Bush should be killed

[nafnikufesin]

Originally posted by Ragamuffin
I live in Chicago and he didn't say that.

You're sure about that? It was reported in the Toronto Metro a week ago. I'll see if I can find an online link for you.

@Thraude: I hope you're kidding about the "Nuke Iraq" statement. It's frightening to think that people could have such a cavalier attitude about nuclear war, and taking millions of innocent lives.

 

[anthrax_moshing_maniac]

it that have to bomb iraq to stop a war then do it they are only gonna bomb america or highjack planes again

 

[Ragamuffin]

Originally posted by nafnikufesin
You're sure about that? It was reported in the Toronto Metro a week ago. I'll see if I can find an online link for you.

I'm very sure.

In fact he hasn't said anything in about a week since his mother died.

 

[nafnikufesin]

Originally posted by Ragamuffin
I'm very sure.

In fact he hasn't said anything in about a week since his mother died.

The quotes was made last week, this is from the February 14 edition of the Metro:

http://129.142.171.205/content/030214/cator_20030214_A_Metro.pdf

(It was originally reported on cbc.ca, although my computer at work won't let me install the flash player to give you the original link)

Originally posted in the Toronto Metro, February 14, page 22
Chicago shouldn’t have been made in Canada: mayor

The U.S. government has
turned its back on American
filmmakers, forcing pictures
like Chicago to be
made in Canada, the city’s
mayor said, cbc.ca reports.
“The movie is great,” Mayor
Richard Daley said. “I said,
‘Too bad it wasn’t filmed in
Chicago.’”
Filmed in Toronto, the
hit musical topped the
Oscar contender list with
13 nominations, including
best film. The adapted
stage play was also nominated
in the best actress,
best supporting actor and
actress and best director
categories.
“The film industry in
America was going strong.
Canada says, ‘OK we want
the film industry. We will
subsidize you.’ So all the
film industry went from
America to Canada,” Daley
said.
The government needs
to provide incentives to
American filmmakers to
keep them at home, he
said.
“We do the creative
work. We do the financial
work. Why should we send
the production work overseas?
Our priorities should
be keeping people working
in the film industry here,”
Daley said.
Recently, actor Robert
Duvall lashed out at Canadian
actors, saying their
skills are inferior to their
American counterparts.
“I prefer not to work in
Canada. I prefer to work in
my own country,” Duvall
said. “There are better actors
down here. That’s why
they have to import so
many actors for their Canadian
productions.”
Metro Toronto news services

 

[nafnikufesin]

Originally posted by anthrax_moshing_maniac
it that have to bomb iraq to stop a war then do it they are only gonna bomb america or highjack planes again

If you think bombing mostly innocent people is going to stop terrorism, you are incredibly naive. Moreover, it risks turning previous bystanders into enemies when they watch their innocent loved ones die.

"Let's kill them before they kill us." Not only is that a totally paranoid statement, but in nuclear war, I'm afraid that doesn't work. The whole world will see innocent lives lost, whether they're American, Iraqi, or just about every other nation.

"Kill'em all and let God sort'em out" How do you think God will judge you with that attitude, when you're one of the dead, too?

 

[Ragamuffin]

That's what youre talking about? That's something he said about movies in general and something he's been saying for years (Chicago was passed up for a location in Malaysia or something).

As far as 'innocent bystanders' being bombed in war, that's complete bullshit. Innocents die in EVERY war, more so when Iraq is concerned because he relocates his people strategically around bases and factorys so he can jump up and down screaming how bloodthirsty America is that they'll bomb his citizens.

 

[ThraxDude]

NFF-
You know we've been over this. If I'm a sick-twisted phsycho for saying "Nuke Iraq" and sincerely meaning it, than I'm a sick-twisted phsycho.
They'd kill us in a heartbeat if they could. The "innocent" people over there feel the same way about America as I feel about them.

 

[anthrax_moshing_maniac]

if someone doesent get them there get london or america
and the amount of people asylm seekers sneaking into england they could be working with bin laden and co and they could blow the fuck out of this country they won't care if they die all they gotta do is leave a few bags on the tubes in train stations on oxford street and london is fucked

 

[nafnikufesin]

Originally posted by Thraude
NFF-
You know we've been over this

Yeah, I know. What can I say, I like to be a shit-disturber sometimes.

Originally posted by Thraude
The "innocent" people over there feel the same way about America as I feel about them.

My question is, why do you think they hate you so much? Why do you hate them so much? You've never even met them. You have a lot more in common than you might realize. You're both just trying to get by in life, but being fed propaganda by your own government that if we don't do something first, they will. Such great paranoia makes for great nationalism no matter what country you're from, because you can be unified in hating someone else that wouldn't have otherwise given a shit about you one way or the other. It's also great for the government leaders to create such a terrifying world, because it distracts attention from the shitty job they're doing at home. And I'm not trying to bash the US or Iraq, this is pretty much any government you can name, Canada included.

However, if Bush continues to act like a bully and threatens anyone that doesn't do exactly as he says, he's going to have a lot more enemies in this world than just Iraq. What then...blow up the rest of the world, too? And then he might have to blow up New York, because there are too many foreigners there, too. And then California...and then...

Sound ridiculous? Yes, but it's not anymore ridiculous than Dubya trying to find an excuse to start and finish the war that his daddy couldn't finish.

 

[Ragamuffin]

Originally posted by nafnikufesin
However, if Bush continues to act like a bully and threatens anyone that doesn't do exactly as he says, he's going to have a lot more enemies in this world than just Iraq. What then...blow up the rest of the world, too? And then he might have to blow up New York, because there are too many foreigners there, too. And then California...and then...

Sound ridiculous? Yes, but it's not anymore ridiculous than Dubya trying to find an excuse to start and finish the war that his daddy couldn't finish.

That's complete bullshit that people who don't actually follow politics want to spew so they can be Anti-Bush. This has been brewing for 10+ years. These sanctions and rules were put on Iraq after the first war by the U.N. not by George The First. In his eight years Clinton only did the minimal checks he had to to make sure that Sadaam was following the rules. Guess what? He wasn't. And now that real checks have been done we can see that. Don't give me that 'finish what his dad started' shit because his dad finished what he started 10 years ago. Newsflash we not only won that war but we kicked their asses badly.

 

[Metal Maiden]

After 9/11 I have wondered what would of happened if Al Gore had won. I just can't picture him taking charge.

What do you guys think? Where would we be now if Gore was Pres.?

 

[nafnikufesin]

Even better question that we'll never know the answer to: Would 9/11 have happened if Al Gore had won?

 

[Ragamuffin]

You dont plan something like that in that short a time, that's been in the works for a long time.

 

[Metal Maiden]

Originally posted by Ragamuffin
You dont plan something like that in that short a time, that's been in the works for a long time.

Agreed, it was againt America, not Bush.

 

[mentalmeltdown]

Can someone explain me this:

- How did the Bush make the american nation "switch" focus from the war on terrorism to a war against Iraq?? I don't think that the ties between the Iraqi and the 9/11 are that obvious - so they may have had a couple of terrorist cells on their territory; so have the USA. Does that mean that we should bomb Anytown USA just because it might or not have terrorists in it? I'm all for an out and out war on terrorism and truly believe that sick cowards that fly planes into buildings should be stopped by all means necessary - but bombing a country just because they are a potential menace seems rather arbitrary and oh so removed from the initial wave of patriotism that followed the 9/11. I'm not so sure I'd want to go to war to fight a country that has a legitimately elected president; so they may have disobeyed UN ... so fucking what?? Who hasn't?? I say until the Iraqi openly manifest some form of aggression on someone or until the inspections prove me wrong, the free world should adopt a diplomatic stance rather than sending thousands of men to war and spending billions....

That's my 2 cents.

And, yes I'm Canadian and proud of it!

"Why leave America to visit America Jr.?" - Homer Simpson

 

[Ragamuffin]

Who said any focus has been switched to anything from anything? It's not like America has suddenly pulled out of Afghanistan and sent everyone to Iraq. The biggest issues in Afghanistan have been taken care of (Al Qaeda has been turned to chaos and for the most part unorganized) And Iraq has taken the 'national spotlight' because that's the 'next step'.

 

[mentalmeltdown]

Originally posted by Ragamuffin
Who said any focus has been switched to anything from anything? It's not like America has suddenly pulled out of Afghanistan and sent everyone to Iraq. The biggest issues in Afghanistan have been taken care of (Al Qaeda has been turned to chaos and for the most part unorganized) And Iraq has taken the 'national spotlight' because that's the 'next step'.

Excuse me for asking, but what do we have to show for all the actions taken in Afghanistan?? Exactly, not much... a couple of collaborators of Bean Larden but no trace of him that's all - oh yes, the Afghanistan now have a new government... for how long? And how many people there still hate Americans? I'll bet they're a whole bunch and in a few years who's to say there won't be another Taliban nation there??
As for the focus changing from the war on terrorism to Iraq, I think that's one of the best public relations stunts in recent history - America's public opinion, or a big part of it, seems to have swallowed the idea of Iraq being the enemy all of a sudden.
Next step to what?? Now I'm afraid that any country that the "Dubya" has a beef with, might get bombed; this all urgency to wage war on Iraq is highly suspect to me...

Anyhoo, I'm not a political expert so my opinion has to be taken with a grain of salt...

Peace!

 

[nafnikufesin]

Originally posted by Ragamuffin
These sanctions and rules were put on Iraq after the first war by the U.N. not by George The First. In his eight years Clinton only did the minimal checks he had to to make sure that Sadaam was following the rules. Guess what? He wasn't. And now that real checks have been done we can see that.

Can we? The UN doesn't seem to agree, which put the sanctions in place doesn't seem to agree, and has not agreed to condone the war. The U.S. would be acting unilaterally, without the UN's support, so Bush says "Agree with me or else". Bush has said "War is our last option"...well, it's easy to get to the last option when you're only considering one option.

Originally posted by Ragamuffin
Don't give me that 'finish what his dad started' shit because his dad finished what he started 10 years ago. Newsflash we not only won that war but we kicked their asses badly.

If their asses were kicked so badly, why is this still going on?

 

[Ragamuffin]

Originally posted by mentalmeltdown
Excuse me for asking, but what do we have to show for all the actions taken in Afghanistan?? Exactly, not much... a couple of collaborators of Bean Larden but no trace of him that's all - oh yes, the Afghanistan now have a new government... for how long? And how many people there still hate Americans? I'll bet they're a whole bunch and in a few years who's to say there won't be another Taliban nation there??
As for the focus changing from the war on terrorism to Iraq, I think that's one of the best public relations stunts in recent history - America's public opinion, or a big part of it, seems to have swallowed the idea of Iraq being the enemy all of a sudden.
Next step to what?? Now I'm afraid that any country that the "Dubya" has a beef with, might get bombed; this all urgency to wage war on Iraq is highly suspect to me...

What do you WANT? No one ever expexted America to go in there and pull Osama out by his beard. He has a network of people designed to stop exactly that. However he and his people are now scattered to the winds and that was the point. Yes, we have completley replaced their government and that was the other point. Who can say for how long but it's been done and we can now keep an eye on whos in charge there and make sure that they don't suddenly get the same kind of people in charge who will harbor and hide the terrorists like the last regime.

Can we? The UN doesn't seem to agree, which put the sanctions in place doesn't seem to agree, and has not agreed to condone the war. The U.S. would be acting unilaterally, without the UN's support, so Bush says "Agree with me or else". Bush has said "War is our last option"...well, it's easy to get to the last option when you're only considering one option.

Most of the U.N. seems to agree but as always there are countries that don't. If we have to go in without the support of the full U.N. though there won't be any hesitation. It's not 'agree with me or else' it's 'I'm doing whats best for MY country and don't need your approval. Other options were considered, but it's more than apparent that he cares not what America has to say about his building and storing weapons he's not supposed to have. In the past we've seen that the only way to make him stop is by taking action, we've done the diplomacy thing for years now, yet the weapons continue to be built and the sanctions continue to be ignored.

If their asses were kicked so badly, why is this still going on?

It could have something to do with his forcing the people to vote him back into office again and again. You don't really think 100% of people voted for one man ANYWHERE do you?

 

[nafnikufesin]

Originally posted by Ragamuffin
Most of the U.N. seems to agree but as always there are countries that don't. If we have to go in without the support of the full U.N. though there won't be any hesitation. It's not 'agree with me or else' it's 'I'm doing whats best for MY country and don't need your approval.

So it's okay to ignore the decisions of the U.N. as long as it's in the interests of what is best for your own country. Sounds like what Iraq is doing.

Look, sure, I'm stirring up shit, and the fact is I think the world would be a better place without Saddam. But I disagree with how Bush is going about it, and bombing and war are never good solutions, even if they were to work. Do I have a better solution? Shit, if I did, I wouldn't be here right now. But I do think that there are better solutions out there.

It's obvious that I'm not got to change your mind, and you're not going to change mine, but I do want to highlight that there are many ways of thinking about this thing. Neither of us are 100% right. But the taking of innocent lives, be it American, Iraqi, or Martian, is 100% wrong. But it happens, and unfortunately we're powerless to stop it. Bush isn't going to stop it either, and I think the way he's going about trying to will make it worse. I'd debate this further, but it won't change anything, and besides, it's Friday afternoon quitting time, and there's a couple of beers with my name on them.

Cheers