Why we don't need Bush

Discussion in 'Every Day Debating' started by Ranger_of_Gondor, Oct 25, 2004.

  1. Ranger_of_Gondor

    Ranger_of_Gondor Gondorian Defender

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    2,091
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Massachusets(The mostly Anti-Bush state. Hooray!)
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0
    To counter the Anti-Kerryism I will make a brief paragraph on why the world is a better place without George Bush. He sent the U.S. into Iraq apprently because we had weapons of "mass destruction". Unless you consider a machine-gun a weapon of mass destruction, we found none. Bush had no proof that Saddam had Weapons of Mass Destruction. He just presumed he did. So he sent us into Iraq. What good has come out of this? Only one thing. The downfall of Saddam. I am happy that he is out of power, but that is still not a good enough excuse for us to go in Iraq. This has cost the lose of more then 1,000 U.S. troops ALONE. And hostages are continuesly being taken and losing their heads. In other words, we have cost our troops and our allies's troops to lose their lives in the search for something that doesn't exist. Now say that we knew Saddam had Weapons of Mass Destruction and we knew they were a threat to the U.S. Then it would be different to go into Iraq. Then we would actualy have a purpose to be in there. But we had no proof. Hello Bush? A brain in there?

    .Because of this pointless war in Iraq, Bush has completely neglected Afaganistan. Asumo Bin Laden is still running free somewhere and Bush is too focused on Iraq to care. Why do we have troops in Iraq when they should be in Afaganstan? We need more troops looking for him then fighting in Iraq right now for no reason. Another funny thing is Bush said something like this (not exact words, but similar) "I will not forget 9/11 and Asumo Bun Laden". Looks to me he has. Now come on people.

    .Bush acts more like a child then an adult. While Kerry is acting like his age in his debates Bush is making faces, smirking and smiling, and chuckling. He also thinks like a child.

    .This is my ultimate weapon againt those of you who like Bush to show you that you are voting for an idiot. Because of Mr. Bush's ignorance we are not as liked as we used to be. Though we still have our allies the people themselves think we and Bush are idiots. And those of you who support Bush are just makiing the matter worse. A poll was taken from around the world for who they would vote for if they were Americans. Now look at this: 92 % Kerry, 8% Bush. Now counter that Bush fans.

    conclusion:
    Bush is a horrible president and most of the world except America knows it. Now who are you going to beleve, half a country who says he is a good president or several countries and a half who says he's an idiot? More to reason to come.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. kartaron

    kartaron Hunter / Gatherer

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,287
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +20 / 0 / -0
    Poll suggests world hostile to US

    The survey of 11 countries - for the television programme What The World Thinks of America, to be aired this week in the UK - revealed that 57% of the sample had a very unfavourable, or fairly unfavourable attitude towards the American President.

    The figure rose to 60% when discounting the views of the American respondents.

    Thirty-seven per cent thought it right to invade - including 54% of the UK response, 74% of the US response and 79% of the Israeli sample.

    Attitudes towards America as a whole, however, were a lot more favourable, with 50% expressing fairly or very favourable views, as opposed to 40% of unfavourable views.

    That figure excludes Americans polled.

    Asked who is the more dangerous to world peace and stability, the United States was rated higher than al-Qaeda by respondents in both Jordan (71%) and Indonesia (66%).

    Noting that 58% of Europeans consider "strong U.S. leadership to be undesirable," an interesting take on that 35 country poll showing that international opinion favors Kerry by about 2-1 over Bush:

    Leave aside the fact that Europe seems to prefer "strong U.S. leadership" when the Marines are storming Normandy or imposing a peace that Europeans failed to achieve in the Balkans. More significant for the current moment is that these polls show that the same Europeans who overwhelmingly favor the election of John Kerry also favor a weaker America. So even the Europeans realize that Kerry will weaken the US in the fight with terrorism.

    Why doesnt anyone defend Kerry instead of attacking Bush?
     
  3. Ranger_of_Gondor

    Ranger_of_Gondor Gondorian Defender

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    2,091
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Massachusets(The mostly Anti-Bush state. Hooray!)
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0
  4. Turambar

    Turambar Harebrained Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,784
    Likes Received:
    162
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Not in Amsterdam :)
    Ratings:
    +189 / 0 / -0
    57% is not in favor of Bush... That's pretty much, if you are the most powerfull guy in the world. The guy is making decisions for us too, and the future of the world.

    well, we know nations are confounders in these kind of studies. UK, only half in favor, not that much, has seen lower figures. Now that the war is going, they realinse it should be fininshed in a proper way. I share that opinion. These are current figures, remember that. The other two nations had good reasons to go to war. Israel is under fire of about all surrounding nations, not to mention the Palestineans, and has a special grudge towards Saddam, since he used the Scud-missiles a war or two ago. The Americans had something called 9/11.

    Leaves us 8 other countries, and if logics are right, they average about 25% pro war... That's really little support, isn't it? But, of course, these nations don't count since the US discarded the UN

    Remember, there is more about America then just Bush. Imagine what my computer would look like without the US IT companies. And then there are the big brands, the nice people from the US we've all met... In that light, still 40% votes unfavourable of the US? that's a pretty substastantial figure, I guess.

    Well, let's have a closer look at those figures. About 25-30% of the Indonesians are Christians. Looking at what happened in the past, they will vote US, concidering the choices. I believe further that about half of the Indonesians is Muslim, the only group who will vote Al Qaeda, and in that respect, the majority votes Al Qaeda. Alarming, isn't it?

    Jordan could be concidered one of the mildest Islamic states in the Middle East. They aren't that fond of the hard line Sha'ria Al Qaeda plans to install. Fot the time being, the US doesn't really bother about Jordan, so why would they vote against them?

    Nice correlation.... Concider the fact that these people think that Bush exerted too much power. Texas cowboy, starting two wars in 4 years. Even for American standard, that must be above average. There is a balance in these kind of things, and I think these people thought Bush tipped the scales in the wrong direction. I would say Kerry isn't for a weak America alltogether, but for a more balanced America.

    hehe... Yeah. That doesn't really count anymore in Europe. Do you know the Bilderberg foundation? Do you know why it was set up? In the late 50's of the last century, Bilderberg and a New York banker, whom's name I have forgotten decided to bring the most important US and European Industrials and Politicians together to talk about the US-European realtionship, to prevent the two drifting too far apart. So even then, the Liberation wasn't that strong an arguement anymore to follow the US.

    And besides, it wasn't solely the US being responsible for "our" liberation. There were tons of English and Canadian soldiers. Plus the fact that my birthgrounds weren't even liberated bu the US, but by the signing of Peace. And it were the Canadians and the Polish soldiers to reach us first...

    Oh, and the Balkan was (is) a civil war, just like Korea, Vietnam, Somalia.... How wel exactly did the Americans did in those kind of wars?
     
  5. kartaron

    kartaron Hunter / Gatherer

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,287
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +20 / 0 / -0
    We did really well in all three of those. The problem in Korea and Vietnam was that we were not politically allowed to invade the neighboring countries that the enemy retreated to when defeated (China and Cambodia respectively). In Somolia the polite nature of the war limited the effectiveness. All three wars failed under democrat leadership!

    It is very dissapointing that the best defender of Kerry (and attacker of Bush) is the guy from northern Europe who doesnt have to live under a Kerry presidency. No offence meant Turambar.
     
  6. Radagast

    Radagast Art House Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    3,058
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Saskatchewan, Canada.
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -0
    Interesting poll I saw on CBC news last night (I am trying to find an internet source, none found yet). Apparently in a poll across Canada, 17% support Bush, 39% support Kerry, and the rest don't care. However the point that caught my interest was that over 50% (I can't remember the exact number) thought that the US presidental election will affect Canada more than our own election a couple of months back will.

    I guess that's what happens when your running for president in the most powerful nation in the world.
     
  7. Turambar

    Turambar Harebrained Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,784
    Likes Received:
    162
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Not in Amsterdam :)
    Ratings:
    +189 / 0 / -0
    No offence taken. I, however are maybe even more disappointed that the US TFF members with the same opinion don't voice them that much.

    Exactly my point. I am concearned about the future of this world, and the upcomming election will have a major influence. Or at least, that's what I am affraid of. I am concearned about the greater picture, overlooked, as it seems, by the people that actually get to vote. There are absolutely some issues on internal policy in the US, but the impact of the election will be minor on that, certainly compared to the international interests and problems. Don't forget that global stability is a great foundation to build an economy on. I fear, with Bush, we are heading for four more years of international turmoil.
     
  8. Arwen

    Arwen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    5,450
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Long Island, NY
    Ratings:
    +45 / 0 / -0
    I'm anti-Bush/pro-Kerry but just tired of argueing politics of people who aren't going to change their opinion no matter what :p
     
  9. LOTR Fan

    LOTR Fan Universals v. Particulars

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2004
    Messages:
    330
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    In reading this thread and a number of others on this site; the only thing that really seems to be a commonality amongst Kerry supporters is a strong disdain for Bush. There could NOT BE a worse reason for voting for a president than we just don't like the other guy! No one has spent time talking about the positive things that Kerry would supposedly bring to the table, no one has discussed how they really like Kerry's plans for the world. Most contributors to this and other threads have swallowed the leftest adjenda of an attempt to win by default - make America hate Bush, then we can squeek into the most powerful office in the world! That is not the way our country ought to go, we should not just grant such power to a man that no one really seems to be that much behind; if you don't like Bush, that is your own issue - but perhaps a no vote is better than a vote for a man you don't know much about or don't believe in.

    By the way let me include just a few more examples of this fish from Mass, Kerry and his and others comments about terror and Iraq, I think you will get a kick out of this!:

    "We know that he has stored! secret supplies of biological and chemical
    weapons throughout his country." -Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002


    "Iraq's research for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to
    deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is
    in power." -Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002


    "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
    developing weapons of mass destruction." -Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002


    "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are
    confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and
    biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to
    build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence
    reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." -Sen. Robert Byrd
    (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002


    "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority
    to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe
    that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a
    real and grave threat to our security." -Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct.
    9,2002


    "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
    aggressively
    to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the
    next five years . We also should remember we have always underestimated
    the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass
    destruction."-Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV),Oct 10, 2002


    "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years
    every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and
    destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity.
    This he has refused to do" -Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA),Oct. 10, 2002

    "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show
    that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological
    weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program.
    He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al
    Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam
    Hussein
    will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical
    warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." -Sen. Hillary
    Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002


    "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that
    Saddam
    Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for
    the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -Sen. Bob
    Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002


    "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal,
    murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .. He presents a
    particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to
    miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his
    continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass
    destruction... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass
    destruction is real" - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2004
  10. Turambar

    Turambar Harebrained Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,784
    Likes Received:
    162
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Not in Amsterdam :)
    Ratings:
    +189 / 0 / -0
    Well, realisticallt, the US is a two party system. That means the choice is limited. So either you vote for the best man or you vote not for the worst man. Since I haven't seen a "best man" in this election, I'd suggest not voting for the worst man.

    Quoting a quote, isn't that cute...

    Yes, but when he, under Clinton, was in power he didn't do anything about it. And let's bring Bush's old man in the play here. No denying he had the chance to kick Saddam out, but he left him in Bagdad, didn't he? And before that Saddam already did his worst (involving chemical agents and Kurds). Bush sr. had reasons enough to "liberate" Iraq. Can anyone of the Repubblcan supporters please tell me why. Could it be because he had better insights in what would happen upon removal of this dictator? I can remember an interview of Bush sr. for the Dutch television, which unhappily I can't quote since there isn't a typescript of the interview available, told that "At that time we thought it would be better to leave Saddam Hussein in place." Upon the question what he thought of Jr's attempt to undo his father's mistake, he said, unconvincing, that he supported the new president. When the interviewer moved in on this subject, he said that wasn't in place to comment and that he supported the President.

    Hey, that was on my 21st birthday!

    So where did President-candidate Kerry get this information? Could it be... the falsified information the CIA provided? Oh, and then there is the posibility that the Bush administration forced the CIA to come up with this kind of info... Doesn't sound very unlikely, does it?
     
  11. Justice

    Justice New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,260
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Southern California
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0
    This is reason alone to discount everything you have said.

    The CIA did no falsify any information. The informaion turned out to be incorrect.

    Learn the difference and perhaps objective reasoning will not be out of your grasp.
     
  12. Justice

    Justice New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,260
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Southern California
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0
    It seems Kartaron's post countered that quite well...

    Funny that no one for Kerry can point out anything positive about him, even AFTER 20 years in the US senate. What has he done to make this country better? What has he done in his past that wasn't vastly UnAmerican? I am absolutely shocked a man like this is running for president. The Democratic party had no candidates this time around, they almost nominated Howard Dean for God's sake! People voting for Kerry can't even say why they are voting for Kerry other than "He's not Bush". Funny how you and others try to make Bush sound like an idiot when you can't even provide one reason to vote for Kerry unless it involves something he'll do better than Bush but is not at liberty to tell us how he's going to do it.

    KERRY is more than likely to institute a draft than Bush because the draft has been and always has been a Democratic idea. Nixon removed the draft. Two democratic congressmen just had a draft bill defeated only a few weeks ago.

    Yet this coward Kerry will go around trying to scare young people like the ones on this board saying that Bush is going to draft every college student so don't vote for him!

    Fear mongering coward, a damnable liar, that is John Kerry. hero to the VietCong whom slaughtered two million Cambodians thanks to the lies Kerry spread in his testimony to Congress. What a legacy.
     
  13. Justice

    Justice New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,260
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Southern California
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0
    I'm not too worried about this election. Bush is still polling beyond the margin or error in the states he needs to win in order to get the electoral vote. Only the ABC poll places John Kerry and Bush in a statistical dead heat, all the other have Bush at least 3 to 8 points above Kerry.

    http://www.zogby.com/

    The Zogby poll was the closest to predicting the last election though it did have Gore as the winner (and after the months of recounts Bush remained victorious). This time, although very close, if Bush wins, he'll win by a fairly good margin, much larger than the margin that Gore won the popular vote.

    And if Kerry loses, but not by an uncontestable margin?

    http://apnews.myway.com/article/20041020/D85R51DG3.html

    He's willing to piss on the legal system the same way Gore did back in 2000. Weird, they said Bush stole the election. Well, what if Bush had been declared the winner but then Gore won in the courts? Would he have been any more legitimate of a President? or would he have been the president the courts appointed instead of our voting system?
     
  14. LOTR Fan

    LOTR Fan Universals v. Particulars

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2004
    Messages:
    330
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    The fact that George Bush Sr, didn't in your mind act the way that you would have wanted him to had nothing to do with the issues of cruelty and atrocities to his own people; what changed of course is the entire lanscape of the world - we now have the impetus to hunt down and kill terrorist cowards!
     
  15. Turambar

    Turambar Harebrained Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,784
    Likes Received:
    162
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Not in Amsterdam :)
    Ratings:
    +189 / 0 / -0
    The intelegence were misjudges, and, as it looks, not undisputed at the time of publishing. Furthermore, you have to appreciate the fact that this intelegence came on the right time... But even so, the CIA provided wrong info, whether on purpose or no, we'll not know for the first 50 years. But that doesn't matter. There were way too many assumptions and the results should never have been published as the truth in retrospect. The only thing that could have been said was: "Giving the current intelligence, it is likely that Iraq/Saddam Hussein has indeed Weapons of Mass Destruction." Now I don't know about you, but enhancing the truth could be called lying, what about you?

    Oh, and pleas don't have a go at my reasoning. I think it is more then respectable, certainly after reading:

    or

    This is what I call the resort of a man pushed in a corner or one that doesn't know how to argue.

    Or would you like to vote a presedent on the basis of a bad voting system (the punchcards of Florida). I don't know, but there is actually something lingering in my brain about Gore being, after all recounts took place turned out to be voted for more then Bush... Does that make Bush a legitimate President? Same question, isn't it?

    And, now we're on it, can anyone explain what's up with the voting system in the US anyway. I mean, normally the guy with the most votes wins in a democracy, right....? Does that make Bush a legitimate President?

    1. So it does all have to do with terrorists? I thought those were from Afghanistan, and that was the reason to invade that country. Besides, wasn't North Korea a bigger threat at that moment in time?

    2. Why then are these cruelties mentioned over and over again when it comes to the latest war on Iraq?

    3. I think Bush sr. acted the right way.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2004
  16. LOTR Fan

    LOTR Fan Universals v. Particulars

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2004
    Messages:
    330
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Turambar - I feel sorry for your naivity when it comes to the the global outlook. To assume that terrorism was only to be found in Afghanistan is the height of ignorance!
     
  17. kartaron

    kartaron Hunter / Gatherer

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,287
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +20 / 0 / -0
    One document, captured by the U.S. from Vietnamese communists in 1971 and later translated, indicates the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese delegations to the Paris peace talks that year were used as the communications link to direct the activities of Kerry and other antiwar activists who attended.

    Madame Binh (a leader in the North Vietnamese war movement) was directing the antiwar movement ... and the person who implemented her strategy was John Kerry."

    July 22, 1971, Kerry called on President Nixon to accept the plan at a press conference in which he surrounded himself with the families of POWs, a strategy outlined in the first document.

    The two documents also connect the dots between the Vietnamese communists and the radical U.S. group People's Coalition for Peace and Justice through the person of Al Hubbard, a coordinating member of PCPJ and the executive director of VVAW while Kerry was its national spokesman.

    The second document, captured by U.S. military forces in South Vietnam May 12, 1972, urges Vietnamese officials to promote the antiwar activities in the United States.

    Significantly, the fifth paragraph makes it clear the Vietnamese communists were using, for propaganda purposes, a protest described as taking place April 19-22, 1971.

    This coincides with the well-known "Dewey Canyon III" protest in Washington, D.C., highlighted by Kerry's Senate Foreign Relations testimony charging American soldiers with war crimes.

    The document's description of the protest includes the "return the medals" event in which Kerry and other VVAW members threw their war decorations toward the steps of the Capitol.

    An FBI field surveillance report stamped Nov. 11, 1971, showed Kerry and Hubbard were planning to travel to Paris later that month to engage in talks with Vietnamese communist delegations. Other FBI reports clearly show the Communist Party of the USA was paying for Hubbard's trips to Paris, Corsi notes.

    Another FBI report, dated Nov. 24, 1971, gives details of Hubbard's presentation to a VVAW meeting of the Executive and Steering committees in Kansas City, Mo., Nov. 12-15, 1971.

    At that meeting, the VVAW considered a plan to assassinate several pro-war U.S. Senators. Kerry is listed as present.

    actual translated docs
    http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=vccircular
    http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=vcdirective
    http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=fbi111171
    http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/staticpages/index.php?page=fbi112471

    If this guy gets elected He better he gets impeached or I give up on the Republicans..

    While we are on the subject:

    Ohio voting ballots. Where would you mark your vote for Bush?




    If you followed the arrow you just voted independant. Color highlights are for clarity.
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Oct 26, 2004
  18. Lego

    Lego God amongst men

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    15,757
    Likes Received:
    70
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Ratings:
    +71 / 0 / -0
    *Applause* Well said....and sad fact, people like the American people but absolutely despise the government etc. as a whole.
     
  19. Turambar

    Turambar Harebrained Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,784
    Likes Received:
    162
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Not in Amsterdam :)
    Ratings:
    +189 / 0 / -0
    Fact remains that after all the threat of Iraq wasn't that big a threat at the start of that war last year and ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda were minimal. Al Qaeda is (was) more present in Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Pakistan...
     
  20. Lego

    Lego God amongst men

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    15,757
    Likes Received:
    70
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Ratings:
    +71 / 0 / -0
    yeah and what about In sudan and places like that....oh I know...It's because there is no oil there!!