China tells U.S. to shut up....

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by scandium

This often repeated but rarely challenged assertion blows my mind. The largest attack on U.S. soil since Pearle Harbour occured on Bush's watch, the guy behind it remains at large, and Bush has initiated two nation-building style wars to what end? What have they accomplished for the 2,500+ lives lost and $1 trillion+ price tag?

The seeds for 9/11 come from the Clinton Administration. We had 5 terror attacks under Bill Clinton including the first WTC attack, and Bill Clinton's response was to sit on his hands. No thanks. Under Mr. Bush, we have changed two regimes that supported international terrorists. Many on the left and right recommended many times we do it. Yes it has cost lives and treasure and it's a shame. But unless we confront this stuff, it will only grow and the costs won't ever stop in blood and treasure.

And in such a climate, where national security is the issue, what makes Bush the best qualified to be the man in charge? The (R) attached to his name, or the last name "Bush"? Seriously, look at the man's bio and point out what about it makes him more qualified than anyone else:

- he was a legacy student (ie: affirmative action for the rich) at Yale and graduated with a 'C' average before going on to Harvard and getting an M.B.A.

- he did a brief stint in the TANG during the Vietnam war where he never saw combat and never advanced beyond the rank of 2nd Lt;

- he ran for Congress and lost;

- he started an oil company that never found any oil;

- he served briefly with the Carlyle Group, likely a position handed to him through his daddy's influence (who was a member of its board of directors);

- he bought into the Texas Rangers and traded Sammy Sosa;

- he served as Governor of Texas. His only political office and the net of his public service career before becoming President.

What among that bio screams out at you that he is the best man for the job of running and protecting the country?

I don't think he is the best qualified to run the country. Not even close. But he was duly elected by the people. And he was the best option we had IMHO (and the American People's opinion for that matter) when compared to Gore (China sell-out) and Kerry (Indecisive, aloof, and you never knew where he stood on anything). Both of these two absolutely have no business being President of the USA. Your response to attack Bush's stats show the weakness of your premises. Personal attacks usually come from a lost argument.

That was why I mentioned him: because it seems only the peons at the bottom like Graner are ever held accountable for their misconduct.

The Bush administration did not order the misconduct. The Bush administration pushed for convictions of those who did these actions. What the heck do you expect?

[SUBMAN1]

Bush didn't lie. Something worse - he was duped. How can he stand up there and tell you that he was duped by a freindly nation (France in this case) since that freindly nation wanted to discredit Bush? France fabricated the Yellow Cake incident - I posted this back about a year ago in this very forum. Why? Simple, to discredit Bush in the international community so that he wouldn't invade Iraq. Problem is, exactly the opposite happened.

Why would France do this? It had a lucritive arms trade going on with Iraq, bought with oil for food money (nice). The very weapons US troops are getting killed with are French design and manufactured after 2000. Nice. Anyway, you guys can bicker back and forth on this issue, but France is your real liar.

-S

PS. If you want to find out more, search yellow cake in the General forum. A very long timeline exists on how exactly the envents took place.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

Your response to attack Bush's stats show the weakness of your premises. Personal attacks usually come from a lost argument.

Your statement that:

I have plenty of my own criticism for the Bush Administration, but he's alot better than what the Democrats have been able to conjure up

made his credentials fair game, and worthy of bringing out to contrast against the job he is tasked with and the rarely challenged assertion that he is uniquely qualified to do it (you didn't quite go that far, but that mantra is still implied and repeated so often everywhere you look). I had not intended to attack him personally; if that were my intention I would have instead said what I think of the man, which is that he is an inept drug addled sock puppet who if he were born with any other last name he would be pumping gas at a 7/11 and washing windshields. And I doubt he'd even be able to manage that level of responsibility for very long.

That's a personal attack, and one I would not make on anyone else except Bush is unique in the extraordinary amount of power he wields, the unearned good will he has squandered, and the far reaching consequences his 8 years in office will have for all of us.

[Yahoshua]

If the situation in the Taiwanese straight is as bad as it sounds then Taiwan should vote to declare independence NOW. And risk war while Beijing doesn't fully have the upper hand.

The U.S. must pick a side. Will she allow Beijing to hold her hostage with her debts, or will she hold to the principles she was founded on and rush to the aid and defense of Taiwan?

Likewise, will the world stand silent if Taiwan is invaded, or will they rally to save a fellow democracy from the communists?

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by scandium

made his credentials fair game, and worthy of bringing out to contrast against the job he is tasked with and the rarely challenged assertion that he is uniquely qualified to do it (you didn't quite go that far, but that mantra is still implied and repeated so often everywhere you look). I had not intended to attack him personally; if that were my intention I would have instead said what I think of the man, which is that he is an inept drug addled sock puppet who if he were born with any other last name he would be pumping gas at a 7/11 and washing windshields. And I doubt he'd even be able to manage that level of responsibility for very long.

That's a personal attack, and one I would not make on anyone else except Bush is unique in the extraordinary amount of power he wields, the unearned good will he has squandered, and the far reaching consequences his 8 years in office will have for all of us.

Your response is typical of the American left, which is why we may see a Republican executive in 2008.

[bradclark1]

All this should show you that the decision to move was actually a difficult one. Based on the fact that many were on the same page, it's hard to just link George Bush to some sort of conspiracy theory. Well, unless you have PROOF. Which you don't.

Err, do you think they could possibly be on his staff?
1998. How many years was that before 9/11? He was govenor of Texas then wasn't he?
The stuff is looking you in the face but you refuse it. I think my part in this conversation is over.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by Yahoshua

If the situation in the Taiwanese straight is as bad as it sounds then Taiwan should vote to declare independence NOW. And risk war while Beijing doesn't fully have the upper hand.

The U.S. must pick a side. Will she allow Beijing to hold her hostage with her debts, or will she hold to the principles she was founded on and rush to the aid and defense of Taiwan?

Likewise, will the world stand silent if Taiwan is invaded, or will they rally to save a fellow democracy from the communists?

I agree. And yes, the world will stand silent. They have shown they don't care about Jewish civilians killed at the hands of Hezbollah. They don't care about slaughtered Kurds, and Shia under Saddam. Likewise, they won't do anything to help Taiwanese civilians. They criticisize attacks on terrorist because terrorists hide behind civilians. Funny how they don't show any anger at terrorists for doing so. This is why world opinion should not matter to the USA. Do what's right, and ignore those who advocate self-destruction. European/Canadian/American leftists do not believe in opposing tyranny of any kind. If you're attacked, you're supposed to just sit and die....... lest you create more hatred against you.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by bradclark1

Err, do you think they could possibly be on his staff?
1998. How many years was that before 9/11? He was govenor of Texas then wasn't he?
The stuff is looking you in the face but you refuse it. I think my part in this conversation is over.

You have shown nothing. You're trying to link Bush to something crazy, and assert he lied. Which you have not proven. No, they weren't on Clinton's staff. What has that got to do with anything? But the policy was there before Bush, during the Clinton administration. And even when Clinton was gone, these same people (Democrats) were asserting that Saddam had weapons programs and presented a danger. Something you have yet to refute.

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

Gotcha. So you make it look like we should attack North Korea in your first statement.....quickly, but then say you don't want Bush to do it. Do you think Kim Jong-Il deserves more trust than Bush?

Oh yeah, do you trust Bill Clinton. How about the UN. How about Germany, France, UK, Russia, Israel, Madeline Albright? They must all be liars regarding Iraq also, seeing as how they're on record saying the same stuff about getting rid of Saddam.

Gotcha? What kind of crap is that? I made my point with you Sea Demon and that remains the same. Bush is a liar and is profiteering off this whole damn war in Iraq. It is a pointless, nothingless, meaningless, war. It shouldn't even be classified as a war. It's more like genocide against a muslim nation. Good Sadaam is out of power, so what? He was a brutal person and I don't think anyone disagrees with that, but he hadn't been a brutal person since the 1st gulf war that his daddy got us in and never finished. I find it too coincidental that here we are again - at war with Iraq - and exactly 8 years after pappy Bush left and little snob Bush Jr. is back to finish what daddy didn't. He was even quoted stating "We'll after all, this is the man that that tried to kill my daddy" - Bush talking to reporters about Sadaam.

I don't know, but that statement seems a bit personal to me.

I think at this point the US would be better run by a group of chimpanzees...

Wait a minute, oh no, it IS run by a group of chimpanzees and Bush is the star of the show... http://www.bushorchimp.com/pics.html

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by SubSerpent

Gotcha? What kind of crap is that? I made my point with you Sea Demon and that remains the same. Bush is a liar and is profiteering off this whole damn war in Iraq.

Prove that he lied. This is too much fun.

Oh yeah, and answer my question. Does Kim Jong-Il deserve more trust than Bush? It's really a simple question.

Also speaking of liars, did you (do you) trust Bill Clinton. He lied to a grand jury ya' know. Something Bush has not done.

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

Prove that he lied. This is too much fun.

Oh yeah, and answer my question. Does Kim Jong-Il deserve more trust than Bush? It's really a simple question.

They both deserve each other. Both of them are ruthless dictators!

[Yahoshua]

War is personal.

A Snipers' war is even more so.

And this war, is personal for Bush. Big deal.

Saddam was a crook that should've been taken down the first time around, NOT the second time.

This war is NOT genocidal. Saddam's war against the Kurds WAS genocidal.

We do not have arbeitschlagers in Iraq. And I'm becoming increasingly irritated with this accusation against the U.S. in this term when it is blatantly FALSE and untrue. I have relatives who barely escaped the grasp of the Nazis with the skin on their back, and your comments are incredibly insensitive and naive.

So until you can show me photos of the U.S. massacreing hundreds of thousands of unarmed civilians in Iraq, STFU. (Don't even start with Abu Ghraib, I condmened it because it was discovered, not because it happened. Terrorists have NO rights, and are not covered by the Geneva convention and so forfeit all benefits of the Geneva Convention thereof.).

Rant over.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by SubSerpent

They both deserve each other. Both of them are ruthless dictators!

Your response shows why a Republican President is likely to be elected in 2008. Crazy comments like this are linked to Democrat party activists, and leaders among the DNC itself.

The middle of the road voters won't vote Democrat when push comes to shove IMO. Especially during these times.

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

Prove that he lied. This is too much fun.

Oh yeah, and answer my question. Does Kim Jong-Il deserve more trust than Bush? It's really a simple question.

Also speaking of liars, did you (do you) trust Bill Clinton. He lied to a grand jury ya' know. Something Bush has not done.

Many of us already have proven that he lied. Are you sure you are reading this stuff! WMD he lied about, Sadaam he lied about, terrorism he lied about... HE JUST WANTS OIL!!!

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

Your response shows why a Republican President is likely to be elected in 2008. Crazy comments like this are linked to Democrat party activists, and leaders among the DNC itself.

I highly doubt that a republican will be in office for quite some time after all this. Most likely I'd say you will be wrong on this issue. Then again, Bush in his followers will try to lead the world to believe that little blue men from Pluto, armed with WMD, are going to attack if we don't do something about it first. OMG!!! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!