Bush Haters - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-02-2004, 12:58 AM   #46
The Fly
 
odowdpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 215
Local Time: 06:28 PM
quote:

"Everyone deserves to be free

There is no bad reason to remove a thuggish dictatorship

Terrorism will only end when it is not a viable option that achieves results."

Listen, there will always be a form of terorism, thats just life, if you don't believe that, then your living with your eyes closed. And there will always be injustices. You just have to try and minimize it.
__________________

__________________
odowdpa is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 12:59 AM   #47
ONE
love, blood, life
 
zoney!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: six metro locations
Posts: 11,292
Local Time: 05:28 PM
Is the New York Post still a Murdoch property?
__________________

__________________
zoney! is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 01:10 AM   #48
The Fly
 
odowdpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 215
Local Time: 06:28 PM
I'm not sure, but I tell you what, its so funny reading the papers everyday. You can tell people's views just by their choice of paper.

NY Post - Very Republican Paper

NY Daily News - Liberal Rag (plus Page Six is better )

Wall St. Journal - Republican

NY Times - Dems paper and also has writers that make things up.

If you want to be entertained for a while, just read the WSJ or the Times editorial sections - good reads, very biased towards their party. If your like me and are reading the opposing paper, you should begin talking to yourself about how absurd the read is about two lines in.
__________________
odowdpa is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 02:53 AM   #49
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 09:28 AM
You Rock odowdpa

Im quite serious, you seem to have conviction and also read over all the articles out there. I personally love to hate reading collums from lefty wankers, it gets the blood pressure going up in the morning. Nothing like a big bit of hypocracy to wake you up.

I will not just sit back and accept injustice, I know that realism is a must but when you have the oppertunity and the will it must be siezed. The reason the world is fucked now is because we let the nationalist movements run wild in the 20th century and ruin the half baked pieces of Empire formed in the early 20th Century. Peace on Earth can be achieved and it is the only way to guarantee the survival of the human species and allow us to move forward.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 03:01 AM   #50
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 09:28 AM
I shall just add my two cents by recalling Machiavelli

a prince should guard himself, above all things, against being despised and hated, and liberality leads you to both.

So if the US intends to maintain a unipolar power structure through the 21st Century as PNAC envisions then it must show the world that it is very powerful but at the same time work to fix problems, to become loved or revered rather than hated. Difficult to do in the world of realpolitik but certainly possible when the civilized world finally moves beyond the concept of the nation/state.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 03:18 AM   #51
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 12:28 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
I shall just add my two cents by recalling Machiavelli

a prince should guard himself, above all things, against being despised and hated, and liberality leads you to both.

So if the US intends to maintain a unipolar power structure through the 21st Century as PNAC envisions then it must show the world that it is very powerful but at the same time work to fix problems, to become loved or revered rather than hated. Difficult to do in the world of realpolitik but certainly possible when the civilized world finally moves beyond the concept of the nation/state.
And what if the PNAC boys don't really give a sh*t about being 'liked'? The massive build up of hate is the core of the problem, and most of their doctrine will only inflame that.

Did you do much reading of the PNAC website pre Iraq war? It used to have some really great stuff on there. It's much more sensitised and 'PC' (in a super power political sense) now.
__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 08:06 AM   #52
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,256
Local Time: 05:28 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by odowdpa
This is why i don't understand why half the nation is against him, he's looking out for YOUR safety.
But explain to me how bombing a country will make us safer? If Bush's actions involving wars were indeed supposed to make us less likely to be attacked (I realize there's always that distinct possiblity regardless, but the way Bush was talking, the threat was going to be greatly reduced), why are there still threats? Why was our government considering pushing back the election this year for fear of an attack? Just now there's another story of yet another threat against our country. Obviously Bush's method isn't really working all that well if all that stuff is still happening.

I have no problem whatsoever with our government keeping an eye out on any potential threats against our country-it's just that once we have an idea of what groups exactly are a threat to us, why can't we just find some way to go after those specific groups, instead of have a war that kills innocent people in the process and makes the people there even less thrilled with us?

Also, A_Wanderer, in regards to getting rid of thuggish dictatorships-does this mean that you're totally in favor of getting rid of every single dictatorship that exists out there (some of which, keep in mind, the U.S. supported)?

And I'm sorry, but this just doesn't make any sense to me: Saddam is killing his people, and that's bad (obviously), so what's our solution to the problem? A war, which will...kill a lot of the same people that we're trying to stop Saddam from killing.

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 09:01 AM   #53
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 06:28 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Moonlit_Angel


But explain to me how bombing a country will make us safer?
That was Clinton's strategy. He would lob missles into Iraq. It happened quite a few times during his presidency. He also lobbed them into the Sudan.

#1 People are forgetting that the main reason we were on the hit list from Al-Qaeda is that they were pissed off about us being in Saudi Arabia. Why were we in Saudi Arabia? To protect them from Saddam. We no longer have to be there and this makes us safer.

#2 This has created a front in a war which had no front. Hopefully it is pulling terrorsits towards Iraq and away from our land. This by itself makes us safer because they are focused on the military.

Is it pretty? No, it is not.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 09:20 AM   #54
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 09:28 AM
I must remind people that Al Qaeda in the 1990's was setup around the goal of removing infidels soldiers from Saudi Arabia, now this has already happened does Al Qaeda simply dissolve, Their Demand was answered do they stop attacking?

Answer is of course no, these are religious fanatics and they will not stop until civilization is brought to its knees and Word of Islam is the only thing left on this earth, not a happy picture because this ties in with the entire apocalypse death cult that is Islamist Terrorism in the Globalization Age.

If I had a magic wand and could remove despotism and replace it with freedom and peace in any place then I would in a heartbeat, I dont think that reinforcing bad regimes is the proper way to win any war on terror because the same problems will occur again (that is US support for dictatorships which turns people to the next best option which has become Islamism). Now in the real world we have to operate differently but when the oppertunity arises it must be taken, if the political will exists then it should be siezed. Now here is where it gets more fine, I do not advocate war against any and all dicatorships, I believe that using all tools at the disposal of the civilized world we may court them into reform. Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe is an awful leader however in that particular situation political pressure may be able to solve the problem and reform the government within a suitible timeframe. Pakistan too is a situation where by courting Musharraff the US is also using democratic reform as part of the Stick and Carrot game of diplomacy. Saudi Arabia, ah yes, now this is the Big Fish in my book. Saudi Arabia is already downright awful, it sponsers the enemies of the west with its oil money, it spreads a violent and expansionist ideology and its corrupt dealing with the world have given it a lot of enemies, now the problem is that you cannot put too much pressure on them or the Kingdom will collapse, if that occurs then oil prices would skyrocket and the global economy could crash, Europe and Asia would be especially hard hit and it would be a fuckup of monumentous scale. From such chaos an even worse system could take root and you could have an Afghanistan Redux with more money and control of a large portion of the world Oil, not a pretty picture. Saudi Arabia is why I think Iraq is a must succeed operation. If Iraq can provide stable supply and introduce liberal democratic principles into the region it may help accelerate reform in other more progressive Arab countries such as Jordan and Egypt. Saudi Arabia could then have more pressure applied to it and the internal politics may be swung in the favour of reformist elements. Now I dont know nearly enough about internal Saudi politics to formulate a plan however in principle Saudi Arabia must be changed from within because there is no way you could take millitary action there. Where theres a will theres a way, if both are there take it.

Lastly Saddam was killing a lot more people than the war itself. Some 100,000 people in Iraq are alive today because the US went in there with the Coalition. Some 15,000 civilians have been killed in the war and subsequent postwar situation. This is a vastly lower number than those who would be lying dead under Saddam. We have brought hope to Iraq in one of the most successful millitary campaigns in the history of the world, liberating a country with minimal casualties on all sides, if WW2 was worth the price in defeating Nazi Germany then supporting the Second (Technically Third) Gulf War is a no-brainer. Regardless of what talking heads say this campaign was brilliant, the country is moving forward steadily and the ludicrous claims of a mass exodus, Stalingrad style battle for Baghdad, use of WMD's against civilians or ethnic bloodbath predicted by the anti-war movement did not eventuate, mistakes were made to be sure but as one knows the best laid plans dont survive the first encounter. Some proponents out there did say that the US would be greeted as liberators but most did not, Iraq is going pretty much as I envisaged it, short war followed by long period of nation building where you are a day trip away for any budding Jihadis. In 20 years down the track if there is a stable liberal democratic Iraq standing as the first Beacon of freedom in the Middle East I know that history will judge the action as just and the first major victory against Islamic Fundamentalism where we took the fight to them and created a catalyst for change in the region.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 09:24 AM   #55
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 12:28 AM
Dreadsox:
#1 i mostly agree. But i don't think it's correct to say that the US troops were there to protect one dictator against the other. I think it's more "the US troops were there to protect the Oil of Saudi Arabia"

#2 Many people claim that this has created a front.
Is it really like that?
Does the Al-quaida now wear uniforms? Does the US see Al-Quaida on the battlefields? No! It's still terrorism also they (And not only Al-Quaida) make many terroristic strikes in iraq. Why? Because this country is easy to attack, nothing worth to worry for a terrorist. A weak Government which is not democratic elected and can't do anything without the help of the coaltion of the willing.

Maybe some of the terrorists are "lucky" and find the WMDs which could be there.
If they really get access to such weapons thanks to the chaos which is there we can only pray to God...
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 09:36 AM   #56
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 09:28 AM
Al Qaeda does not really exist, it is just one part of the much vaster web of Islamic Fundamentalist Terror groups out there, see the enemy for what it really is Islamofascism from the operative planing a bombing to the power players Saudi Politics, it is a vast all encompassing problem that is not beaten by launching a few misiles or chasing around in Afghanistan, it is done by removing the support base and eliminating the key operatives and leaders.

The INTERIM government was selected mostly by the UN, when the elections do take place there will be a democratically elected government there calling the shots. That is a key part of nation building, transitional governments, East Timor had to do it and now Iraq does to, it doesnt do any good trying to make it out as a puppet regime in some sort of cold war replay.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 09:40 AM   #57
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 12:28 AM
A_Wanderer:
What do you think about the US administration decision to harbour terrorists?
http://forum.interference.com/t94531.html

I don't think it has to do anything deeper with Islam, people like them just use whatever oportunity they have to get support of radicals. Because of Mr. Bushs behaviour it's the easiest way to get new terrorists by calling yourself "Islamofundamentalist who defends the arab world"
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 09:50 AM   #58
War Child
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 940
Local Time: 11:28 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


#1 People are forgetting that the main reason we were on the hit list from Al-Qaeda is that they were pissed off about us being in Saudi Arabia. Why were we in Saudi Arabia? To protect them from Saddam. We no longer have to be there and this makes us safer.

#2 This has created a front in a war which had no front. Hopefully it is pulling terrorsits towards Iraq and away from our land. This by itself makes us safer because they are focused on the military.

Is it pretty? No, it is not.
You are not in Saudi Arabia. You are in Saudi Arabia and Iraq.
Once you are out of Saudi Arabia you will still be in Iraq.
You will be in Iraq for a very, very, very long time.
Even if there was no US military presense there (and there probably always will be, even just if it's in the form of bases) and simply a democratic government there, it will be a target for the same propaganda that makes you being in Saudi Arabia so dangerous. They had 2 reasons before (Israel, Saudi Arabia) and they now have either 3 (add Iraq) or still 2 (replace Saudi with Iraq).

Point #2 just isn't reality.
__________________
TylerDurden is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 10:08 AM   #59
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 06:28 PM
Point #2 most definitely is. There are more terrorists going into Iraq which = safer America. It has created a battlefield.

Iraq is not the holy land, Saudi Arabia is.

Its nice to have differing opinions.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 08-02-2004, 10:16 AM   #60
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 12:28 AM
Dreadsox
Afik Iraq has some holy places too.
And you're right, the Terrorists who do Suicidal attacks in Iraq can't come to the US but i think you forget that the situation there multiplies the number of people who are willing to join the terrorists.
I bet many Terrorists have Mr. Bush on VCR to show the people down there that he was talking about crusade, that there was torture in Iraqi prisons etc.
__________________

__________________
Klaus is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com