About Bush...

Started by MsKatuha, September 26, 2006 06:11 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 31 Guests are viewing this topic.

kam

Quote from: athingI didnt read a single word of that  

Well you sure told him  
"Why do angry guys always resort to throwing babies from windows?"

T-Bones

athing for the love of god stop spamming
read this backwards:       ssabmud tihs siht daer dluow uoy ylno

Irishman

#22
Quote from: athingI didnt read a single word of that  
You asked a question. I gave an answer. If your not going to read the answer, don't ask a question and waste my time.

And NATO stands for "North Atlantic Treaty Oranization." It's a military pact between western European and North American countries. Though, the scope of the countries involved has greatly expanded since the end of the Cold War. As ironic as it is, Russia is a member now.

Irishman

Quote from: athingjesus christ I did read it ok cant any of you guys take a fucking joke?
Yes, because a joking tone is easily interpreted through an entirely textual medium. We had no way of knowing whether or not you were joking. The smilie appended at the end could have multiple interpretations, and so your intent became far less clear.

Irishman

Quote from: athingok
well its rather hard to show sarcasm through the internet isn't it?
Yes, it can be.

MynameiscalledDisturbance

My, my, my! that was quite the E-stoning! Bravo!
back to the subject, Bush no longer has credibility after katrina.
for the rest of them... every incumbent needs to be exiled from washington. both parties need to be desolved and our bureaucratic government ought to be destroyed. there comes a point where something is too broken to be fixed and our government has reached this point.

Scotsman

so you suggest what?  Anarchy?

Albrtd3

Quote from: MynameiscalledDisturbanceMy, my, my! that was quite the E-stoning! Bravo!
back to the subject, Bush no longer has credibility after katrina.
for the rest of them... every incumbent needs to be exiled from washington. both parties need to be desolved and our bureaucratic government ought to be destroyed. there comes a point where something is too broken to be fixed and our government has reached this point.

Isn't Katrina the fault of the government, while you are going on that maybe there are some problems here the state did not put enough emphasis on it and the governor wawsn't doing much, that was his state, he messed up. The president has 50 states and a war to watch out (wether that war was not neccessary or is neccessary is not the point). The governor didn't know what he was doing.

That's my oppinion but by now I have no idea as far as facts go, the media says one thing, another news channel says another, thier websites say this... By now I don't really care and I don't watch TV much as it is.
So by all means if I said something wrong let me know so I can get it straight.

Irishman

I don't think Katrina was the "last straw" but rather just some new ammunition. There's not much one can do to prepare for a force-5 hurricane, but FEMA wasn't exactly very helpful afterwards. I think the primary loss of credibility came from the lack of biological/chemical/nuclear weapons in Iraq. When that fell through, it no longer mattered what Bush did, people just hated him.

T-Bones

lol u got a point irashmen
read this backwards:       ssabmud tihs siht daer dluow uoy ylno

Dagolith

Quote from: T-Bonesbush is racesse lol
thats true i read about it in people.

Quote from: IrishmanIn fact, the death rate in Iraq is lower than the murder rate in Washington D.C. (50 per 100,000 vs. 60 per 100,000). So more people die in our nation's capital per year than in Iraq,
but your only thinking the american soldiers that have died, what about the people that live there, orall the other soldiers that died there, you realy have to think about all the sides.
Quote from: taylorfuck dagolith
Quote from: systechovans with paintings of viking women on them are impervious to all types of damage

ProjectAccord

#31
I think Bush is trying to make the best of a complicated situation right now.  Right now in Iraq the situation has evolved into complete chaos, with one crisis after another and the US not knowing for sure which one to handle first.  Personally I don't see any end to this conflict, as the newly established democratic government and police force in Iraq have a weak influence against the more determined insurgency right now.  They will probably need a lot more US support and won't be able to stand on their own two feet for at least another decade, maybe two.

One thing that strikes me about Bush is how obsessively he talks about terror, the war in Iraq, and the like.  I mean sure terror is a significant worry for many, but it's not the full scope of our lives.  We also have domestic issues to take care of such as health care, education reform, why the nations of the world are suddenly having hostile attitudes toward America.  One of my biggest concerns is the budget problem.  As one particular example, just look at the staggering amount of debt the US owes to China.  And yet this administration has rarely vetoed a spending bill.  Except in one notable case involving stem cell research, supposedly because it was a "form of murder."

I think Bush should think seriously about his administration's maniacal spending, and realize the US should start taking care of itself and do what it can to improve its situation as well as it apparently takes care of everyone else.  Because when it comes time to sign bills, not every freakin' one is a good idea.

As for the Iraq conflict, right now it seems there are two solutions.  One, the US retreats and the insurgency (which IMO will never really disappear) makes repeated attempts to overthrow the democratic government.  Two, Bush finishes what he started and eliminates the insurgency's influence, at least in Iraq.  But right now the former seems more likely to me than the latter.