Posts Tagged ‘George Bush’
McCain makes a dangerous visit – to the wrong side of the fence.
Wednesday, March 19th, 2008John McCain is currently on a ‘fact’ finding mission to a rocketed Israeli town. He said the following:
“The fact is that I come from a border state, and if people were rocketing my state, I think that the citizens from my state would advocate a very vigorous response.”
The fact is, the rocket attacks are a response. They are a response to Israeli attacks on Palestinians which are, in turn, a response to previous attacks by Palestinians on Israel which are, in turn, a response to previous attacks by Israel… You get the idea.
Very similar to the situation in Northern Ireland, neither side is the ‘good’ side anymore and I believe that John McCain’s visit only reinforces the opinion in Arab nations that America will never understand them and that America has a bias support for Israel no matter what Israel does to it’s neighbors.
The problem is, nobody knows who shot the first shot (infact I’d personally blame the English for the situation in both Northern Ireland and Israel), so nobody knows who’s the bad guy. The problem is, both sides have now committed what are probably war crimes (there are stories of Israeli soldiers walking into buildings pushing civilians infront of them so that they will get shot by their ‘own side’ and of course – everyone knows about the attacks the Palestinians do to the Israeli’s – because it’s only the negative Palestinian acts that seems to get reported).
Like Northern Ireland, the attacks will get worse and worse until someone does something so deplorable that somebody finally stops. The thing that needs to happen is for someone to stop before that happens, if Israel stopped attacking Palestine I am pretty sure Palestine would stop attacking Israel, if Palestine stopped attacking Israel I am pretty sure Israel would stop attacking Palestine, but of course, neither of them will stop until they feel they have won.
I worry greatly that John McCain’s ‘fact’ finding mission will be a signal to the Arab world that America has not moved on and will not move on after the departure of George Bush…
That whole ‘Iran’ thing…
Thursday, December 6th, 2007All quotes are from this article.
The President looked awful. He stood puffy-eyed, stoop-shouldered, in front of the press corps discussing the stunning new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that Iran halted its nuclear-weapons program in 2003. He looked as if he’d spent the night throwing chairs around the Situation Room.
As recently as Oct. 17, the President had said Iran’s bomb-building program could be a precursor to “World War III.” It was a statement that was both outrageous in its extravagance and very strange. Bush acknowledged that he had first heard in August that a new intelligence analysis of Iran’s nuclear-bomb program was imminent, but — and here comes the strange part — he hadn’t bothered to ask the Director of National Intelligence, Mike McConnell, what it might contain. “If that’s true,” Senator Joe Biden opined soon after, “then this is … one of the most incompetent Presidents in modern American history.”
Yikes…
Didn’t France Critisize the USA over WMD War with Iraq?
Monday, September 17th, 2007Remember before the Iraq War? Back when it was thought there were WMD’s just scattered around the Iraqi desert like sprinkles on an Ice Cream dessert?
I believe I remember France criticizing the decision to enforce co-operation from Saddam Hussein over inspection teams and the apparent hiding of WMD. So why is it that now – when the same people are saying Iran is producing WMD – is it OK for France to talk war?
I’m probably in the minority when it comes to the Iraq War. I think that the security forces made a mistake, if there were WMD’s they are probably in another country now, if there weren’t – oh well, they screwed up. If the leaders of the allied forces all saw the information and all made the same decision – albeit in hindsight probably the wrong one – I don’t blame them for that. In their position I can’t say I would have made any better choice. I don’t think it’s about oil (they have lost more than they have gained – for the amount of money spent on the war, they could have just bought the damn oil), I don’t think it was Bush trying to ‘please daddy’ – I just think they messed up…
But anyway… It seems to me as-though Iran is co-operating a hell of a lot more than Saddam Hussein ever did, so why are they an OK target for tough-talk from the French? Because they’ve verbally threatened Israel? Because they didn’t like the movie “300″?
It seems the age of paranoia is back – oh joy.
It saddens me that people believe the 9/11 conspiracies…
Tuesday, September 11th, 2007Conspiracies aren’t always wrong, but in this case I find it a bit of an insult to those who died on September 11th, 2001.
People actually believe that the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City were wired with explosives and this was the American Governments planned exercise of destruction! People actually believe that it was orchestrated – by Americans – in an effect to drum up support for a war and was an effort – by America – to frighten the people of America.
First, if President Bush knew anything about it, he sure managed to put on a good act of looking stupid and useless when he was pretending to be first told about the “attack.” He should have gotten an Oscar for his “clueless President” performance.
Second, what about the people who actually claimed responsibility? They made threats before the attack. They even made videos before the attack, with threats in them, where they “toasted their success” in the attacks before they even happened. It seems when people talk of conspiracies they conveniently forget that someone actually said they did it. If a relative of yours was killed somehow, can you imagine how hurtful it would be to have it questioned whether the person blamed for their death was actually the culprit? It would tear my heart apart to think that the person responsible was someone/thing I am meant to trust (ie: US Government) and by suggesting it… The conspiracy “nuts” are literally poking at the hearts of those relatives. Are the theorists actually suggesting, infact, that the US Government knew about the attacks and let the planes fly into the building, then demolished them?
Third, it seems the main reason why people believe the building’s were demolished is because of the fire. It seems that people think that the fire cannot have burned as hot as suggested to cause the building collapse, because a man and a woman close to the aircraft entry point survived and were waving for help before the collapse. Well, if they did survive the initial impact, does that really bother you? They eventually died during the collapse, so does that satisfy you more? The suggestion that because those people could survive, the fire could not have been intense enough to weaken the metals of the building is just absurd. Did you listen to any of the eyewitness accounts? Did you listen to the stories of “melted people”? Just because you can see something, it does not mean you can discount what you can’t see… If you were looking at photos of that building recently saying “Where’s the fire?” perhaps you should take note of the smoke – the amount of smoke is a clear indication of the fire that existed. Also, those people you saw survived in one building. What about the other? Does the lack of evidence of waving survivors mean that building was hot enough for you?
Fourth, if the destruction was an attempt to persuade the American people to accept the case for war – who the hell cares about Afghanistan? Why on earth would America attack there? Remember it was that country which was brought to war first, not Iraq. Although you may question the reasons for the Iraq war, there is absolutely no way that the US Government orchestrated the attacks of 9/11 in an effort to make people feel OK about war in Afghanistan because what did they gain? What did they gain from the war in Afghanistan? Um… They reduced illegal drug production? No, America attacked Afghanistan because they believed their country had been attacked first by an organization largely supported by the Taliban.
Please, think about what you’re doing. Don’t insult the people who died that day and stop giving the relatives conspiracies and questions they do not want to hear just so you can get your jollies and spread your ideas. I recently posted blog entries questioning the theory of both global warming and the extinction of the dinosaurs, none of which hurt anybody, yet I got a fair few abusive responses for it. If you are posting a conspiracy or even a question about what really happened on 9/11 of course it’s your right to do so, but please, think about the effects of your questions on those relatives still seeking answers.
Low taxes… and a balanced budget?
Tuesday, January 30th, 2007Now, you tell me if this is possible…
“I’m going to submit a budget for Congress to look at that shows how we can balance the budget in five years and keep your taxes low,” George Bush said in a speech to workers of heavy equipment maker Caterpillar.
The US is in huge debt, it is losing money, it is waging a war, how is it that this man can balance the budget while keeping taxes low? I have one question; What cuts are going to be made to turn the economy around? Healthcare? Education? If you have to raise taxes, raise them, cutting services that people need can’t ever be good.
Ah… So she is a politician after all…
Monday, January 29th, 2007Isn’t it a shame to see Hillary Clinton fall into the pit with the rest of the political morons? I always try go give them a chance but, as soon as she starts with the stuff she did the other day, again, I make my mind up.
Hillary Clinton backed the Iraq war, she backed the invasion and the occupation. At that time, nobody could have seen what was going to happen and what was going to need managing – neither George Bush or Hillary Clinton.
Hillary Clinton is now critisizing current President, George W. Bush for his mismanagement of the war… While she may not be wrong that the war was mismanaged, I’m not sure anyone, including her, could have done any better once the invasion (something she backed!) was planned.
I would really like to ask her what she would have done differently, because it seems really easy to critisize when you are not the person who has to make the decisions and has to take the flak if things go wrong. It’s an easy thing to get support from those too blind to realise what is being said, when you say negative things without substance. The moment she chose to do what politicians do – attack something she brought about through her support – she becomes just another annoying politician to me. If she is like this when someone else has the power, what is she going to be like if she becomes the one making the decisions and the one who will be taking the flak?
It’s fine to take a shot at whoever is in power but you need to be able to provide details on what you would have done differently. I personally have problems seeing exactly what George Bush did wrong, he inherited a country that was already due to be attacked! We are in a world where Muslim’s seem to feel they don’t want to fit into the country they live in anymore and where Muslim’s also seem to want to attack anything “foreign” just as much as George Bush does. We are living in a messed up world, one where a war probably didn’t make an awful lot of difference either way when hatred already existed. What a shame Hillary wasn’t more creative than to bash people with the negativity stick…
The National Health Service
Saturday, January 20th, 2007People in the UK really have no idea how lucky they are to have the NHS. Not only does the NHS save lives – for free, it also allows procedures such as sex changes – for free. Anything your doctor pushes forward as something that will improve your life, you will, eventually (albeit sometimes only if you live in the right area) be given.
In the United States, people have to pay for everything. There are free clinics, but you’re only likely to use those for something minor such as a broken leg… It seems people in the UK are so busy complaining about the waiting time for their operation, that they forget that unlike many Americans, they won’t have to spend the next 30 years paying off the medical debt.
So why am I writing this? Well… I know people in the USA who have had the rough end of the US medical system, I also know people in the UK who ride the NHS like it were their own personal cash-cow. George Bush is planning to try to help out a lot of Americans. I don’t think it’s enough, but it’s a start – and at least he’s thinking about it.
Why are they in the Army if not to go to war?
Thursday, January 11th, 2007I see that George W. Bush has announced 20,000 more troops will be sent to Iraq. I’m not going to point out whether he is right or wrong to do that, because nobody really knows what is going to happen. What I am going to wonder is why very often you hear family members of people in the Army (of any nation) saying: “Why do they have to go back there, they were in Iraq last year…”
What, honestly, do people expect to happen when they join the ARMY? I think if you, or your wife, would find it so unacceptable if you went to war, joining the armed forces was pretty dumb.
I am so proud of everyone who joins the Army of any nation because they obviously have the heart to fight for their country… I suggest though that they, and their family, stop complaining when they’re actually asked to do their job. Do it, or don’t sign up.