bush's comments on our politics (1 Viewer)

[George W. Bush]

off the top of my head, both the French and German leaders spoke about the importance of international law in conflicts.

could be wrong, but i remember that both contained underlying criticism of the war (not straight out, of course)

 

[ihatecensorship]

xama................... there is a huge difference.

Bsh senior attacked iraq after it invaded another country.

Clinton just droppped a few boms on a few weopon making facilities.

George bush on the other hand..............sold lies to the world and then we alll illegally invaded a country killing heaps of innocent people. There are heaps andheaps of countries...that.............torture people etc

It seems there is eveidence that iraq made alot of effort to disarm its wmd stockpiles like america requested.

How is it fair that iraq takes america at its word and then disarms and then it is defenceless when it is invaded..............This is .........pathetic.

Im not sure if iraq has totally disarmed, but if it has america needs to apologise to saddam, pay him $50 billion in repirations and then kiss his arse and leave.

there are so many governments that abuse human rights.....................america has no right to go around the world acting as a policeman on this issue. If they want to fix human right violations they can go to their concentratyion camp in cuba.
Shit loads of asian countries torture citizens into confession etc. In china some jails have heaps of deaths from guards bashing prisoners. Its discusting.

Look wat america did to japan it used an Atomic bomb to kill like 50,000 innocent ppple now it wants to telll everyone how to actn and how to treat pple.

I am happy to take the past as being the past. But america needs to do the same, iraq invaded kuwait like 15 years ago....everyone needs to get over it, if america wanted to do something to iraq at that stage its understandable..its tooo late to get your knickers in a knot over iraq invading kuwait now.

As far as i can seee iraq totally reformed and us going in there is totally unjustified.

This war is disgraceful. I dont want innocent ppple in iraq to die, but i really hope this war turns into a huge failure.

 

[400miles]

Originally posted by George W. Bush

PS: About the topic, did Bush just come out and say "Mark Latham's idea is really shit!"? Because the footage I've seen looked like someone asked him a question, "What do you think of Mark Latham's idea?" and Bush said "Well, I think it's really shit!". There's an important difference.

We all know that politicians have to watch every word they say, especially in press conferences. Now whether or not Bush's comments were in reply to a question or not he knows full well there's an election on and he knows full well the impact his words have on many - especially those aussies who value the relationship we have with america. I reckon George was way out of line with his reply to the question... and example of another way it could have been done was Mark Latham tonight on Rove... Rove asked him something along the lines of what he thought about this situation or what he thought about George Bush (something like that) and Latham replied that we should worry about Australian politics and leave US politics to the US. Much better answer...

Originally posted by George W. Bush
The most recent example which comes to mind are the French and German speeches at the D-Day Memorial.

That's completely different. The implications of George Bush's comments are very real... It's more than fair for any Australian to read into what George said and begin to think that if Australia pulls out of Iraq the relationship between the US and Australia might be damaged and the US is a powerful ally to have on our side... George's comments around Australian election time play a much bigger role than simply criticisms...

Originally posted by Xayma
We will leave when we are asked to by the interim government.

No, we will leave when the Australian government decides to pull out... (which hopefully isn't very long away.. everyone vote latham in).... The fear I have is that if John Howard stays in power we'll end up leaving when George thinks we should leave... and quite frankly I'm not happy about leaving the fate of Australian troops in the hands of a man that I can neither vote in or out... (Not that it mattered in the last US election... didn't he lose? and yet he's still president? god bless america... probably regretting that one)

 

[George W. Bush]

Originally posted by ihatecensorship
xama................... there is a huge difference.

Bsh senior attacked iraq after it invaded another country.

Clinton just droppped a few boms on a few weopon making facilities.

George bush on the other hand..............sold lies to the world and then we alll illegally invaded a country killing heaps of innocent people. There are heaps andheaps of countries...that.............torture people etc

Figures directly related to the Clinton administration are bolded.

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18,1998.

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

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

"Iraq's search 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 b elieve 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 Rockerfeller (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 weap ons 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.

"[W]ithout 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 contin ued 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.

 

[ihatecensorship]

hey bush,,,,,,,,,,, there is a huge difference.

Clinton didnt invade iraq and occupy it.

A heap of iraqies have been killed. Patriots not terrorists have been killed simply because they dont want to seee another country come and imprison their nation -- i respect those iraqies. Also alot of innocent civilians and even american soldiers have died as a result of bushes stupidity.

From what i have seen on foxtel and thre is a shit load on there, basically hans blix suggessted that in around 2000 saddam may have destroyed a huge amount of WMD. The situation is in 1998 or whatever, clinton could have been right in relation to alot of the statemtns he made.

It is clear however that ...............bush/chaney etc etc the evidence they gave has been proven to be bull shit. Even if some weopons do turn up it is very very very very very very very likely that they will be far less from what the US government stipulated.

Its also clear that iraq had taken massive effforts to disarm and dramatically reduced if not eliminated its development of WMD's.

Iraq welcomed the weopons inspectors into Iraq and for the most part was very co-operative.

The Un wanted more time, because...............america gave the UN instructions where to find the WMD's and the Un found none at those places so the UN began to question the US intelligence. When this started to happen..........................America rushed into going to war, because if it became more and more likely that Saddam didnt have any WMD's then America wouldnt get the support to invade a nation and steal its oil.

Going to war for any country is the biggest decision any government can make. A sophisticated country like america, should have taken the time and effort to get good intelligence.
They have lied to the world and alot of people have beeen killed.

I believe George Bush should be trial for war crimes. I dont know if he is guilty or not but i do think he should be trialed.

He rushed to judgement and alot of people seem to have been killed for nothing. Surely that must be some crime?????????

 

[lengstar]

as with ihatecensorship you don't see america invading nigeria over the conflict going there or taking out mugabe for his massacres of the populations do you? it all comes down to oil.

 

[ihatecensorship]

exactly, there aer so many countries that commmit huge human rights violations.

In the filipines this aussie dude married a filo, and they alledged the filo woman stole somethihng and they bashed the shit out of the husband.....................like belt him with bambo everyday etc...trying to get a confession out of the chick.

In asian countries they also torture people to confesss. In some chinese prisons they electicute people heaps of shit like that.

They also force people in jail to work as slaves and if you talk or look backwards etc..you get bashed...........and in some cases killed.

In some asian countries the death penalty is up to the discreation of the guards etc. Like if you are on death row, and you have a fight with a guard,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,the next day they can execute you. Shit like that..........I watched a show about it..its fucking slack. To prevent suicide they do not plan the executions of prisoners you only find out the day you are going to die.

America - they hold people as suspects and dont give them trials, they also condon sleep deprivation and starvation and other mental torture to make people confess to crimes. It has been alledged that they also hold peoples heads under water to further torture them. Look at abo graid - fucking animals. (BTW if they were following orders i dont blame the soldiers)

America doesnt give a shit it thinks it can do whatever it likes and then can when its convenient throw stones at others..........did america go and invade china over whatever the massacre ur talking about is???????????/

america is full of shit and our government is too gutless to call america on its bull shit polices. America is a total hypocrite with no principals.

 

[ihatecensorship]

like pretty much all countries are guilty of suppporting in one way or another (even just through our trade agreements or our silence or even allowign them to remain members of the united nashions etc) of supporting these nations that commit human rights violations.

So none of us should march into another country killing ppple cos we dont like how a government treats its citizens. Its total hypocrisy.

I think there is a quote where John Howard said he wouldnt go into iraq based only on human rights violations. It was to disarm hes WMD program. And now when it appears america just bull shitted.

now he is like look we freeeed iraq we are so goood.

It is fucking bull shit.

 

[smegger_em]

if i chuck a couple of cliches in here can i be cool?

 

[budj]

the underlying concept of democracy is the exercising of freedom right? Should then democracy be forced upon people

Fuk of George bush. If you really wanted democracy, you could of stopped the genocide in Africa. You could donate a shit load to poor third world countries to colour humanity

 

[Persephone87]

Originally posted by ihatecensorship
perse phone...........wow dude or dudette..........i am in oar of your genius .........

That was a very well thought out idea, most pple on here are like the rest of australia they are total sheap. We need more people like you spreading your propaganda.

Australia needs to hear the truth and your one of the few people telling it. your government and media are totally pathetic and most of our citizens are too blind tooo seee it.

Terrorism is so over rated, to me terrorism is a joke. The government uses it for immoral purposes.

Primarily to Invade a country and destroying all our civil rights and freedoms in this country.

And to the rest of you take a few notes on what phone says hes a fucking genius.

She.
And thanks. I think.

Originally posted by lengstar
as with ihatecensorship you don't see america invading nigeria over the conflict going there or taking out mugabe for his massacres of the populations do you? it all comes down to oil.

:nods: