View Full Version : Is the man wise?
Royster1911
22-Nov-07, 20:27
It has been reported that Mr Bush is thinking of an air strike against Iran. What are your views and what do you think the consequencies of such a strike could be?[evil]
Mr Bush has always been a warmonger american people dont want their troops in iraq never mind iran but he will likely go ahead with it.
Completely out of his tree! The Americans are always doing this - thinking with their big guns instead of with their brains. They think that if they throw enough ordinance at a country it will just lie down and cry. This time they should be allowed to go it alone, they always lose out.
Completely out of his tree! The Americans are always doing this - thinking with their big guns instead of with their brains. They think that if they throw enough ordinance at a country it will just lie down and cry. This time they should be allowed to go it alone, they always lose out.
Ricco, I am sorry, I think your generalisation of Americans is wrong, we have American .Ogers and I know they get upset at posts like this. They dont like G W either and cannot wait to get rid of him and his government. Its not every American citizen that thinks like Bush!!!!
You titled this thread: "Is the man wise?". Then I open the thread and it's a question about G.W.Bush. Is it acidic sarcasm or are you being thunderously obtuse?;):lol:
He said he's a war president.... more like a daft president if you ask me.
Royster1911
22-Nov-07, 23:36
You titled this thread: "Is the man wise?". Then I open the thread and it's a question about G.W.Bush. Is it acidic sarcasm or are you being thunderously obtuse?;):lol:
Hmmm....let me think....ah, yes and yes!
Ricco, I am sorry, I think your generalisation of Americans is wrong, we have American .Ogers and I know they get upset at posts like this. They dont like G W either and cannot wait to get rid of him and his government. Its not every American citizen that thinks like Bush!!!!
True. Americans aren't responsible for the actions of Bush, America isn't a democracy.
Completely out of his tree! The Americans are always doing this - thinking with their big guns instead of with their brains. They think that if they throw enough ordinance at a country it will just lie down and cry. This time they should be allowed to go it alone, they always lose out.
I agree with your first sentence, Ricco.
Ricco, I am sorry, I think your generalisation of Americans is wrong, we have American .Ogers and I know they get upset at posts like this. They dont like G W either and cannot wait to get rid of him and his government. Its not every American citizen that thinks like Bush!!!!
Thanks for that, golach. It needed to be said!
Lolabelle
23-Nov-07, 05:08
Why am I not suprised???? [evil]
How sad that we can't even respect or expect any sensible behaviour from the world leaders.
Fred: "True. Americans aren't responsible for the actions of Bush, America isn't a democracy" What countries are Fred?
My own opinion is that Israel will wait a while then do an air-raid on the facilities there - after all they are the one's who will be on the end of any 'perceived' threat.
Why isn't the USA a democracy?:confused They vote, don't they?
It would be interesting to see/know which coutries FRED considered actually have democracy.
Why isn't the USA a democracy?:confused They vote, don't they?
Yes they vote, then five unelected Conservative Supreme Court Judges make the person who got least votes president.
Come on Fred that's a couple of us asking!
1. Fred: "True. Americans aren't responsible for the actions of Bush, America isn't a democracy" What countries are Fred?
2. (Scotsboy) It would be interesting to see/know which coutries FRED considered actually have democracy
It would be interesting to see/know which coutries FRED considered actually have democracy.
The name is fred, not FRED, not Chemical Fred.
Strange how people who can't handle the truth revert to a mental age of twelve.
Yes they vote, then five unelected Conservative Supreme Court Judges make the person who got least votes president.
Surely the judges are there to see that an election is run fairly and squarely? Yes, the USA is a democracy. The UK has an independent judiciary as well, it is essential for democracy.
Surely the judges are there to see that an election is run fairly and squarely? Yes, the USA is a democracy. The UK has an independent judiciary as well, it is essential for democracy.
Democracy and an election run fairly and squarely is when the person with most votes gets to be president.
The name is fred, not FRED, not Chemical Fred.
Strange how people who can't handle the truth revert to a mental age of twelve.
Apologies fred, did't realise that CAPS LOCK would cause offence. Not sure if me not being able to handle the truth is akin to you not being able to answer a question - but I would still be interested in which countries you consider to have democracy.
Apologies fred, did't realise that CAPS LOCK would cause offence. Not sure if me not being able to handle the truth is akin to you not being able to answer a question - but I would still be interested in which countries you consider to have democracy.
Yes, not having an argument for what I say about the country which is the subject of the thread I'm sure you would like to broaden it out and see if you can argue against what I say about one of the many other countries in the world.
Democracy and an election run fairly and squarely is when the person with most votes gets to be president.
The same could happen here, but there must be rules within every electoral system and Bush was legally elected to be the President, so the USA is a democracy afterall.
It has been reported that Mr Bush is thinking of an air strike against Iran. What are your views and what do you think the consequencies of such a strike could be?[evil]
There is nothing illegal about drawing up military plans against a country.
However, if there was strong evidence to suggest that Iran was planning to build a nuclear bomb then there would be a clear mandate for an airstrike upon those nuclear sites. The next step would be to weigh up the consequences of allowing a nuclear armed theocracy to yield its power against a country that it has openly spoke of eradicating.
The same could happen here, but there must be rules within every electoral system and Bush was legally elected to be the President, so the USA is a democracy afterall.
No, giving the power to the person blackmailing most Florida, drug gateway to the United States, Supreme Court Judges is not democracy.
Giving power to the person who gets most votes is democracy.
We just suspended Pakistan from the Commonwealth for doing what Bush did.
We just suspended Pakistan from the Commonwealth for doing what Bush did.
You've lost the plot good style now, Pakistan isn't a democracy. Bush got the most votes in Florida and won the election, how did drug dealing have owt to do with it?
No, giving the power to the person blackmailing most Florida, drug gateway to the United States, Supreme Court Judges is not democracy.
Giving power to the person who gets most votes is democracy.
We just suspended Pakistan from the Commonwealth for doing what Bush did.
Sorry for butting in on your debate but I'm a bit confused. Who did get the most votes fred?
Sorry for butting in on your debate but I'm a bit confused. Who did get the most votes fred?
Impossible to say.
When the voting ended the media were reporting an overwhelming Gore victory based on exit polls which are known to have been accurate in the past. The actual results showed Bush just the winner but close enough for a recount. When the Bush majority had dwindled to around 500 votes the Supreme Court stopped the recount with a lot of votes still to be counted.
Yes, not having an argument for what I say about the country which is the subject of the thread I'm sure you would like to broaden it out and see if you can argue against what I say about one of the many other countries in the world.
So you can't answer it then - thought so. Thanks.
So you can't answer it then - thought so. Thanks.
The American 2000 election I was following the race and listening to the results as they came in. I was discussing the events with people in America on the internet as they happened. I followed the press reports from around the world on the Florida controversy and I've been seeing the information I had updated regularly in the years since.
You are right, I don't have that sort of knowledge about every country in the world.
The American 2000 election I was following the race and listening to the results as they came in. I was discussing the events with people in America on the internet as they happened. I followed the press reports from around the world on the Florida controversy and I've been seeing the information I had updated regularly in the years since.
You are right, I don't have that sort of knowledge about every country in the world.
Sorry fred, I didn't realise you were only talking about the RESULT of the 2000 election, and that you considered the outcome undemocratic. I thought you said:
True. Americans aren't responsible for the actions of Bush, America isn't a democracy.
that America (I assume you mean the United States of America) wasn't a democracy. Hence my question, sorry for the misunderstnading. Glad you think that the electoral college in the USA is democratic.
Re: Fred: "Glad you think that the electoral college in the USA is democratic"
Me too.
cullbucket
23-Nov-07, 18:29
You titled this thread: "Is the man wise?". Then I open the thread and it's a question about G.W.Bush. Is it acidic sarcasm or are you being thunderously obtuse?;):lol:
I think he means "wise" pronounced weise in the caithness way - also means "right in the heid" i.e. Is the man right in the heid?
Also used in the popular saying "no right wise"
A bunch of people like that could be called "no-wisers"
I am only scared of two things in life....the first is Flying....the second is George Dubya Bush......this man is a retard and he could very easily cause WW3, i know quite a few Americans from my years spent online....and none of them think that Dubya is a good or worthy president, he scares them aswell, history will tell a very sad tale of his time in office, i am not politically orientated at all....but even i will breathe a sigh of relief when he is removed as president.
Giz
Sorry fred, I didn't realise you were only talking about the RESULT of the 2000 election, and that you considered the outcome undemocratic. I thought you said:
The Supreme Court decision wasn't the only irregularity in the 2000 or the 2004 presidential elections, both were well and truly rigged. Bush wasn't elected by the American people, it was a coup d'etat along with his actions since to give him the power to override congress and the firing of government officials who may have investigated his voting fraud.
In another thread I pointed out to golach that Britain being a democracy we all share the responsibility for our government's actions, in this thread I was just saying to golach that the same doesn't apply to Americans and Bush.
Camel Spider
23-Nov-07, 19:47
The name is fred, not FRED, not Chemical Fred.
Strange how people who can't handle the truth revert to a mental age of twelve.
Fred .. I would like to apologise to you on thread for referring to you as Chemical Fred.
As we all know Chemical Ali was the nickname given to an Iraqi spokesman from Saddam's regime who claimed he was right 100% of the time. He refused to accept any other point of view, facts and figures or evidence and would maintain he was right even when it was patently obvious and/or he was proved wrong. He also displayed a legendary ability to dodge legitimate questions and would rubbish and insult anyone who dared to cross examine his claims.
And that certainly doesnt sound like you at all .. I dont know what I was thinking.
:roll:
Boozeburglar
23-Nov-07, 19:48
In another thread I pointed out to golach that Britain being a democracy we all share the responsibility for our government's actions, in this thread I was just saying to golach that the same doesn't apply to Americans and Bush.
What do you mean by all?
Fred .. I would like to apologise to you on thread for referring to you as Chemical Fred.
As we all know Chemical Ali was the nickname given to an Iraqi spokesman from Saddam's regime who claimed he was right 100% of the time.
:roll:
I think you will find that he was nicknamed 'Comical Ali', still, you would be right anyhow.
Jeemag_USA
23-Nov-07, 20:06
I don't think the USA is a true democracy. Yes people get to vote every four years but there vote has no consequences on the USA's wider plan for the world because they will do what they want. The Judiciary thing, well several worthy cases were taken to the judiciary after the vote was rumbled in Florida and many other places and they were all thrown out, all of them were black politicians who claimed that a large part of each of their electorate were removed during the voting and their votes did not count or were not counted.
Also US governments use propaganda and media manipulation to encourage people that what they are doing is very necessary, this is not becoming of a democracy, not sure what it makes it but its something else thats for sure.
If the USA government decides to go into Iran and the people protest and they go in anyway, then they do so against the will of the people, which is undemocratic.
When a government puts a plan forward to go into Iraq and the people don't want it, but they get to do it because there is enough members in the house on both sides who have enough money invested in enough companies wether they be oil companies, supply companies or weapons manufactures that they will back it up despite the wishes of the public who elected them. Undemocratic.
The word Democracy comes from the ancient greek for "rule by the people"?
In another thread I pointed out to golach that Britain being a democracy we all share the responsibility for our government's actions, in this thread I was just saying to golach that the same doesn't apply to Americans and Bush.
fred, I never asked for you to point anything out to me. I have no need to go in the direction you and your ilk go, I dont go around insulting the American people as you do.
fred, I never asked for you to point anything out to me. I have no need to go in the direction you and your ilk go, I dont go around insulting the American people as you do.
When did I insult the American people?
What do you mean by all?
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=all
Also US governments use propaganda and media manipulation to encourage people that what they are doing is very necessary, this is not becoming of a democracy, not sure what it makes it but its something else thats for sure.
They use propaganda and media manipulation to sway elections as well, the swiftboating of John Kerry was a deciding factor in the 2004 election.
Ricco, I am sorry, I think your generalisation of Americans is wrong, we have American .Ogers and I know they get upset at posts like this. They dont like G W either and cannot wait to get rid of him and his government. Its not every American citizen that thinks like Bush!!!!
Sorry, you're right I was generalising and I do owe many of our American amigos an apology. I was simply thinking of Bush and those hawks in gov't that keep the military perspective, not our general American brothers and sisters. :confused
When this war first started there were many here singing Bush's and the war's praises so it nice to see so many people coming to their senses and speaking out against Bush.
Royster1911
23-Nov-07, 23:43
When this war first started there were many here singing Bush's and the war's praises so it nice to see so many people coming to their senses and speaking out against Bush.
Seems my thread has been taken over by politics, I was questioning, in your opinion, what the conciquencies of an air strike on Iran would result in? We all have our opinions of Mr Bush but this is not so much about him and his possie but the innocent who might / will suffer. Will Scottish / Brittish troops be sucked in? God forbid it![evil]
Bobinovich
24-Nov-07, 00:12
That really depends on Gordon Brown's view of the Anglo-American relationship, but there is no doubt (in my mind anyway) that the British public would not stand for involvement in yet another war.
Seems my thread has been taken over by politics, I was questioning, in your opinion, what the conciquencies of an air strike on Iran would result in? We all have our opinions of Mr Bush but this is not so much about him and his possie but the innocent who might / will suffer. Will Scottish / Brittish troops be sucked in? God forbid it![evil]
Fair point. I think it we were wrong to invade Iraq and there is even less reason to invade Iran. Our troops are giving their lives in Iraq and unless Brown has more backbone than Blair and says "NO" to Bush out troops are going to suffer.
Fair point. I think it we were wrong to invade Iraq and there is even less reason to invade Iran. Our troops are giving their lives in Iraq and unless Brown has more backbone than Blair and says "NO" to Bush out troops are going to suffer.I don't think it was a question of Blair having no backbone. I think he believed he was doing what had to be done in the circumstances and he has stated many times since then that he thought he was doing the right thing and that he would do the same again. I won't pass judgement as to whether it takes backbone to be as stubborn as he seems to be, but I will at least disapprove of what he actually did, whether he is fooling himself or not.
I see no reason to invade Iran if only because it would most likely lead to a worse mess than Iraq. There are better and more constructive humanitarian reasons for not doing so and I would prefer to stick to these.
To get back to the topic of the thread I think Bush is as dangerous as ever because he has only one more year to make his final mark on history. The good news is that there has been a sea change in the attitude of the American people in the last two or three years and the media, with the abominable exception of Fox, are no longer on his side. At this point in time I can't see past a Democrat occupying the White House in 2009 but a lot can happen between now and then. Perhaps someone who has spent more time over there than I have in the last two years will disagree but I think the Bush era is well and truly on its way out.
Moi x
They use propaganda and media manipulation to sway elections as well, the swiftboating of John Kerry was a deciding factor in the 2004 election.
That is just election politics, something that non-democracies never experience.:roll:
Back to the consequences of an airstrike, probably a bit of sabre rattling and then it will all be forgotten. If we don't, then (assuming Iran has a nuclear device and there was good evidence for it)what are the consequences of not an airstrike? Then that will be a war that we don't want to get involved in...
When did I insult the American people?
I don't think I have seen you directly insult the American people, fred - however I think many of them would be insulted if you told them they didn't live in a democracy:)
IF there is a real threat then an air strike may be advisable. The threat has to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, after all we seen what happened in Iraq with WMD. I would be behind Mr Bush and Mr Brown if this was the case.If not then i would take a bit of persuasion. A little patience and less haste is what is required. But then again it is hard to have dialogue with the Iranian president as he is a wee bit nuts ;)
I don't think I have seen you directly insult the American people, fred - however I think many of them would be insulted if you told them they didn't live in a democracy:)
It was them who told me.
Here, just see what happens to someone who even questions the validity of the 2004 elections.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqAVvlyVbag&feature=related
A free democracy?
:eek: Crikey , thats on par with the woman in Russia who was silenced very swiftly with a injection for speak out if i recall overthe russian sub disaster.
Boozeburglar
24-Nov-07, 14:25
In another thread I pointed out to golach that Britain being a democracy we all share the responsibility for our government's actions, in this thread I was just saying to golach that the same doesn't apply to Americans and Bush.
What do you mean by all?
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=all
In fairness I gave you the benefit of the doubt and asked you to clarify what you meant by 'all'.
You have given me a characteristically condescending response.
What I see in your current postings, Fred, is the same pub bore I have previously mentioned. You are quick to sound off in any thread that you can squeeze your pet subjects into, but all too often your contributions are contradictory. Your arguments are practised and too narrow in focus to be of benefit to the discussion. You seem ill prepared to see the wider picture, no matter how many times you are shown it.
In reference to this particular issue, you are attempting to suggest that we live in a Direct Democracy, and are able to express our will in anticipation of all our Government's actions.
We live in a Representative Democracy, and as such anyone who did not vote Labour in has certainly no reason to accept responsibility for any of the actions of the Government.
Yes, MPs from other parties voted to send troops to Iraq, but all MPs are free to vote as they like, not merely according to the wishes of their parties or constituents.
Unless we have a system where every voting individual is able to contribute to every decision your statement is patently false, and betrays a lack of understanding of our political system.
You hold forth all the time about political issues.
Do some reading.
Even better, go and get involved.
I leave most of my ranting to meetings and campaigns in which I am involved in the real world, where change can be affected.
Someone with the energy and enthusiasm you display should be educating themselves and getting involved.
Right now you are nothing more than a virtual pub bore sitting at the end of the virtual bar, on their own, spewing forth an incoherent series of assertions. In the short term you will find some willing ears, but you rely on plenty of passing trade to ensure fresh ears, as those familiar with your invective shut firm, dreading their round lest they encounter more of the usual as they visit the bar.
Margaret M.
24-Nov-07, 15:38
When did I insult the American people?
I do recall your insulting us -- something along the lines of us being mindless twits who blindly follow our government. But not to worry, Fred, you're an equal opportunity insulter. You insult anyone who does not see an issue as you do. Although I agree with you from time to time, I have grown tired of hearing how only you can accurately interpret reports and how only you know "the truth".
It was them who told me.
Here, just see what happens to someone who even questions the validity of the 2004 elections.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqAVvlyVbag&feature=related
A free democracy?
Fred, this is nothing more than university security using excessive force to remove a student who was hogging the mike. He was going to be removed regardless of what he was questioning. Is this what you use to conclude that the U.S. is not a democracy?
You obviously read much on the Internet but your extreme bias prevents you from seeing things from all sides.
I do recall your insulting us -- something along the lines of us being mindless twits who blindly follow our government.
Quote where I said that.
It was them who told me.
Here, just see what happens to someone who even questions the validity of the 2004 elections.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqAVvlyVbag&feature=related
A free democracy?
I'm sure you mean SOME of them;)
I've seen the clip before, not sure if he was tasered for questioning the validity, or refusing to go......but that was covered in another thread. Tell me Jeemag - you been tasered for questioning democracy in the US of A?
Royster1911
24-Nov-07, 17:09
I'm sure you mean SOME of them;)
I've seen the clip before, not sure if he was tasered for questioning the validity, or refusing to go......but that was covered in another thread. Tell me Jeemag - you been tasered for questioning democracy in the US of A?
The men in black are on their way as we speak....Run and HIDE:confused
Jeemag_USA
24-Nov-07, 17:43
I'm sure you mean SOME of them;)
I've seen the clip before, not sure if he was tasered for questioning the validity, or refusing to go......but that was covered in another thread. Tell me Jeemag - you been tasered for questioning democracy in the US of A?
Why are you bringing me into it? I am very careful of what I talk about over here and to whom I talk about it with, most of my in-law family in america share my political views and I have some friends who I can talk about issues with, but still I am very careful, thats the way it is, I am an immigrant and a green card holder, so I watch my mouth, not for my own sake but for that of my family, my wife and son who are both american citizens and am sure don't want to see me lose my residency rights. And I can also assure you there is a lot of people in the USA who can see they are not living in a free democracy. Its plainly obvious, to think otherwise would be to call americans unintellegent. You don't need to go very far where I live to find the "if you don't like it go home" attitude that rules some americans political ideals. That attitude clearly displays a "not up for disussion" standpoint, one which is mirrored by the Bush regime.
I don't think it was a question of Blair having no backbone. I think he believed he was doing what had to be done in the circumstances and he has stated many times since then that he thought he was doing the right thing and that he would do the same again. I won't pass judgement as to whether it takes backbone to be as stubborn as he seems to be, but I will at least disapprove of what he actually did, whether he is fooling himself or not.
I don't believe Blair is stupid so he had to know there were no weapons and he chose to believe Bush and co and not the UN experts and now our troops are paying the price.
I agree with everything you are saying here:
I see no reason to invade Iran if only because it would most likely lead to a worse mess than Iraq. There are better and more constructive humanitarian reasons for not doing so and I would prefer to stick to these.
To get back to the topic of the thread I think Bush is as dangerous as ever because he has only one more year to make his final mark on history. The good news is that there has been a sea change in the attitude of the American people in the last two or three years and the media, with the abominable exception of Fox, are no longer on his side. At this point in time I can't see past a Democrat occupying the White House in 2009 but a lot can happen between now and then. Perhaps someone who has spent more time over there than I have in the last two years will disagree but I think the Bush era is well and truly on its way out.
Moi x
To answer the original title of the thread "Is the man wise?"
To get back to the topic of the thread I think Bush is as dangerous as ever because he has only one more year to make his final mark on history. The good news is that there has been a sea change in the attitude of the American people in the last two or three years and the media, with the abominable exception of Fox, are no longer on his side. At this point in time I can't see past a Democrat occupying the White House in 2009 but a lot can happen between now and then. Perhaps someone who has spent more time over there than I have in the last two years will disagree but I think the Bush era is well and truly on its way out.
Moi x
Let's hope he isn't planning on going out with a bang.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/28181
Let's hope he isn't planning on going out with a bang.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/28181
It was Lex Luther who did it.
Why are you bringing me into it? I am very careful of what I talk about over here and to whom I talk about it with, most of my in-law family in america share my political views and I have some friends who I can talk about issues with, but still I am very careful, thats the way it is, I am an immigrant and a green card holder, so I watch my mouth, not for my own sake but for that of my family, my wife and son who are both american citizens and am sure don't want to see me lose my residency rights. And I can also assure you there is a lot of people in the USA who can see they are not living in a free democracy. Its plainly obvious, to think otherwise would be to call americans unintellegent. You don't need to go very far where I live to find the "if you don't like it go home" attitude that rules some americans political ideals. That attitude clearly displays a "not up for disussion" standpoint, one which is mirrored by the Bush regime.
I "brought you into it" Jeemag as you earlier indicated you did not think the USA was a democracy - you have stated this, was simply asking if you were tasered for your views?
As for the "if you dont like it go home attitude" I have found that to be present in nearly every country I have visited.........it is certainly alive and well in Caithness!
Margaret M.
24-Nov-07, 19:46
Quote where I said that.
It was on another thread some time ago -- I have no desire to wade back through the posts to find it.
IF there is a real threat then an air strike may be advisable. The threat has to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, after all we seen what happened in Iraq with WMD. I would be behind Mr Bush and Mr Brown if this was the case.If not then i would take a bit of persuasion. A little patience and less haste is what is required. But then again it is hard to have dialogue with the Iranian president as he is a wee bit nuts ;)
No, it isn't hard to have a dialogue with the Iranian President, we have done it, successfully.
In November 2004 Britain, France and Germany representing the EU came to an agreement with Iran, they agreed to suspend uranium enrichment and enter into agreements with Europe for joint ownership and running of their nuclear facilities in exchange for which Europe would guarantee Iran's security. America refused to endorse Europe's security guarantees and Bush issued Presidential Directive 12938 which would make any cooperation between Europe and Iran impossible.
Then there was the FISSBAN treaty which would mean that every country in the world would put their production of fissile material under international supervision. In November 2004 the UN Disarmament Committee voted 147 to 1 for a verifiable FISSBAN treaty, America was the only country to vote against, two countries abstained, Britain and Israel. So far the only country in the world which has put their fissile material production under international supervision is Iran.
It isn't Iran which is the obstacle to a diplomatic settlement, they are just as eager as we are for a peaceful solution.
Iran is not viewed well in many middle east countries as it has "imperialistic" ambitions to forge a greater Shiite state - i t has very few "friends" in the Middle East.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.