|
|
|
|
|
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/30/2004 9:25:39 PM | | I agree with..we have a lack of choices FalseProphet I always have. And it does stink, but I can speak for myself I vote either way, I like to think Im a realist. I am Not a Republician, Democrat, Liberal or independant. I vote for the lesser of two evils, in my eyes. There isnt a policitian in this world ever born that had a clean record or back ground. Fact of life. | |
|
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/30/2004 9:36:48 PM | well, and thats almost where i come from too.
I used to be an independant and the definition of that word is what i feel at my core, but i chose to lay down my arms there and align myself with the democrats because i felt that was the closest to what i believe. I always vote on issues, and never partylines. I call myself a democrat because i just don't want to explain everytime. when i look at what is important to me, the republican party does not really consider important. i know this president doesn't because of what he has done to the environmental laws and to funding for disease relief and health education funding. the caveats make it impossible.
he gives science broken tools and dead end paths, but the public does not know this. really he fights us tooth and nail. By doing these things he is my worst adversary in my quest to improve the condition of human existance and the environmental state of the earth. | |
|
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/30/2004 9:40:42 PM | | I like your idea igotoosu. I actually just say what party I agree with at that time. For instance right now I’m with the democrats in the USA, while I’m going with the Conservative party of Canada up here. It just makes things easier. | |
|
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/30/2004 9:57:48 PM | casperlcaf you are quite right when you say there isn't a single politician with a clean record or background. We can't ignore that fact that all politicians are people and have faults.
For example Bush says he's a klutz and isn't the best speaker in the world. Our last Prime Minister Jean Chrétien in Canada had a facial deformity that caused his speech to sometimes be slurred. The former Home Secretary of England David Blunkett (I believe I spelled the name right) was blind. They all have human faults physically and I imagine they tend to have personality faults as well.
One thing interesting difference between Canadian and American politicians is the emphasis on certain parts of their backgrounds. For example there is a lot of emphasis in the US on a presidential candidates military service (or lack there of). Here is Canada that is never an issue and in fact most Prime Ministers haven't served in the armed forces. I imagine this trait comes from the fact the first US President was an ex-general. Another aspect I find interesting is how many US Celeberities to into politics. I've always found this fascinating.
Also because politicians are human being they have self interest, ideals, ambitions and fears. I highly suspect that many go into politics for two reasons - a genuine desire to do something for ones fellow man or the desire for personal power. It is my hope that most politicians go into politics for a desire to help fellow man. I suspect at least in the beginning most politicians go into politics for that reason but perhaps many change as they spend time in office. | |
|
| |
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/30/2004 11:00:03 PM | | Yea, don't want to get off the thread but I threw out a king.. I also said "How the fu*k you doing to Larry Wilcox of chips..And told BillShatner to eat sh*t, and I flipped a cop..I've done alot of stupid sh*t in my time but now that I'm retarded I can only look back and smile... | |
|
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/30/2004 11:25:50 PM | One thing about this "all politicians are corrupt" stuff...
that may all be true and everything but NO PRESIDENT has been or is as blatantly corrupt as Bush. He openly lies about anything and everything. He's destroyed all our credibility as a nation and made the world hate us.
His money stealing schemes are unsurpassed and everyone who knows ANYTHING knows it. He's gotten us involved in a war we might not be able to win based on false pretenses and lies and our whole military in Iraq is in danger of being destroyed because of it. He's made it so enlisted men are having to go back YEARS after they've completed active duty. He's got the national guard stuck over there. He's broken every international treaty that meant anything, trashed NATO and the UN; lost all our friends and we're losing our economic leadership to China.
Bush is a disgrace and a curse to this nation. | |
|
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/31/2004 12:13:50 AM | every major country in history has its fair share of war crimes. japan killed over 25 million chinese and other surrounding countries, stalin murderd more people then hitler did and it was his own people. britain was the first country to start firebombings of major cities and in the new frontier they baught scalps from dead american indians. nazi germany killed 6 million jews. and even the united states nuked japan when they didnt have to. everyone can tell you that they nuked japan to end the war quickly and to save american lives. but actualy they nuked japan to send russa a message, all the united states needed to do was cut japan off and starve them into submission.
so when you bash another countries leader why dont you look back on your own country. | |
|
| |
| |
| |
DMT
|
Joined: 12/3/2004
Msg: 137 | |
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/31/2004 5:07:55 AM | I think that Swiftcut makes a really excellent point when he says
every major country in history has its fair share of war crimes. japan killed over 25 million chinese and other surrounding countries, stalin murderd more people then hitler did and it was his own people. britain was the first country to start firebombings of major cities and in the new frontier they baught scalps from dead american indians. nazi germany killed 6 million jews. and even the united states nuked japan when they didnt have to. everyone can tell you that they nuked japan to end the war quickly and to save american lives. but actualy they nuked japan to send russa a message, all the united states needed to do was cut japan off and starve them into submission.
It is unboubtedly true and we need to keep one eye on history to stop the same atrocities happening again - rather than use it to justify contemporary atrocities as natural inevitiablities.
One novel thing that the Bush administrations' (and I acknowlege the UK administrations') millitary strategy in the second Iraq invasion is the deployment of a preemptive strike. It is very hard for many of the public to actually know if the millitary intelliegence that is used to justify such a strike is real or otherwise. We know now that the justification that Tony Blair gave the British people was not based on truth. There is a terrible danger that justifications of invasions based on flimsy evidience or paranoia could become more acceptable since being used by apparently respectable, dominant and democratic governments.
What if every paranoia despotic leader developed some delusions or spread some lies about neighbouring countreis in order to justify an invasion? The world could become the equivelent of sitting in a seedy bar with a bunch of tripped out paranoiac, as reaching for their knives and guns the moment anyone so much as looked at them.
Wishing you all a happy, healthy and safe 2005
DMT
| |
|
DMT
|
Joined: 12/3/2004
Msg: 138 | |
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/31/2004 5:16:05 AM | sorry got distracted in the last bit: I meant - What if every paranoiac despotic leader developed some delusions or spread some lies about neighbouring countries in order to justify an invasion? The world could become the equivelent of sitting in a seedy bar with a bunch of tripped out paranoiacs, all reaching for their knives and guns the moment anyone so much as looked at them.
And incidently Swuftcut in other threads I have discussed the British system. The reason that the US and it's leadership causes so much concern is that the choices that are made, always based on concentrating the power and weath more squarely in the hands of elite, endanger the rest of the world more than the political choices of any other country in history. I actually this that us in the UK should have votes in US elections - becuase your policies affect us so much and also because the people of the UK have just about shaken of the nightmare of the Christian faery tales that used to contrain and weaken us so much. | |
|
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/31/2004 6:59:45 AM | elwood blue was it not Bill Clinton who started bombing Iraq at around the exact time a special prosecutor was about to deliver a report on him? I would say that Bill Clinton was easily as corrupt as Bush.
It was also Democrat Presidents who started Vietnam and Korean wars ('police actions') that proved much more costly then I think Iraq will. As for people having to return to active service or doing service they weren't expecting that is an unfortunate part of fighting wars it has happened in many of the wars the US has fought WWII, Korea, and Vietnam etc. It has happened in wars other countries have fought. It’s not something unique to Iraq.
First of all let me point out that I have nothing against the United States or any of its people. I hate to tell you that world opinion of the United States was quite bad before the Bush became the American president. A year of the US trying to act as the international police force has exacted its toll on the world. The reason this has taken its toll is not because they have done it but they have acted as though the world should hail America as heroes for doing so. America is a superior country in many ways but holding that superiority arrogantly over the rest of the world has not won America any friends.
This also comes from prominent figures in American culture making false assumptions about the rest of the world. These can be political commentators or politicians such as Michael Moore or Ralph Nader for instance making the extremely false assumption that Republican Party (US) = Conservative Party (Canada) and making presumptuous comments based on those assumptions. It comes from America belief that they were sole the reasons WWI and WWII the 'good' side won. Often time this belief leaves out contributions that were played by the British and the Russians in these wars. It is Hollywood's constant portrayal of the US and US culture as superior to that of other nations.
I think all of these factors have lead to the bad opinion of the United States on the world stage. It hasn't just been the four years of Bush's reign that has done this.
As for Bush breaking international treaties he has done that. Many of those treaties are unfortunately not worth the paper they are printed on. Many are out of date and badly in need of updated. The Geneva Convention is a very good example of that. Again the UN as a forum for solving international political conflict has always been very ineffectual. The UN has no way of enforcing its edicts without relying on the good grace of its member states. As an organization for delivering international aid and dealing with international social issues it is more effective. Unfortunately one of the problems with international organization such as the UN and international law (such as treaties) is that they were established with the assumption that everyone would willingly follow them. Governments must sometimes look out for the self interest of their own nation and since there is not way to independently enforce these things.
I am not absolving Bush of his role in hurting America's international image but I simply saying that he hasn't done all of the damage or even most of the damage. | |
|
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/31/2004 7:23:58 AM |
I think all of these factors have lead to the bad opinion of the United States on the world stage. It hasn't just been the four years of Bush's reign that has done this.
I agree with you there... but the guy as sure been doing his best to
make things worse. He could at least pretend to play well with others.
Some might call this his supposed "integrity"... but its arrogance plain and simple.
The US did play major roles in WW1 & WW2... to say our entering WW2 didn't help
end it would be a load of crap. But at the same time people today still use WW2
as a reason the world should love us and not question us. When France got uppity
with us, right away Americans start yelling the "We saved your asses in WW2"
Screw you they are Freedom Fries now... blah blah blah. And that is bullsh!t....
What have we really done in the past 60 years to help the world as a whole?
Seriously.... all we do is go in and screw small countries. We go to Korea
and Vietnam and split the countries in 2.... is that winning? No, its not.
Kuwait? Yeah, we can see our impact on that part of the world has been positive.
I'm not ashamed to be American... just the opposite. I'm ashamed of our Government
and its effect on the world as a whole, and ashamed of other Americans who are
so ignorant or blindly patriotic that they can't see what is going on.
All that said, I don't think Bush is really mentally ill. Sure I like to call him a moron,
it makes me feel better. Truth is he is an evil little man, controlled but many other
larger evil men with evil agendas disguised as "good works" to make the masses happy. | |
|
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/31/2004 8:28:33 AM | My replies have asterisks:
elwood blue was it not Bill Clinton who started bombing Iraq at around the exact time a special prosecutor was about to deliver a report on him? I would say that Bill Clinton was easily as corrupt as Bush.
*Clinton bombed Iraq, yes. There was an agreement at the end of the gulf war that Saddam was not to act militarily against the kurds or shiites and they were not supposed to fly in the "no fly" zone. G.H.W. Bush enforced that before Clinton came to office and regardless of whether Clinton was about to have a "special prosecutor" deliver a report on the "blow job that [republicans made] into a huge investigation where they managed to get the president impeached", it was justifiable under the circumstances..
And by the way; when you say Clinton was easily as corrupt as Bush, you're crazy. Clinton balanced the federal budget, didn't try to break california's economy, didn't lie in front of the UN to start a war and didn't plan the war before he came into office. He didn't reveal the identity of a CIA agent in retribution for telling the truth about his administration's lies, he didn't promise funding for education, alternative energy research, funding for children's hospitals and help for senior citizens and then back out.
Here's a list of Bush's lies and corruptions:
*“This is a hospital, but it's also - it's a place full of love. And I was most touched by meeting the parents and the kids and the nurses and the docs, all of whom are working hard to save lives. I want to thank the moms who are here. Thank you very much for you hospitality…There's a lot of talk about budgets right now, and I'm here to talk about the budget. My job as the President is to submit a budget to the Congress and to set priorities, and one of the priorities that we've talked about is making sure the health care systems are funded.” – Egleston Children's Hospital, Atlanta, Georgia 3/1/01
Bush’s first budget proposed cutting grants to children’s hospitals like the one he visited by 15% ($34 million). His 2004 budget additionally proposes to cut 30% ($86 million) out of grants to children’s hospitals.
*Bush had been saying that he was proposing $3.5 billion in “new” money for first responders. However, his budget tried to cut more than $1 billion out of existing grants to local police/fire departments to fund this. Then, in August of 2002, Bush rejected $150 million for grants to state and local first responders. Bush’s decision prompted the President of the Firefighters Union to say, “President Bush, don't lionize our fallen brothers in one breath, and then stab us in the back by eliminating funding for our members to fight terrorism and stay safe.” The President of the Virginia firefighters association said, “The president has merely been using firefighters and their families for one big photo opportunity.”
*“I said when I was running for President, I supported ethanol, and I meant it. (Applause.) I support it now, because not only do I know it's important for the ag sector of our economy, it's an important part of making sure we become less reliant on foreign sources of energy.” – Bush at South Dakota Ethanol Plant 4/24/02
According to the AP, Bush’s 2004 budget proposes to eliminate funding for the bioenergy program that funds the Dakota Ethanol Plant he visited. [4/22/02]
*According to the Associated Press, Bush proposed “to slash funding 20 percent for the Even Start program, which offers tutoring to preschoolers and literacy and job training for their parents” – the very program he was touting in New Mexico [2/4/02].
*“We're working hard to make sure your job is easier, that the port is safer. The Customs Service is working with overseas ports and shippers to improve its knowledge of container shipments, assessing risk so that we have a better feel of who we ought to look at, what we ought to worry about.” – Bush, 6/24/02]
The President’s 2003 and 2004 budget provides zero for port security grants. The GOP Congress has provided only $250 million for port security grants (35% less than authorized). Additionally, in August, the President vetoed all $39 million for the Container Security Initiative which he specifically touted.
*“We've got to do more to protect worker pensions.” – Bush, 8/7/02
Just four months after touting pension security, Bush’s Treasury Department announced plans to propose new rules that “would allow employers to resume converting traditional pension plans to new ‘cash balance’ plans that can lower benefits to long-serving workers. Such conversions are highly controversial. Critics contend that they discriminate against older workers in violation of federal law” [Washington Post, 12/10/02]
*“Our workers are the most productive, the hardest working, the best craftsmen in the world. And I'm here to thank all those who work hard to make a living here in America.” – Bush, 9/2/02
Bush’s 2003 Budget proposed a 9% ($476 million) cut to job training programs and a 2% ($8 million) cut to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Similarly, his 2004 budget proposes a $60 million cut to adult job training programs and a total elimination of the Youth Opportunities Grants, which provide job training to younger workers.
*“A secure and efficient border is key to our economic security.” – Bush, 9/9/02
While Bush did hold a photo-op to sign legislation promising more INS/Border Patrol staff and facilities, his budget provided no additional money for this. Additionally, in August, Bush vetoed $6.25M for promised pay upgrades for Border Patrol agents. Additionally, he vetoed all $39 million for the Container Security Initiative. His 2004 Budget slashes total total “Border and Transportation Security” by $284 million.
*“I hope people around this country realize that agencies such as this food bank need money. They need our contributions. Contributions are down. They shouldn't be down in a time of need. We shouldn't let the enemy affect us to the point where we become less generous. Our spirit should never be diminished by what happened on September the 11th, 2001. Quite the contrary. We must stand squarely in the face of evil by doing some good.”
- Bush, 12/19/02
The 2003 and 2004 Bush budgets proposes to freeze the Congregate Nutrition Program, which assists local soup kitchens and meals on wheels programs. With inflation, this proposal would mean at least 36,000 seniors would be cut from meals on wheels and congregate meals programs. Currently, 139,000 seniors are already on waiting lists for home-meal programs. His 2004 budget continues the freeze.
There's much more where that came from.
FP: when you make a statement like that, you've really got your head up your butt.
____________________________________________________________________________
This also comes from prominent figures in American culture making false assumptions about the rest of the world. These can be political commentators or politicians such as Michael Moore or Ralph Nader for instance making the extremely false assumption that Republican Party (US) = Conservative Party (Canada) and making presumptuous comments based on those assumptions.
*What ARE you trying to say here?
It comes from America belief that they were sole the reasons WWI and WWII the 'good' side won. Often time this belief leaves out contributions that were played by the British and the Russians in these wars. It is Hollywood's constant portrayal of the US and US culture as superior to that of other nations.
*That's true.
I think all of these factors have lead to the bad opinion of the United States on the world stage. It hasn't just been the four years of Bush's reign that has done this.
*that's true.. but what you don't understand is that with Bush it's taken a radical turn for the worse. Things were certainly not this bad before Bush took office and he's done much to cause things to deteriorate. He's destroyed cooperation with other nations on trade, the environment and common defense of the free world. He's destroyed US credibility beyond repair by lying to the UN in a bald faced way and acting as no other nations opinion means anything. He's about as bad as US arrogance and stupidity can get.
As for Bush breaking international treaties he has done that.
*THANK YOU
Many of those treaties are unfortunately not worth the paper they are printed on.
*When they kept new nuclear weapons from being tested they were...
Many are out of date and badly in need of updated. The Geneva Convention is a very good example of that.
*This is a document that was mainly put together by the US in the first place... and what do YOU think should replace it?
You're obviously not going to be involved in any war... Do you think soldiers should be allowed to be murdered, raped or tortured as Don Rumsfeld has allowed? You don't think BUSH is involved in this?
How blind you are...
Again the UN as a forum for solving international political conflict has always been very ineffectual.
*It kept a nuclear war from happening, bozo.
The UN has no way of enforcing its edicts without relying on the good grace of its member states.
*Be that as it may: it worked!!!
As an organization for delivering international aid and dealing with international social issues it is more effective. Unfortunately one of the problems with international organization such as the UN and international law (such as treaties) is that they were established with the assumption that everyone would willingly follow them. Governments must sometimes look out for the self interest of their own nation and since there is not way to independently enforce these things.
*So now you're saying everyone should go their own way and the US is right to ignore the UN's opinion?
I question your veracity in this post. I don't even believe you're what you say you are. I believe you're a Bush supporter.
I am not absolving Bush of his role in hurting America's international image but I simply saying that he hasn't done all of the damage or even most of the damage.
*He's doing alot right now, and we're trying to enlighten the American public to try and stop him. No thanks to you, neocon. | |
|
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/31/2004 8:41:38 AM | Hey Elwood! Thanks for the welcome. 
I agree with you on the fact that if we zoom back in time (for the benefit of Republicans), they would see that the South was a very racist place, where males joined the Klan, like I join knitting clubs.
Having lived abroad in two different countries, I'm terrifyingly aware of the fact that the U.S. effectively has no open, free media. It's all owned by 2 or 3 corporations, at best. Corporations are the new, fashionable name we moderns give to the businesses of the rich. Republicans expect us to worship at the altar of corporations, when, if truth be told, corporations are indeed the enemy. Think of it... in what other area of life can a person create an entity to hide behind, for the purpose of getting rich, getting away with everything, doing harm to smaller businesses by shutting them down forever, pollute the environment, use massive power to influence politics, get laws passed by giving millions of dollars to politicians, thereby making formerly illegal things, "legal", destroy the environment, AND (this is the worst part), not lose any wealth if the corporation goes to hell? And that sort of entity that certain people are hiding behind, is what owns the media here. Gee, and I wonder what kind of news corporations want published?
That's not freedom for our people. That's rule by corporations.
Sarah  | |
|
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/31/2004 8:56:38 AM | Hi Casperlcaf!
Relax. I'm not going to bash you. In fact, I'm going to say that from what I've seen you write and express, you evidently have GW Bush beat in the I.Q. department by a good 30 or 40 points. You write eloquently. GW Bush, on the other hand, is a complete imbecile. You can call him dyslexic, learning-disabled, nervous, distracted, or what have you. It is virtually impossible for someone to be such a complete buffoon in every conceivable area of life, with all the prep, learning, practice, writing of speeches, and all the non-stop 24/7, never-ending help he gets. Hell, he's not even allowed to talk openly to the press! He's not allowed to have interviews without the questions and answers prepared days in advance! He's not allowed to have Democrats in any room where he reads a speech! In Spanish we have a saying: "You can't cover up the sun with one finger." Let's stop the bullsh*t. The man is an complete idiot. I thank GOD he's the candidate elected by the right wing. I'd hang my head in shame to have such an illiterate freak for my candidate or choice. This isn't a matter of something he has trouble with. It's not that he fumbles his words, or doesn't know the names of dignitaries after being told them 1,000 times, or that he lacks historical knowledge, or that he doesn't know the meanings of words. This is a matter of the man being STUPID. He knows nothing.
The fact that Republicans would risk our lives by putting a complete freakish idiot in the White House, is testament to the fact that Republicans don't give a crap what harm comes to this country. Either that, or that Republicans are also on the lower end of the intelligence scale.
This country is safe because it has gigantic oceans on either side. It is successful because it has massive natural resources, so that the whites that landed here and took this land, hit the jackpot. It is safe because the oceans have never allowed any other country to attack it. However, it is now the laughingstock of the planet for us having a dunce as our president. How embarrassing. We have to make sure Republicans never do this crap again. If they want to destroy our country, they shouldn't live here.
Sarah
| |
|
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/31/2004 9:05:18 AM | Ahahaha! False Prophet says: I find am shocked that some of the political dialogue that I am hearing has degenerated to the level of an elementary schoolyard argument.
As for the topic at hand I don't know how people can think that George Bush is mentally ill. There is nothing to indicate that he has any mental illness.
I also find it disturbing that someone who is anger by the word being liberal used in a bad light yet in the same breath they label someone who is Republican as homophobic, racist and bigoted. Blindly labeling someone does nothing to decrease the odds of you being blindly labeled - it in fact makes matters worse.
_______
First off, can anyone who names himself, "False Prophet" be taken seriously or as a false prophet? 
Secondly, I don't know if GW Bush is mentally ill, but I do know that he's an idiot.
Third, you allude to the fact that Republicans may not be racist, homophobic and bigoted. Where are these Republicans that aren't racist, aren't homophobic and aren't bigoted? Someone told me there were two at last count. 
Sincerely,
Sarah the happy lib | |
|
| |
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/31/2004 9:34:29 AM | Varus: I think you've got some reading to do. *LOL* We'd debate ya, but before you'd understand what we're talking about you'd need to catch up on about six years of school and we're just not equipped to handle that at POF.
Sorry | |
|
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/31/2004 9:50:40 AM | elwood,
it is hard to justify fighting a battle of wits with anyone who is unarmed... | |
|
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/31/2004 10:04:20 AM | Again you start with the insults elwood blues.
Alright I will conceed the fact that Clinton may not have been as corrupt as Bush. I simply don't have the time right now to dig up any evidence that there might be.
What I am trying to say with regards to my comment:
"This also comes from prominent figures in American culture making false assumptions about the rest of the world. These can be political commentators or politicians such as Michael Moore or Ralph Nader for instance making the extremely false assumption that Republican Party (US) = Conservative Party (Canada) and making presumptuous comments based on those assumptions."
Is that many American public figures make the false assumptions that people from other countries. It is those false assumptions that they act. They take actions and make comments that are insulting. The assumption that Republican Party = Conservative Party is one of those poor assumptions. It was an arrogant assumption that Canadian political parties are the same as American political parties.
As for international treaties not being worth the paper they are written on they aren't. They didn't prevent nuclear weapons from being tested France has preformed tests on Nuclear weapons.
What makes you think that I am obviously not going to get involved in any war? My country currently isn't involved in any war so I won't be getting involved. If it were they I would volunteer to serve.
The Geneva convention is in general fine for the treatment of prisoners but it only covers a more conventional definition of warfare. Two indentifiable armies fighting each other. It needs to be updated to take into account the changing face of warfare. The Geneva convention doesn't take into account the currnet type of war being fought. The types of people fighting in Iraq aren't combatants under the Geneva convention.
The UN was designed to prevent violence between nations. It hasn't fulfilled that role. It didn't prevent Korea, it didn't prevent Vietnam, it didn't prevent fighting in Yugoslavia, violence in Rwanada, the Ivory coast and it didn't prevent Iraq. I wouldn't say the UN has fulfilled its role.
I am not saying that everyone SHOULD go there own way and ignore the UN. I am saying that countries have gone their own way and will probably continue to go their own way. The US shouldn't have ignored the UN opinion. The problem is that no one stood up to stop the US from ignoring the UN.
Yes there has not been a nuclear conflict but that really isn't a result of the actions of the UN. That would more be a result of the collapse of the USSR. Or perhapst that those with nuclear weapons aren't all that insance and realize the destruction that they can cause so do not use them.
You accuse me of being a neocon. I am certainly not a neocon. I have tried to keep my political affiliations out of this conversaton but I won't any longer. I am Canadian. I am a member of the the Liberal Party of Canada and the Liberal Party of Ontario. | |
|
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/31/2004 10:07:50 AM | | Shannanigan I didn't suggest that the Americans playedc no role in WWI or WWII. In fact I would say that WWII couldn't have been one without the Americans. It couldn't have been won without the British either. America played role in WWI but it wasn't as large as that of France, England (and the rest of the British Empire) or Russia. | |
|
| Is Bush mentally ill?
Posted: 12/31/2004 10:16:53 AM | FP: You REALLY need to read up about world war II...
did you know Prescott Bush, Henry Ford and Rockefeller were bankrolling Hitler as far back as 1924?... and that this financing even supported the science of "eugenics" which eventually became the holocaust?
World War II was the war in which the US took over the world's economy. We certainly didn't fight as long or as hard or the Russians... or lose as many soldiers, but don't you find it ironic that Hitler was financed by these guys and then we came out on top after all was said and done?
Also, you don't understand that this is a "life script" for the USA... to prop up a dictator by selling arms to him and then suddenly oppose him and take over the country we've helped him gain control of... ala Saddam, Noriega, Tojo, etc, etc....
ALL of those guys started out with arms provided by the US.
YOU figure it out! | |
|
|
| Page 6 of 22
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 |
|
Home
login 
