Which candidate would enemies of the U.S. least want to be elected President?

[Ishmael]

followed by a French-style retreat...

Man, are you nuts? The French NEVER retreat.

They surrender.

Ishmael

 

[Fawkin'Injun]

What was I thinking?

A retreat requires SOME military discipline!

 

[Borscht]

dup.

 

[Borscht]

What was I thinking?

A retreat requires SOME military discipline!

Yeah, look at how much better the Americans were at it in Vietnam.

And Somalia.

And Beirut.

And Iran.

And ( my personel favourite ) Libya. Gadafi didn't even have to fight, just said 'Hey, never mind Lockerbie, just give me what I want or I might build an atom bomb.'

Pussies.

 

[Borscht]

. . . Of course, knowing that Khaddafi told Italian PM Berlusconi that he saw what happened to Hussein and was afraid puts the current President one big step above the others in my book. . .

You idiot. Gadafi showed the US his WMD programs (much as a mugger shows his victim a knife ) before the attack on Iraq.

 

[Jimi]

Re: Re: Well...

Oh yea, that IS the primary criteria for voting here...

Hey - I wouldn't expect a driver of Bowling Green's best to say differently.

There are a lot of folks within the US who happen to WANT a respectable Chief Exec., not one elected under a cloud, in whom the truth and statements made are as divergent as they are with the current Administration.

WMD's? National Guard service? Grants and support to cronies?

 

[Fawkin'Injun]

Yeah, look at how much better the Americans were at it in Vietnam.

And Somalia.

And Beirut.

And Iran.

And ( my personel favourite ) Libya. Gadafi didn't even have to fight, just said 'Hey, never mind Lockerbie, just give me what I want or I might build an atom bomb.'

Pussies.

You sir, help to MAKE my point...

 

[Jimi]

You sir, help to MAKE my point...

Yup - and I agree with you... the Donald UNpleasance pic suits well.

I don't like Shrubbya, but to tar the US as the perpetual "Bad guy" of the world is WAAAY old...

 

[Borscht]

You sir, help to MAKE my point...

Always glad to be of service.

( As the intern said to the president ).

 

[Fawkin'Injun]

You idiot. Gadafi showed the US his WMD programs (much as a mugger shows his victim a knife ) before the attack on Iraq.

Didn't the shipment we intercepted happen at or before the beginning of the war?

Notice the thawing relations with Iran and the US. Our aid workers are being welcomed as warmly as our troops were in Iraq.

The left is always telling us how it takes a strong hand to rule these people and keep the region stable. It's their main argument fro keeping Saddam and his ilk in power. But now that we are employing the strong hand, why the region won't sit still for that! Hell, you're starting Armeggadon. Now ANYTIME Ya'll on the left start to echo the sentiments of the far right wacho religious-fascists you might want to re-consider your position!

 

[Jimi]

Now ANYTIME Ya'll on the left start to echo the sentiments of the far right wacho religious-fascists you might want to re-consider your position!

Well, you KNOW that it will happen... e.g. Aldolf und Josef Vissarionovich, circa 1939-41

 

[Borscht]

Yup - and I agree with you... the Donald UNpleasance pic suits well.

I don't like Shrubbya, but to tar the US as the perpetual "Bad guy" of the world is WAAAY old...

Not the perpetual bad guy, not by a long chalk. In fact, only a couple of years ago it was the good guy. But then that whole democracy thing broke down for ya, and the rest, as they say, is history.

You make a good point about not confusing a nation with the regime that rules it, especially when that regime is a small, corrupt elite.

On the other hand, of course, whose fault is it that your democracy has been twisted into a device for serving the interests of such an elite ?

 

[Jimi]

Christ, you sodding POM!

Not the perpetual bad guy, not by a long chalk. In fact, only a couple of years ago it was the good guy. But then that whole democracy thing broke down for ya, and the rest, as they say, is history.

You make a good point about not confusing a nation with the regime that rules it, especially when that regime is a small, corrupt elite.

On the other hand, of course, whose fault is it that your democracy has been twisted into a device for serving the interests of such an elite ?

Look at my "title" - EEjit!

 

[Guest]

Re: Christ, you sodding POM!

 

[Borscht]

Notice the thawing relations with Iran and the US. Our aid workers are being welcomed as warmly as our troops were in Iraq. . .

If that was true they'd need an awful lot more bodybags.

 

[Jimi]

Re: Re: Christ, you sodding POM!

Canada is not a democracy?

Apology accepted, Mate. Now go and have a REAL Imperial 20-Oz. Pint of Real Ale for me.

 

[Borscht]

. . . The left is always telling us how it takes a strong hand to rule these people and keep the region stable. It's their main argument fro keeping Saddam and his ilk in power. But now that we are employing the strong hand, why the region won't sit still for that! . . .

Stalin employed a strong hand.

So did Gandhi.

Dubya didn't. All he did was to lash out at a convenient scapegoat, an act of ill considered aggresion that is now (predictably) spiralling out of control.

 

[Borscht]

Re: Christ, you sodding POM!

Look at my "title" - EEjit!

I wasn't talking to you.

 

[Purple Haze]

It's not a matter of producing nuclear warheads. He already has enough enriched plutonium to produce several "dirty bombs", which are capable of killing thousands and rendering thousands of acres od land unliveable for centuries.

He doesn't need jet planes to deliver them. He has a willing and able network of terrorists eager to drop them off whenever they're finished.

And we ahve no reliable way to detect when they'll be ready. We do know for a fact that he has the material to build them. He could build them in a day or a month or a year or, in fairness, not ever. But, every single scrap of information we have indicates that he is willing to use such weapons and he has stated openly that he will use them, and allow them to be used by others.

I'm not necessarily arguing that we need to bomb Iraq into the Stone Age. Hussein has quite ably put them there over the years. I am saying that he is a genocidal student of Stalin who has at his fingertips weapons capable of killing hundreds of thousands of Americans and he is quite willing and able to use them. He's proven that he'll kill hundreds of thousands of his very own countrymen without remorse. He needs to be removed from power - he and his cronies in the government. They need to be replaced with people who are willing to foster democracy and who will not practice genocide nor make attempts to kill Americans.

I honestly don't understand why there's so much hesitation. I see both sides of the argument. I've done as much studying as a layman can possibly do. I do not in any way see how this man can be allowed to remain in power for one second longer. How many more times does anyone need to repeat the litany of offenses this man has committed against millions of people in Iraq and elsewhere?

Words from the informed...

 

[LovetoGiveRoses]

Clark Kent?

I think his name is Dean Clark

 

[LovetoGiveRoses]

Bush is probably the least favorite.

He is disinclined to pander to them and that drives them nuts.

 

[Purple Haze]

Motivation One: Hussein has weapons capable of killing tens or hundreds of thousands of people and a method of delivering them to the United States. That method isn't quite as reliable as he'd like, but it does exist.

Motivation Two: Hussein has states that he is quite willing to use these weapons outside his borders, and has already used them inside his borders.

Motivation Three: He has disobeyed every single resolution passed by the UN since 1991. Those resolutions were the conditions under which the Allies would stop destroying his military.

Motivation Four: Since 1991, Hussein has killed over 180,000 people in his own country, used biological or chemical weapons over 250 times (when he didn't have them, remember?), and destroyed a large part of the liveable land in the southern part of his country.

We're quite honest. We couldn't be more honest about them.

You shouldn't throw words like "ignorant" and "idiot" around...

 

[Borscht]

Bush is probably the least favorite.

He is disinclined to pander to them and that drives them nuts.

You're joking, obviously.

What other American President would have given in to a blackmailing tin-pot dictator like Gadafi ?

Unlike Kim, Gadafi didn't even need to produce a bomb. All he had to do was to threaten to produce one, and suddenly all those Americans Gadafi's boys murdered at Lockerbie were no longer a big deal.

 

[Thumper]

Thumper, you're an idiot of the highest order...

Even REDWAVE makes more sense because his viewpoints are at least firmly rooted in fantasy.

Once again you offer nothing to counter my argument. Just an insult. I consider the source.

Please point out my "fantasy". If you can.



Just because you and GW think the weapons exist doesn't make it so.

 

[Thumper]

Didn't the shipment we intercepted happen at or before the beginning of the war?

Notice the thawing relations with Iran and the US. Our aid workers are being welcomed as warmly as our troops were in Iraq.

The left is always telling us how it takes a strong hand to rule these people and keep the region stable. It's their main argument fro keeping Saddam and his ilk in power. But now that we are employing the strong hand, why the region won't sit still for that! Hell, you're starting Armeggadon. Now ANYTIME Ya'll on the left start to echo the sentiments of the far right wacho religious-fascists you might want to re-consider your position!

Your reading comprehension is abysmal.

The postulation is that Saddam ruled for so long because he was so brutal and ruthless. If he wasn't he would have been ousted long ago. It is also an explanation of why democracy will be a tough sell over there. Get your head out of GW's ass for a few minutes. Tell me how long do you think it will be before we can leave? We're still in Afghanistan.

Get this straight. Hussein was not a genocidal student of Stalin. They were alike though. He was/is a narcissistic, egotistical sociopath. His sole desire was to stay in power and be regarded as a big man in the region. Even if he had to pretend his guns were loaded. (They were at one time...by Reagan)He loved no one but himself. Did you ever think that maybe he wanted the world to believe he had such weapons in order to oinflate his own self importance. Or perceived importance. A man like Hussein believes only power gets respect.

He reminds me of the 4' tall, two bit South American dictator that thinks bigger shoulder boards and more medals make him a powerful man.

Relations with Iran were thawing long before GW took office. George iced them with his "Axis of Evil" drivel. The moderates in Iran had the hardliners by the balls until that happened. The "Axis of Evil" comment just gave a second wind to Khameini.