Bush Officially "making It Up As He Goes" !!!

Page 2 of 2 First 12

  1. Quote Originally Posted by Rufio View Post
    The US is dominating the world through veto power and puppet control. That's why the creation of Israel was allowed to bypass international law -- the US backed it as their personal military base in the Middle East and as a superpower, they had the influence to overrule international law. Then there's the US' long history of vetoing UN resolutions where they're VASTLY outnumbered. Generally, what the US says goes. That's the real reasoning behind the Iraq war. Control of the oil reserves means veto power over the parts of Europe and Asia that depend on it.


    If you think that politicians invade poor countries that are little threat to us to spread "freedom," you need to study the history a bit more. It is all about holding control over the world, just as it was for France, Rome, England, and all the other hegemonies.
    WOW! you make anabolicrhino sound sane. At least he attempts to connect his delusions with factual information.


  2. bush = worse ever by far.
    •   
       


  3. Quote Originally Posted by rcarracedo View Post
    bush = worse ever by far.
    Your post = most worthless by far.

    You lose, try again.

  4. Quote Originally Posted by CNorris View Post
    Your post = most worthless by far.

    You lose, try again.
    I've been brought up Republican, have always been Republican ... Capitalist. What we currently have in the White House, whether he/she be Left or Right ... is a Corporatist. Moderates are always elected ... (Clinton, Bush, Regean). They're all out for BIG BUSINESS. A modern age Fascism. In what moral, good hearted, intelligent human being's head fits the notion that the mass massacre of decent innocent people, whether they be American or Iraqui people be good for our country (us as a people). I could understand it if they had been the ones to attack us but they were not. There's no denying that. No WMDs found. Free Trade, Imigration ... No child left behind. When have we ever had such and incompetent individual. This is not a fan club. This is our country. He who has said he wanted to spread Democracy to Iraq has compromised ours (wire tapping, habeas corpus, Abu Ghraib,the list goes on ...) .
    His support of Alberto Gonzales? Remarkable individual our president. Truly powerful. May God forgive him.

  5. Quote Originally Posted by CNorris View Post
    WOW! you make anabolicrhino sound sane. At least he attempts to connect his delusions with factual information.



    Oh, right. Because random ranting about "the liberal media wants everyone to think the same" is citing facts. In case you didn't notice, I DID cite examples, such as Churchill and Chavez's words being distorted by the media unanimously, including Democrat-biased sources.


    Here's an example of the US veto power:


    http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/20...is3291.doc.htm


    147 countries vote for it, but it doesn't go through because the US, along with US puppet Israel disagree, and the UN abstains. The reasoning given was that "experts claim it couldn't be monitored." Apparently 147 different countries either had crappy experts or they never thought about whether the monitoring of fissile materials was actually possible, and just voted anyway. It couldn't be that the US leaders don't want their own fissile material monitored.


    And of course there's the long list of vetoes on the issue of Palestine:


    http://www.miftah.org/Display.cfm?Do...9&Category****4



    Yeah, the US has no veto power alright. And do you want to get into the large list of "regime change" including installing dictators?


    I can't believe that there are people naive enough to think our leaders are just trying to spread "freedom" and yet claim that people recognizing the POWER issue are the real whackos. Yeah, installing and supplying dictators over democratically elected leaders was all for freedom. Consolidating world power and influence has nothing to do with it. They don't care if other countries grow powerful enough to challenge their influence. Right.
    •   
       


  6. What I just can understand is .... if Bush and Co. are so much for spreading democracy ... Why haven't they done something with Castro? ....


    Cuba = Tabaco = $$$
    Iraq = Oil = $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$

  7. Castro isn't the best example. There's still an embargo on Cuba due to a grudge left over from the Cold War. There were several terrorist attacks on Castro back then, and in fact the world was virtually brought to nuclear war because of Kennedy's vendetta.

    It was pretty much political imperialism ... If you were a Communist sympathizer, nothing else mattered. That's why the US helped install Augusto Pinochet and the Shah in Iran, and supported Saddam. Being anti-Communist mattered more than how democratic a leader you were. Anti-Communist dictators were favored over democratically elected leaders with Communist leanings.

    A better point to raise is why Bush's people allied with Saddam for so long, even for a brief time after the Cold War was over, as well as Osama in the first place. Or installing dictators and stopping elections in various instances.


    The truth is that most US leaders (and world leaders in general) are for democracy except when it's inconvenient to their strategic and economic goals.

  8. Quote Originally Posted by Rufio View Post
    Castro isn't the best example. There's still an embargo on Cuba due to a grudge left over from the Cold War. There were several terrorist attacks on Castro back then, and in fact the world was virtually brought to nuclear war because of Kennedy's vendetta.

    It was pretty much political imperialism ... If you were a Communist sympathizer, nothing else mattered. That's why the US helped install Augusto Pinochet and the Shah in Iran, and supported Saddam. Being anti-Communist mattered more than how democratic a leader you were. Anti-Communist dictators were favored over democratically elected leaders with Communist leanings.

    A better point to raise is why Bush's people allied with Saddam for so long, even for a brief time after the Cold War was over, as well as Osama in the first place. Or installing dictators and stopping elections in various instances.


    The truth is that most US leaders (and world leaders in general) are for democracy except when it's inconvenient to their strategic and economic goals.
    There are so many points! The embargo is irrelevant in bringing democracy to Cuba. We've placed it ... so as I said .... pointless. We started a war and didn't even care what the UN thought. We could finsh with Castro tomorrow ... but what for? I just brought Cuba up to show the hypocracy of the "spreading freedom" 50th defense on going into Iraq. Also, I am of Cuban decent and its close to my heart. Want to talk about desregard for human rights? Cuba is a tragedy.

    I think I read on MSNBC or some other news site that Cheney's stock in Haliburton didn't double, triple or quadruabled ... it multiplied by a factor of 32.

    Why did we go into Iraq?

  9. Quote Originally Posted by rcarracedo View Post
    Why did we go into Iraq?
    Because Iraq had the inclination, the stated desire, and some level of capacity to be expansionistic locally, and send attacks at the US. Unlike Cuba or Darfur.
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. 1RM Contest - You make it up! Bikini shot? Pick a number?
    By 1RMsupplement in forum Company Promotions
    Replies: 236
    Last Post: 10-17-2015, 08:54 AM
  2. I messed up really bad.. Now I'm gonna make it all right.
    By factsmachine in forum Cycle Logs
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 11-10-2014, 06:14 PM
  3. Replies: 23
    Last Post: 04-09-2011, 08:09 AM
  4. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 12-07-2002, 04:02 AM
Log in
Log in