George Bush
Pages
| Author | Topic: George Bush |
|---|---|
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Friday, February 2 2007 04:42
Profile
quote:At that point, the Second Amendment would finally get to fulfill its purpose. As for the "Bush is more likely to get a third term than be impeached" comment: I'm pretty sure you couldn't be more wrong, Elog. Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Master
Member # 5977
|
written Friday, February 2 2007 07:46
Profile
Homepage
quote:Why would it happen in Iran too? And are you sure it would be suicide? The UN was helping the Sirians capturing Israeli sholdiers, handing them over to hesbollah (or whatever you spell it in Ebglish)... -------------------- Play and rate my scenarios: Where the rivers meet View my upcoming scenario: The Nephil Search: Escape. Give us your drek! Posts: 3029 | Registered: Saturday, June 18 2005 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Friday, February 2 2007 07:48
Profile
Homepage
I'll assume by "Elog" you meant me. The way I see it, Dick Cheney committed treason when he blew that agent's cover. Treason: a hanging offense. And he remains the sitting Vice President of the United States. This disgusts me, and so I have no faith that Bush would be brought to justice for any crimes he may in the future or may have already committed. Impeachment will simply not happen. As for a third term, I say it's more likely because strange things happen during wartime. A sudden attack could send Bush's ratings through the roof for no reason other than fear. And should things suddenly get much worse than they are, which is possible, that puts dangerous constitution violating legislation on the table. I don't think either are particularly likely, and I was really just saying that to make a point, but surely you see the point now? -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 7143
|
written Friday, February 2 2007 08:35
Profile
Just playing devil's advocate here (I'm not pro or anti Isreal): Why do certain countries get to develop military technologies and suddenly proclaim others that aren't their allies can't? Why are so many pro-Israel? Is it fear that we will be thought of as antisemites? Why does Isreal get a huge military and all their neighbors are harrassed if they start reinforcing their own? Why does eveyone have to think in black and white? There are so many shades of grey in this world of ours. Why must it always be "good" or "evil"? "Ally" or "enemy"? And in the end, I know terrorism may be the worst acts that human kind can offer, but you need to remember something: One man's patriot is another man's terrorist. See the Sons of Liberty (who I hold great disdane for) who are often thought of as American heroes. THEY WERE TERRORISTS. Oh, you are a neutral? That makes you a Tory! Get out the tar and feathers; we'll strip him naked and drag him in the streets. My point is that we cannot always claim a higher moral ground. We have to look from all angles and truely think. For we cannot condemn others by sinking to their level. -------------------- "After I'm dead I'd rather have people ask why I have no monument than why I have one." - Cato the Elder (234-149 BC) "The mind, if it exists, is nothing but an unfortunate after effect of the brain process." -Kripke "One should die proudly when it is no longer possible to live proudly." -Friedich Nietzche Posts: 333 | Registered: Saturday, May 20 2006 07:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Friday, February 2 2007 10:38
Profile
quote:A person would have a hard time exposing themselves to enough media outlets to gather the type of intelligence you recommend. The analysis and sifting out of bad information would take a lifetime, and by that time it is useless. Unlike the newspaper era, when competing editors would only influence readers in a small area, today's media has a worldwide voice and can polarize many millions. Examples include NPR, FoxNuz, AirAmer, and BBC. Political agendas shape the news we hear. The opinions we form are largely based on the limited information we recieve. If it seems Americans support Isreal, that is because the foreign press reports it that way. I'll let you figure out how that is to their advantage. -------------------- quote: Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 5754
|
written Friday, February 2 2007 17:14
Profile
It seems to be a popularity contest between Isreal and Iran. So far Isreal seems to be winning. If I'm correct Isreal has the 4th largest army in the world. That makes it completely unfair that the other countries don't get to reinforce their army. Posts: 626 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 6785
|
written Friday, February 2 2007 19:16
Profile
Iraq used to have the 4th largest army in the world. Israel doesn't come close, especially compared to all the countries near it that are somewhat hostile. The first Arab-Israeli war had 20 Arab countries sending troops. Besides army size is meaningless in a missle war. All that matters is number, damage, and targeting capabilty. Anyone catch Chirac's (France) comment about how Iran would be leveled if it tried to launch a nuke? Posts: 4643 | Registered: Friday, February 10 2006 08:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 5754
|
written Saturday, February 3 2007 03:51
Profile
Hmm...... I thought I read that somewhere. Oh well. Posts: 626 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Master
Member # 5977
|
written Saturday, February 3 2007 05:04
Profile
Homepage
EDIT: never mind that army part. It was allready commented on. quote:1) Inform me about this, as it seems I don't really know what you are talking about. 2) so amny pro-Israeli!? How did you come up with that strange idea? 3) See above. They may be large, but they are underpowered (okay, it's a fact, their pilots are the best, but still) 4) Because that's how a normal human being thinks. can't do all that much about that. [ Saturday, February 03, 2007 05:05: Message edited by: Thralni ] -------------------- Play and rate my scenarios: Where the rivers meet View my upcoming scenario: The Nephil Search: Escape. Give us your drek! Posts: 3029 | Registered: Saturday, June 18 2005 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 5754
|
written Saturday, February 3 2007 05:50
Profile
1. Iran doesn't seem to be allowed to develop nuclear technology, while many other countries are allowed to. 2. Because most people you meet are pro-Isreal. 3. Last time I checked they weren't underpowered when they crushed Lebanon. 4. No opinion. Posts: 626 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 7143
|
written Saturday, February 3 2007 06:37
Profile
Another example of #1 would be China and its anti satelite missile. We did it in the 50's and now we are pissed that they learned to do it. China can't do anything to us really because they are too close to us investment-wise and economically-wise. #2: I'm talking about in the US, not the Middle East. #3 see above response, they leveled Lebanon. #4: One of the great things about human kind is that we always have the chance to advance further than the last generation, it really up to the individuals to push for change. [ Saturday, February 03, 2007 06:39: Message edited by: Retlaw May ] -------------------- "After I'm dead I'd rather have people ask why I have no monument than why I have one." - Cato the Elder (234-149 BC) "The mind, if it exists, is nothing but an unfortunate after effect of the brain process." -Kripke "One should die proudly when it is no longer possible to live proudly." -Friedich Nietzche Posts: 333 | Registered: Saturday, May 20 2006 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Saturday, February 3 2007 11:09
Profile
Homepage
quote:Here's a brief history of this: It was determined that the five members of the UN Security Council could have nukes, and no one else could. Pakistan, India, and Israel made them anyway. We forgave Israel and got mad at the others (see #2). Since then, North Korea has made nukes (supposedly), but we don't care since they have no natural resources we want (we still trade sanction them, though). And Iran is trying to make them now (with all that oil, they better watch their backs). quote:I think the reason you think this is because much of the Western world is pro-Israel. This is probably because after World War I they went through the trouble of screwing over the Ottoman Empire and founding Israel, and now they have to stick with that unfortunate decision. quote:I though Israel had a powerful army as well. Not necessarily on a world scale but I thought they were capable of defeating their neighbors. Compulsory military service and all... [ Saturday, February 03, 2007 11:26: Message edited by: Emperor Tullegolar ] -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 5754
|
written Saturday, February 3 2007 11:53
Profile
And how come we forgave Isreal but not India and Pakistan? How come only a select few countries can make them? That still isn't fair. Posts: 626 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 5310
|
written Saturday, February 3 2007 12:48
Profile
Because some nations have money. Like Israel. And it has been proven time and time again money is power. Since the US is really the only nation the Israelis need answer to things are what they are. Because it seems Americans don't give a ****. Posts: 57 | Registered: Monday, December 20 2004 08:00 |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Saturday, February 3 2007 13:05
Profile
Homepage
Because Israel has money? Does Israel really have any more money than anybody else? -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
|
written Saturday, February 3 2007 14:55
Profile
Homepage
Money? Not really, not on their own. The US are sponsoring them like crazy... [ Saturday, February 03, 2007 14:57: Message edited by: The Sorcerer ] -------------------- Encyclopaedia Ermariana • Forum Archives • Forum Statistics • RSS [Topic / Forum] My Blog • Polaris • I eat novels for breakfast. Polaris is dead, long live Polaris. Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair. Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 2759
|
written Saturday, February 3 2007 15:17
Profile
Homepage
quote:Only in the USA. In Europe most people are pro-Palestine. Something to do with the oil, I believe. -------------------- "I can't read this thread with that image. But then, that's not a complaint." -Scorpius Geneforge 4 stuff. Also, everything I know about Avernum | Avernum 2 | Avernum 3 | Avernum 4 Posts: 1104 | Registered: Monday, March 10 2003 08:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 7420
|
written Saturday, February 3 2007 15:21
Profile
Homepage
I wouldn't say "pro-Palestine." Really, they're just not anti-Palestine like the United States is. -------------------- You lose. Posts: 2156 | Registered: Thursday, August 24 2006 07:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 2759
|
written Saturday, February 3 2007 15:30
Profile
Homepage
Given the overt support for Yassir Arafat, and funding for the Palestinian Authority, I'd go so far as to say pro-Palestinian. But hey. -------------------- "I can't read this thread with that image. But then, that's not a complaint." -Scorpius Geneforge 4 stuff. Also, everything I know about Avernum | Avernum 2 | Avernum 3 | Avernum 4 Posts: 1104 | Registered: Monday, March 10 2003 08:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 6785
|
written Saturday, February 3 2007 15:55
Profile
European support for Palestine is probably on the way out since they are becoming anti-Islamic. Europeans for the most part are closet anti-Semites (at least at the political level) but they are starting to support Israel to balance out the growing threat of an Islamic takeover of Europe. It's not that they like Israel, but they are more worried about terrorism at home and figure they can use Israel somehow. Posts: 4643 | Registered: Friday, February 10 2006 08:00 |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Saturday, February 3 2007 16:09
Profile
Homepage
Arguing on Facebook is the Only Way to Solve the Israel/Palestine Problem Be sure to read "Recent News" too, if you can access this page. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 1934
|
written Saturday, February 3 2007 16:13
Profile
Homepage
That's pretty amazing. I'd join but, eh. :) -------------------- You acquire an item: Radio Free Foil Posts: 1169 | Registered: Monday, September 23 2002 07:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 6388
|
written Sunday, February 4 2007 16:41
Profile
quote:If by 'terrorism at home' you mean 'Arabs at home', then yes. The European relationship with Israel has been defined by bigotry, whether positive or negative. Zionism was allowed to establish itself among English Jews, who were by far the most powerful and influential of the Jewish communities in Europe, because Victorian England believed the Jews controlled the world and making nice with them would result in controlling the world by proxy. Once the Holocaust got it out of their system, the Brits eventually let the Israelis go because they were too much of a nuisance to hold onto. The rest of Europe detests Israel because, obviously, they are anti-Semites. (The European left, generally, no - but anti-Israelism isn't, like in the US, confined to the radical left in Europe, and that's why.) They don't much like Palestine, except as a tool to tweak off the Israelis. And now the Palestines are part of the Arab unterkultur they hate so much, it's time to swing towards Israel. Why? Obviously, there are no Palestinians in Europe; for the most part, European Muslims are Turks and Maghrebis, with the occasional African Arab - Libyans, Egyptians, etc. - thrown in for leavening. But Islamophobia is necessary to keep the European economy going. The Islamic underclass is becoming obvious - you need poor people to support a capitalist economy, and the Europeans have done an excellent job of making sure native Europeans don't get poor enough for that to work. So you wind up with socialism for the upper class and capitalism for the underclass - you have to justify that somehow, not just legally (the citizenship mechanism does that) but socially, so nobody changes the laws. And how do you manage that? Why, Islamophobia, of course! Slander their religion constantly, discriminate against their religious practices, make them mean and desperate, and then point and shout about the angry, angry Muslims as soon as any hothead does anything. Why Islamophobia and not anti-Turkicism or anti-Algerianism or something? Well, because Europe is united now. If you just go on and on about the dumb, savage Turke stealing our arbeit, you're gonna get Algerians from France and then what? Instead, Europe can pretend to be culturally united by bashing the underclass, who have only one thing in common: their religion. Of course, Europe is proud. They will not admit they're every bit as bad as we are, because at least Mexicans are Christian. --- Boots proffers the following: boots: What you need to factor in is the success of multiculturalism alec: Sure, but the left felt guilty about that. alec: Nobody feels too guilty about Islamophobia. boots: That is what makes it so that the only licit way to hate darky is to say that darky is incapable of tolerance. alec: Educate me here: not sure what you're talking about. alec: The darky does not know it's Ramadan? boots: The darky only knows that it is Ramadan. alec: And thus he does not know that it is Christmas. boots: Darky is not capable of liberal tolerance. boots: Therefore darky does not deserve liberal tolerance. -- I'm still for the repeal of the amendment limiting Presidents to two terms. Bush will never win another; someone that bad will get to be hated like the poison he is before eight years are up anyway. [ Sunday, February 04, 2007 16:55: Message edited by: Protocols of the Elders of Zion ] Posts: 794 | Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00 |