World Wants Bush Out!

Originally posted by mwm1331
So specialasianx if you have never been to the US, how would you, or could you possibly know what problems the US may or may not have?
I see you posting constantly about the problems with the US system, the problems faced by US citizens etc. But with no practical or first hand knowledge you are pretty much talking out of your as* aren't you?

No I'm not, i am looking at it from an outsiders prospective, and from many of my contacts within the US tell me..

And how is it any different to many of you within the US who rant and rave about how opressed Iraq and Afghanistan were before the US 'liberated' them when most of your people couldnt even find the places on a map if it wasnt for CNN, and FOX having nightly reports on the mess caused there...

Alot of people within the US know squat about the rest of the world, yet rant and rave about how great the US is compared to them...

I have seen the rest of the world, and the places i have seen were great, from what i see in the US, from the US media, from my friends there, from relatives who trael there frequently, and from my own observations of the countrys actions... i have no desire for the US.. and when i state the people of your country deserve this and that... if they dont want those things its up to them, i'm just giving my points of view...'

But your reaction is a typical reaction i find from many defenders of conservatism on this board... we dont want the world being interested in our politics... but its ok for us to butt into theirs...

I think the real issue here is that some people, at least in how they present their view on this issue, may tend to confuse their patriotism (which in itself is all and well), with actual fact about which country on earth should be considered the greatest to live in.

Clearly, most people tend to have a biased opinion in this respect; favoring their own nation.

Originally posted by IBM

Originally posted by 7th_Chakra

Originally posted by IBM
It is where dreams can come true.

Like most other country.

Tell me what other country has a better college and university system than the US? Why do others come to study to the US? Obviously we are better. IF you study in the middle of a jungle ridden country your dreams will not come true because the resources do not exist.

LMAO? Students go study all around the world. There are actually Americans going to study in Europe also. Every University has probably Foreign students, not only American Universities.

Originally posted by Durden
I think the real issue here is that some people, at least in how they present their view on this issue, may tend to confuse their patriotism (which in itself is all and well), with actual fact about which country on earth should be considered the greatest to live in.

Clearly, most people tend to have a biased opinion in this respect; favoring their own nation.

I dont think there is one actualy country that is the best to live in, i think many countries have their merits... sure i'd prefer the USA over Laos, or Chad... but i'd rather Norway, Britain. or Australia over the US

Originally posted by specialasianX
I dont think there is one actualy country that is the best to live in, i think many countries have their merits...

I agree.

I haven't read every post in this thread but at the end of the day, if Bush wins, i think world War 3 will begin in the next 4-8 years.

This time, it will just be a few mad men pushin a couple of buttons.

It wont matter about the alien agenda, environmental issues, our families or anything for that matter cause the world will be wrecked.

Bush is a war monger bent on control and power of the most precious physical resource our world offers at this time... Oil.

He and his buddies will do anything they can to seize their stake of that gem regardless of who they take down or take down with them in the process.

If Bush gets taken out of office, i think the so called terrorists may well settle down with him.. Half of them are probably employed by them anyway for propaganda.



[edit on 26-10-2004 by Dreamkidd]

I also have not all the posts - who ever wins the US election will never have as much political power/freedom as there has been in the past.

The US president is merely a puppet at the moment who's strings are about to be pulled or cut depending on the outcome of the November elections.
The REAL power lies (no pun intended) behind the president - Corporations and foreign investment funding.

Lets see who pulls the strings this time War or Peace!!

Originally posted by Dreamkidd
�������������.
If Bush gets taken out of office, i think the so called terrorists may well settle down with him.. Half of them are probably employed by them anyway for propaganda.
���..

It�s great you have an opinion and all, but it would be nice if you at least were a tad bit informed�.American interests were being hit with record frequency BEFORE shrub got into office. So what delusion makes you think that whoever the next president is all of a sudden the terrorist are going to play nice?

Originally posted by specialasianX
But your reaction is a typical reaction i find from many defenders of conservatism on this board... we dont want the world being interested in our politics... but its ok for us to butt into theirs...

You mean like when conservatives say that since I'm not an American I shouldn't offer judgement on American politics, because I don't know what living in America means... but then turn around and declare that Canada has socialist policies and would've been better off spending more on the military?

Originally posted by Otts
You mean like when conservatives say that since I'm not an American I shouldn't offer judgement on American politics, because I don't know what living in America means... but then turn around and declare that Canada has socialist policies and would've been better off spending more on the military?

Maybe if your opinions had the clarity that theirs did they would welcome them so how would you describe Canada�s policies?

Originally posted by keholmes
Maybe if your opinions had the clarity that theirs did they would welcome them

They *are* clear! Kerry good, Bush bad!

Edited for typos


[edit on 27-10-2004 by Otts]

Listen up world people.....
You as citizens, in a majority sense, might not approve of USA actions or Bush for that matter,
BUT
Why then did many of your governments back these actions by becomming part of the coalition?
OR
why havnt your governments taken actions that would oppose the USA like trade embargos, closing of embassies, or other actions.

I'll tell you why,
IN PART, I agree that capitalist interests do indeed play a big part of governmental policy in the USA as well as IN YOUR OWN COUNTRIES!

After 9-11, the worlds economy teetered on the edge....and this economic suffering was not limited to the USA. Things could be far far worse world wide if the global economy had faltered....I think your leaders in charge know this. The way of life most of us live, driving autos, going to grocery stores for cheap food, using goods made and shipped around the world, would have been in serious jeapordy....we were looking at world wide famine, disease spreading as people starved and weakened...massive depression as jobs were lost globally.

Mabey those in charge of nations chose the lesser of 2 evils here...a localized war vs a global deterioration of living conditions, possibly resulting in massive casualties, with an increasedchance some now unstable areas would erupt into chaos. Knowing that oil is the life blood of the worlds economic engines, let alone its basic mechanisms for survival, places its cheap use for all above the concerns of weather a localized war is pleasent.

Gee mabey there is somethings the masses dont know/realize that those in power do? Mabey the needs of the many (the global economy) outweigh the needs of the few (those affected directly by/in opposition to a war).

People often choose the easy way instead of the hard way...people often want things that are not in their best interests....(like doing nothing because its more pleasent than doing the hard unplesant thing)
Leaders are supposed to be able to make that hard choice, i i see that WORLD leaders including the USA, GB, Austrailia, and others can see that the alternatives to inaction are not as plesant as those involving doing the hard unplesant thing. (waging war)

Personally im glad lots of people are now taking notice of the USA/Bush...its about time that you feared the people that have been giving the MOST in aid on the planet....there is a price for our generosity, and it is that we will no longer sit idle while some threaten the stabillity of the world....not just for the fatcat corporate owners that indeed profit from this, but for the masses on the planet that would indeed suffer if capitalism breaks down because of unchecked threats and hostile actions commited by a few.

WAKE UP!!! dont sit there and say "bad USA" when some of your countries couldnt survive without interactions with us.
Unless your willing to sacrifise some of your comforts and standards of living, then you have no room to whine about things.

I'd be happy to retain alot of the aid $$$$ that we give out to others and use it to make things better here...
BUT
we realize that aid is nessisary, and without it, suffering could spread from people starving to people waring for food.

It is better for the world that sadam is gone for many reasons, while in a local sense, in the short term idea this war seems not as "nice" of a thing to have, can you immagine the suffering caused if sadam had been able to lob a wmd onto israel, even just one? the resulting conflagration in that region would have indeed been a world war...
there is no world war now....and there wont be because
no country has lifted a finger to stop the USA/coalition....
Even if your whole countries populations said "bad America", how will you wean yourself away from the USA to oppose us?
This takes willpower to sacrifise your own comfort and future success inorder to do.
I dont see any of you whiners talking about things you could do to oppose this, only whine, bitch, moan...."bad usa"
Things could be alot worse...are you ready for that?

I think that for most of the people on this planet. The way of living wouldn�t changed a bit without the iraq war. Oil was the reason to go there, not some funky wmd:s.
And many countries tried to stop Usa, even united nations said that "Do NOT go there"..but bushy didn�t listen. Now it�s your own soap and i hope you will not give the "cleaning up the mess" job to other countries like in kosovo. Civil war broke out and Usa had to bomb whole country to stone age.
Now they are long gone and other nations peace corps are cleaning the place up. So I, as a tax payer, am paying for cleanin of Usa�s wars.
I would gladly trash my mercedes and start to grown my own food if it would help to stop the killing in iraq. But it won�t help and it�s too late to stop the killing because it has just started. What you see today is only a little bit of taste to what is coming.
-ap

[edit on 27-10-2004 by aape]

Dont try to confuse EUROPES failure to act in kosovo and the resulting NATO actions requested of the USA with the Iraq situation...the only thing in common is MUSLIM RADICALISM and resulting ethnic cleansing....similar to what weve seen in Iraq.

Again notice the FAILURE to take strong actions that allowed kosovo to escalate...WHY, because it seemed nicer, more peaceful, to keep your heads in the sand and hope the problem went away, than it did to go in and eliminate the factions of MILLITARIAZED oppression that was being used to surpress the ethinic muslim minorities. (similar to Iraq)

Whats nessisary isnt always popular
whats popular inst always nessisary

Look at a bigger picture, one with more long term ramifications than "war is ugly".

If your soo ready to begin to sacrifice to make a change, more power to you...get busy, get organized, then come back and try your leverage with the USA, because until you do...you have little to bargain with.
Just remeber that your sacrificing may have ramifications for others in your own country, like the farmers put out of work because your now not buying their foodstuffs, or the person at the mercedes factory that gets laid off because you all stop buying them.

Actions have consequences,
so does inaction...
one is choosing to shape destiny,
the other is letting destiny dictate to you
which do you prefer?

For you to say that your lifestyles wouldnt have changed if iraq wasnt invaded is a farce...no one can predict the future, let alone predict the future of a divergant timeline. This position also overlooks the interlinkage of many things.

Originally posted by CazMedia
Dont try to confuse EUROPES failure to act in kosovo and the resulting NATO actions requested of the USA with the Iraq situation...the only thing in common is MUSLIM RADICALISM and resulting ethnic cleansing....similar to what weve seen in Iraq.

Europe only acts on countries in EU. Serbia,jugoslavia,kosovo whatever country divided to 4 different nationalities have had it�s difficulties throught history..same thing as israel and palestinians. Bombing the sh*t out of the place doesn�t help a thing. Now the country is in same debate but without infrastructure.

For you to say that your lifestyles wouldnt have changed if iraq wasnt invaded is a farce...no one can predict the future, let alone predict the future of a divergant timeline. This position also overlooks the interlinkage of many things.

Ok that�s terminator 2 bullsh*t versus john titor. You don�t have to be a prophet to see future now days. It doesn�t look so shiny.
But this debate won�t lead to anywhere. It just goes the same circle of debates of is it right to attack on other countries and with what agendas.
-ap

aape questions,

this debate won�t lead to anywhere. It just goes the same circle of debates of is it right to attack on other countries and with what agendas.

Id say the aggressor nation is deciding this wouldnt you? That combined with the reaction (or lack of) by other nations determines if the attack was "right" or not.

The attacking country must weigh weather the risk outweighs the gain before it attacks....IE the risk of not only the retaliation from the defender, but that of world reaction as well.

Well in the Iraq/USA case...the risk was small that Iraq was going to give a serious defence, AND it seems the President gauged world reaction CORRECTLY...not the reaction of the populas of nations but of the reactions of nations governments, which has seemingly been little more than hot air being extruded from their flapping oral orifaces.

Where are the nations attempting sanctions, trade embargos, removal of diplomats...ANYTHING more than lip service to "bad America"?

In my previous post i mention actions have consequences, and so does inaction
OH YEAH,.....blame BUSH for the inactions of YOUR GOVERNMENTS for not putting up stronger opposition the the USA invading Iraq.
Try putting that blame where it really belongs, YOUR GOVERNMENT! not mine.

Where are the nations attempting sanctions, trade embargos, removal of diplomats...ANYTHING more than lip service to "bad America"?

I have wondered that myself also. If i remember correctly french boycoted something and eu put up the steel tax boycots. Maybe world is fearing that usa is going to wage war against anyone if bush get�s something to begin with. UN was a pussy because it didb�t do # when usa attacked after every nation except uk declared to oppose the attack. Countries around the world are just lacking balls to start anti bush campaign. It should have started years ago.

In my previous post i mention actions have consequences, and so does inaction
OH YEAH,.....blame BUSH for the inactions of YOUR GOVERNMENTS for not putting up stronger opposition the the USA invading Iraq.
Try putting that blame where it really belongs, YOUR GOVERNMENT! not mine.

I�m not blaming bush because he is already guilty about anything a corrupt leader could do. You should be the ones blaiming him for killing people and ruining your civil rights&economy. And I do blame EU for not taking any action on this case. Maybe they have somekind of behind curtains oil deal what have kept them nice and quiet.
-ap

[edit on 27-10-2004 by aape]

Id say the aggressor nation is deciding this wouldnt you? That combined with the reaction (or lack of) by other nations determines if the attack was "right" or not.

The attacking country must weigh weather the risk outweighs the gain before it attacks....IE the risk of not only the retaliation from the defender, but that of world reaction as well.

Well in the Iraq/USA case...the risk was small that Iraq was going to give a serious defence, AND it seems the President gauged world reaction CORRECTLY...not the reaction of the populas of nations but of the reactions of nations governments, which has seemingly been little more than hot air being extruded from their flapping oral orifaces.

Where are the nations attempting sanctions, trade embargos, removal of diplomats...ANYTHING more than lip service to "bad America"?

In my previous post i mention actions have consequences, and so does inaction
OH YEAH,.....blame BUSH for the inactions of YOUR GOVERNMENTS for not putting up stronger opposition the the USA invading Iraq.
Try putting that blame where it really belongs, YOUR GOVERNMENT! not mine.

-Why should we blame our Government for something what YOURS did: Invading Iraq?!
-For not reacting? Do you actually read the newspapers,and not only the Bush supporting ones ? Belgium IE. reacted on which was stated that the USA could take the NATO away there if other reactions from Belgian Ministers or so came out. Which means unemployment for a few 1000 people.
A few major American concerns where thinking suddenly to do the same..
Some taxes on export products were raised as another pressing reason to not react more. Get your facts straight and put those glasses away.
Bush didn�t calculate right, he used lame manners to keep reactions low.
-What exactly is the gain huh? Oil, or safety? The oil is kind of secured at the moment but is Iraq a safe place? Hell no. And it�s only getting worse.

-The risk was small they were gonna give a hard defence, you say it yourself. Why would that be? Because of the previous war and sanctions? Yep. So tell me how they were a threat to the USA then if they aren�t even able to defend themselves?



[edit on 27-10-2004 by Calibre]

So its Caz vs the World eh? Is there NOONE from other nations that can see things in a similar fashion to the USA position? Are you affraid or reprisals if you do?

Calibre asks,

Why should we blame our Government for something what YOURS did: Invading Iraq?!

Because both before the war and certantly afterwards, little more than a slap on the wrist manouver by a few nations occured...hardly a deterrent.
This is the same DO LITTLE/NOTHING deterrent that gave hitler the impression that he could invade the rest of europe...after taking a piece of czechoslovacia, the britts and french said essentially..."take the rest" to appease him...well why not take more he thought, that was no detterent.

Hmmm mabey its like the deterent that the UN was giving to saddam thru endless sanctions with no consequences....why would he stop his shell game with weapon inspectors if the UN wasnt going to really do anything....
again a failure to take actions by the world body here which only perpetuated sadams insolence and giving the finger to the world, (while secretly getting into bed with a few of those same countries not willing to back up the sanctions.)

Now were supposed to listen to these same "do nothing" countries in reguards to Iraq? Your talking to the hand.

If your nation REALLY had the will to back up its peoples wishes on this matter, then you'd have done MORE, taken a stronger stance than the message a few, pathetic and mostly symbolic gestures make.

Heck why dont you people hold your governments accoutable for their FAILURE to represent your wishes to the USA.

Ive got an even better idea, why not vote them out like al queda asked the spanish people to do? Just lay there and give in to terrorist demands.
LMAO....When spain gets hit again, i can say "WE TOLD YOU SO".

Why arent you telling the dozen or so nations that allied with the USA they need to stop interactions with the USA or you'll cut off trade with them too?
No accountabillity for them?
OH YEAH, Some of them are your OWN governments.
cant blame yourselves eh?

Originally posted by specialasianX

Originally posted by Durden
I think the real issue here is that some people, at least in how they present their view on this issue, may tend to confuse their patriotism (which in itself is all and well), with actual fact about which country on earth should be considered the greatest to live in.

Clearly, most people tend to have a biased opinion in this respect; favoring their own nation.

I dont think there is one actualy country that is the best to live in, i think many countries have their merits... sure i'd prefer the USA over Laos, or Chad... but i'd rather Norway, Britain. or Australia over the US

Actually the UN Keeps track of such things and even produce a league table!!

It asseses quality of life for all member countries based on everything from how technologically advanced they are to how many public toilets there are.

For the last few years it has been Norway on top.

news.bbc.co.uk...

news.bbc.co.uk...

These links are for the 2002 results, i can't yet find the 2004 link but i know there was not a change at the top.