The Election

[kim]

So folks...

What's your take on the election?

It's been strangely quiet in regards of the recent developments
concerning the new regime about to take hold of the
US administration.

Any thoughts? Any hopes? Any worries?...Anyting at all?

For what it's worth, I'm reeeeeeealy excited that if the US says
we can back out of Afghanistan, we're doing good!

I still, to this day, don't understumble what the F*ck we were doing
there in the first place??? Unfortunately, because we did take part
in the futile effort, we are now on the terrorist's list of country's
to target. What a shame. I thought we were pretty decent folks
all along, but I guess George Bush has made an impact and our silly
government went along with it. Thank you Paul Martin and thank you
Steven Harper.

Good for you George. You made a number of countries hate us because of your stupidity. I sure hope that in the following years of your life, you can take some comfort in knowing that you were not arguably, but GUARANTEED!!! the worst president in history and should someone find you on the street, shoot you dead like the dog that you are you miserable son of a bitch....ahahaha...but I digress...

Good ole George is a good guy and will go down in history just fine.
What the hell is 8 years of misery, abuse and certain chaos anyway?
Daddy will be proud of Junior...great job Dubya! Atta Boy!!! You got Saddam hanged!!! MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!!!...What an achievement!!!

After 8 years...that's about the only thing "Stupid" people will remember you for...the rest of the country and the world will have a hard time trying to remember anything good about your administration from 2000 to 2008!!!!!?

AWWWWWW...Someone took a pot shot at poppa Bush and you went out and hauled him in...well aren't you the hero???...
You freakin' Jackass! Fool! Idiot, Retard!!!

The entire planet has just taken a breath of fresh air after this election
and I'm thinking that although, things aren't going to be easy, I'm pretty certain that the lines of communications and the overall look of democracy will be looked at in a whole new light because of the decision that the USA made last Tuesday.

My first kick at the Presidency if I was Barack, would be to go to Georges house and give him a slap right up side the head!...and say
YOU STUPID SON OF A BITCH!!!!!!! ARE YOU REALLY THAT F**KED IN THE HEAD?

Other than that, I'm sure that Dubya can cook a mean steak on the grill
so he can't be all that bad?...but what do I know...
I'm a simple Canuck.

Thanks
Kim

[Pete]

While your views may be the sentiment of the majority they are expressed simplistically, childish and in very poor taste.

While I disagree with Obama (who said in his campaign that he wants to increase troop presence in Afghanistan) on just about everything especially his disastrous economic policies I hope that he does well. Having a black President will go a long way to heal racial division in America.

[Jesse]

Going by everything I've heard in the campaigns, with Democrats in charge of the House, Senate, and Presidency, I expect nothing less than sunshine and farts for the next 4 years begining on January 20th, 2009. No more excuses.

[Jesse]

BTW-no offense Kim, I still love ya, but that has got to be the dumbest, most uninformed post I've EVER read on ANY subject. Please tell me you cut and pasted that from the Daily Kos.

[blackers45]

I'm damn glad it's over, but is it. Already this morning there's talk on FOX News of who will represent the republicans in 2012, believe it or not there's a meeting of 21 former or present governors in the republican party scheduled to meet next week. Politics never ends, it just has a new face for now.

[jimmccormick3]

I'm not a Bush lover by a long shot, but Kim, even though I agree with some of your comments, I don't wish death on anyone, even Republicans.

I think Obama will be a milestone President. I believe he'll do great things, but he also has a great pressure on him to do that. Being the first black president, all eyes will be on him, with large expectations. Actually something that never gets brought up, & is what I believe is more important, is that he's half white, & he is being accepted by all races. Here in the US, probably every where else, it is the people of mixed races that often get the shaft both ways. For a half black, half white man to be elected President in my opinion, is even a bigger milestone than just a black man being elected. It is quite an achievement both for Obama & the citizen voters of the United States.

As far as Afghanistan goes, hell, all terrorist from that area. America has Sh*t on the Middle East's poor way to long, in the form of sanctions on their governments. All these sanctions do is repress & suppress the poor, while the rich & the governments stay in power. The US's unswerving support of Israel has been a black eye to the Arab community ever since Israel's formation. There really is not any other country I can remember in recent times that was formed for religious purposes. Israel was created for a home for misplaced Jews after WWII. I personally don't have a huge problem with that, but it is another reason for the Muslims, especially the radicals to dislike us. You reap what you sow, so the US is getting theirs. I'm not being unpatriotic here, just practical. You can't Sh*t on people all their lives & expect roses & chocolates back. Hopefully Obama knows this & we can patch up some of the wrongs we have done.

[Scott]

I don't get too much into political debates, usually...but I have to agree with Kim for the most part.

Bush's Presidency was a complete and total failure. Name one good thing that he did. Name one thing that has gotten better over the last eight years. You can't...because there is nothing.

Will Obama be any better? That remains to be seen. I'm not holding my breath.


But...Mickey f*ckin' Mouse would be a better President than George Bush. Thanks for runnin' the country into the ground, Georgie. Good ridance to your sorry, embarassing ass.

[Pete]

Nov 10, 2008 23:27:15 GMT -5 Scott said:

I don't get too much into political debates, usually...but I have to agree with Kim for the most part.

Bush's Presidency was a complete and total failure. Name one good thing that he did. Name one thing that has gotten better over the last eight years. You can't...because there is nothing.

Will Obama be any better? That remains to be seen. I'm not holding my breath.


But...Mickey f*ckin' Mouse would be a better President than George Bush. Thanks for runnin' the country into the ground, Georgie. Good ridance to your sorry, embarassing ass.

I can understand why you don't get involved in political discussions if this your level of discourse. I wouldn't want to flaunt my ignorance in that way either.

I'll guess one thing Bush tried to do was have the feds get more involved in fannie and Freddie as far back as 2003 but congress wanted nothing to do with the executive branch messing with their piggy bank.

[kim]

Nov 9, 2008 18:18:06 GMT -5 Pete said:

While your views may be the sentiment of the majority they are expressed simplistically, childish and in very poor taste.

While I disagree with Obama (who said in his campaign that he wants to increase troop presence in Afghanistan) on just about everything especially his disastrous economic policies I hope that he does well. Having a black President will go a long way to heal racial division in America.

Pete, I completely understand your feelings and thoughts in regards to my otherwise simplistic and albeit childish remarks concerning the current administration. A lesser person would feel the same way. I understand.

However, my initial post was pretty much a lament and a gasp for fresh air and freedom in terms of the life that we as inhabitants of this globe wish to breathe and enjoy.

I agree, my comments were a tad acerbic, but in all honesty, in my
opinion, the last 8 years was not a very encouraging time and with the
previous results, I had no choice but to "breathe" that breath of fresh
air and once again look to the future in a positive manner and hope that we can once again come together, not only as a society, but as a global
family.

One man over the course of the last 8 years pretty much alienated the entire world, closed down all lines of communications and "is" and "was" responsible for the unnecessary loss of life for WHAT?

Democracy lives at home and we can't echo our intent without
launching missiles and firing bullets, then we, as North Americans have thus far failed in our mission...that is to say... "Mission Not Yet Accomplished".

Pete, I didn't mean to offend you. I sure as hell hope that I didn't.
I must admit that my comments can sometimes lack the diplomatic
integrity that my message for the most part intends.

Thanks
Kim

[kim]

Nov 10, 2008 8:20:14 GMT -5 Jesse said:

BTW-no offense Kim, I still love ya, but that has got to be the dumbest, most uninformed post I've EVER read on ANY subject. Please tell me you cut and pasted that from the Daily Kos.

Nope.

No cut and paste on my behalf Jesse...you should
know me well enough by now...haha.

Please tell me that I'm wrong on all fronts and back it up
with some facts that proves George was right in the head and that
he did good for North America and the world as a whole. Tell me that we need to embrace this man for his decisions and that life as we know it is much better now than it was before he took office???...Give me something............

Dumb, maybe...?
Uninformed...okay, I suppose...?
Bad choice of words...possibly...?

But consider this, when a leader of arguably the most powerful nation on this planet tells me that, and I quote, "you're either with us or against us", I have to take a stance. I took a stance and still stand strong to this day that this guy made a huge mistake.

Talk about "dumb"!!! Talk about "uniformed"!...and yet he had the audacity to try and convince me, as a neighbour that what he did was the right choice???

George Bush had no right to tell ME to take a stance! George Bush
had no right to tell ME whether or not I was right or wrong in my thought
process in regards to world politics, George Bush is a bully and history
has proven that...his legacy will not escape him.

George Bush did not have the right to tell MY COUNTRY to go to a foreign land and kill innocent people because he was looking for ONE individual!!! He did not have the right to tell ME that all of these people are bad, yet convince my government to go and
do his dirty deeds on his behalf!

He did not have the right to force ME to tell another country how to run their lives and their business.......but in doing so Mr. Bush, you have now put my safety in jeopardy by putting innocent Canadians on the terrorist list!!!!!!! We didn't ask for this! I didn't vote for it...and the next time I'm standing in the middle of Yonge St. in Toronto, and a bomb goes off because of some militant extremist, I hold you personally responsible George!!!!!...along with the Canadian administration that backed up your FUBAR creed!

I'm sorry, but nobody will ever convince me that his decision was the
right one!

I won't even get into the fact that as this 43rd president leaves office, he leaves the country in one of the worst economical states that it has known in decades. Once again, good for you Mr. Bush.

Global economics is certainly a cyclical beast, however, the man and his administration did little or nothing to quell the upcoming storm...the "perfect storm" as some economists predict. This "cowboy" was too busy over the last 8 years trying to win a war that he'll never win by firing bullets and/or insults towards nations that didn't back his sorry arse!

One other thing to note...was the US at one time in the recent past
not at least a friend of Iraq???

A few years ago, when Saddam asked to sit down with Dubya, why couldn't George not at least taken a moment to consider it?

Yeah, I know,..."he took a shoot at my daddy"... story book finish, but in reality, I have to wonder, would George have had a better chance at capturing his enemy in Bin Laden by employing the help of the Iraqi's instead of going through the last 6 years of endless futile and turmoil?
Iraq could have fought the dirty war for the US and most likely
succeeded in capturing the enemy. Osama would have been the one swinging from the gallows instead and oil Prices might have stabilized
and McCain would have had a better shot at the title??? Who knows?

Would that not maybe have helped solved the problem of redemption and also, granted, helping out Iraq without totally demolishing it?...heaven forbid, strengthening relationships?
I mean who's next?...Cuba???...because they have a few bullets and a beach front and a different way of looking at things?

YEAH, there was problems, but maybe, just maybe, through talks and diplomatic relations, less people would have succumbed to the fate that they have to this day, not to mention US forces but the coalition as well?

The new administration will have it's work cut out for itself and I hope that they'll at least be witnessed on the world stage as one that at least has an open mind and ears big enough to listen to the rest of the world to do what's right without causing more pain and grief to those that we continually state that we are in support of.

I'm not going to apologize to see the door hitting his sorry arse
leave office...in my opinion, that's a good thing and for what it's worth, we just turned the doomsday clock back at least a few seconds because of it.

That may sound crazy Jesse, but as a Canuck, and regardless as to how dumb and uninformed as I am
...........I feel a little bit better. ;D

Thanks
Kim

[kim]

Oh yeah,

Something else...

The board was getting a little slow and I thought that I'd stir
things up a bit.

No harm intended, it's still me, just Kim... ;D

No worries folks, things are gonna be just fine...

Thanks
Kim

[Pete]

Nov 11, 2008 14:01:08 GMT -5 kim said:

Nov 9, 2008 18:18:06 GMT -5 Pete said:

While your views may be the sentiment of the majority they are expressed simplistically, childish and in very poor taste.

While I disagree with Obama (who said in his campaign that he wants to increase troop presence in Afghanistan) on just about everything especially his disastrous economic policies I hope that he does well. Having a black President will go a long way to heal racial division in America.

Pete, I completely understand your feelings and thoughts in regards to my otherwise simplistic and albeit childish remarks concerning the current administration. A lesser person would feel the same way. I understand.

However, my initial post was pretty much a lament and a gasp for fresh air and freedom in terms of the life that we as inhabitants of this globe wish to breathe and enjoy.

I agree, my comments were a tad acerbic, but in all honesty, in my
opinion, the last 8 years was not a very encouraging time and with the
previous results, I had no choice but to "breathe" that breath of fresh
air and once again look to the future in a positive manner and hope that we can once again come together, not only as a society, but as a global
family.

One man over the course of the last 8 years pretty much alienated the entire world, closed down all lines of communications and "is" and "was" responsible for the unnecessary loss of life for WHAT?

Democracy lives at home and we can't echo our intent without
launching missiles and firing bullets, then we, as North Americans have thus far failed in our mission...that is to say... "Mission Not Yet Accomplished".

Pete, I didn't mean to offend you. I sure as hell hope that I didn't.
I must admit that my comments can sometimes lack the diplomatic
integrity that my message for the most part intends.

Thanks
Kim

A breath of fresh air or sigh of relief I could understand and take part in after this divisive election cycle. If that's your idea of positive and comming together It scares me to think what cynical and pissed would look like.

[Pete]

Nov 11, 2008 15:30:53 GMT -5 kim said:

Nov 10, 2008 8:20:14 GMT -5 Jesse said:

BTW-no offense Kim, I still love ya, but that has got to be the dumbest, most uninformed post I've EVER read on ANY subject. Please tell me you cut and pasted that from the Daily Kos.

Nope.

No cut and paste on my behalf Jesse...you should
know me well enough by now...haha.

Please tell me that I'm wrong on all fronts and back it up
with some facts that proves George was right in the head and that
he did good for North America and the world as a whole. Tell me that we need to embrace this man for his decisions and that life as we know it is much better now than it was before he took office???...Give me something............

Dumb, maybe...?
Uninformed...okay, I suppose...?
Bad choice of words...possibly...?

But consider this, when a leader of arguably the most powerful nation on this planet tells me that, and I quote, "you're either with us or against us", I have to take a stance. I took a stance and still stand strong to this day that this guy made a huge mistake.

Talk about "dumb"!!! Talk about "uniformed"!...and yet he had the audacity to try and convince me, as a neighbour that what he did was the right choice???

George Bush had no right to tell ME to take a stance! George Bush
had no right to tell ME whether or not I was right or wrong in my thought
process in regards to world politics, George Bush is a bully and history
has proven that...his legacy will not escape him.

George Bush did not have the right to tell MY COUNTRY to go to a foreign land and kill innocent people because he was looking for ONE individual!!! He did not have the right to tell ME that all of these people are bad, yet convince my government to go and
do his dirty deeds on his behalf!

He did not have the right to force ME to tell another country how to run their lives and their business.......but in doing so Mr. Bush, you have now put my safety in jeopardy by putting innocent Canadians on the terrorist list!!!!!!! We didn't ask for this! I didn't vote for it...and the next time I'm standing in the middle of Yonge St. in Toronto, and a bomb goes off because of some militant extremist, I hold you personally responsible George!!!!!...along with the Canadian administration that backed up your FUBAR creed!

I'm sorry, but nobody will ever convince me that his decision was the
right one!

I won't even get into the fact that as this 43rd president leaves office, he leaves the country in one of the worst economical states that it has known in decades. Once again, good for you Mr. Bush.

Global economics is certainly a cyclical beast, however, the man and his administration did little or nothing to quell the upcoming storm...the "perfect storm" as some economists predict. This "cowboy" was too busy over the last 8 years trying to win a war that he'll never win by firing bullets and/or insults towards nations that didn't back his sorry arse!

One other thing to note...was the US at one time in the recent past
not at least a friend of Iraq???

A few years ago, when Saddam asked to sit down with Dubya, why couldn't George not at least taken a moment to consider it?

Yeah, I know,..."he took a shoot at my daddy"... story book finish, but in reality, I have to wonder, would George have had a better chance at capturing his enemy in Bin Laden by employing the help of the Iraqi's instead of going through the last 6 years of endless futile and turmoil?
Iraq could have fought the dirty war for the US and most likely
succeeded in capturing the enemy. Osama would have been the one swinging from the gallows instead and oil Prices might have stabilized
and McCain would have had a better shot at the title??? Who knows?

Would that not maybe have helped solved the problem of redemption and also, granted, helping out Iraq without totally demolishing it?...heaven forbid, strengthening relationships?
I mean who's next?...Cuba???...because they have a few bullets and a beach front and a different way of looking at things?

YEAH, there was problems, but maybe, just maybe, through talks and diplomatic relations, less people would have succumbed to the fate that they have to this day, not to mention US forces but the coalition as well?

The new administration will have it's work cut out for itself and I hope that they'll at least be witnessed on the world stage as one that at least has an open mind and ears big enough to listen to the rest of the world to do what's right without causing more pain and grief to those that we continually state that we are in support of.

I'm not going to apologize to see the door hitting his sorry arse
leave office...in my opinion, that's a good thing and for what it's worth, we just turned the doomsday clock back at least a few seconds because of it.

That may sound crazy Jesse, but as a Canuck, and regardless as to how dumb and uninformed as I am
...........I feel a little bit better. ;D

Thanks
Kim

You talk of history. You really need to look at the history of what lead to the use of force and continuation of war in Iraq. Not to get into a long history lesson but it is public record. Bill Clinton started the slow process of forcing Saddam Hussein to prove he had gotten rid of chemicals and other weapons he had used on his own people. The Bush administration continued this policy until the U.S. declared war on terrorism and decided Saddam had to abide by the resolution or we would use force against him. Most every U.S. politician: John Kerry, Hillary & Bill Clinton, John Edwards etc approved force against Iraq. At the time it was above President Obama's pay grade to have a vote on that one.. he was busy voting present in IL. It wasn't until the war became difficult and unpopular did politicians start trying to escape responsibility for their leadership and lay it all at the feet of George Bush. To say they where mislead in some way is disingenuous to say the least. No Country was forced to help the U.S. in our fight to dispose of the Hussein regime.

When Bush talked of not with us or against us he was using hyperbole speaking generally to specific countries about terrorism. He obviously was not talking about Canada, UK, France, Germany, Australia etc. He was talking to countries like Pakistan, Iran, North Korea, Libya etc who in the past didn't openly support terrorism but didn't do anything to stop it either.

Don't get me started on the economy. Every time the Bush administration tried to do anything about the housing market, Fannie and Freddie they'd get slapped down by both sides in Congress. The United Sates Congress is to blame for the world financial crisis. When it was controlled by the GOP and by the dems. Not the Bush administration. An argument can be made that the Clinton administration was the root of this current crisis. A very good argument. Obama is also neck deep in Fannie and Freddie money. In my opinion asking Obama to fix this current financial crisis is like asking the man who burnt thanksgiving turkey to cook the Christmas ham.

Extreme Muslim terrorists have hated the west and democracy before Bush and they will long after he's gone. They've been weakened somewhat but Obama being nice isn't going to stop the true believers.

But I am an American and hope my president, President Obama, does well. I hope I'm wrong and Muslim extremists won't want to destroy the west because Obama uses more gentle speech and sides with UN on more issues. I hope taking money out of the economy will help the economy. I hope everything I've learned in economics 101 is wrong. I really hope I'm wrong because I love my country.

[Jesse]

Nov 11, 2008 15:30:53 GMT -5 kim said:

Nov 10, 2008 8:20:14 GMT -5 Jesse said:

BTW-no offense Kim, I still love ya, but that has got to be the dumbest, most uninformed post I've EVER read on ANY subject. Please tell me you cut and pasted that from the Daily Kos.

Nope.

No cut and paste on my behalf Jesse...you should
know me well enough by now...haha.

Please tell me that I'm wrong on all fronts and back it up
with some facts that proves George was right in the head and that
he did good for North America and the world as a whole. Tell me that we need to embrace this man for his decisions and that life as we know it is much better now than it was before he took office???...Give me something............ ok

Dumb, maybe...?
Uninformed...okay, I suppose...?
Bad choice of words...possibly...?

But consider this, when a leader of arguably the most powerful nation on this planet tells me that, and I quote, "you're either with us or against us", I have to take a stance. I took a stance and still stand strong to this day that this guy made a huge mistake. Have you forgotten about 9/11/01? Attacks on USS Cole, US embassys, the anthrax scare? How much is the leader supposed to take before he says "Enough! We're not putting up with this shit and Canada, France, etc, you guys want to show you're our allies? Help us out here or NEVER ask for OUR help again.

Talk about "dumb"!!! Talk about "uniformed"!...and yet he had the audacity to try and convince me, as a neighbour that what he did was the right choice???

George Bush had no right to tell ME to take a stance! George Bush
had no right to tell ME whether or not I was right or wrong in my thought
process in regards to world politics, George Bush is a bully and history
has proven that...his legacy will not escape him. Again, how many times is the big guy supposed to take a sucker punch from a little guy before he fights back? That's not bullying, that's standing your ground.

George Bush did not have the right to tell MY COUNTRY to go to a foreign land and kill innocent people because he was looking for ONE individual!!! He did not have the right to tell ME that all of these people are bad, yet convince my government to go and
do his dirty deeds on his behalf! Your Country could've stayed out of it. In fact, How many Canadians are actually involed in any of "our" conflicts? I hear all the time about British forces, Australians, Italians, Polish, even Spanish troops helping us out. Don't hear much about Canada's help. Not saying it doesn't exist, but I don't think Canada's been as commited to the cause as the US and these other Countries. That's fine, but don't act like Canada and the US are BOTH waste deep in the mud if your Country has just dipped it's big toe into it.

He did not have the right to force ME to tell another country how to run their lives and their business.......but in doing so Mr. Bush, you have now put my safety in jeopardy by putting innocent Canadians on the terrorist list!!!!!!! We didn't ask for this! I didn't vote for it...and the next time I'm standing in the middle of Yonge St. in Toronto, and a bomb goes off because of some militant extremist, I hold you personally responsible George!!!!!...along with the Canadian administration that backed up your FUBAR creed!Again, unless Canada becomes a major factor in the fight against Al Quaida, I don't think Canada is very high on their hit list

I'm sorry, but nobody will ever convince me that his decision was the
right one! Then why ask me to tell you you're wrong? You trying to give me carpel tunnel syndrom or something?

I won't even get into the fact that as this 43rd president leaves office, he leaves the country in one of the worst economical states that it has known in decades. Once again, good for you Mr. Bush. Economy was going along just fine until Dems took over congress. Is that a simplistic view? Yes, but no more simplistic than the views you've already shown.

Global economics is certainly a cyclical beast, however, the man and his administration did little or nothing to quell the upcoming storm...the "perfect storm" as some economists predict. This "cowboy" was too busy over the last 8 years trying to win a war that he'll never win by firing bullets and/or insults towards nations that didn't back his sorry arse!

One other thing to note...was the US at one time in the recent past
not at least a friend of Iraq??? Yes. At one time we were backing Iraq in their war against a bigger threat, Iran. What's the point? At one time we were backing the USSR against a bigger threat in Nazi Germany. If you want to keep playing this stupid game we were once at war with Britain and Canada eagerly sent troops into the US to kill our soldiers. See how stupid this argument can get when you go in that direction?

A few years ago, when Saddam asked to sit down with Dubya, why couldn't George not at least taken a moment to consider it?
Saddam had his chances, like 17 of them, for peace. It was only after war was inevitable that he made the faux gesture that HE wanted peace. Bush wasn't buying it and I don't blame him.

Yeah, I know,..."he took a shoot at my daddy"... story book finish, but in reality, I have to wonder, would George have had a better chance at capturing his enemy in Bin Laden by employing the help of the Iraqi's instead of going through the last 6 years of endless futile and turmoil?
Iraq could have fought the dirty war for the US and most likely
succeeded in capturing the enemy. Osama would have been the one swinging from the gallows instead and oil Prices might have stabilized
and McCain would have had a better shot at the title??? Who knows?
I don't think Iraq would've fought any war on our behalf. They were clearly an enemy of the US and were thumbing their nose at all cease-fire agreements from the first Persian gulf war. Everything I've read, Cheney and Rumsfeld were the biggest advocates for going to war with Iraq, NOT BUSH. Bush WAS the one to make the decision, and I think he was right for it, but I don't think it was all about Saddam's death threat to Bush Sr. As for the oil prices, they would've gone up anyhow, the high prices have more to do with OPEC wanting more money for their own infrastructure and the likes of China and India's increased demand for oil than anything to do with war in the middle east. I will say this, it sure would be a nice gesture for Iraq to GIVE us oil to help pay for OUR costs of freeing THEIR Country.
Would that not maybe have helped solved the problem of redemption and also, granted, helping out Iraq without totally demolishing it?...heaven forbid, strengthening relationships?
I mean who's next?...Cuba???...because they have a few bullets and a beach front and a different way of looking at things?
Last I saw, Cuba was not threatening to build a nuke, nor had Castro used biological weapons upon his own people.

YEAH, there was problems, but maybe, just maybe, through talks and diplomatic relations, less people would have succumbed to the fate that they have to this day, not to mention US forces but the coalition as well? Again, we'd been talking to Iraq for years. Didn't do much good

The new administration will have it's work cut out for itself and I hope that they'll at least be witnessed on the world stage as one that at least has an open mind and ears big enough to listen to the rest of the world to do what's right without causing more pain and grief to those that we continually state that we are in support of. How about the pain and grief caused by Al Quaida?

I'm not going to apologize to see the door hitting his sorry arse
leave office...in my opinion, that's a good thing and for what it's worth, we just turned the doomsday clock back at least a few seconds because of it. Never appologize for your beliefs, but make sure what you believe is true and logical. Personally, I'm sick to death of defending Bush, a guy I was not exactly thrilled about to be President, against unfounded attacks. In that way, I'm glad McCain did not win the election, because I'd be doing it again. All you Bush haters got what you wanted and I hope it works out for you. Any bumps in the road and I hope you're willing to defend your savior as much as I and others have wound up defending a guy that we only voted for because he wasn't Gore or Kerry. There ARE legitimate reasons for being glad Bush is leaving office come January, I haven't heard one of them in this thread though.



That may sound crazy Jesse, but as a Canuck, and regardless as to how dumb and uninformed as I am
...........I feel a little bit better. ;D

Thanks
Kim

[Pete]

Nov 11, 2008 15:37:34 GMT -5 kim said:

Oh yeah,

Something else...

The board was getting a little slow and I thought that I'd stir
things up a bit.

No harm intended, it's still me, just Kim... ;D

No worries folks, things are gonna be just fine...

Thanks
Kim

Stir up you did! No harm taken juts a little annoyed.

[jimmccormick3]

Nov 12, 2008 8:04:16 GMT -5 @Jesse said:

Nov 11, 2008 15:30:53 GMT -5 @lumberman said:

Nope.

No cut and paste on my behalf Jesse...you should
know me well enough by now...haha.

Please tell me that I'm wrong on all fronts and back it up
with some facts that proves George was right in the head and that
he did good for North America and the world as a whole. Tell me that we need to embrace this man for his decisions and that life as we know it is much better now than it was before he took office???...Give me something............ OK

Dumb, maybe...?
Uninformed...okay, I suppose...?
Bad choice of words...possibly...?

But consider this, when a leader of arguably the most powerful nation on this planet tells me that, and I quote, "you're either with us or against us", I have to take a stance. I took a stance and still stand strong to this day that this guy made a huge mistake. Have you forgotten about 9/11/01? Attacks on USS Cole, US embassy's, the anthrax scare? How much is the leader supposed to take before he says "Enough! We're not putting up with this Sh*t and Canada, France, etc, you guys want to show you're our allies? Help us out here or NEVER ask for OUR help again.

Talk about "dumb"!!! Talk about "uniformed"!...and yet he had the audacity to try and convince me, as a neighbor that what he did was the right choice???

George Bush had no right to tell ME to take a stance! George Bush
had no right to tell ME whether or not I was right or wrong in my thought
process in regards to world politics, George Bush is a bully and history
has pr oven that...his legacy will not escape him. Again, how many times is the big guy supposed to take a sucker punch from a little guy before he fights back? That's not bullying, that's standing your ground.

George Bush did not have the right to tell MY COUNTRY to go to a foreign land and kill innocent people because he was looking for ONE individual!!! He did not have the right to tell ME that all of these people are bad, yet convince my government to go and
do his dirty deeds on his behalf! Your Country could've stayed out of it. In fact, How many Canadians are actually in voled in any of "our" conflicts? I hear all the time about British forces, Australians, Italians, Polish, even Spanish troops helping us out. Don't hear much about Canada's help. Not saying it doesn't exist, but I don't think Canada's been as committed to the cause as the US and these other Countries. That's fine, but don't act like Canada and the US are BOTH waste deep in the mud if your Country has just dipped it's big toe into it.

He did not have the right to force ME to tell another country how to run their lives and their business.......but in doing so Mr. Bush, you have now put my safety in jeopardy by putting innocent Canadians on the terrorist list!!!!!!! We didn't ask for this! I didn't vote for it...and the next time I'm standing in the middle of Yong St. in Toronto, and a bomb goes off because of some militant extremist, I hold you personally responsible George!!!!!...along with the Canadian administration that backed up your FIBER creed!Again, unless Canada becomes a major factor in the fight against Al Quad, I don't think Canada is very high on their hit list

I'm sorry, but nobody will ever convince me that his decision was the
right one! Then why ask me to tell you you're wrong? You trying to give me carpel tunnel syndrome or something?

I won't even get into the fact that as this 43rd president leaves office, he leaves the country in one of the worst economical states that it has known in decades. Once again, good for you Mr. Bush. Economy was going along just fine until Dem's took over congress. Is that a simplistic view? Yes, but no more simplistic than the views you've already shown.

Global economics is certainly a cyclical beast, however, the man and his administration did little or nothing to quell the upcoming storm...the "perfect storm" as some economists predict. This "cowboy" was too busy over the last 8 years trying to win a war that he'll never win by firing bullets and/or insults to wards nations that didn't back his sorry Ares!

One other thing to note...was the US at one time in the recent past
not at least a friend of Iraq??? Yes. At one time we were backing Iraq in their war against a bigger threat, Iran. What's the point? At one time we were backing the USSR against a bigger threat in Nazi Germany. If you want to keep playing this stupid game we were once at war with Britain and Canada eagerly sent troops into the US to kill our soldiers. See how stupid this argument can get when you go in that direction?

A few years ago, when Saddam asked to sit down with Dub ya, why couldn't George not at least taken a moment to consider it?
Saddam had his chances, like 17 of them, for peace. It was only after war was inevitable that he made the Fax gesture that HE wanted peace. Bush wasn't buying it and I don't blame him.

Yeah, I know,..."he took a shoot at my daddy"... story book finish, but in reality, I have to wonder, would George have had a better chance at capturing his enemy in Bin Laden by employing the help of the Iraqi's instead of going through the last 6 years of endless futile and turmoil?
Iraq could have fought the dirty war for the US and most likely
succeeded in capturing the enemy. Asama would have been the one swinging from the gallows instead and oil Prices might have stabilized
and McCain would have had a better shot at the title??? Who knows?
I don't think Iraq would've fought any war on our behalf. They were clearly an enemy of the US and were thumbing their nose at all cease-fire agreements from the first Persian gulf war. Everything I've read, Chaney and Misfield were the biggest advocates for going to war with Iraq, NOT BUSH. Bush WAS the one to make the decision, and I think he was right for it, but I don't think it was all about Saddam's death threat to Bush Sr. As for the oil prices, they would've gone up anyhow, the high prices have more to do with OPEC wanting more money for their own infrastructure and the likes of China and India's increased demand for oil than anything to do with war in the middle east. I will say this, it sure would be a nice gesture for Iraq to GIVE us oil to help pay for OUR costs of freeing THEIR Country.
Would that not maybe have helped solved the problem of redemption and also, granted, helping out Iraq without totally demolishing it?...heaven forbid, strengthening relationships?
I mean who's next?...Cuba???...because they have a few bullets and a beach front and a different way of looking at things?
Last I saw, Cuba was not threatening to build a nuke, nor had Castro used biological weapons upon his own people.

YEAH, there was problems, but maybe, just maybe, through talks and diplomatic relations, less people would have succumbed to the fate that they have to this day, not to mention US forces but the coalition as well? Again, we'd been talking to Iraq for years. Didn't do much good

The new administration will have it's work cut out for itself and I hope that they'll at least be witnessed on the world stage as one that at least has an open mind and ears big enough to listen to the rest of the world to do what's right without causing more pain and grief to those that we continually state that we are in support of. How about the pain and grief caused by Al Quad?

I'm not going to apologize to see the door hitting his sorry Ares
leave office...in my opinion, that's a good thing and for what it's worth, we just turned the doomsday clock back at least a few seconds because of it. Never apologize for your beliefs, but make sure what you believe is true and logical. Personally, I'm sick to death of defending Bush, a guy I was not exactly thrilled about to be President, against unfounded attacks. In that way, I'm glad McCain did not win the election, because I'd be doing it again. All you Bush haters got what you wanted and I hope it works out for you. Any bumps in the road and I hope you're willing to defend your savior as much as I and others have wound up defending a guy that we only voted for because he wasn't Gore or Kerry. There ARE legitimate reasons for being glad Bush is leaving office come January, I haven't heard one of them in this thread though.



That may sound crazy Jesse, but as a Zanuck, and regardless as to how dumb and uninformed as I am
...........I feel a little bit better. ;D

Thanks
Kim

I can't even read the above post. Maybe I'll use my magnifying glass.

I'm not going to make this long, but George Bush is a warmonger of the first degree. There is no arguing about it, & yes, the congress & senate were goaded into believing that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, but they all were wrong. I'm still not convinced that oil, Iraq having the second largest reserves in the world, was not a prime motivator in this war. Protecting, or should I say investing in future assets for the US. The whole world except are stalwart allies the British, the Canadians, & a few other countries, that I can't remember, were & are against this war. Everybody is wrong, & we're right? Hardly. There has not been a war worth fighting since WWII. I will say that old man Bush was at least honest about our motives with Kuwait, when Iraq attacked. Oil.

People in Africa are facing genocide, yet what are we doing? Nothing. Why? Because they have no natural assets that we're interested in. Pure & simple.

No, Bush has not been good for this country, & the far majority of Americans believe that. You can argue, all you want, but the fact is Bush will go down in history as the most incompetent President in US history. Not just because I think so, but people far more qualified than myself think so, know so, & McCain would have not been much better. His campaign was a fiasco. If he can't manage, nor hire the right people to manage his campaign, how is he ever going to run the US? Thank God he's not!

Well, I've went off again. So much for a short post.

[Pete]

Nov 12, 2008 12:47:29 GMT -5 jimmccormick3 said:

I can't even read the above post. Maybe I'll use my magnifying glass.

I'm not going to make this long, but George Bush is a warmonger of the first degree. There is no arguing about it, & yes, the congress & senate were goaded into believing that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, but they all were wrong. I'm still not convinced that oil, Iraq having the second largest reserves in the world, was not a prime motivator in this war. Protecting, or should I say investing in future assets for the US. The whole world except are stalwart allies the British, the Canadians, & a few other countries, that I can't remember, were & are against this war. Everybody is wrong, & we're right? Hardly. There has not been a war worth fighting since WWII. I will say that old man Bush was at least honest about our motives with Kuwait, when Iraq attacked. Oil.

People in Africa are facing genocide, yet what are we doing? Nothing. Why? Because they have no natural assets that we're interested in. Pure & simple.

No, Bush has not been good for this country, & the far majority of Americans believe that. You can argue, all you want, but the fact is Bush will go down in history as the most incompetent President in US history. Not just because I think so, but people far more qualified than myself think so, know so, & McCain would have not been much better. His campaign was a fiasco. If he can't manage, nor hire the right people to manage his campaign, how is he ever going to run the US? Thank God he's not!

Well, I've went off again. So much for a short post.

What did Saddam Hussein use to kill hundreds of thousands of Kurds in Northern Iraq? Spit balls? Iraq had WMD. The whole world knew it. Even the democrats new it. Bush did not trick the whole world into believing that Saddam Hussein had weapons. He did have them and used them in his own country. Even France, Russia, Germany, Bill Clinton and John Kerry believed this. George Bush did not make it up. The U.N. even believed that Saddam had weapons and passed resolution after resolution demanding he proved he had gotten rid of them. Saddam Hussien thumbed his nose at the U.N. and the world. The only people fooled are the American voter after American politicians shirked their leadership and changed their minds when polls turned and things got tough. A commander in chief can't do that. As John McCain had said winning a war is more important than winning elections.

Of course the presence of oil in the region makes volatility and mad men in charge of arsenals unacceptable. To say we went to war for oil isn't really wrong and Bush never really used it in arguments because it's apparent. I don't think it's a secret to anyone that there's a lot of oil there and stability in the region is important. Having a dictator who openly funds terrorism and has a history of invading other countries and yes using WMDs is not good for the region or the world. Many of the democratic governments of the world agreed. Democrat politicians in America agreed until the polls shifted and it became unpopular.

[jimmccormick3]

Nov 12, 2008 13:05:16 GMT -5 @step said:

Nov 12, 2008 12:47:29 GMT -5 jimmccormick3 said:

I can't even read the above post. Maybe I'll use my magnifying glass.

I'm not going to make this long, but George Bush is a warmonger of the first degree. There is no arguing about it, & yes, the congress & senate were goaded into believing that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, but they all were wrong. I'm still not convinced that oil, Iraq having the second largest reserves in the world, was not a prime motivator in this war. Protecting, or should I say investing in future assets for the US. The whole world except are stalwart allies the British, the Canadians, & a few other countries, that I can't remember, were & are against this war. Everybody is wrong, & we're right? Hardly. There has not been a war worth fighting since WWII. I will say that old man Bush was at least honest about our motives with Kuwait, when Iraq attacked. Oil.

People in Africa are facing genocide, yet what are we doing? Nothing. Why? Because they have no natural assets that we're interested in. Pure & simple.

No, Bush has not been good for this country, & the far majority of Americans believe that. You can argue, all you want, but the fact is Bush will go down in history as the most incompetent President in US history. Not just because I think so, but people far more qualified than myself think so, know so, & McCain would have not been much better. His campaign was a fiasco. If he can't manage, nor hire the right people to manage his campaign, how is he ever going to run the US? Thank God he's not!

Well, I've went off again. So much for a short post.

What did Saddam Hussein use to kill hundreds of thousands of Kurds in Northern Iraq? Spit balls? Iraq had WMD. The whole world knew it. Even the democrats new it. Bush did not trick the whole world into believing that Saddam Hussein had weapons. He did have them and used them in his own country. Even France, Russia, Germany, Bill Clinton and John Kerry believed this. George Bush did not make it up. The U.N. even believed that Saddam had weapons and passed resolution after resolution demanding he proved he had gotten rid of them. Saddam Hussien thumbed his nose at the U.N. and the world. The only people fooled are the American voter after American politicians shirked their leadership and changed their minds when polls turned and things got tough. A commander in chief can't do that. As John McCain had said winning a war is more important than winning elections.

Of course the presence of oil in the region makes volatility and mad men in charge of arsenals unacceptable. To say we went to war for oil isn't really wrong and Bush never really used it in arguments because it's apparent. I don't think it's a secret to anyone that there's a lot of oil there and stability in the region is important. Having a dictator who openly funds terrorism and has a history of invading other countries and yes using WMDs is not good for the region or the world. Many of the democratic governments of the world agreed. Democrat politicians in America agreed until the polls shifted and it became unpopular.

The plain fact is there was no weapons of mass destruction found, Bush had supported this idea intensely, to the point everyone believed it.

Yes, 50,000-60,000 Kurds did get massacred, not hundreds of thousands. Some of them, if I remember right, were killed by Mustard gas. The US has been looking for a long time for something to justify an invasion. So Abra Cadabra, make everyone paranoid about biological weapons, nuclear weapons, etc. I don't buy it, & neither should you. Save the Kurds! I don't believe it & neither should you.

What is it now, one million killed in Africa? Lot more than 50,000, hmm.

[jimmccormick3]

During the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s, the regime implemented anti-Kurdish policies and a de facto civil war broke out. Iraq was widely-condemned by the international community, but was never seriously punished for oppressive measures such as the mass murder of hundreds of thousands of civilians, the wholesale destruction of thousands of villages and the deportation of thousands of Kurds to southern and central Iraq. The campaign of Iraqi government against Kurds in 1988 was called Anfal ("Spoils of War"). The Anfal attacks led to destruction of two thousand villages and death of between fifty and one-hundred thousand Kurds - From Wickpedia

The above in bold is one of the reasons why Bush wanted to go to war, at least what he'd, they'd, have you believe.

[jimmccormick3]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War_(2003)

An excerpt:

On September 18, 2002, George Tenet briefed Bush that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction. Bush dismissed this top-secret intelligence from Saddam's inner circle which was approved by two senior CIA officers, but it turned out to be completely accurate. The information was never shared with Congress or even CIA agents examining whether Saddam had such weapons.[79] The CIA had contacted Saddam Hussein's foreign minister, Naji Sabri, who was being paid by the French as an agent. Sabri informed them that Saddam had ambitions for a nuclear program but that it was not active, and that no biological weapons were being produced or stockpiled, although research was underway.[80]

In September 2002, the Bush administration, the CIA and the DIA said attempts by Iraq to acquire high-strength aluminum tubes, which were prohibited under the UN monitoring program, pointed to a clandestine effort to make enriched uranium for nuclear bombs.[81] This analysis was opposed by the Department of Energy (DOE) and INR which was significant because of DOE's expertise in gas centrifuges and nuclear weapons programs. The DOE and INR argued that such tubes were poorly suited for centrifuges.[82] An effort by the DOE to change Powell's comments before his UN appearance was rebuffed by the administration.[83][84] Indeed, Colin Powell, in his address to the U.N. Security Council just prior to the war, made reference to the aluminum tubes. But a report released by the Institute for Science and International Security in 2002 reported that it was highly unlikely that the tubes could be used to enrich uranium. Powell later admitted he had presented an inaccurate case to the United Nations on Iraqi weapons, and the intelligence he was relying on was, in some cases, "deliberately misleading."[