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.

 

'I am Become Death, Destroyer of Worlds'

page: 5
6
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Bush isn't evil. He actually thinks he's doing good. I would never judge someone as being evil not even by their actions. Judging others (in non-judiciary way) has nothing to do with them, but with yourself.

It's they who should judge themselves. Judging someone as being evil or not involves your own personal emotion, which clouds the matter for you already. You will not be able to see it as rationally as possible.




posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by TheBandit795
 


Hitler, stalin, pol pot, saddam etc etc ALL thought they were doing at least some good - that doesn't make it true.

Nor is mine an emotional reaction or a projection - I see what I see, and that's evil, in the sense of the complete disregard for anything and everything except what he wants.
Not all sociopaths are evil, but if it's good enough for bush to label other country's that way, it's good enough for him to be labelled the same way.

Strangely, I look at blair as the incompetent one in the relationship - although I think brown is closer to bush than he would care to admit.



[edit on 27/3/2008 by budski]



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski
I could go on, but won't - these are the actions of an evil man who cares nothing for anyone or anything except his wallet.

Ok.....but practically everything you listed is pure speculation or rumor on your part.
So just because you think he is evil does not mean Bush is evil.



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
Substitute evil with "incompetent" and we're 99% there.

Thats my opinion. Do I have facts to prove it? Well every time he opens his mouth is a damn good start....

What?? Sorry, I was distracted by your avatar. Nice. Anyway....

I don't believe he is as bad as you portray but I do believe he has made some stupid moves.



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by 4thDoctorWhoFan
 


Really?

abu ghraib is speculation?

shrub trying to change the law regarding torture is speculation?

the documented warnings that were ignored prior to 9/11 is speculation?

Please provide evidence to support your "position".

If you can.



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski
reply to

Nor is mine an emotional reaction or a projection - I see what I see, and that's evil, in the sense of the complete disregard for anything and everything except what he wants.


Everything that you give meaning or value has an emotional reaction involved. The meaning or value comes from yourself, based on your memory of passed events. Of it's own, it has no meaning.



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski
Hitler, stalin, pol pot, saddam etc etc ALL thought they were doing at least some good - that doesn't make it true.

Come on!
Did they tell you that info??

Hitler and the rest did not think they were doing good. They knew exactly what they were doing.



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan

Originally posted by budski
Hitler, stalin, pol pot, saddam etc etc ALL thought they were doing at least some good - that doesn't make it true.

Come on!
Did they tell you that info??

Hitler and the rest did not think they were doing good. They knew exactly what they were doing.


As does bush.

I rest my case.

QED.



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by TheBandit795
 


Please Bandit, spare me the cheap psychoanalysis


I think you know exactly what I mean.

Care to respond to the rest of the post?



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski
Really?

abu ghraib is speculation?



Please......So let me get this straight. You are saying that the evil Bush sat down with his military leaders and specifically said, I want a secret pison and I want you to take picture of the inmates in humiliating scenarios. I want you to torture them with electricity and waterboarding.

Is this what you believe? That Bush planned and instigated the entire plan?

If not, then your point is moot.



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski
As does bush.

I rest my case.


Oh, boy.......yes, that is true, in your head.



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by 4thDoctorWhoFan
 


So you are saying that bush is NOT in command and doesn't know what's going on.

That he had no idea that CIA personnel were involved in the encouragement of the initial stages of the torture and allegedly carried out further, more extreme forms of torture.

Your position is that bush is incompetent and hasn't a clue what's going on, despite the daily briefings.

WOW
You really are clutching at straws.

Again, please provide evidence to support your position.

Last time I said "if you can"
It appears you can't and that you are just trying to make some wriggle room for an untenable position.



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by 4thDoctorWhoFan
 


I doubt that they had much feelings of guilt.



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


Then you don't even care about what I think then. You've formed your conclusion already.



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 

Well judging by your response, I was correct. Your point is moot.

Look, you believe he is evil and I don't. Nothing we say will change that so lets move on....



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by TheBandit795
 


Not at all, I simply wanted to point out that you responded only to a small part of my post.
A post which should be taken in context as a whole rather than one small piece of it, however important that piece may be.

I also think it's slightly dodgy to analyse the motives of someone you don't know - for all you know I could simply be playing devils advocate in order to facilitate discussion, and that would make your point moot.

I appreciate where you're coming from, but I also think that the context of the first post is important and that picking one part of it to comment on is missing the point of it.



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by forestlady
Furthermore, this number doesn't include the numbers that have died or been permanently disfigued, injured, etc. by depleted uranium and other nuclear-type weapons. Last count, there were almost 200,000 killed by DU - that's a govt statistic going back to the Gulf War. I just read that but can't remember where that source was posted.


DU is used because it's a heavy metal (weight-wise). When used as a round, it really slams into the target more than a normal round would.

There is spalling to worry about, and US troops are briefed to stay away from anything that might have been hit with DU because of that.

DU is not a "nuclear type weapon".



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by 4thDoctorWhoFan
 


My response was in direct proportion to the lack of any evidence you have to support your position, and so the point is not moot, unless all your points have been too.

I notice that you still cannot answer my questions and are now trying to end the discussion rather than back down and admit you have no evidence to support your view.

Not even a clever tactic, but rather transparent instead.



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski
Not according to the sources I've read, which hardly makes it universal - of course if you only read military journals which pose as serious publications then you would take that point of view.


Well, I'd believe a military journal more than your source. The World Socialist Web Site? Just a bit of bias with them, I'd think.



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski
I notice that you still cannot answer my questions and are now trying to end the discussion rather than back down and admit you have no evidence to support your view.

DUDE!
I already answered your query a few posts back. You just did not like what I had to say.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join