Yank (ie. Bush) go home!

[yoxer]

Is no one looking at the huge crowd protesting in the United States? You are not one single force and opinion. The United States is not an island. It has "American Interests" abroad. Your F-16 fighters are made around the world. Most of your consumer goods are made off shore. Your dollar is tanking. Wake up. Its time to act responsibly.

 

The US deficit this year alone will top $500 BILLION dollars (that is half a TRILLION dollars). That does not take into account State budgets in the red (California is over $31 Billion dollars alone!) What is the count now 49 States in the red. Taxpayers can't even get income tax refunds back. Now throw in the enormous capital losses. Not just the Enrons, World.com, Global Crossing, K-Mart, Bethleham Steel, Polaroid and more not to mention the $100 Billion dollar right off by AOL/Time Warner. That one alone is larger than the entire GDP of Egypt. The US economy is heading towards crisis and we hear how the US is going to buy this or finance that. With what? More monopoly money? Everyone is concentrating on Saddamn Hussien. A far greater threat is North Korea, we know they have nuclear weaponsl and one hell of a big army. So why Iraq.

[Smudge]

I think that George Bush is on a crusade and trying to do the job that his father failed to do when he had the chance during the Gulf war as for Blair this could all backfire on him in 6 months he will be out of a job (unless the forces go in !!!)

[H Jampton]

yoxer:

they think attacking Araq is a solution that will lead to peace instead of armagedon..

Oh so that's it. Someone's been reading the book of Revelation.

 

[ 17. February 2003, 07:21 AM: Message edited by: H Jampton ]

[billy5000]

Hi all,

keeping this thread going as yoxer is ammusing me with his fine rants.

Y,you ask for a debate but it seems you have little intension of,or the ability to have one as most posters have air'd there opinions as we all should if we feel thats what we want but it seems you dont like it when someone disagrees with you,you have your opinon and so do we all which doenst mean you can fire on anyone with one different to yours.

most of us brits dont give a rats ass about bush or blair.

but yes as we all know "they are in it for the cash" as most politic repersentatives are,so whats new?plus they dont want to lose face which is what is called pride and at some point we have all lost some of that its not a great feeling but i would rather lose face than live under a moron like saddam at least blair wont shoot us for not paying a bill on time etc.

but in my case i think they should get saddam out and then let thier people decide which nutter to be next to rule,because even if the us/uk take sadman out in ten years we will all be talking about ridding another idiot.

cleanse saddam and his family and make way for someone else to bore us.

 

and sod the his people if they stood up to him and got him out they wouldnt be hard up

 

billy

[yoxer]

I dont care either way if someone agrees or not Billy . What I find objectionable is people postin up comments that THEY can not, or will not, either justify or support.If such a person posts up comments without justifying them then we must presume that theyre doin so out of ignorance.

[yoxer]

Concerning your opinion on why we should wage war against Iraq ....."but i would rather lose face than live under a moron like saddam at least blair wont shoot us for not paying a bill on time etc.

but in my case i think they should get saddam out and then let thier people decide which nutter to be next to rule,because even if the us/uk take sadman out in ten years we will all be talking about ridding another idiot."

 

I will ignore the fact that your expecting Sadam to come over to the UK to rule us for obvious reasons

 

Yes it is up to the Iraqi people to decide if they want another leader, not western goverments who would be acting as the dictators that they appose. As you have stated , if we do take Sadam out then we will more than likely be in the same position again in an another ten years . Well done mate a realy good reason to go to war and we get the pleasure and satisfaction of murdering thousands all over again in another 10 years.

[yoxer]

"now i know that the UN mandate does not say this but it never will so get real ,could we of got a UN mandate against hitler ?probably not."

 

In 1938, there were six major capitalist powers and one large communist one. Three of the major capitalist powers were cleary bent on imperial growth, at the expense of the other three. Appeasement in that context was about Britain siding with the 'wrong' three.

 

In 2003, there is one major capitalist power, and several minor ones. The major one is attempting to capitalise on the opportunities created by the death of communism. The minor ones are to some degree cashing in alongside it, and to some degree resisting. In the course of this business, various tinpot regimes are used as whipping boys pour encourager les autres.

 

Appeasement? Saddam Hussein's shattered country is not the industrial powerhouse of 1930s Germany, and has no imperial delusions left. Picking on him is not an glorious act of bravery that you could attribute to Churchill - it is the pompous act of a PM too sanctimonious to realise whose grubby interests he's serving.

[Newt]

yoxer:

....

In 2003, there is one major capitalist power, and several minor ones. The major one is attempting to capitalise on the opportunities created by the death of communism. The minor ones are to some degree cashing in alongside it, and to some degree resisting. In the course of this business, various tinpot regimes are used as whipping boys pour encourager les autres.

....

yoxer - classic and beautiful. Textbook example for a Demagoguery exercise.

 

- Eschew specificity.

 

- Obfuscate (/w extra points for doing it in French).

 

- Allow for multiple interpretations - and that's double points for getting extra mileage out of the one phrase (pour encourager les autres - to encourage the others).

 

I'd say you are likely to have a bright future ahead if you go into politics.

[corydoras]

OK Yoxer, riddle me this. What would you have Blair/Bush and the UN do about Iraq?

[yoxer]

There's a stand-up case for wars being the nail in the coffin of all the promise of progress and human emancipation from want that existed before the wars. If people had refused to fight for their greedy leaders, who knows how far the world could have come by now?·

 

Your Administration has offered no evidence to support its alarming rhetoric about Iraq. For instance, that Iraq "retains the infrastructure needed to build" a nuclear weapon (as Bush warned in his September 12 speech to the United Nations) is not the same thing as building one. No credible authority believes that Saddam Hussein possesses nuclear weapons.

 

According to former UN weapons inspectors, 95% of Iraq’s chemical weapons have been destroyed. Iraq may possess stores of biological agents, since the US supplied Baghdad with stock for anthrax, botulism and other diseases in the 1980s. However, Ritter and others point out that the potency of these agents is expired and that Iraq lacks the delivery systems (e.g., long-range missiles and rocket launchers) to turn chemical or biological agents into weapons.

 

Remind people that the most likely scenario in which Saddam Hussein would launch weapons of mass destruction < presuming he had any > is an all-out war aimed at deposing him -- exactly the course being pursued by the US.