American-led Peace Movements

[Georgie-Porgie]

I am not sure what happened there, but...I am back!

As to Dean, I am so happy to be back, that I will even admit that he was against the war (I said most on purpose), also Ted Kennedy was against it from the beginning. I think that they are both wrong, but at least they are not changing their tune for the sake of politics.

The other clowns should be ashamed of their lies.

[adjan jb]

Georgie-Porgie, what do you think of Robert Byrd ?

[adjan jb]

Georgie-P, you are now a "born again poster" !

[Georgie-Porgie]

Georgie-P, you are now a "born again poster" !

Agreed, I like that!

I just did a search on Robert Byrd. I enjoyed a speech he gave against the war, and then read an article by Michelle Milkin that said he was in the Klu Klux Klan when he was younger, and that his heart is still with them.

Michelle Milkin is one of the most beautiful women in the world, and one of the cleverest, so I am willing to believe any thing that she wants me to!

Anyway, he sounds like an interesting character.

Actually I am a lot more interested in Michelle Milkin than Robert Byrd!

[Thaiquila]

The mildness of recent posts leaves me uninspired. Perhaps a triple espresso is called for. We needed a "bear pit" for this? Have the Bush apologists lost their resolve in the face of overwhelming evidence of the folly of their spokesleader (sic)?

[adjan jb]

overwhelming evidence of the folly of their spokesleader (sic)?

And the worst is yet to come...

Thanks to Bush the smaller, I will witness in my lifetime the rise and fall of the american empire.

[Membrane]

In your dreams, adjan jb!

...only in your dreams.

[the gentleman]

Wow, this is definately "the bear pit" - Get it on guys and gals. It is very funny to read the silent slaps. 

If you like it, join us more often.

Thanks for the invitation adjan, but I have said previously I will agree to disagree - I am not a Bush supporter, so I dont want to offend my American mates here is If can help it

One question though - Where is Saddam now, it seems to have all gone quiet about him?

I saw something on BBC a "Saddam Specialist" said that it was'nt him it was a double - can anyone shed more light on it as If this is true, Bush will look very silly!

[Membrane]

I dont want to offend my American mates here if I can help it

Thank you! You are one of the very few who actually considers this--a "Gentleman".

I saw something on BBC a "Saddam Specialist" said that it was'nt him it was a double - can anyone shed more light on it

No, they verified it was him through DNA analysis.

[Thaiquila]

I dont want to offend my American mates here if I can help it

Thank you! You are one of the very few who actually considers this--a "Gentleman".

Just to be clear, a huge percentage of Americans are not in the least offended by attacks on George W. Bush by non-Americans. In fact, we welcome them.

Critizing Bush, believed by many to the worse president in American history, does not make an American unpatriotic and does not make a foreigner anti-American.

[Thaiquila]

Does this remind anyone of how the American people were snookered into the war in Iraq?

"Naturally the common people don't want war. . . . But, after all, it is the

leaders of a country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter

to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist

dictatorship or parliament or a communist dictatorship. All you have to do

is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of

patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every

country."

Hermann Goering (1893-1946) Nazi Reichsmarschall, at the Nuremberg Trials,

4/18/46. (From Nuremberg Diary by Gustave Gilbert)

[Georgie-Porgie]

All very clever, until one realizes that Nazi Germany was not actually under attack when trying to initially convince their countrymen to fight the Second World War. Germany was the aggressor.

America is under attack, almost every day. That puts pacifism and spreading anti-American propoganda in a much different category. More like a lack of patriotism or even being a traitor, wouldn't you say?

[Thaiquila]

All very clever, until one realizes that Nazi Germany was not actually under attack when trying to initially convince their countrymen to fight the Second World War. Germany was the aggressor.

America is under attack, almost every day. That puts pacifism and spreading anti-American propoganda in a much different category. More like a lack of patriotism or even being a traitor, wouldn't you say?

Please name the date and event when IRAQ invaded the United States?

And don't say 9/11 because even Bush has publicly stated there was no connection between Iraq and the 9/11 attack.

So, you have done well to prove my point about the similarity of German aggression in WW2 to American aggression in Iraq today.

It is shameful. When America was at its best, the world looked to us a shining example; now they wonder where we went wrong. (Hint: George W. Bush.)

[Membrane]

Please name the date and event when IRAQ invaded the United States?

And don't say 9/11 because even Bush has publicly stated there was no connection between Iraq and the 9/11 attack.

So, you have done well to prove my point about the similarity of German aggression in WW2 to American aggression in Iraq today.

It is shameful. When America was at its best, the world looked to us a shining example; now they wonder where we went wrong. (Hint: George W. Bush.)

No one said Iraq attacked America. We simply dislodged a stick-in-the-mud, pain-in-the-ass dictator from power, freed the people, rebuilt roads, hospitals, schools and other necessary infrustructure--and we spent billions of our own dollars to do it! And most importantly, we are trying to show that a government can exist in the middle east where people can live without fear of prosecution, rape, murder, torture--by their own government (Saddam's).

So once and for all--get over it! As much as many of you want to believe it (and as much as you want to try to persuade others here)--America is not there to conquer Iraq and steal the oil. In fact, what Bush is trying to do is create a little stability in the middle east. It's the Islamic extremists who don't want to see him succeed and are trying desparately to sabotage all the progress (since the U.S. is notoriously pro-Israel and of course, we're the dreaded "infidels").

The U.S. has a history of always being the one to go in and clean up a country run into the ground by dictators that have, for far too long, raped and molested his own people (literally and figuratively) and then starts to look outward to claim other lands and riches beyond his own borders.

Do you want to know the real villians? It's not the U.S.! It's the countries who looked the other way, ignoring the plight of the average Iraqi, who have died or suffered torture, rape, etc. Until the U.S. stepped up to the plate and took the initiative, no other country was doing anything substantial and that includes the U.N. Think about it. What did France do to dislodge Saddam and to help free the average Iraqi? What did Germany done? What did China do? (Thanks go out to the allies who have helped, and who did not ignore the humanitarian plight there).

Why is it always the U.S. that has to get things done and lead the way? Because we're evidently the only ones who can--and who care enough to spend our own tax dollars and lives to do it.

[Membrane]

"Naturally the common people don't want war. . . .

..[snip]..

in every country."

Hermann Goering (1893-1946) Nazi Reichsmarschall, at the Nuremberg Trials,

4/18/46. (From Nuremberg Diary by Gustave Gilbert)

When in doubt, use a Hitler analogy. How predictable and how utterly irrelevant. You think you have scored a big point, when actually you have demonstrated what little ammunition your argument contains.

[Membrane]

Just to be clear, a huge percentage of Americans are not in the least offended by attacks on George W. Bush by non-Americans. In fact, we welcome them.

Critizing Bush, believed by many to the worse president in American history, does not make an American unpatriotic and does not make a foreigner anti-American.

Actually, Bush has high public approval and the majority of Americans approve of the action in Iraq. Regardless of how you feel Thaiqila, the majority of Americans, if they read this board, would be disgusted that there is so much animosity towards us and misunderstanding of what we are trying to do in the world and what we stand for.

We welcome freedom of speech and we encourage dialogue. But the relentless, constant drum-beating and bashing gets a little old after a while. If more people would try to look at the situation from different angles on this forum, it would be a much more interesting experience here. But certain people are always dogmatic and relentless in their position and refuse to see anything other than the way they want to see it: that the U.S. is always wrong.

[Georgie-Porgie]

No one said that Iraq attacked the US, although they certainly would have if they had the capability. They did, however launch an unprovoked attack on Kuwait, launched missles at Israel, and then tried to put a contract out on our President, any of which could be considered an attack on our country and it's interests.

However, World War III isn't only about Iraq and it isn't only about Afghanistan. It is about stopping low-life Arab Terrorists, of all types, from using any and all means necessary to destroy the Civilized World. Terrorists have attacked Americans repeatedly. 9/11 is only the most drastic example.

As Membrane says:

In fact, what Bush is trying to do is create a little stability in the middle east.

We are trying to protect ourselves. We are not trying to conquer the World. What kind of an "American"would equate us with Nazi Germany?

[Thaiquila]

What kind of an "American"would equate us with Nazi Germany?

Oh my God, please don't report me the department of Homeland Security!

(Doesn't that sound like the name of a department the Germans would have created inWW2?)

This has all been good sport, but I agree it has become tiresome.

Not enough participants and too much recycling of the same stuff.

And Georgie and Membrane totally twist what I say.

For example, it is stated that the Hermann Goering quote is not relevant because the US were not aggressors. Then I say, yes, it is clear we are the agressors in Iraq. And then you ignore the root of the argument and agree with me that Iraq was never the agressor against the US. So I can't be bothered anymore to waste my time playing around with this sort of bozo logic.

In closing, and to repeat, to criticize Bush and his actions is not anti-American. People who do that may or may not be anti-American, but the act itself is only a commentary on the leader of the US, not the country or its people. Were the rabid right-wingers who spent 8 years bashing Clinton anti-American?

It would be nice if some new people had some fresh ideas.

[Membrane]

And Georgie and Membrane totally twist what I say.

For example, it is stated that the Hermann Goering quote is not relevant because the US were not aggressors.

Ahh... come on Thaiqila!

My posting to you (about the Goering quote) was a direct verbatim quote from YOU, that you posted to me in another thread, when I used a Nazi analogy. Don't you remember? What you're doing is actually responding to your very own words!

...I got quite a chuckle on that one!

[Thaiquila]

And Georgie and Membrane totally twist what I say.

For example, it is stated that the Hermann Goering quote is not relevant because the US were not aggressors.

Ahh... come on Thaiqila!

My posting to you (about the Goering quote) was a direct verbatim quote from YOU, that you posted to me in another thread, when I used a Nazi analogy. Don't you remember? What you're doing is actually responding to your very own words!

...I got quite a chuckle on that one!

Yes, I do remember. Glad you had a laugh.

I can also see quite clearly you are dodging the truth about American agression against a country that did not attack the US. It was a clear, major mistake.

To be precise, I said using a Hitler analogy, not a Nazi analogy. Mine was a Goerring analogy. I am not saying nor have I said that Bush is equal to Hitler.

I am saying that the US is heading down a slippery slope of facism that has parallels to the Nazi era.

Examples:

reduction of civil rights

reduction of privacy

invading sovereign nations unprovoked

playing on the politics of fear to get people to voluntarily give up their freedoms

demonizing critics as traitors or un-American

the priorties of the corporations being the priorities of the state

moving towards a one party country

labelling people as terrorist criminals with no constitutional due proces

Freedom loving Americans see the writing on the wall and are trying to stop it, if it is not too late.

LATE NEW YEARS RESOLUTION: No more US politics posts from me.

IN CLOSING: I have grown tired of this runaround discussion about the sad state of affairs in the US. This is a Thailand board anyway. It was fun and I think I presented my point of view, to the few people that might be interested. To membrane, georgie poo et al, we can agree to disagree. This is an election year and for the sake of the US and the world, I hope the passion of the anti Bush forces wins the day. Be sure to vote (unless you like Bush, then perhaps you should stay home and watch tv). Ciao baby!

[Georgie-Porgie]

Thaiquila, let us be frank, both sides are "spinning" as Bill O'Reilly would put it. That is the nature of debate. Membrane has pointed out vast inconsistencies in your "logic", and I'm sure that you feel that you've poked holes in ours.

As far as you staying out of the argument, I don't blame you. To be honest, this stuff bores the hel...-ck out of me, but I'm not going to sit by while people, that I feel, are ill-intentioned or just plain wrong, make mince-meat of my country, or of a president that I actually think is doing a damm good job -under the unusual circumstances.

About all the points being repeated, YES, I KNOW! Newcomers to the venue are always asking the same questions, over and over, and if we don't answer them, they think it's because we can't. Again, the nature of (this type of) debate.

Remember that almost every single Pro-American debater voted against the Bear Pit. We don't want to have to read tons of posts by people trashing Bush or the USA. We aren't doing this for fun. It is a burden, but we feel that we are defending the reputation of our country.

Also, sorry if I got too personally abusive. I had decided to cut back on both you and adjan jb, as a sign of respect for your debating skills, if not what you have to say, but several days ago you complained that the Bear Pit was getting too tame, so I stepped up my rhetoric to keep you happy!

Anyway, enjoy your retirement! Peace!

[Boon Mee]

Since this thread is labled "American-led Peace Movements I can't help but think of the idea that surfaced just after 9/11 where the majority of Americans were "onboard" with the idea of invading the Axis of Evil countrys, killing their leaders and converting the masses to Christianity. Didn't sound so bad at the time.

Then along comes Dean and the rest of the boys who want to get in power with a "new" idea. Now, we might not want to go as far as Ann Coulter advocates but we certainly don't want some mush-headed tax-raising Liberal in the White House appeasing/pandering to "Evil-Doers" either.

[plachon]

Since this thread is labled "American-led Peace Movements I can't help but think of the idea that surfaced just after 9/11 where the majority of Americans were "onboard" with the idea of invading the Axis of Evil countrys, killing their leaders and converting the masses to Christianity. Didn't sound so bad at the time.

Then along comes Dean and the rest of the boys who want to get in power with a "new" idea. Now, we might not want to go as far as Ann Coulter advocates but we certainly don't want some mush-headed tax-raising Liberal in the White House appeasing/pandering to "Evil-Doers" either.

With the exception of Clinton, it seems that having "mush-headed" leaders in the White House has been the norm going back to Reagan, although none tops them like the present incumbent, who has made mediocrity a virtue in office. When Bush Jr went back to his old Uni Yale, he inspired them with his academic prowess by saying that even those straight C students, like him, could rise to the top of the pile and become the Prez. Wow, nowt to do with having your Dad as an ex-Prez, brother as Florida governor, buddies in the Supreme Court, oodles of dosh and the corporate crooks behind you, eh? Least he could probably identify Beavis and Butthead in an identity parade, even if he couldn't distinguish between the leaders of India and Pakistan until not so many years ago. Wonder if he could name their capitals today?

[Georgie-Porgie]

I would really love to know how many of the left wing dildo.. do-dos that bring that incident up, knew the answer at the time. Not many, I bet

[adjan jb]

If it's true that Bush is well-intentioned about bringing democracy and peace to the world (which, by the way, hasn't asked him anything), can someone explain away the presence of Islam Karimov (Uzbekistan) in the "democratic side" ?

This guy is equal, if not worse, to Saddam. His people, I mean those who live long enough, despises him. On his hands is the blood of thousands and thousands of Uzbeks (he likes to torture himself). Nevertheless, Bush labelled him "a man of peace, dedicated to democracy and human rights". U.S troops are stationed there. U.S dollars are pouring down all over the country.

Does it have something to do with the fact that there's oil and a pipe-line under construction in this area ?

Misters the crusaders, I need your lights on this one:

- Is supporting the dictator Karimov a part of a democratic process I don't understand at all ?

OR

- Is it about oil and control of a strategic area?

Over to you.

[Membrane]

To be honest with you adjan jb, I know very little about Islam Karimov, so I'm not qualified to comment on this one (I assume you were referring to myself and G-P, asking for a comment)?

I do know one thing though--the U.S. is not the world's police. We cannot single-handedly boot out every single bad politician on the planet now can we?

[adjan jb]

I do know one thing though--the U.S. is not the world's police. We cannot single-handedly boot out every single bad politician on the planet now can we?

AM I DREAMING ???????????????

Karimov is part of YOUR coalition. He is one of the willing. HE IS YOUR FRIEND.

[Georgie-Porgie]

Give me a break! Membrane is supposed to know every single figure in Iraq?

We are over there, trying to make heads out of tales, trying to tell friend from foe in this great big country that we are trying to straighten out, and it's supposed to be a big surprise that there might be some bad guys on our side, or pretending to be on our side?

Maybe you are dreaming. You certainly are living in a pinko dream-world from what I have seen posted here.

[Boon Mee]

Since this thread is labled "American-led Peace Movements I can't help but think of the idea that surfaced just after 9/11 where the majority of Americans were "onboard" with the idea of invading the Axis of Evil countrys, killing their leaders and converting the masses to Christianity.  Didn't sound so bad at the time.

Then along comes Dean and the rest of the boys who want to get in power with a "new" idea.  Now, we might not want to go as far as Ann Coulter advocates but we certainly don't want some mush-headed tax-raising Liberal in the White House appeasing/pandering to "Evil-Doers" either.

With the exception of Clinton, it seems that having "mush-headed" leaders in the White House has been the norm going back to Reagan, although none tops them like the present incumbent, who has made mediocrity a virtue in office. When Bush Jr went back to his old Uni Yale, he inspired them with his academic prowess by saying that even those straight C students, like him, could rise to the top of the pile and become the Prez. Wow, nowt to do with having your Dad as an ex-Prez, brother as Florida governor, buddies in the Supreme Court, oodles of dosh and the corporate crooks behind you, eh? Least he could probably identify Beavis and Butthead in an identity parade, even if he couldn't distinguish between the leaders of India and Pakistan until not so many years ago. Wonder if he could name their capitals today?

I guess Clinton can't be called "Mush-Headed" for lobbing million-dollar Stinger Missles into empty tents, blowing up Pharmaceutical factorys and basically spending his time getting blow-jobs & eating greasy fast food for 8 years.

Clinton & Rodham were the worst two occupants of the White House in living memory...

[SoCal]

Adjan,

How you leftist like to twist things, then dart to another subject when you can no longer argue the non-sensical.

Ukraine gave us the much needed support durring the Afghanistan war. It is for this reason that he has gained such pre-eminence. He was given money for this support, and his continued support ie- still letting us place troops in the region.

For many years, many countries, not just the U.S. have wanted to tap into the natural gas in the region. Kudos, for once you are not talking oil, and probably didn't even realize it.

The basic fact is however, that there is no suitible place to end the pipeline, and there is still not, so construction has not begun.

Without a doubt he is a meglomaniac, but I see no substantiation for what you profess.