Where was GW having Turkey today?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
whenhiphopdrovethebigcars said:
The differences between Dreadsox?and my opinion are astonishing (there is a positive tradition).

I really distrust people who are proud of arresting reservists who fail to serve their country. Even if it?s their duty to arrest, sure; I know police officers, but they are not proud of arresting people. They just do it, beacuse it?s their job. When they can avoid to arrest someone, f.e. talk and resolve the situation, they do so. When they have to arrest someone, so be it. But they aren?t proud of it. I just distrust anyone who is proud of doing harm to others.

I ask myself what you get from of calling other?s crybabys, Dread. Generally (to make clear I?m not referring to you especially), people who have fun in displaying their power + strongly follow a certain mindfuck - american nationalism, in that case - are dangerous elements for a society. I fear those extreme people, maybe because of history. They also bore me when they?re pushing their agenda.

So, yeah, do we have any substantial input here except of bush is great bush is the best i?m really impressed no its a publicity stunt no he is a brave warrior oh look at him sharing that fucking turkey with an afroamerican oh look he even has tears in his eyes now see he always says the truth and is such a sensible person who just happens to like electric chairs bush is great bush is the best?

Hiphop-
I think your perspective would be different if you were raised in our country.
I think maybe mine and Dread's perspective would be different if we were raised in Euro.

I do know one thing we wouldnt be publicly 'mofoing' a world leader outside of our country.

DB9
 
HIPHOP,

"So, yeah, do we have any substantial input here except of bush is great bush is the best i?m really impressed no its a publicity stunt no he is a brave warrior oh look at him sharing that fucking turkey with an afroamerican oh look he even has tears in his eyes now see he always says the truth and is such a sensible person who just happens to like electric chairs bush is great bush is the best?"

Sorry if this thread does not fit the typical FYM model that says that Bush is the Anti-Christ.
 
It has been pointed out by NUMEROUS people that President Bush has not attended any of the funerals that have taken place since the war began......

President Clinton did not attend a SINGLE military funeral including:

18 U.S. Army Rangers killed in Somalia in 1993
19 U.S. airmen killed in the 1996 Khobar Towers barracks bombing
four soldiers dead in Haiti
17 Navy men and women killed in the 2000 attack on the USS Cole.

Not a SINGLE funeral. President Clinton did manage to make it to many campain donor's funerals however:

Larry Lawrence
The father fund-raiserand and later DNC chief Terry McAuliffe
Commerce Secretary Ron Brown
 
whenhiphopdrovethebigcars said:
The differences between Dreadsox?and my opinion are astonishing (there is a positive tradition).

I really distrust people who are proud of arresting reservists who fail to serve their country. Even if it?s their duty to arrest, sure; I know police officers, but they are not proud of arresting people. They just do it, beacuse it?s their job. When they can avoid to arrest someone, f.e. talk and resolve the situation, they do so. When they have to arrest someone, so be it. But they aren?t proud of it. I just distrust anyone who is proud of doing harm to others.


Doing harm to others? Obviously these people were breaking the law, thus doing harm to others. Therefore it's not up to the cops to talk to them and let them go, it's their frekin' job to arrest them and let the courts figure out their punishment. The criminals are not the victims!!!!!!!!
 
wolfwill23 said:


Doing harm to others? Obviously these people were breaking the law, thus doing harm to others. Therefore it's not up to the cops to talk to them and let them go, it's their frekin' job to arrest them and let the courts figure out their punishment. The criminals are not the victims!!!!!!!!

Thanks Wolwill! Amazing to think that someone can get their student loans repayed, collect paychecks, get insurance, get free tuition, and be eligible for a pension.....for a job they VOLUNTEERED for...that sudennly they no longer wish to serve when their country calls upon them to serve during wartime.

And you are correct....arrest them and let the courst figure it out.
 
Dreadsox said:
It has been pointed out by NUMEROUS people that President Bush has not attended any of the funerals that have taken place since the war began......

President Clinton did not attend a SINGLE military funeral including:

18 U.S. Army Rangers killed in Somalia in 1993
19 U.S. airmen killed in the 1996 Khobar Towers barracks bombing
four soldiers dead in Haiti
17 Navy men and women killed in the 2000 attack on the USS Cole.

Not a SINGLE funeral. President Clinton did manage to make it to many campain donor's funerals however:

Larry Lawrence
The father fund-raiserand and later DNC chief Terry McAuliffe
Commerce Secretary Ron Brown

So automatically we go to Clinton. I will never understand this form of debate tactic.
 
Why is it always incumbent on us.....the so called conservatives to come up with actual facts and figures in this forum.

Fine....

Show me facts and figured from any other war that would indicate that this administration is somehow any different than any other in its practices.

I have shown how the present administration is no different than President Clinton...who managed to attend FUNDRAISERS FUNERALS while missing the funerals of 18 Rangers sent to their deaths in Somalia arguably because the administration DID NOT equipt them properly.

Or how about the 4 soldiers President Clinton sent to their deaths spreading Democracy in Hati. Where was this President that he installed in Hati while they were dying? He was enjoying tea and crupets in the cosy confines of the Ritz-Carlton Boston, safe and sound. How do I know? I was helping provide security for him. Did President Clinton attend their funerals? No?


I gave Facts...and you get ruffled because I compare these situations to Clinton.....Want to bet that I could compare it to almost Every sitting President of the past 50 years and come up with statisticaly almost the same result.

I will leave it up to you. Clinton was the easiest for me to research.
 
Last edited:
Dreadsox said:
Why is it always incumbent on us.....the so called conservatives to come up with actual facts and figures in this forum.

Fine....

Show me facts and figured from any other war that would indicate that this administration is somehow any different than any other in its practices.

I have shown how the present administration is no different than President Clinton...who managed to attend FUNDRAISERS FUNERALS while missing the funerals of 18 Rangers sent to their deaths in Somalia arguably because the administration DID NOT equipt them properly.

Or the 4 soldiers sent to the deaths spreading Democracy in Hati.


I gave Facts...and you get ruffled because I compare it to Clinton.....Want to bet that I could compare it to almost Every sitting President of the past 50 years and come up with statisticaly almost the same result.

I will leave it up to you. Clinton was the easiest for me to research.

No, I see what you're saying. It probably isn't any different than any other administration. I just never get the if you don't like Bush you must like Clinton tactic, but I see that that's not exactly what you were doing.

But I do remember an article in FYM recently that stated the differences of a few previous administrations and the current when it came to memorial services. But I'm too exhausted to make that search right now.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
But I'm too exhausted to make that search right now.

I can relate....my problem is...after almost seven weeks of feeling like Rush Limbaugh taking pain killers...I am off them...hehe look out!!!!:wink:


Peace Brother!
 
Family comforted by Bush, but differences remain
By SCOTT WILLIAMS
swilliams@journalsentinel.com
Last Updated: Nov. 25, 2003
Brookfield - A visit with President Bush brought comfort to family members of fallen U.S. soldier Mathew Schram, but it did not mend their differences about the war in Iraq.

Presidential Meeting


Matthew Schram, 36, of Brookfield and a major in the Army, became the second Wisconsin soldier to die in Iraq when his convoy was ambushed by gunmen May 26 northwest of Baghdad.


It was awe-inspiring. It was the right thing to
do.


The Brookfield soldier's father and stepmother and four of his siblings met Monday with Bush during a ceremony in which the president paid tribute to several U.S. servicemen and servicewomen killed in Iraq.

Schram, 36, a major in the Army, became the second Wisconsin soldier to die in Iraq when his convoy was ambushed by gunmen May 26 northwest of Baghdad.

Family members said they were impressed by Bush's face-to-face contact with grieving relatives during Monday's ceremony at Fort Carson, Colo., the Army base where Schram was assigned.

"It was awe-inspiring," said Susan Kuske of Brookfield, a sister of Schram. "It was the right thing to do."

After having lunch with soldiers and addressing relatives flown to Fort Carson by the federal government, Bush met privately with the Schram family and others away from the news media.

He exchanged hugs with the relatives, signed autographs and offered comforting words.

Earl Schram of Sister Bay, Mathew Schram's father, said President Bush spent about five minutes talking with the Schram family. "He was very emotional. He said he felt our grief," Earl Schram said. "He was very kind to us. He gave my wife a little kiss."

Despite losing his son, Earl Schram said most of his family supports the U.S. effort in Iraq. "Our family will stay the course. We hope we don't turn around and go out of there," he said of Iraq.

But Robert Schram of Milwaukee, a brother of Mathew Schram, said the experience did not change his feelings that the U.S. military mission in Iraq is wrong.

"I don't dislike the president, by any means," Schram said. "I just dislike the war."

Mathew Schram, who graduated from Brookfield Central High School in 1985, is buried in Highland Memorial Park cemetery in New Berlin.

Gov. Jim Doyle attended Mathew Schram's funeral in June and declared the fallen Waukesha County soldier "the best Wisconsin has to offer."

Also in attendance Monday in Colorado were Schram's stepmother, Audrey Schram, and two other brothers, Phillip Schram of Hartland and David Schram of Hales Corners. One sister, Carol Barr of Pewaukee, was unable to make the trip.

Kuske, who said she supports Bush on the war, said the president autographed a small American flag for her and hugged her. He assured family members of several soldiers that their loved ones died for a worthy cause and that the United States would prevail in Iraq.

Kuske said she had never been to an Army base before and was intrigued to see where Mathew had served.

"I'm very proud of my brother," she said.

Despite his misgivings about the war, Robert Schram agreed that Bush's personal attention was thoughtful.

"He didn't have to do that," Schram said. "And he did seem genuine."

Mike Johnson of the Journal Sentinel staff contributed to this report.
 
Last edited:
I have found another site that indicates President Clinton did attend the USS COLE Ceremony but NOT the Funerals. This site lists from LBJ the Funerals that were attended by all of the Presidents through Clinton. It is not a very long list given the amount of servicemen and women lost.



http://hnn.us/articles/1784.html
 
Last edited:
From the History News Network

Lyndon Baines Johnson - According to the Johnson Library, LBJ attended two funerals for soldiers who died during the Vietnam War. The first funeral was for Captain Albert Smith, son of White House correspondent Merriman Smith, which was held February 28, 1966. The second was for Major General Keith R. Ware, held September 17, 1968. LBJ had met Ware while visiting Vietnam.

Richard Nixon - Richard Nixon does not appear to have attended the funerals of any soldiers killed in Vietnam. He did award posthumous medals of honor to the families of several soldiers on 22 April 1971 and on several other occasions. On Veterans day in 1971 he visited the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Arlington Cemetery. In 1973 he met with the family of Colonel William Nolde after the colonel was buried in Arlington Cemetery. Colonel Nolde was killed on January 27th, the night before the cease-fire went into effect.

Jimmy Carter - According to the New York Times, Jimmy Carter attended a memorial service for the soldiers killed in the failed rescue of America hostages in Iran in 1980.

Ronald Reagan - Ronald Reagan attended memorial services on several occasions for American soldiers. In 1983 he attended a service at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, in connection with the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut, which cost the lives of 241 people. In 1987 he attended a service at Mayport Naval Station in Florida for the sailors killed on the USS Stark.

George H.W. Bush - President George Herbert Walker Bush does not appear to have attended any funerals for American soldiers. (The NYT, citing Marlin Fitzwater as a source, indicated that the president did attend several such funerals. But no details were provided.)

Bill Clinton - Bill Clinton attended a service in October 2000 in memory of the 17 sailors killed in the attack on the USS Cole.

After the terrorist bombing the Murrah building in downtown Oklahoma City he publicly grieved with the families of the victims at an event that was regarded at the time as a turning point in his presidency.
 
george.howard.ap.jpg
bush.police.badge.jpg
0922badge.jpg


bush has done plenty of consoling over his presidency... and so did clinton... and so has every american. saying how he hasn't gone to a soldier's funeral as a rebuttal of him going into baghdad for thanksgiving is frankly a little silly.

and as for his "not inviting all the press" that was in the article... well, that was done for safety reasons. yeah... fox news & bloomberg... two "conservitive" news agencies... whatever the hell that means... were invited along, and cnn and msnbc weren't. oh well. maybe it's because the president trust the agencies that were invited more than the ones who were not. it's not like the clintons didn't play favorites with the press. all politicians do.
 
wolfwill23 said:
I think it was very honorable for him to be there. He didn't have to risk his life on Thanksgiving to fly to Iraq and visit troops, but he did. This shows the character of this president. Good for him.

And I'm sure all the liberals will be upset by the visit but when history looks back, what will be remembered, the complaining liberals or President Bush visiting the troops on Thanksgiving Day in Iraq?

:yes: :up:
 
Dreadsox said:
She was traveling on a FACT finding mission to make her case against the Bush administration, not to boost the moral of the troops. Its a little different.


Right, a fact finding mission. That sure won't help our soldiers any. Wouldn't want any uncomfortable facts lying around. :wink:

Feel better, dear. :sad:

SD
 
wolfwill23 said:
The criminals are not the victims!!!!!!!!

Obviously you don't know a defense attorney. Anyway I don't like the assumption that b/c someone is arrested they are guilty but that is a different thread entirely.

Right, a fact finding mission. That sure won't help our soldiers any. Wouldn't want any uncomfortable facts lying around.

Good point SD, good point....:wink:
 
As far as facts and the truth go, its a bit uncomfortable for some that Saddam is no longer in power and he is not coming back. The leader primarily responsible for that is George Bush. The leader primarily responsible for the opportunity Iraqi's now have to live a better life is George Bush.

I have never heard of a nationbuilding operation where there were NO problems so it should not be to hard for Mrs. Clinton to find some problems to make politics out of.
 
STING2 said:
As far as facts and the truth go, its a bit uncomfortable for some that Saddam is no longer in power and he is not coming back. The leader primarily responsible for that is George Bush. The leader primarily responsible for the opportunity Iraqi's now have to live a better life is George Bush.

I have never heard of a nationbuilding operation where there were NO problems so it should not be to hard for Mrs. Clinton to find some problems to make politics out of.

Who exactly is it uncomfortable for knowing Saddam is no longer in power other than Saddam and his staff?

I thought we weren't doing nationbuilding?
 
BonoVoxSupastar,

There are plenty of people besides Saddam and his staff that did not want to see Bush succeed and still do not.

"I thought we weren't doing nationbuilding?"

Its December 2003, the 2000 election campaign has been over for some time now. Bush is not the first person to run for office and do things contrary to what he said during the campaign. Someday, liberals and democrats will get over the 2000 election, maybe.
 
STING2 said:
BonoVoxSupastar,

There are plenty of people besides Saddam and his staff that did not want to see Bush succeed and still do not.
That is not what you said. You said "As far as facts and the truth go, its a bit uncomfortable for some that Saddam is no longer in power and he is not coming back." Those are two different things and I'm tired of you implying that anyone on the side that did not agree with this war of wanting Saddam to continue in his power. The end doesn't always justify the means.

STING2 said:
Its December 2003, the 2000 election campaign has been over for some time now. Bush is not the first person to run for office and do things contrary to what he said during the campaign. Someday, liberals and democrats will get over the 2000 election, maybe. [/B]

So campaign promises, especially those as big as this, have expiration dates. That's good to know.
 
BonoVoxSupastar,



It is fact that Saddam was removed from power. It is the truth that Bush as a leader played the biggest role in bringing that about. It is true and fact that people beyond Saddam and his staff
are not happy that he is gone and that Bush succeeded.

There is nothing inconsistent in what I said.

"I'm tired of you implying that anyone on the side that did not agree with this war of wanting Saddam to continue in his power"

Your the one that implied this, not me.

"So campaign promises, especially those as big as this, have expiration dates. That's good to know."


This is something that Bush said during the campaign, not a major promise. I was opposed to it then as I am now. I knew ahead of time that any such idea's would be chucked in the can, once he was in office.

I was also opposed to all of Bush's tax cuts at the time which were a bigger issue than the nation building statement. Given the recession though, I support some of them now.

Bush was not my #1 candidate at the time, McCain was.

But Bush in office has proved to be far better than I thought he would be and he has surrounded himself with perhaps the best Foreign Policy and National Security team this country has ever seen.

Although I may of had several disagreements with Bush on various policies during the 2000 election, I am glad I voted for him.
 
Death Takes No Holiday in Iraq

As Bush and others enjoyed photo ops on Thanksgiving, the carnage went on.

Robert Scheer

December 2, 2003

First the president, and then Hillary Rodham Clinton, popped in to spend Thanksgiving with the troops at Baghdad airport ? competing, apparently, in the Olympics of photo ops.

What's the point? To prove that almost half a year after that last big "Mission Accomplished" photo op on the aircraft carrier, U.S. leaders can land in "liberated Iraq" without getting shot?

Unfortunately, the level of stealth and security provided to these showboating politicians can't be replicated for our troops or those of our allies who have sent their young men and women to this adventure: 104 coalition soldiers were killed in Iraq in November, up from 43 in October and more than were slain during the war's heaviest fighting in April.

In the days after the president's quickie holiday visit, seven Spanish agents, two Japanese diplomats, a Colombian contractor and two South Korean electricians were murdered and three more GIs were killed.

The administration, however, insists everything is, has been and will be just fine, thank you very much. On Saturday, a U.S. spokesperson stated that attacks on Americans were down. The very next day witnessed the fiercest attack on American convoys since the so-called end of major hostilities.

No Americans were killed this time, and the military claimed that all 54 Iraqis killed were Baathist militants. Journalists entering the battle-scarred town of Samarra on Monday found a much more complex picture, however, reporting that the use of random and overwhelming firepower killed a number of innocent civilians in addition to a much smaller number of Saddam Hussein's fedayeen loyalists than was originally reported by the military.

In any event, the anger and alienation felt by our onetime allies, the Sunnis, have reached a perhaps unprecedented height.

Those in Iraq opposing the U.S.-led occupation were described as "thugs and assassins" and "terrorists" by the president during his two-hour cameo at the U.S. garrison. This simplistic portrayal of the Iraqi opposition to the occupation, however, ignores the nationalist and religious impulses that have riven the region for centuries.

Ronald Reagan and the president's father relied on these same demon Sunni Baathists as a bulwark against Shiite Iran and Iraq's own Shiite majority. Now we point to the Shiites of southern Iraq as the most acquiescent to our occupation, but that will last only as long as the United States keeps favoring them over the Sunnis.

This is an inherently unstable situation, and White House policymakers are well aware of it ? which is why they have shown such extreme reluctance to transfer power to the Iraqi people.

The fact is, odds are very high that a fair national election in Iraq would lead to a Shiite takeover and a variant of the Iranian nationalist theocracy that's been in place since the mullahs overthrew the shah, a U.S.-supported dictator.

An Iraqi theocracy, of course, would little resemble the secular democracy promised by the neoconservatives who engineered this neocolonialist venture.

Having failed to find weapons of mass destruction or any of the other justifications for his preemptive war, President Bush is desperate to discover something even more elusive; a representative government in Iraq that will not embarrass or threaten U.S. interests. It won't happen.

Instead, the U.S. will sink deeper into this quagmire, alienating larger sections of the Iraqi population through ever more heavy-handed military responses to the guerrillas' effective hit-and-run tactics.

But don't for a moment accept the logic of the administration's apologists that there is no responsible alternative. There is: Turn this mess back over to the U.N. Security Council ? which was doing a constructive job of disarming and feeding Iraq before its role was abruptly ended by Bush's preemptive invasion.

Under U.N. leadership, it would be possible to marshal a truly international force, including U.S. troops, instead of the current token presence of allies.

The U.N.'s blue helmets have done it before in equally tough situations, and they would certainly be treated with far less suspicion by the Iraqi people than an occupying army and administration run by the world's sole superpower.

Of course, U.N. intervention would require the president to abandon his macho unilateralism and move to embrace his father's model of a new, multinational world order: a world of shared responsibility for keeping the peace, in which the hubris of no single nation is allowed to dominate.

Staying the course, Bush's inherited mantra, might strike a militant patriotic chord, but his last photo op will not be the promised one of cheering crowds welcoming our president. Instead, get ready for seen-before footage of enraged mobs chasing our helicopters out, or of Iraqi demonstrators being gunned down by frightened American 18-year-olds.

Like the swaggering, self-righteous Crusaders of old, we presume to be the savior of the souls of heathens while inevitably destroying our own.
 
Dreadsox said:
Yeah...but you are not talking about me specifically....if this last post was not thee biggest personal attack on me, then I do not know what to think. Come on out and call my a Facist....LOL

:huh:

Now the next time you(and I am not talking about you specifically HIPHOP) want to imply that I am a Nationalist Facisist, whatever, please read the post or PM me.

Thanks.

easy easy. take a shower and cool down :) relax and have fun
 
diamond said:


Hiphop-
I think your perspective would be different if you were raised in our country.
I think maybe mine and Dread's perspective would be different if we were raised in Euro.

I do know one thing we wouldnt be publicly 'mofoing' a world leader outside of our country.

DB9

mister diamond

yes i think there are some differences. anyway, i am sure there are many Americans who see my perspective, just as a few Europeans who might see your perspective.

As to the mofoing: its a tradition here. we love it. anyway, this tradition is alive and well in the U.S. too, remember France and the French?
 
STING2 said:
HIPHOP,

Sorry if this thread does not fit the typical FYM model that says that Bush is the Anti-Christ.

Now you exaggerate. he?s a killer, a cruel neo-conservative death row lover, and he?ll rot in hell for his actions. But to call him Anti-Christ would be a little.. exaggerated, no? He?s just a servant of the Anti-Christ.
 
whenhiphopdrovethebigcars said:


easy easy. take a shower and cool down :) relax and have fun
Don't quote me or refer to my posts and I will. Apparently it is FUN for you to Insult me. I do not like it.No? so Relax, and bother someone else. There are many other posters.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom