably couldn't watch the speech from chieftain Bush, but during the question period, it was obvious that most journalists, by the questions they placed towards Bush, didn't agree with his almost unilateral offensive against Iraq. Almost all of them asked him, in a way or another, why was he so rushed to start the war in Iraq. He never answered and dodged the questions, often going completly off-topic from the question that was asked to him. Pityful. And that's democracy?

Do we live in a democracy? Hell no! I don't know what proportion of the United States population backs the warrish behavior of their government, but I doubt it's above 50%.

Something else I thought about. I catch at least 15 american TV channels, if not 20, and I often watch them. I also catch a single channel from France, but almost never watch it. The rest are local channels. When I compare the US news to ours, those of the Canadians and those from France, one conclusion is obvious. No matter how much you might believe that United States is a country where freedom to speak and to think rule, it isn't the case at all. Compared to whatever else I watch, the US TV channel filter the info like few others in the occidental world. I can understand that many of you American deeply believe that your government is "on the side of God" and all that rubbish-like way of thinking, because most if not all of what you've see on TV since you were a child is a sort of information control. Impossible you'll tell me? Well, I've seen news from elsewhere, and when compared to yours, the range of different ideas if an order of magnitude richer outside United States than into it. I'm always refering to medias, not people here. The result is that your view of the world is somehow twisted and distorted. And it's very sad, especialy when you put this in contrast with what your country claims to represent : freedom.

Fortunately, despite the information control exerced by your major media channels, many of you still are able to look further and make a clearer opinion about the actions of your government. To all of you, I sincerely want to say a deep "thank you". Cause if if your country ever falls completly under the control of redneck extreme-right preachers (thik Bush) and taking the fact that you are, by far, the most heavily militarized nation of this world, the result will be ugly. You currently have a redneck leading the White House. Just don't let him do all what wants to do. The rest of the world will be grateful.

I'm not saying I'm the holder of the ultimate truth, but I have access to far more various information sources by being outside of the United States than most people inside the most powerful nation of the world. United States aren't always wrong, but under Bush, the odds aren't good.

 

[blakerwry]

Well I'm glad we Americans have you to tell us up from down Coug... otherwise we'd sure be lost.


I think the reason we're going to war against Iraq is that their contry fosters and promotes Terrorism... Terrorism that hurts more than just the US, I might add.



The reason we're not at war with N. Korea is because it would be foolish. We've been working at trying to stay at peace with N. Korea for 50 years... they have a military... they have formidable weapons... N. Korea has made threats before and they will probably continue to make threats in the future... to attack N. Korea now, especially considering we've already gotten involved with Iraq, would be very dumb.

 

[blakerwry]

not that Bush isn't making excuses for going to war...

 

[CougTek]

I think the reason we're going to war against Iraq is that their contry fosters and promotes Terrorism... Terrorism that hurts more than just the US, I might add.

See what I mean about information control? Think hard about it. I mean, real hard. North Korea has tremendous manufacturing capabilities compared to Iraq for everything that concerns the infamous "weapons of mass destruction" that your uncle Bush constantly says he is so concerned about. Anyone following even remotely the international actuality knows that N.Korea sells significant quantities of those weapons to whom ever has the money for, including terrorists. Iraq, in ten years, all they've been able to build were a few tens of relatively low-range missiles. If national security was the real concern behind the upcoming war (Nintendo game, with US holding the gamepad), your forces would have never been even near Iraq, but would have mobilized in South Korea, Japan and whatever else nation that would have agree to harbor your troops.

And don't talk to me about the fear of breaking relationship with China and Russia because of the proximity of those super powers (let's call them middle powers since there's only one super power nowadays : you). Afghanistan is right in the middle of Asia, close to both Russia and China and Bush lost no time when he saw the golden opportunity of taking control of the oil pipeline in Afghanistan after September 11th.

Just like that, no one has confirmed the death of Ossama yet. Officially, one of the main reason behind the attacks on Afghanistan was to kill or capture him, wasn't it? They didn't. But since US has taken control of Afghanistan's oil, have you noticed how little your medias cared about Ossama compared to before the war? Again, put aside your deeply anchored nationalism and think hard about it. Same will happen with Saddam. Once you'll get control over the oil, all suddenly then poof! number one targeted terrorist or terrorism supporter will become yesterday's main concern. All will be cleaverly hidden behind a nicely presented bliss of filtered news. Of course. Media control at its best. And you will all eat that like a hungry baby eating pablum.

The reason we're not at war with N. Korea is because it would be foolish. We've been working at trying to stay at peace with N. Korea for 50 years... they have a military... they have formidable weapons... N. Korea has made threats before and they will probably continue to make threats in the future... to attack N. Korea now, especially considering we've already gotten involved with Iraq, would be very dumb.

Did they really told you at school that your country has tried to stay in peace with North Korea for the past 50 years? Wow, I never thought they would push the irony so far. It might sound differently, but I'm not trying to ridiculize you here. I just find it very sad to see you, a good person, believing this hard like a rock.

Last thing :

Well I'm glad we Americans have you to tell us up from down Coug... otherwise we'd sure be lost.

Don't worry, no matter who will be your president won't change the fact that you will remain by far the most powerful nation of the world, both militarily and economically, although Bush is threatening the second like few of his predecessors.

While your might isn't threatened at all Blake, the philosiphical side of your nation is in great danger. In fact, I'm wondering if it hasn't already been lost, somehow.

 

[Mercutio]

I dimly recall George the first as saying something like:
"When I get my newspaper in the morning, I turn to the same section as every other average American, the International News".

George I's administration lost any kind of momentum it might've gotten from winning a popular war due to the simple fact that the sitting president at that time spent nearly all his time working on foreign policy issues. Not surprising for an ex-diplomat and CIA chief, but now, looking back, I wonder if the current president is repeating the same mistakes.

Certainly seems like every time we put a Bush in the White House, there's a big ol' recession.

 

[its.fubar]

one thing has me thinking that the only difference between bush the religious fanatic and a moslem cleric fanatic is who they are trying to convince.why I'm saying this is because the way he preaches is every thing you would expects to hear in a church or a mosque, You know what I'm talking about,Good and Evil which translates to God and the Devil,you are for us or against us which translates to The Evil Will Be Vanquished,Isn't there enough religious fanatic in the world today without being expected to tolerate more.

 

[jtr1962]

And North Korea? It's obvious they have far more advanced weapons than Iraq. Nuclear weapons more over. Than why doesn't he do anything about it and concentrates on Iraq? OIL!!! Oil, my American friends. This guy is running into war because your oil supplies are starting to be depleted. Instead of working on developping new replacement technologies, this oil millionaire is encouraging your country to consume even more fossile fuel and all his moves share one goal and one goal only : getting control over more oil. There was the very important oil pipeline in Afghanistan and important oil resserves in Iraq. Your young soldiers won't die for the freedom and safety of your people, they will die (and many many more civil citizen from the targeted countries) just to keep increasing the wealth of the world's worst poluers and most influent people in America.

You know this is about oil, I know it's about oil, but sadly the average American couldn't care less. In fact, the average SUV-driving moron probably supports anything that keeps the price of gas low. All I hear now from people are complaints that the price of gas is going up. The minute I start talking about the need to stop burning fossil fuels I just get either a blank stare or a look of disbelief. In my opinion the best thing in the world would be for gas prices to hit something like $10/gallon and stay there. The environmental angle just doesn't seem to get people to conserve. We've had over 30 years since the fuel crisis of the 1970s to do something, and all we've done since then is to drive more, fly more, and build bigger, more fuel hungry vehicles. Every other first world country except the United States either has or is building a high-speed rail network. Really pitiful in my opinion.

One other thing. Besides the fact that oil and auto companies get rich due to our wasteful habits, don't forget all the money hospitals get treating those millions injured each year in auto accidents, and the millions more who get cancer or other illnesses from breathing the junk those autos fill the air with. I rarely go out before 7 PM any more to avoid breathing the pollution at its worst. Even after that it sometimes stinks, especially in the summer. If I ever hear someone say again about how clean today's autos are they'll get my fist in their mouth.

Can someone tells me why you shoot guys like Kennedy but let this danderous fool governing peacefully? I'm totally enraged against this complete imbecile. And so should you all.

Kennedy wasn't a great President either, but I'm sorry he got assassinated. If he didn't, his term likely would have ended in scandal from his affair with Marilyn Monroe. Instead, someone(likely the CIA) bumped them both off for national security reasons(I'm surprised they didn't do the same with Monica and Clinton). As a result, Kennedy became a martyr and many of his questionable programs were passed into law under LBJ. LBJ's "Great Society" was largely responsible for nearly two decades of urban decay and crime. Sure there were other factors, but welfare without personal responsibility, and treating criminals as "victims of society" were the primary culprits.

Just for the record, I voted for Bush simply because I felt he was the lesser of two evils. I hated his environmental stance, but I feel both parties are sold out to big oil anyway so Gore couldn't have done much better. Gore in my opinion was just too weak to be President. I also don't care for the socialistic baggage that accompanies the Democratic Party. Honesty, in my lifetime there hasn't been one Presidential candidate that I've been very enthusiastic about. I really don't care for what either party stands for any more. Republicans have their own baggage, in particular the religious right. Both sides like to use minor issues like abortion to focus people's attention from more important ones that they would rather not deal with, such as the fossil fuel problem.

 

[blakerwry]

And North Korea? It's obvious they have far more advanced weapons than Iraq. Nuclear weapons more over. Than why doesn't he do anything about it and concentrates on Iraq? OIL!!! Oil, my American friends. This guy is running into war because your oil supplies are starting to be depleted. Instead of working on developping new replacement technologies, this oil millionaire is encouraging your country to consume even more fossile fuel and all his moves share one goal and one goal only : getting control over more oil. There was the very important oil pipeline in Afghanistan and important oil resserves in Iraq. Your young soldiers won't die for the freedom and safety of your people, they will die (and many many more civil citizen from the targeted countries) just to keep increasing the wealth of the world's worst poluers and most influent people in America.

You know this is about oil, I know it's about oil, but sadly the average American couldn't care less. In fact, the average SUV-driving moron probably supports anything that keeps the price of gas low. All I hear now from people are complaints that the price of gas is going up. The minute I start talking about the need to stop burning fossil fuels I just get either a blank stare or a look of disbelief. In my opinion the best thing in the world would be for gas prices to hit something like $10/gallon and stay there. The environmental angle just doesn't seem to get people to conserve. We've had over 30 years since the fuel crisis of the 1970s to do something, and all we've done since then is to drive more, fly more, and build bigger, more fuel hungry vehicles. Every other first world country except the United States either has or is building a high-speed rail network. Really pitiful in my opinion.

One other thing. Besides the fact that oil and auto companies get rich due to our wasteful habits, don't forget all the money hospitals get treating those millions injured each year in auto accidents, and the millions more who get cancer or other illnesses from breathing the junk those autos fill the air with. I rarely go out before 7 PM any more to avoid breathing the pollution at its worst. Even after that it sometimes stinks, especially in the summer. If I ever hear someone say again about how clean today's autos are they'll get my fist in their mouth.

Can someone tells me why you shoot guys like Kennedy but let this danderous fool governing peacefully? I'm totally enraged against this complete imbecile. And so should you all.

Kennedy wasn't a great President either, but I'm sorry he got assassinated. If he didn't, his term likely would have ended in scandal from his affair with Marilyn Monroe. Instead, someone(likely the CIA) bumped them both off for national security reasons(I'm surprised they didn't do the same with Monica and Clinton). As a result, Kennedy became a martyr and many of his questionable programs were passed into law under LBJ. LBJ's "Great Society" was largely responsible for nearly two decades of urban decay and crime. Sure there were other factors, but welfare without personal responsibility, and treating criminals as "victims of society" were the primary culprits.

Just for the record, I voted for Bush simply because I felt he was the lesser of two evils. I hated his environmental stance, but I feel both parties are sold out to big oil anyway so Gore couldn't have done much better. Gore in my opinion was just too weak to be President. I also don't care for the socialistic baggage that accompanies the Democratic Party. Honesty, in my lifetime there hasn't been one Presidential candidate that I've been very enthusiastic about. I really don't care for what either party stands for any more. Republicans have their own baggage, in particular the religious right. Both sides like to use minor issues like abortion to focus people's attention from more important ones that they would rather not deal with, such as the fossil fuel problem.

I voted for Gore... i wonder what things would be like now... But I agree about not being enthusiastic about the candidates... I would have probably voted for Clinton again if it were possible...

 

[its.fubar]

congratulations gentleman I always knew the average American was a decent person and after that devastating day 9/11 it would take some time for sanity to come back, unfortunately this government you have in place at the moment can do an tremendous amount off of damage in the short time left before the next election where he will be no better than his father.

 

[Kofi Annan]

My friends! We must all work for peace!

Listen - Let us agree that we must solve this problem. First however I must define the problem for you so that we have a clear idea at to who we must screw so that we may have peace. The Americans are all but tapped out and we must find new pockets to pillage.

Now as I understand it - We have Americans opposing Americans who oppose America. We also have Quebecois present who oppose the Americans who are opposing the Americans who oppose America. And of course we have the Americans who oppose the American who oppose America opposing the Quebecois as well. And as usual the Canadians are no where to be found. Finally we have the Australians who of course oppose anyone who hasn't bought a round or two so far.

What shall we do then to resolve this? Blame Canada? They have no money... no oil... How about the Swiss? They have deep pockets and haven't been accused of anything in years! They are overdue are they not? Yes Switzerland... Oh and they have hot chocolate as well with cute little marshmallows in it - Oh and cuckoo clocks... yes Switzerland! I can hardly wait!

 

[The Giver]

congratulations gentleman I always knew the average American was a decent person and after that devastating day 9/11 it would take some time for sanity to come back, unfortunately this government you have in place at the moment can do an tremendous amount off of damage in the short time left before the next election where he will be no better than his father.

Ok fubar - I'm going to make one attempt to reason with you and point out the error of your ways. Accept this criticism in spirit in which it is given, a desire to be helpful, or reject it if wish - I don't care.

What you have insinuated above is that those Americans who stand with their President are not decent people. This is rude, uncalled for, and last but not least - untrue. You further add insult to injury by insinuating that post 9-11 this country has been "insane" which also rude, uncalled for, and untrue.

None of the other critics here have found any need to attack American policies by personally attacking Americans. I suggest you follow their example.

 

[its.fubar]

OK Giver:- I'm going to make one attempt to reason with you and point out the error of your ways. Accept this point of view in spirit in which it is given, a desire to be helpful, or reject it if you wish - I don't care.

Before 9/11 bush had not the slightest interest in Iraq, his only interest was taking home they American military, with ridiculous statements such as, why should we spend so much money defending other countries,after 9/11 the Reagan doctrine showed his face in the form of people like Wolowitz,cheney and rice where there attitude is let's finish the business we didn't get around to last time,then started the politically propaganda machine and people believe the rubbish they were told, as I have stated earlier he takes time to see through all the BS,even Colin Powell has gone on record as saying Iraq is not a threat and they are contain, what has changed and how many more countries are on the list ?

it must be abundantly clear for normal people what the U.S. is trying to do, at the very least they are trying to undermine the U.N. at the worse destroy it ,I know it's is not a perfect system but it is a democratic system, not like what ragan bush doctrine has in mind for the rest of the world.

where will it all finish with a new world war is that what bush wants ?

 

[its.fubar]

congratulations gentleman I always knew the average American was a decent person and after that devastating day 9/11 it would take some time for sanity to come back, unfortunately this government you have in place at the moment can do an tremendous amount off of damage in the short time left before the next election where he will be no better than his father.

Ok fubar - I'm going to make one attempt to reason with you and point out the error of your ways. Accept this criticism in spirit in which it is given, a desire to be helpful, or reject it if wish - I don't care.

What you have insinuated above is that those Americans who stand with their President are not decent people. This is rude, uncalled for, and last but not least - untrue. You further add insult to injury by insinuating that post 9-11 this country has been "insane" which also rude, uncalled for, and untrue.

None of the other critics here have found any need to attack American policies by personally attacking Americans. I suggest you follow their example.

Temporary insanity can happen to the nicest of people,or you might use the words like propaganda machine overload but eventually normal decent people will wake up from that type of nightmare And regain their sanity. Hasn't there been enough women and children murdered by that insane War Is there any acceptable reason for more women and children to die.

 

[The Giver]

OK Giver:- I'm going to make one attempt to reason with you and point out the error of your ways. Accept this point of view in spirit in which it is given, a desire to be helpful, or reject it if you wish - I don't care.

Before 9/11 bush had not the slightest interest in Iraq, his only interest was taking home they American military, with ridiculous statements such as, why should we spend so much money defending other countries,after 9/11 the Reagan doctrine showed his face in the form of people like Wolowitz,cheney and rice where there attitude is let's finish the business we didn't get around to last time,then started the politically propaganda machine and people believe the rubbish they were told, as I have stated earlier he takes time to see through all the BS,even Colin Powell has gone on record as saying Iraq is not a threat and they are contain, what has changed and how many more countries are on the list ?

it must be abundantly clear for normal people what the U.S. is trying to do, at the very least they are trying to undermine the U.N. at the worse destroy it ,I know it's is not a perfect system but it is a democratic system, not like what ragan bush doctrine has in mind for the rest of the world.

where will it all finish with a new world war is that what bush wants ?

Sigh.... obviously you completely misunderstood the point I was making. It had nothing to do per se with your opinion of the situation in Iraq. It had everything to do with being rude. Suit yourself.

 

[its.fubar]

OK Giver:- I'm going to make one attempt to reason with you and point out the error of your ways. Accept this point of view in spirit in which it is given, a desire to be helpful, or reject it if you wish - I don't care.

Before 9/11 bush had not the slightest interest in Iraq, his only interest was taking home they American military, with ridiculous statements such as, why should we spend so much money defending other countries,after 9/11 the Reagan doctrine showed his face in the form of people like Wolowitz,cheney and rice where there attitude is let's finish the business we didn't get around to last time,then started the politically propaganda machine and people believe the rubbish they were told, as I have stated earlier he takes time to see through all the BS,even Colin Powell has gone on record as saying Iraq is not a threat and they are contain, what has changed and how many more countries are on the list ?

it must be abundantly clear for normal people what the U.S. is trying to do, at the very least they are trying to undermine the U.N. at the worse destroy it ,I know it's is not a perfect system but it is a democratic system, not like what ragan bush doctrine has in mind for the rest of the world.

where will it all finish with a new world war is that what bush wants ?

Sigh.... obviously you completely misunderstood the point I was making. It had nothing to do per se with your opinion of the situation in Iraq. It had everything to do with being rude. Suit yourself.

The Giver:
O but I did look at the next post and what time it was posted.
but obviously you only see what you want to see and as you say is your decision to suit yourself.

 

[The Giver]

fubar,

Do you have any children?

 

[its.fubar]

fubar,

Do you have any children?

Yes but no smart remarks regarding my family thank you.

 

[The Giver]

fubar,

Do you have any children?

Yes but no smart remarks regarding my family thank you.

Scary

 

[its.fubar]

fubar,

Do you have any children?

Yes but no smart remarks regarding my family thank you.

Scary

No I do not have any problems sleeping overnight he he

do you ?

 

[Tannin]

Coug: great posts!

 

[CougTek]

Thanks Tony. I'm not the only one who wrote something I fell is worth reading though.

 

[flagreen]

My apologies to all of you who may feel I have disrupted this thread. It was never my intention to do so. My notion of what is humorous varies greatly from the norm here and I'll be keeping it to myself in the future.

I most certainly do not wish to deprive anyone of the freedom to discuss their point of view here through the use of disruptive tactics. My only motive in chastising fubar was that of standing up for myself and those who may agree with me that Americans on both sides of this question are decent people.

Again - My apologies

Bill

 

[CityK]

Cougtek, I enjoyed reading your posts - I hope there are many others who equally share your sense of passion and frustration with this whole state of affairs.

I would also like to thank all others who have added opinions and clarified points and drawn attention to some of the underlining issues that really matter - sadly such enlightenment is lost on most....I guess ignorance really is bliss.....to make light of the situation, fans of the animated series "The Simpsons" may already be aware of the relationship depicted in Lisa's Education vs Happiness graph....anyways..

Recently, a friend directed me to two web sites that I found rather interesting. How reliable, truthful, factual or sensationalist the material presented on their pages really is I leave up to you to decide. IMO, certainly some what is written isn't to far off the mark.

http://www.bk2k.com/bushbodycount/index.shtml
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/

CK

 

[blakerwry]

Dont worry 'bout it. I like the dialog we have here.

I didn't want the war, but I think we may have gone too far to stop now. If we attack Iraq, what will happen to us?

And as i believe Tony put it, "Why not just let sleeping dogs lie?"...
I think alot of people are thinking the same thing as me, I see signs of protest every day...

Personally I think Bush is doing things wrong, he should have worked for full support of the UN and done things through the UN instead of sending US troops and recon into Iraq and neighboring countries. He's pushing this war for some other reason than the threat of Iraq to America.

One things fo sure, I dont know anybody who is going to vote for him next election day.

 

[Howell]

Than why doesn't he do anything about it and concentrates on Iraq? OIL!!! Oil, my American friends. This guy is running into war because your oil supplies are starting to be depleted. Instead of working on developping new replacement technologies, this oil millionaire is encouraging your country to consume even more fossile fuel and all his moves share one goal and one goal only : getting control over more oil. There was the very important oil pipeline in Afghanistan and important oil resserves in Iraq. Your young soldiers won't die for the freedom and safety of your people, they will die (and many many more civil citizen from the targeted countries) just to keep increasing the wealth of the world's worst poluers and most influent people in America.

OK, I'll bite Coug. How exactly will attacking Iraq solve the problem of depleted oil supplies assuming such a problem exists? What does the oil pipeline in Afghanistan have to do with with our choice to go in there? It's not like we own any oil over there before or after.

 

[its.fubar]

I have no problem with the idea of getting rid of terrorists and anybody willing to help them.

the problem I do have is one country telling the rest of the world we will do it without your help and in that way destroying the credibility of the UN.

another problem I have is the real threat to stable world today is north Korea what is being done about that because they do have the possibility of weapons of mass destruction but it seems the U.S. is only interested in soft targets.

and yet another problem is who is going to run Iraq after the War where so many women and children will pay the price again.

And one last thought is this the beginning of a U.S. dominated and controlled middle east.

if you want something done You do not dictate to your friends you ask them And continue to ask and persuade them, there is a psychological difference in which most people understand and it is a more intelligent way to get what you wants.

 

[fool]

What Coug said about the diversity, or lack thereof, of viewpoints represented in US media.
Not having had much exposure to US media I couldn’t say. But I cant help wondering if any of the primetime news shows or serious newspapers would have regular coverage of as broad a range of opinions as, picking an example from in front of my nose, this forum, or for that matter those on SR?
BTB articles whose tone ridicules their content don’t count.
Any answers?

 

[its.fubar]

What Coug said about the diversity, or lack thereof, of viewpoints represented in US media.
Not having had much exposure to US media I couldn’t say. But I cant help wondering if any of the primetime news shows or serious newspapers would have regular coverage of as broad a range of opinions as, picking an example from in front of my nose, this forum, or for that matter those on SR?
BTB articles whose tone ridicules their content don’t count.
Any answers?

it is hardly surprising about your thoughts it is the first casualty of war when the politically propaganda machine has started, but eventually even the Iraq War will be history and I feel pretty certain that the historians will write a entirely different story where the truth will emerge.

 

[Howell]

Let's try a mind exercise, Coug. Now, I assume you think Bush is after the oil so that his oil buddies can get more rich. Since oil isn't an end unto itself I have to assume you think it comes down to money.

And so, in order for oil companies to get rich they have to sell the oil for more money than it takes to obtain. We will disregard the happenings in Venezuela and the probable fact that it would be a much easier coutry to conquer both militarily and politically.

Now, we know that increasing prices decreases demand. So there is a cap to how much the oil companies can charge. There is a profit range but certainly there is a practical cap. And so we can determine that in order for oilmen to make the most money they want low prices from their suppliers.

Bush has stated that he wants stability in the Middle East and I've heard no one suggest that Bush actually wants instability in the Middle East.

Instability leads to an increase in price.

Therefore, Oilmen are probably benefitting right now due to the delay and concurrant instability but in the near future (relative) this will not be the case. Once the rebuilding of Iraq begins and the oil begins to flow to pay for infrastructure rebuilding the price should drop.

 

[Howell]

That's it, I'm writing my posts in notpad from now on. :x

 

[Howell]

its, Can you explain why it's important for Iraq to voluntarily disarm rather than be disarmed?

 

[its.fubar]

Howell wrote:Bush has stated that he wants stability in the Middle East and I've heard no one suggest that Bush actually wants instability in the Middle East.

if you want stability in a area you don't go to War you give peace a chance.
the Iraq crisis has been going on for ten years, bush has been in office a little over two years now and he expects to resolve this problem in so short time as possible by issuing demands almost on a daily basis, what is he worried about! is it may be he won't be reelected because there's so little time left to change the economical and living standards for the average American or is he interested in such mundane task, you might also ask what has he achieved except one justifiable war obviously and this new war Which the jury hasn't made his mind up on get,Unfortunately for the American people you have got a president that is more interested in what goes on outside the USA than at home,because all this BS nonsense about his protecting the USA from future attacks is Stupid because even if you succeed with the absolute destruction of Iraq you will still be left with Israel, Iran, Syrian,Pakistan,Saudi,Libyan,To name a few will you start attacking them also because the CIA has reported they have terrorists and possible weapons of mass destruction,what will happen when the body bags Start arriving back in the USA.

so this leaves me with one question is the U.S. trying to domesticate that area into American politics and doctrine.

one last thought: he who has control of the oil has the power to control the world so yes it is all about OIL and CONTROL big time.

 

[its.fubar]

its, Can you explain why it's important for Iraq to voluntarily disarm rather than be disarmed?

because farless people Die !!

 

[fool]

fool wrote:
What Coug said about the diversity, or lack thereof, of viewpoints represented in US media.
Not having had much exposure to US media I couldn’t say. But I cant help wondering if any of the primetime news shows or serious newspapers would have regular coverage of as broad a range of opinions as, picking an example from in front of my nose, this forum, or for that matter those on SR?
BTB articles whose tone ridicules their content don’t count.
Any answers?


it is hardly surprising about your thoughts it is the first casualty of war when the politically propaganda machine has started, but eventually even the Iraq War will be history and I feel pretty certain that the historians will write a entirely different story where the truth will emerge.

No. That’s not the point I was trying to make. My point was/is that almost all the viewpoints I've read both here and at SR have fallen within what, for the UK and as far as my experience of the rest of the European press goes, would be considered the mainstream of political thought. True one or two would be up close to the banks of said stream, but would not be viewed as outlandish or extreme.
What I wanted, and indeed still want, to know, was whether or not the same could be said of the US.
I ask because it may help me to understand the apparent differences in the frames of reference between those on this board who are American and those who are European.
That the truth is the first casualty of war, what I think you were trying to say, I often encounter no little difficulty in parsing your posts, is IMO in this instance neither here nor there.