It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bush's address to the Nation..Your thoughts

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by polanksi
Ditto forestlady. All you 20 somethings out there oil is running out you can't relie on it. Get over it and find alternative sources of energy or read James Kunstler's book 'The Long Emergency'


It's very easy for those of our generation to preach to the next generation that they need to find other energy sources. " Get over it? That's great advice.

"Sorry, we've used up most of your inheritance, you better find a job"

Is that it?

Oil is the foundation of modern technological society, and will be until the very last drop is consumed......You get over it.


If we would take a fraction of the money spent on war we would eliminate most of the world's problems.


Would you care to substantiate this wild claim?




posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by RRconservative
Dems have been crying since the beginning that Iraq is going badly. The dems only counter proposal is "Cut and Run." They want America to look bad to the rest of the world. They want America to lose this war. They believe that anything bad that happens to Bush and America is good for them.

If things were going that bad in Iraq, common sense says more troops would help the situation. A cut and run like what happened in Viet Nam is exactly what the Democrats want.

Dick Durbin is human scum. I actually felt ill watching this troop basher give his speech.



[edit on 10-1-2007 by RRconservative]


It's not just democrats it's Chuck Hagel who served probably a bit more than you did and he believes it's necessary to rethink this debacle that you support. you don't mention him or what he said. You only mention "DEMS" like they are an american enemy to you because alot of them object to a wasted conflict and wasted lives for something.


Bashing soldiers is when you put them in harms way for corporate interests. Bashing soldiers is when you leave the stranded in the sand and away from their families. Bashing Soldiers is when you rape the Veterans Administration which is what this administration did more than any other administration in history. Try to remember that,next time. You see Dick Durbin instead of retorting who is scum for towing different politics than you. Durbin didn't kill thousands of soldiers and hundreds of thousands of civilians. But this administration is the catalyst for this disaster. And you will never get a victory,ever.



Yet you fail to see that,RRconservative.


Alot of the military doesn't want this conflict. It's time to wake up no one likes this Administration direction.



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Two major thrusts:

1. 20K additional troops to keep the 9 Baghdad districts stable after they have been secured. This has been missing in the past, since the troops would drive out the insurgents and then leave the area. Once they were gone, the insurgents returned.

2. The Iraqi gov't will lift the restrictions they had previously placed on the coalition forces. For example, last year Maliki refused to allow checkpoints in Sadr City.

Hopefully, they (Iraq gov't) have learned that you cannot win a PC-directed war. If you're being fired upon from a mosque, it becomes a fair target. Time to unleash the dogs of war.

I agree with both proposals, btw. Bush also did mention that Iraq should be responsible for all security by November.




Unleash the dogs of war? This is the most naive thing I hear uttered. We can't. Don't you understand that? Iraq will rise up against us and this conflict is already lost. And we don't have 20,000 troops. It's just recycled soldiers from 2 and 3 tours of duty. You are living in a fantasy if you think this is going to help.

This is for Oil and U.s. corporate interests abroad. Bush has no credibility and either does this deluded plan of military strategy. It's just american bravado that has gone overboard.


Iraq doesn't want us there and you need to realize that as the months roll by. There are no major thrusts that are going to help this conflict because another region is going to ignite and you are going to be in the same predicament before. You are taking cues from a failure as a president. He's the Titanic of America. It's amazing how guillible people are. Look at his track record for godsake.



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 12:30 PM
link   
www.warresisters.org...


How Could Our Tax Money Be Used?
You can only spend money once. If our tax dollars are spent on the military, they cannot be used to meet basic human needs. At a time when people in the U.S. suffer — from hunger, poor health care, insufficient day care, substandard housing, inadequate mass transportation, deficient education, meager pollution control, and an inefficient profit-oriented energy program — it is easy to see how money could be better spent[/quote.

I would consider these major world problems that might be solved with money spent on war.


Many argue that military spending creates jobs, but dollar-for-dollar the same amount of money creates nearly twice as many jobs in education or health care as in the military. Additionally, military-related jobs do not result in socially useful goods. Millions of people are underfed, unemployed and homeless while billions of dollars are spent to fuel, house and store weapons, tanks, planes and ships, and to recruit and train our youth in the ways of war. Skilled scientists and engineers are perfecting methods of destruction rather than developing products that improve the quality of life. In addition, tax payers end up paying again to clean up after the military — one of the worst polluters on the planet.



I would consider these major world problems that might be solved with money spent on war.

I’ll watch my tone but it was more a warning than a lecture. My generation has screwed up, other are going to have to try to straighten things out.


[edit on 11-1-2007 by polanksi]



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by mecheng
Why can't we just split up Iraq into separate "states" or countries to satisfy the Sunnis and Sheites and get the hell out of there? Where has that discussion gone?

My understanding is that the majority of Iraqis do not support this solution.


Well how many Iraqi's supported our illegal, preemptive invasion and subsequent occupation in the first place?

I think either bush has gone off the deepend, or there is a ulterior motive here. Maybe a complete US empire in the middle east?

Yeah, we'll convert them from oppressed islamists to oppressed christains!



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soitenly
I am not certain about most of you, but I am only in my early 20's. My generation needs to secure its source of oil. Older generations do not have the same fretting ideas as we do. Their retirement unlike ours, is bound in about a decade and past wars such as Iran-Iraq, Gulf War and many other campaigns in and out of third world africa, vietnam and elsewhere have secured oil for their retirement.

I am not going to allow my children and grandchildren live in a world where they are forced to fight wars like WWII in order to secure oil. We do not owe it to ourselves to have fought and bleed simply to see Old Europe powers take control of Iraq. We must let the world know that we are not the "paper tiger" Mao said we are. People get suspicous and then they get ideas.


Numbskull!

What makes think we NEED oil. Whats wrong with hemp?

I'll tell you, hemp is not as profitable. You can't patent it!

Everything that we could potentially need oil for can be done and more , and cheaper with hemp. Not to mention Electricity, Solar Power etc.

READ AND LEARN

[edit on 11-1-2007 by QuasiShaman]



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 02:47 PM
link   
To the OP.......

The only thing that i heard was....I know we've been pushed around over there and we got distracted, but THIS time we will get our shiat in a pile and get our duties done. So give me your sons and daughters....give me your money and it will all be possible.

Just my take on it.
MissAshleyDear



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Hi There,

Having read the transcript kindly provided by one or two thoughtful posters, I have to say that I intuit, along with other posters that there is subterfuge afoot! Once again, the American president is being somewhat economical with his true intentions. I do not see how an additional 20k troops are going to manage the sectarian violence any more differently, or more successfully, than those whom are already there. Perhaps, the real intention of the additional troops is not sectarian managment, but the management of America's interests, or rather American corporate interest, afterall, buisness runs the world, not governments.

Thus, by 'interests', Bush may really mean a response to Iran and Syria whom have been positively identified (by and in the speech) to be wholly connected to the so-called insurgents. It is possible that we will see more 'hit and run' incursions upon Iranian and Syrian interests and territory, perhaps to 'goad' them into open conflict by some angered response. I cannot see either country doing so, but I can purview further attacks upon western interests and mainlands, and that these will be blamed on terrorists and insurgents, fuelled, financed, and armed by Iran and Syria, which will provide the necessary lawful response upon them by America and allies. The extra 20k troops will more than likely be used for this, even though they will be embedded in Iraq. This is still, and will always remain a conflict whose cause is that of corporate interest and greed, and only by some distant relation, a cause for American security.

As those 20k troops pour into Iraq, we will see tit-for-tat recruitment for those groups opposed to the American and allied presence, the violence will continue and most likely escalate, not just sectarially, but also against the foreign forces there. The extra 'carrier' fleet declares the true intention, for it won't be this fleet that will patrol the streets of Baghdad, they will be in the region for Iran and Syria, to hit them with missile ordinance should the opportunity (and that's the right word) arise. By adding the extra troops, it enables rapid diversion of military resources along the borders of Iran and Syria, but none of this will become apparent until it becomes necessary. If the military asked for 100k troops, it will get them in phased additions, unless an 'event' occurs in which it will not be necessary to hide their deployment...time will tell. Bush's problem is to get the people's of America's compliance, even if begrudgingly, and he knows this is becoming something much harder to convince for, so an 'event' of some kind might either be staged, or allowed to unfold, so that it raises a 'knee-jerk' response of anger, as it did with 9/11.

Ultimately, this has nothing whatsoever to do with America's security, but more with its interest in another coutry's resource. Corporate oil interest is what is fuelling this conflict. Your own singular interest is simply that you can put another gallon of 'gas' in your car's tank. As you do so, corporate oil makes money. It makes money on buying oil supplies, it makes money when you buy it for your car. Then there is the rebuilding of Iraq's infrastructure, money is to be made from that. Let us not forget that all the bombs and bullets and missiles used during the conflict has to be replaced, and money is made from that...but not everyone makes money, most just make a monthly wage, it is the few sacrificing nothing of their's that make the money, that get rich and richer, that get power and become more powerful, and in order to maintain that grip they will use their most valueable resource to do so...the lives of your sons and daughters in uniform. It is in the corporate interest to keep this cycle going. It must stick in the craw to realise what 'fodder' your offspring becomes in the hands of corporate greed. The speech was a total pathetic sham!



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Fellow citizens: The year ahead will demand more patience, sacrifice, and resolve. It can be tempting to think that America can put aside the burdens of freedom.


the burdens of freedom? i think what he means is the that the united states and the freedom that citizens have is a menace to the NWO, which he is willing to put aside

he is a piece of garbage, but i'm sure if it wasn't him it would be someone else propped up there.



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
1. 20K additional troops to keep the 9 Baghdad districts stable after they have been secured. This has been missing in the past, since the troops would drive out the insurgents and then leave the area. Once they were gone, the insurgents returned.


So... we put 20K more troops in, drive out the insurgents and occupy the district and STAY there instead of leaving for it to be occupied again, right?

For how long? THEN WHAT? How long do we stay? When we leave, whenever that is, won't the insurgents just come back in?

Then what about after Baghdad is 'secure'. We leave? Won't the insurgents just come back? And what of the rest of the country? While we're 'securing' Baghdad, what's to happen in Anbar?

What Bush is proposing is like trying to stop a leak with toilet paper and chewing gum!

I only wish Congress would have the guts to do the right thing and NOT fund this ridiculous move.

What we're setting up for here is permanent occupation of Iraq. I'm surprised you don't see that.



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 05:28 PM
link   
This is a hopeless situation and our president knows NOT what he's doing. That scared look on his face is just that. He's SCARED.
He knows better than we do that his latest attempt at solving anything in Iraq is a last ditch effort...and he doesnt mind sacrificing American lives for his ultimate "goal". He's scared because he knows he's disgraced, and he is likely to have a bad fate...similar to others in the middle east.
I dont know how that man can sleep at night....

The photo op this morning in which he gave a medal for a Marine in Iraq is nothing more than an opportunistic moment on the air letting our kids know how "noble" it is to give your life....

I'd like to see his GIRLS go to war. THAT would make me happy. Fighting with the enemies, front row and center, which is nothing HE is familiar with EITHER.

btw, what happened to the AMERICAN FLAG? Shouldnt it have been directly behind him?
Anyone notice THAT wall had NOTHING??? It was bare.

I'd like to know why.



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 06:43 PM
link   
Bush is afraid, he is afraid that the people of this nation will start rising up in masses to confront him and his policies because obviously our own elected politicians do not have the guts to do it.

And he wonders how well his own cronies will defend him against the mothers of American.

Did anybody saw the face of Ms. Condi when an antiwar supporter got in the hearings today in capitol hill and started screaming to her “Stop the lies, stop the war, enough with the lies” I thought she was going to crawl under her own skin.

Last night Bush did what he has done repeatedly, making Iraqi look like is all about terror, he dismissed the fact that is a civil war in that country, which the only reason democracy has failed is due to the terrorist against US in Iraq.

Terrorist that was not there when he invaded that nation; I guess he forgot about that also.

He continue to lie over and over in order to avoid what in the heck his is doing in Iraq and what goals he have for that country.

He wants the American people to think that is all about terrorist what is the problem in Iraq, but fail to tell also that is Iraqis the ones dying in Iraq.

He was insulting the intelligent of the American people again in this nation.

He cannot even come with a new line to keep lying to the American people anymore, he takes responsibilities for the mistakes of others that actually are not others mistake but his own.



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 07:15 PM
link   
Marg,

I'm sorry i missed Bush's right hand woman getting scared. She should be.
I did see her squirming and pleeding with congress, though. That was satisfaction


If she was any kind of person at all she would resign from this circus and try to distance herself from Bush/Cheney and try to redeem herself thru other means. It cannot be fun working in that White House with those stubborn burros. I wonder just what kind of life she has
I hope she gets paid money beyond her wildest dreams...even for that i;d tell Bush i cannot possibly go on with the lies and dissinformation and tell him to get someone else.
There's got to me more than money to this.



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 07:25 PM
link   
Is madness Dg, This president is ignoring the will of the people, that already has given the sign that Iraq has to stop.

Our president is so arrogant that he care less of what the people of this nation wants and even don't give a fart what the Iraqis want.

When all this people leaves the white house they all have fortunes made and jobs waiting.

While the rest of the American people gets the legacy of their mistakes and favoritism over the private interest they worship, we are to pay for their mistake, our childrens and our children, children.



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 07:25 PM
link   
Is madness Dg, This president is ignoring the will of the people, that already has given the sign that Iraq has to stop.

Our president is so arrogant that he care less of what the people of this nation wants and even don't give a fart what the Iraqis want.

When all this people leaves the white house they all have fortunes made and jobs waiting.

While the rest of the American people gets the legacy of their mistakes and favoritism over the private interest they worship, we are to pay for their mistake, our childrens and our children, children.



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Marge
I really cannot see that woman being offended, shamed, or guilt-ridden. Im sure all these guys sleep very well at night knowing full well that their children will never be placed in danger over there, that their lives will never be in danger here, and that if/when they do go over there for visits they will be well protected, well armored and are able to leave whenever they please. No Rations for them, no sleeping in tents or sand pits. They just smile ,wave and speak patriotic words of encourangement to those that we here may never see again.



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 08:55 PM
link   
He has no soul.

I cant bear to look at him anymore.



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 09:26 PM
link   
"Get over oil" is far easier said than done. What recommendations do any of you have? What are the details?

Refining oil is a complex process, getting oil out of the ground in the first place is extremely expensive and complex as well. We're talking $3,000+ per barrel for initial production in some cases. The reason we however do not have $3,000 barrel oil is because established production from other wells offset the costs, those which have been and can sustain production keep the price of exploration to a minimum.

I know many of you think that drilling for oil is simple, fun and easy, and it can be and should be and is fun. But it is complicated and extremely expensive. The cash flow for oil companies may be high but so are the costs. I can't stress it enough: Rapidly overhauling the United States infrastructure is going to desimate the United States infrastructure.

Today I read a publication (book) put out by the America Chemical Society (ACS) in 2006 which gave their assesment of the US and global chemicals industry. It was about 180 pages with three chapters, one of which focused exclusively on China, and the other two were largely devoted toward Europe (Germany) and the United States pharmaceutical industry. We live in a world where we compete with foreign companies on a daily basis to finance, supply and sell our manufactured products. If a society of chemists can recognize this, why not the rest of you? We need the oil, we need it now and my future grandchildren's grandchildren will need the oil.

There is no alternative.



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soitenly
we need it now and my future grandchildren's grandchildren will need the oil.

There is no alternative.


Ahh so you think that by taking someone elses resource its ok? So then what will stop the future governments,corporations or even citizens from saying to your future relations, hey, I like your house, I think I wanna set up my corporate headquarters right on top of it. Will that be ok too, if they need the land?I mean hell, if you, or them or anyone can go into another country, then whats to stop them here on our own turf?



posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 01:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Soitenly

Refining oil is a complex process, getting oil out of the ground in the first place is extremely expensive and complex as well. We're talking $3,000+ per barrel for initial production in some cases. The reason we however do not have $3,000 barrel oil is because established production from other wells offset the costs, those which have been and can sustain production keep the price of exploration to a minimum.

I know many of you think that drilling for oil is simple, fun and easy, and it can be and should be and is fun. But it is complicated and extremely expensive. The cash flow for oil companies may be high but so are the costs. I can't stress it enough: Rapidly overhauling the United States infrastructure is going to desimate the United States infrastructure.

Today I read a publication (book) put out by the America Chemical Society (ACS) in 2006 which gave their assesment of the US and global chemicals industry. It was about 180 pages with three chapters, one of which focused exclusively on China, and the other two were largely devoted toward Europe (Germany) and the United States pharmaceutical industry. We live in a world where we compete with foreign companies on a daily basis to finance, supply and sell our manufactured products. If a society of chemists can recognize this, why not the rest of you? We need the oil, we need it now and my future grandchildren's grandchildren will need the oil.

There is no alternative.


So do you, by any chance, work in the oil industry?

You seem to think the US has the right to take oil at the point of a gun rather than buying it like everyone else. What's next?, rounding up children for body parts or lampshades? Why not just enslave another race that way your grandchildren will never have to lift a finger?!

I'm still confused why you think it's OK to invade another country to fight a war against your European allies - many of whom have fought and died alongside you in this crusade.

So competition and trade is fine until someone else starts to do well and then it's time to bomb and shoot people to preserve your position?

Why not just bomb Europe - that way you won't have to see the Euro overtake the dollar as the world's (and oil's ) currency?

My country right or wrong? - That seems, to me, to be the rallying call of the dictator and the fascist.

Face it, your Pres has used the lives of your citizens to ensure his friends' corporate profits - good job the price of death and disability doesn't show up on their balance sheets



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join