Room 101: George W. Bush, "because he says so"

Re: Room 101: George W. Bush

What you fail to realize, is that the amount of anti-american sentement is growing throughout the world. Because of our actions in Iraq, more and more people in the middle east are joining together in hatred of America. We can't kill everyone.

The republicans mock Kerry for calling for a 'more sensitive war on terror'. It might not be a bad approach at this point. We're giving the world, and the middle east, more and more fuel for their fire, and soon, everything will begin to explode. If the US could do something other than declare these people a threat, tell everyone we're bombing them, "smoke'em out?" maybe we'd be better off? Most Americans don't even consider the Iraqi people on a human level, they're 'those people over there'. The US forces accidentally bomb a church, or a civilian area, and it's "oops" for America, but tragedy for the people who have lost their friends and family. More fuel for the terrorist fire.

If the US continues in this fashion, all the defense in the world isn't going to do us any good. This country is too free to control everything, and sooner or later, stuff will get very bad for us. Either that, or we evolve into a police state. The patriot act is moving in that direction, anyway.

 

Keenan is the man

[ QUOTE ]
KTallguy said:

Most Americans don't even consider the Iraqi people on a human level, they're 'those people over there'. The US forces accidentally bomb a church, or a civilian area, and it's "oops" for America, but tragedy for the people who have lost their friends and family.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with your whole post. This little part is really important to me. I think it's true and it makes me sad.

If you entered public service, I'd vote for you. I'd volunteer for your campaign. I think this country would benefit from your leading with this kind of thinking. You impress me.

 

Re: Keenan is the man

heheh ... thanks but... I'm just a guy who thinks... I'd rather endorse someone up there. Honestly, it's really hard to actually realize what is happening in Iraq. Watching Farenheight 9/11 gives you a little taste of it, but you can't really understand what people are going through there. You'd like to think that no one in power would be so belligerant in their quest for blood/oil.

Unfortunately, American politics seem to have a way of changing your beliefs. My ideas might not go well with the companies and interest groups lobbying, which probably want something that starts with the letter m and ends with the letter y, and they couldn't care less about the rest of the world. I think that special interests, private funding, shady campaign finance, and deals with companies are what is tearing the US apart. Until we can reform our fiancing system and political system (which was supposed to happen after the last election, but America got rightfully distracted), things will most likely continue in this matter. To be a politicion in this country, you have to 'play the game', and if you try to not play, like Nader, well you'll get 1% of the vote. It's kind of sad. I think networks should give free air time to commericals coming DIRECTLY from each party during the weeks leading up to the election, so that all this money isn't such a big ass deal. God knows that's not happening any time soon.

Anyway, more food for thought: I'm 22 right? As the baby boomer generation gets older, many of them will get older and retire, and the younger workers will have to create an economy to support them right? Well if you think about it, many many troops have been killed in the last few wars we've been involved in as a nation; Vietnam, Korea, and Iraq. So our younger generation is not put in a great position to support them because we are collectively fewer. Now COUPLE this with bad spending policies and cutting away social security, health benefits, and other funding. My generation (and other younger generations) are in deep shit right? The sad thing is, A) my generation barely fricking votes, and B) we don't even know the half of what this spending is getting ourselves into...
The Governments Bad Accounting Practices

http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_bartlett/bartlett200409080940.asp

 

Re: Keenan is the man

Sorry for posting so much, but this is insteresting too, I found it on another forum...

"The Kerry being a flip-flopper is a myth propagated by the Bush campaign. He's never changed his mind on Iraq.

He voted to give Bush power to disarm Iraq, because he thought Iraq was a threat. Shortly after receiving such power, Kerry believed that Bush was handling everything wrong (which he was) by insulting our long-time allies, not letting the weapons inspectors do their job, showing an obvious desire to do nothing other than go to war, not listening to generals regarding troop amounts, not listening to the State department regarding post-war plans, not requesting enough money in the first place.

For the $87 billion (0.3% of which went towards body armor, by the way), he first "voted for it" by sponsoring an amendment which would fund that $87 billion by trimming the tax cuts for the people who needed them the least (those making over $400,000/year). The amendment failed, so he "voted against" the bill that ultimately passed because it didn't propose any way of actually paying for that $87 billion. That's right, the big bad liberal was being fiscally conservative. And yes, there sometimes is something complicated about supporting our troops.

If you repeat a lie often enough, many people will begin to accept it as fact!"

Posted by elchip on fark.com forums
http://forums.fark.com/cgi/fark/comments.pl?IDLink=1114435

Edit: Another interesting link: find out where you stand =P

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

 

Re: Keenan is the man

[ QUOTE ]
KTallguy said:

As the baby boomer generation gets older, many of them will get older and retire, and the younger workers will have to create an economy to support them right? Well if you think about it, many many troops have been killed in the last few wars we've been involved in as a nation; Vietnam, Korea, and Iraq. So our younger generation is not put in a great position to support them because we are collectively fewer. Now COUPLE this with bad spending policies and cutting away social security, health benefits, and other funding. My generation (and other younger generations) are in deep shit right? The sad thing is, A) my generation barely fricking votes, and B) we don't even know the half of what this spending is getting ourselves into...
[

[/ QUOTE ]

You are right that retiring will be very hard in the future because of reckless fiscal policies. You are not quite right when stating that population loss as a result of wars is a reason that we will have dificulty taking care of retirees. In Iraq we have lost 1000. Statistically speaking, that is insignificant. Vietnam= Around 50000 Americans dead, or roughly the number we lose in car accidents annually. Not statistically important in term of effecting the economy. Nam was more of a disaster because of A) billions of $ wasted on napalm, Agent Orange, M-16s etc. and B) 3,000,000 dead Vietnamese people that you can't really place a dollar amout on. Korea only cost about 30,000 US lives, if memory serves, and all those vets are retired now anyway.

It is more accurate to blame the dimming prospects for future retirees on poor government fiscal policy, the weakening of unions, and the increasing stinginess of corporate America. The rich in America are richer than they have ever been while the bottom %40 are in precariously positioned economically. Our course is unsustainable! The conservatives have manipulated our system very successfully in their favor and many will soon reap this shitty harvest.

 

Re: Keenan is the man

Off topic:

[ QUOTE ]
KTallguy said:
Edit: Another interesting link: find out where you stand =P

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL I'm exactly where Ghandi is.

 

Re: Keenan is the man

Well... I kind of tried to put two and two together with the war thing. I know that we lost about 50,000 in nam, but I was guessing that most of them would be younger people. It could make a dent, but you're right, most of the problems will be created by bad preparation on the part of our government.

 

Arab opinion

the US is less loved in the Arab world recently do to our increased presence in the region. I doubt Germany and Japan loved us alot after WW2, but they appreciated the marshall plan, US protection, and US trade. In generations after the occupation of Iraq is over, our efforts to liberate that country from Saddam, and bring democracy to the middle east will be looked on as one of the greatest endeavors of the US.

KTallguy, I'm suprised you thought F-911, made by a far left nut like Micheal Moore, is an accurate representation of the state of American political structure, or the state of pre and post war Iraq. Do you seriously think that the Bush Administration went to war for "blood and oil"?

It's really sad we have such hateful distrustful people in this country like Micheal Moore. What's even worse is when people start to beleive these crazy conspiracy theories. I imagine these are the same people who think Johnson killed Kenedy, and the goverment is hiding little green men out in New Mexico. Well, I guess every country has their share of naive morons who will beleive whatever they here on the television.

In the final analysis, John Kerry still voted against funding the soliders in Iraq that he voted to give the president the power to send there. thats awfully hypocritical, and it was done for political gain during the democratic primaries.

 

Re: Arab opinion

Why do you think highly of democracy?

 

Re: Arab opinion

ok, first off... when I talked about the movie, I talked about the war footage of Iraq. Not the footage that came before it, which was pretty skewed, we know that Iraq wasn't an amazing place before the war. However, the footage of the war, of the civilians crying over their dead loved ones, it paints a more vivid picture of what they are going through then the statistical figures presented on TV. That's what I was talking about.

Oh and by the way, I'm sure you don't really think we went into the nation to liberate the people right? You really think that was the only reason? The administration's information was how accurate? Bush's state of the union address was based on information that was proven false and from a non-reputable source, wasn't it? America was led into this war thinking Iraq was this huge threat, right? Well? Were they really?

If you'd read the post, maybe you'd get it. Kerry didn't vote for the bill; he voted to amend it so that we could actually pay for it by taking some money back from the upper class. It might seem hypocritical to you to vote against something to fund our troops, but at the same time, where's the money man? Where's the damned money? Look at our country, look at the previous link (from a conservative republican publication, no less), we're gonna be paying for this stuff for years. And under this administration, the rich are certainly not paying for anything.

On a lighter note, this is quite funny. Keep in mind that this was written in January, 2001. http://chak.org/pages/onion/bush_nightmare.html

 

Democracy?

what a strange question? Democracy is the only system of goverment that allows the people to decide their fate. Democracy is the freedom of the populace to decide the fate of their nation. Anyone who wants that freedom would like democracy. unless of course you want to be ruled by a monarch, or a dictator. Does anyone not like the freedom of self determination, the freedom to choose your leader. I've never encountered a person who woun't won't these freedoms.

"Freedom is not the United States gift to the people of the middle east, freedom is the almighty Gods gift to the entire world."-George Bush

 

Re: Arab opinion

Oh, I see what you mean about the graphic pictures of Iraqi dead. We never show that on American TV. Those images are both real and disturbing. Unfortunately war has unintended consequences.

I thought you were referring to the way Mr. Moore depicted Iraq as some kind of utopian society where everyone was happy, didn't he show children running and playing with kites.

 

Re: Democracy?

[ QUOTE ]
IamthePope said:

what a strange question? Democracy is the only system of goverment that allows the people to decide their fate. Democracy is the freedom of the populace to decide the fate of their nation. Anyone who wants that freedom would like democracy. unless of course you want to be ruled by a monarch, or a dictator. Does anyone not like the freedom of self determination, the freedom to choose your leader. I've never encountered a person who woun't won't these freedoms.

"Freedom is not the United States gift to the people of the middle east, freedom is the almighty Gods gift to the entire world."-George Bush

[/ QUOTE ]

freedom to choose. freedom to decide. choose based on what? decide based on what?

influences come from everywhere and people can easily be swayed to choose one way or the other. democracy can be manipulated.

sometimes the populace isn't fit to decide for the nation. sometimes people aren't fit to decide their fate either. what would you say to a prisoner?

and as for bush's quote: God never gave us freedom. He gave us free will.

 

Re: Democracy?

BTW, does anyone else find the more pervasive presence of God in our politics the least bit disturbing ? Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with believing in God, but when God tells you to start a war, isn't that the same retoric that the islamic fundamentalists are using to bomb our nation ?

What ever happened to the separation of church and state?

Oh and BTW, Pope, you ignored half of my post. You're really good at that .

 

Re: Democracy?

sup lee.



i have to come to your house again and pwn you .

 

Bush is a threat to us and the world

[ QUOTE ]
IamthePope said:

Unfortunately war has unintended consequences.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that's exactly why war is a bad idea.


I will pretend that the only reason we went to Iraq was to get rid of Saddam...

"Hey, Saddam, you asshole. You kill your own people with chemical agents. You keep all the money your country gets from selling oil (ignore present day sanctions) and let your people starve. You're a menace to the world. We're gonna fix this. We're gonna bomb your country and kill you (unless you're fortunate enough to get captured) and your family."

We don't like him killing, so we kill his family. I think there are huge problems with this. I think the problem is magnified by Bush saying we we're RIGHT TO DO THIS! WE'RE RIGHT TO HAVE GONE TO IRAQ!


Let's go back to a possible reality now...

All the European and Asian countries go to the U.N. for a meeting (of course, the USA doesn't attend)...

"Hey, you know, in America, husbands rape and abuse their wives, they pay women less than men for the same jobs, they squander the world's oil in their big SUVs, and they bombed Iraq cause they hate Saddam (even though they put him in power) because they thought him to be a threat - they had no proof.

We don't like this at all. We'd like to get together and bomb Washington D.C. in hopes of killing Bush. He's a threat to the world. He ignores us all and goes on his own to attack other countries because he wants to (he says he's protecting his country). His country is LOADED WITH WMDs and frankly, we're afraid he'll use em. The USA certainly bombed the shit outta Japan with nukes and firebombs before. Bush is the kind of maverick that might do something like that again."

The countries agree, Washington is bombed, people die.


According to how I've read you view Bush and his policies, the above fits in with your thinking. Everyone else in the world will say, "gosh, isn't the world better off without Bush? Yeah, we accidentally flattended all the cities in Texas, but that was an unintended consequence. And we've read on VFDC that some IamThePope guy passes that off as a usual thing, and he's ok with it... hey doesn't he live in Texas?"

 

Re: Bush is a threat to us and the world

[ QUOTE ]
Plague said:

[ QUOTE ]
IamthePope said:

Unfortunately war has unintended consequences.

[/ QUOTE ]

oh man, that was the biggest bucket of correct thinking ive seen for a while on these forums.
good going plaque

I think that's exactly why war is a bad idea.


I will pretend that the only reason we went to Iraq was to get rid of Saddam...

"Hey, Saddam, you asshole. You kill your own people with chemical agents. You keep all the money your country gets from selling oil (ignore present day sanctions) and let your people starve. You're a menace to the world. We're gonna fix this. We're gonna bomb your country and kill you (unless you're fortunate enough to get captured) and your family."

We don't like him killing, so we kill his family. I think there are huge problems with this. I think the problem is magnified by Bush saying we we're RIGHT TO DO THIS! WE'RE RIGHT TO HAVE GONE TO IRAQ!


Let's go back to a possible reality now...

All the European and Asian countries go to the U.N. for a meeting (of course, the USA doesn't attend)...

"Hey, you know, in America, husbands rape and abuse their wives, they pay women less than men for the same jobs, they squander the world's oil in their big SUVs, and they bombed Iraq cause they hate Saddam (even though they put him in power) because they thought him to be a threat - they had no proof.

We don't like this at all. We'd like to get together and bomb Washington D.C. in hopes of killing Bush. He's a threat to the world. He ignores us all and goes on his own to attack other countries because he wants to (he says he's protecting his country). His country is LOADED WITH WMDs and frankly, we're afraid he'll use em. The USA certainly bombed the shit outta Japan with nukes and firebombs before. Bush is the kind of maverick that might do something like that again."

The countries agree, Washington is bombed, people die.


According to how I've read you view Bush and his policies, the above fits in with your thinking. Everyone else in the world will say, "gosh, isn't the world better off without Bush? Yeah, we accidentally flattended all the cities in Texas, but that was an unintended consequence. And we've read on VFDC that some IamThePope guy passes that off as a usual thing, and he's ok with it... hey doesn't he live in Texas?"

[/ QUOTE ]

woah. best use of common sense award goes to plague!!!
*applause*
good going plaque!!!

 

Re: Democracy?

I think god has always been made reference to in political speeches, though recently politicians mention god less and less. just go look at any of Roosevelt's speeches from WW2 or Abe lincolns from the civil war. I don't recall george bush ever saying god told him to invade Iraq. I know Roosevelt made frequent reference to god, not sure about truman or Johnson. Anyone know when invoking gods name in political speeches went out of fashion.

Plague you logic is flawed in that George Bush, wasn't a dictator, didn't use poison gas on, or invade his neighbors for oil and territorial gain. United States is the oldest democratic nation and is responsible for safeguarding and spreading democracy during two world wars, and the cold war. This is a grossly inaccurate, and misrepresented analogy. to suggest that the US and George Bush are responsible for the same kind of horrific acts as saddam hussein caused is a complete misrepresentation of the truth

By the way George Bush is still winning in the polls. In the critical state of Ohio, he's winning by 14 pts. Vote George Bush in November.
http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/Vote2004/bush_campaign_poll_040909.html?CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312

 

Re: Democracy?

[ QUOTE ]
IamthePope said:

I think god has always been made reference to in political speeches, though recently politicians mention god less and less. just go look at any of Roosevelt's speeches from WW2 or Abe lincolns from the civil war. I don't recall george bush ever saying god told him to invade Iraq. I know Roosevelt made frequent reference to god, not sure about truman or Johnson. Anyone know when invoking gods name in political speeches went out of fashion.

Plague you logic is flawed in that George Bush, wasn't a dictator, didn't use poison gas on, or invade his neighbors for oil and territorial gain. United States is the oldest democratic nation and is responsible for safeguarding and spreading democracy during two world wars, and the cold war. This is a grossly inaccurate, and misrepresented analogy. to suggest that the US and George Bush are responsible for the same kind of horrific acts as saddam hussein caused is a complete misrepresentation of the truth

By the way George Bush is still winning in the polls. In the critical state of Ohio, he's winning by 14 pts. Vote George Bush in November.
http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/Vote2004/bush_campaign_poll_040909.html?CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, shit, I was gonna hack apart the quote to just respond to specific points, but eventually the whole thing just became so tempting for a target.

Actually, it has become MORE fashionable to talk about God during political speeches. Look at Bush. Every time he praises God on national television, or says that God wills us to do whatever, his ratings increase 2 points. It's almost a proven fact. The man may truly be religious, but it's apalling that his religion nets him as many votes, if not more, than his competency as leader.

Plague's logic isn't flawed. He didn't say Bush isn't a dictator, or gassed his neighbors. He did use all of the 'offenses' that take place in the US to drum up a hypothetical situation. One that could very well happen. So please remove your blinders for a moment, before the train hits you.

#3: I am doing my best in Ohio to make sure he DOESNT win. The last thing this country needs is another 4 years of warfare. By the time I'm 30, there won't BE an America to come home to.

 

Re: Democracy?

It is possible that Bush could win in November. This would be a new low for America. The sensible people of the world are looking at us and wondering how we can be so fucked up. Here's how the rest of the world feels about the election:

Kerry by a Landslide!

Changing gears here: To anyone with any common sense it is obvious that Bush has not made us safer against terrorists. The undeniable fact is that as a result of this unprovoked war in Iraq we are

1) less able to put resources into protecting America

2) we have pissed of the Muslim world and transformed moderate Muslims into terrorists

This is Juan Cole with a better explanation:

[ QUOTE ]
A sound bite from President Bush on Mond ay strikes me as emblematic of the country's current crisis. He said,


"It is a ridiculous notion to assert that, because the United States is on the offensive, more people want to hurt us," he said. "We’re on the offensive because people do want to hurt us."


Let me try to help Mr. Bush with this problem. The number of persons in the Muslim world who wanted to inflict direct damage on the US homeland in 2000 was tiny. Even within al-Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri's theory of "hitting the distant enemy before the near" (i.e. striking the US rather than Egypt or Saudi Arabia) was controversial.

The Muslim world was largely sympathetic to the US after the 9/11 attacks. Iranians held candlelight vigils, and governments and newspapers condemned terrorism. Bush's
unprovoked attack on Iraq, however, turned people against the US. The brutal, selfish, exploitative occupation, the vicious siege of Fallujah, the tank battles in front of the shrine of Ali, a vicar of the Prophet, Abu Ghuraib, and other public relations disasters have done their work.

The US was not always universally despised in the Middle East. In some countries, large majorities thought well of the US! Lawrence Pintak notes:

"The latest survey results out of the Middle East show that America's favorability rating is now, essentially, zero. That's down from as high as 75 percent in some Muslim countries just four years ago."


Al-Ahram explains further:


"In the first poll, which surveyed six Arab nations and was commissioned by the Washington-based Arab American Institute (AAI), the overall approval ratings of the US ranged between an unprecedented low of two per cent in Egypt and a high of 20 per cent in Lebanon. Those holding a favourable view of the US in Saudi Arabia were four per cent, 11 per cent in Morocco, 14 per cent in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and 15 per cent in Jordan. That marked a relatively sharp decline compared to a similar poll held by AAI two years ago, and indicated that the main reason behind the fall was the policies of the present US administration led by the George W Bush."


The respondents in the poll did not dislike the US because of values like freedom and democracy. Middle Easterners have even more faith in democracy than do Americans. They dislike the US because of its policies. According to the recent Zogby poll, they had three main concerns: The US-supported persecution of the Palestinians, the US occupation of Iraq, and US plans to dominate and humiliate Arabs in general. It is policies that they hate, and want changed, not US values.

So, Mr. Bush, that is how America "being on the offense" can in fact inspire hatred of the US. Your premise is simply incorrect. In some Middle Eastern countries, the US favorability rating was as high as 75% in the last year of the Clinton administration. They didn't start off necessarily disliking the US. Even after the Afghanistan war, a third of Jordanians thought well of the US. Now almost no one anywhere does. These changes in attitude (which greatly benefit al-Qaeda) are mostly the result of your war on, and occupation of Iraq.

All this is not to factor in the vast fall in prestige and esteem for the US among European publics, our most steadfast allies for half a century. That you do not understand that being unnecessarily and arrogantly "on the offensive" is offensive to the rest of the world and actually hurts US security is extremely worrying.


[/ QUOTE ]

This logic is not hard to grasp, but it may be too much for many Americans. The Bush Administration, by exploiting ignorance and intellectual laziness on the part of many Americans, has, through force of repetition and with the help of a compliant media, convinced a lot of people that conquering Iraq was somehow an appropriate response to 9/11.

I have never been as dismayed by the state of my country as I have been during the years of the Bush Administration. It's as though there is no objective reality. There is nothing that can't be done or spun. How bad does it have to get for people to realize the shit we are sinking in?