Who thinks Bush (jr.) is a good president?

You are absolutely correct Bballad and as a right shifted politically conservative person I feel I should speak. I think it totally sucks and so does a lot of the party. Don't confuse support for taking down violent misguided animals with support for the patriot act and “erosion of freedom.” Although I support it, that support is waning as we draw a close on this year. I have said before in another post, what should we do? - Just let everyone in Cuba go free? “Sorry here’s your black book of terrorist cells and your bank book, see ya in 6 months when you gas someone in Chicago. Jihad brother, peace be with you.”

Without the patriot act, everyone would have gotten out and gone into hiding before they could be caught. What I do consider is the situation is being manipulated and inflated out of perspective. The point of view possibly held by conservatives is that Bush isn't eroding freedom, he is catching people that will kill us and our families if given the opportunity and the administration is using the patriot act to spy where they normally cannot. He is not Hitler or Stalin and this is not out of place in American history.

It's not as black and white as you paint everything. If Bush continues to support the measure as we go into next year. He may not even get close to my vote. You should also follow congress a little closer. Many Republicans are against it and many party members are bashing their own elected representatives for NOT standing on issues they were elected on. I was listening to Hannity in someone else’s office, while fixing a database and he systematically tore down and ridiculed a republican on the air. Can't get much more conservative than him and Rush and they are eating conservatives for lunch. I even watched the Democratic debates in Detroit this week. Did you?

So the short answer is we don't, except on the fringe of the right; although I am definitely not a spokesman for anyone's beliefs other than my own. The Republican Party does seem to be made up of a lot more religious members than democratic or liberal supporters. I don't think they should be persecuted for acting on their own right to freedom of speech, religion etc. And trying to propagate their beliefs even though I hate it when they bug you in public. I like to tell them I sacrifice lambs to my Mickey Mouse shrine. The truth is, most of the radicals on either side don’t even vote because they have lost complete faith in democracy and the republic that supports their asinine perspective.

The liberals try the same thing by forcing tolerance to things that directly violate religious protocol across all denominations including Islam. Thankfully the government holds to the constitution on those matters. A republican running on purely religious hypocrisy never gets the popular vote. Well maybe if the entire city is Catholic or something, but at the national level?

You will have to enlighten me on how the president is forcing Prayer in schools and the like. Sure a lot of republicans try that, but thankfully the courts stop them. They think they have a right like you do, to stand up and say what ever the hell they want, whether in school or not. It's a direct conflict with freedom of speech and the separation of church and state. Unfortunately some radical conservatives don't see the advantage that institutional separation provides.

As for the non-profit insertion of government controlled religious doctrine. What is that? Am I missing something? Is Bush forcing religious doctrine on the N.A.A.C.P? Or the N.C.A.A? I am curious where that originated.

My major problem with both sides is, neither one seeks knowledge. The take a slanted paper article or even the word of another as gospel. The right holds to their bible just as the left holds to their icons. My GF is FAR left btw. It’s an interesting relationship.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by RoadClosed

As for the non-profit insertion of government controlled religious doctrine. What is that? Am I missing something? Is Bush forcing religious doctrine on the N.A.A.C.P? Or the N.C.A.A? I am curious where that originated.

---

I was commenting on the federal funding for religious orgs that bush was pushing "Faith based initive" or some thing like that, got lost with the war and all, think his supporters in the religious right wanted him to back off on it when it was pointed out the islamic and jewish orgs would get funding also (not to mention any other religion that claimed to help the comunity).

Quote:

---

bush was pushing "Faith based initive"

---

Here you go, read the plan for yourself and make your own opinion. Doesn't seem dead to me, it's alive and well I think.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/government...page_ofbci.pdf

I admit I haven't heard of it, but in a nutshell it provides education and means for faith-based and community organizations means to apply for federal grant and spend money on these SOCIAL programs.

It also lets them know that more money is given to the states for dispersment and helps, good minded social do gooders to apply for those funds as well. The turn off mechanism for many it seems is the ability to let an organization with some bases in faith get some money but only for use in these priority programs:

At Risk Youth
Homeless
Ex-Offenders
Hungry Peoples
Substance Abusers
HIV-AIDS
Welfare to work families

The separation of church and state is paramount to a democracy. I think too much money is handed out to charities so this makes me see this as a social program with tax funding.. Of those charities, a lot have some base in faith already. That's the roots at where they came from. This initiative, in my opinion, doesn't negate church and state separation. For example, I think old churches are beautiful so why shouldn't they get money to restore historical significance? Linke Example

I don't like a lot of my tax dollars going to help someone who raped a woman or robbed a gas station at gun point. But if the program exists and some group with a faith based charter can administer and effective program, then why is religious intolerance a major issue? I mean the left preaches tolerance of gays, the constitutional right to have abortions, tolerance of environmental laws, tolerance of Aids patients, the right to not breath second hand smoke, tolerance of others period. Except the ability to worship a higher power in the form of Christianity while in a public place, of which I partly side with the view on separating courts, etc. I say, what’s wrong with funding a homeless clinic where the workers believe in Christ and probably hold a prayer before being fed. I mean I haven't really seen any without a religious slant. If they are getting money it's because they are hiding it. ;)

You miss the point of the faith based initive, religions that ran social programs could allways get federal money, thye just had to setup a secular nonprofit to do so. Chatholic charities and Lutheren charities are set up this way, what bush did was remove the oversight that made sure the mony wasn't being funled back into religious teaching or that the charity wasn't an attempte to convert people (this is why salvation army didn't get federal money, to accept their "charity" you must sit through conversion meetings.)

Hey don't get me wrong, I have no problem wiht someone preying in a public or private plac, my issue is when the goverment supports/funds/shows prefrence to one religion over others

Ok I can agree with you if faith based entities are given preference over others. I don't agree that he removed oversight, he may have loosened it a little by saying that Faith based Homeless shelters are no longer discluded solely based on that eliminating factor. The grant program is very competative and takes a lot of paperwork and effort. You have to document every cent spent. I was involved in getting some money on the COPS program, tough process with ridiculous oversight but the money was significant.

I guess he kind of removed some red tape and cut some fat? Bottom line, I have no problem with this initiative in it's current state and I'll watch to see how it progresses.

I have also read some articles that are slamming it as evil. I don't see it yet and so far every article I read is pure opinion and commentary. However I don't ignore the fact that just like any program it's subject to mislead and abuse by parties applying for grants. Hopefully they catch them all.

Here is the latest crop of grant winners. I could do research on each on to find out just their level of bias toward faith and exactly what program they fund internally, but I am not going to at this time. I see several I recognize and admire in addition to a few who are definitely churches of some sort.


United Way of Tucson & Southern Arizona Tucson AZ $686,982
National Center for Neighborhood Enterprise Washington D.C. DC 498,403
We Care America, Inc. Washington D.C. DC 712,020
Kentucky River Foothills Development Council, Inc. Richmond KY 511,298
Louisana Association Nonprofit Organizations Baton Rouge LA 401,022
Greater Minneapolis Council of Churches Minneapolis MN 532,000
Citizens Committee for New York City New York City NY 312,348
Foundation for Community Empowerment Dallas TX 578,892
Northwest Leadership Foundation Tacoma WA 740,438
Holy Redeemer Institutional Chrch of God in Christ Milwaukee WI 626,598

Total Awarded: $5.6 Million


Compassion Capital Fund Mini-Grants
Applicant Name City State Ammount To Be Awarded
Big Brother Big Sister of Southeast Alaska Juneau AK $49,907
Montgomery S.T.E.P. Foundation Montgomery AL 50,000
St. Clair Children's Advocacy Center, Inc. Pell City AL 50,000
Lee County Family Resource Center Marianna AR 48,185
Rural Human Services, Inc. Crescent City CA 49,430
Contra Costa Opportunity West Richmond CA 50,000
Riverside Coalition of Common Ground Riverside CA 50,000
Interfaith Hospitality Network of Colorado Springs, Inc. Colorado Springs CO 50,000
Community Housing Services, Inc. Denver CO 50,000
Council of Churches Bridgeport CT 50,000
Hartford Action Plan on Infant Health Hartford CT 50,000
City Gate, Inc. Washington DC 50,000
Delaware Ecumenical Council on Children and Families Wilmington DE 50,000
Trinity Church, Inc. Miami FL 50,000
The Center for Drug Free Living, Inc. Orlando FL 50,000
Georgia Legal Services Program, Inc. Atlanta GA 50,000
Hawaii Pro Bono Attorney Referral Project Honolulu HI 50,000
St. Paul AME Church Des Moines IA 50,000
Christ Ecumenical Center Chicago Heights IL 50,000
Housing Options for the Mentally Ill Evanston IL 50,000
Episcopal Social Services, Inc. Wichita KS 50,000
We're Reaching Out Bowling Green KY 50,000
Hazard Perry County Community Ministries, Inc. Hazard KY 50,000
Joy Corporation of Baton Rouge Zachary LA 50,000
Emmanuel Gospel Center, Inc. Boston MA 50,000
Washington County Comm. Action Council, Inc. Hagerstown MD 47,000
Tedford Shelter, Inc. Brunswick ME 49,984
Saint Gregory Community Center Council Inc. Detroit MI 50,000
Center for Family Health, Inc. Jackson MI 50,000
Lao Family Community of MN, Inc. Saint Paul MN 50,000
Breaking Free, Inc. St. Paul MN 50,000
Cornerstones of Care Kansas City MO 50,000
Big Brothers, Big Sisters of Montana Helena MT 50,000
Telamon Corporation Raleigh NC 50,000
Steppingstone Music Opportunities d.b.a. The Sad Café Plaistow NH 48,648
Citizens for Affordable Homes Carson City NV 48,094
Groundwork Incorporated Brooklyn NY 49,913
West Islip Youth Enrichment Services, Inc. West Islip NY 50,000
Care Alliance Cleveland OH 50,000
Thunderbird Challenge, Inc. Pryor OK 50,000
Boys and Girls Aid Society of Oregon Portland OR 49,716
Salem Leadership Foundation Salem OR 48,876
The Philadelphia Youth Network, Inc. Philadelphia PA 50,000
Christ Lutheran Church Upper Darby PA 50,000
The Source: A Boys and Girls Club Sisseton SD 50,000
St. Paul's Episcopal Church Newport News VA 50,000
Access to Racial and Cultural Health Institute, Inc. Christiansted VI 50,000
The Dream Program Winooski VT 47,195
Multifaith Works Seattle WA 50,000
Opportunities Industrialization Center of Greater Milwaukee Milwaukee WI 50,000

I read a nice book about Bush&Bush, it was a bit one sided but anti-Bush so it was a good book. It was ****ing full of humour wich totally consisted of facts (conservative-patriot-anti-argument... that just killed the decentcy of my reply)... it was so humourus it made me cry (worterspiel... laughing and crying are very close to eachother as in phisical activities, I cryed because all the humour was actually facts and those facts made me cry). I'll look up the title and writer (american writer btw), so it might be nice for all you to at least read like... the first page...

so...

*neel collects his puke of the past few years and covers this thread with it

It sounds like you read one of Michael Moore's books or one of Al Frankin's. Either way, they're both nuts who won't listen to the other side.

Definitely sounds like Al Frankin, I saw him on TV plugging a book that he himself calls political satire. Some may label me as a conservative, but I love Micheal Moore's stuff. He always makes some good points that are often misunderstood. Al turned me off a while back when I saw his intro speech at a political rally a while back. I may give his book a read, although I won't give hime a dime of my own money. Librarys are great for that.

RoadClosed,

Yeah, Al Frankin's a jerk. His new book is called Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right, but it is definitely not fair and balenced. Take a look at these two NPR interviews, one with Frankin and one with Bill O'Reilly. Not only is Frankin an *******, but he is an ******* that only participates in interviews where he knows the questions will be easy for him. Compare and contrast!

The book was really one sided indeed, but between the satire and humour there were the facts. Dunno what reputation them people have and I don't know what book I read, but it wasn't all bullshit. The one-side view works both ways though, I doubt Bush-supporters will read anywhere beyond the first 3 words.

If you'd be kind enough to share some of these facts, I'd be happy to give the other side, neel. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by RoadClosed


Here is the latest crop of grant winners. I could do research on each on to find out just their level of bias toward faith and exactly what program they fund internally, but I am not going to at this time. I see several I recognize and admire in addition to a few who are definitely churches of some sort.

---

Is this a compleate list? if so then it shows my point about the abouse of faith based initive, there are now religious groups getting funding that are not christian...that is a very bad thing.

Of course I'll post some... it would be a rather useless argument
"yeah some guy wrote it in some book and it were facts" << lol
I'll try to steal it from my friend tomorrow

Quote:

---

I doubt Bush-supporters will read anywhere beyond the first 3 words.

---

Lol that goes both ways. I doubt anyone on the left would read any of the many anti-Clinton books or anything by Rush or Hannity or Fox news or O-Reilly etc. :)

But speaking for one Bush supporter, I'll read it.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by RoadClosed


Lol that goes both ways. I doubt anyone on the left would read any of the many anti-Clinton books or anything by Rush or Hannity or Fox news or O-Reilly etc. :)

But speaking for one Bush supporter, I'll read it.

---

Thats because they are all liars and distort the facts to prove their point. Read this book:

Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right by Al Frankin
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...glance&s=books

It will prove my point with actual facts that are documented.

Quote:

---

Yeah, Al Frankin's a jerk. His new book is called Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right, but it is definitely not fair and balenced. Take a look at these two NPR interviews, one with Frankin and one with Bill O'Reilly. Not only is Frankin an *******, but he is an ******* that only participates in interviews where he knows the questions will be easy for him. Compare and contrast!

---

Why is he a jerk? Most of the stuff quoted by him is misquoted by the right wing media and the rushheads.

Why do people always miss the question at hand?

The question that should always be asked when discussing any current administration.

Are you better off now than you were 3 years ago?

Everything else is too full of spin and speculation, too full of altered dynamics. Consequently questions about sticking to promises or what government had who when and who did or did not die in what bombing are all moot.

People like to argue how quality of life goes beyond the administration, but isn't it funny who consistant themes follow like administrations?

All I know is that in the last three years:

There has been a huge collapse in the tech sector and in fact the entire economy.
I have fewer civil liberties.
I have known brethren to die, but I still can't get a clear story why.
I'm told by the state department that there is a whole new collection of nations I oughtn't visit because people might kidnap me on account of my being an american.
I have seen a dramatic reduction in civil services coupled with a rise in local government debt to pay for new security.
Questions about Halliburton and unsolicited contracts from undisclosed amounts really lower the faith I have in my government and it was already low to begin with.

Obviously others of you will have different priorities and be in different stations of you life, so these evaluations will be different. Maybe you care about the environment or nation debt or public education or preservation of a valid election process. Maybe nation building makes you feel good, or maybe you feel more secure now thanks to the department of homeland security and operation tips and the usa patriot act part 1 and 2, maybe you feel that issues like money and war take a backseat to questions on abortion and god. It really doesn't matter.

Are you better off now than you were three years ago?

catch

Sure, Frankin is much more honest than all of those put together. He has never "distorted the truth" to prove his point. If you believe that, you might want to have your head checked. Everyone has a bias, and if you automatically trust what they say without checking the source than you are a fool. As for Frankin, he is a complete jerk. Look at the title of his book, you know right from that it is meant as 368 pages of pure unadaulterated libel against conservatives. And it is, full of personal attacks from a moron.

catch:
Clinton and his administration left this country open to attack from terrorists, he disregarded national security time and time again, when he refused to get binladen form Sudan, when he vetoed laws restricting the actions of illegal immigrants (ones that, is ratified could have prevented hijacker mohammed atta from participating in the 9/11 attacks), and numerous other times. We are way better of without a lying, cheating, hipocrite like Clinton in office, so that such mistakes are never made again.

Quote:

---

Then how can you support a administration that has expanded the goverment, striped you of your privacy and freedom, and attempted to insert goverment controlled religion into schools and nonprofit organizations?

---

Don't you have this backwards there big boy?

Bush has taken measures to protect you, not strip you of your rights.

Also, no one is putting religion back in schools, or have you forgotten the ACLU has already stolen that from the American people. If the ACLU is altruistic, then I am an alien from mars and I'm here to do science experiments on your children! Give me a ****in break!

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by paulie walnuts


Don't you have this backwards there big boy?

Bush has taken measures to protect you, not strip you of your rights.

Also, no one is putting religion back in schools, or have you forgotten the ACLU has already stolen that from the American people. If the ACLU is altruistic, then I am an alien from mars and I'm here to do science experiments on your children! Give me a ****in break!

---

No I have it right...patriot act, has that made us any safer...no but it has striped our rights away.humm he has made the goverment bigger, increasd spying on citizans, tried to force his religious beleifs on the rest of the nation.......see I place actions higher then words when I judge somebody, his actions disgust me. Oh as for the religion in public schools, why do you want the goverment decideing what religion your children practice?

Quote:

---

Thats because they are all liars and distort the facts to prove their point. Read this book:

Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right by Al Frankin
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...=glance&s=books

It will prove my point with actual facts that are documented.

---

I heard all Franken’s interview on NPR about a month or so ago. You realize he has stated that book is political satire. Now I have stated I like Al, but I wouldn't take his books or his methods as gospel. He's even apologized on record for lying and deceiving to trick people into giving up information. I find it Ironic that his title is "Lies and the liars who tell them."

I live near a huge military base. I think they are up to 11 or 12 dead. I barely knew 2 of those people and last year was having a beer with one at a party. He died escorting little Iraq girls to school through a turbulent neighborhood. I don't know the other one he was with that day, but they were sniped. Am I pissed of at Bush, no at the coward who killed two men in defense of their continued ability to compose methods of mass murder?

Maybe it was her neighbors, maybe it was a terrorist. But the bottom line is, he died escorting children. The other one I knew drowned in a tank when it fell into a river; I think that one made the media a few months ago. My company is sold out of safety deposit boxes because they come in and open them and put all their most treasured items in before going. I hear what is going on over there all the time. It's all around me. I also have great friend in high places that communicate once in a while. I support the war. I support bush.

I think sometimes people go over the top in conspiracy and hatred for opposing viewpoints and make it their own jihad to absolve any good that could come about by ideology or action. They hold tightly onto their own bible, there own box of thought.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Negative


Like I said: nobody would have a problem with Israel building a wall on their own property. There is another nice example of a wall like this: the one between the US and Mexico. I don't hear anyone complain about that, and why not? Because the wall is on US territory. Don't you think it would be wrong if the US would build that wall on the Mexican side of the border?

And Paulie: it's a vicious circle... Palestinian terrorists kill some Israeli's, the Israeli's kill some Palestinians in revenge (most of the time it's a 10 to 1 ratio, but anyways).
You only call the Palestinians terrorists, I call them both terrorists...
Would you call yourself a terrorist if Canada would invade the US by building a wall on its territory, and you would go to Canada to kill some Canadians? Or would you call yourself a freedom fighter...?

---

I've been out for awhile, but I have to comment on this.

My first thought here was why is a wall between the United States and Mexico relevant in comparison to Israel and Palestine? The last time I checked we were not at war with Mexico and Mexican citizens were not conducting suicide bombing attacks. They might be trying to kill us with illegal drug overdoses but not terroristic acts.

Then I started thinking more about the wall example between United States and Mexico, and I deciced that I completely and vehemently oppose the proposition of any wall separating the United States from Mexico.

If you look at the cold hard facts about this, you will come to realize that if a "serious" wall was built between the U.S. and Mexico that would mean a drastic curtailing of illegal immigrants working as migrant farmers in the U.S. Thus U.S. citizens would have to be hired to fill these positions at a much higher income rate. The workers would then form a Migrant Farmers Union demanding health care and other benifits, which in trun would drive the price of produce out the roof. I for one do not want to pay 5 - 10 bucks for a head of lettuce IMHO

well my friend is still looking for the books, it turned out there were two books
of one I don't remember the title or writer he told me the other one was micheal moore's (if you spell it like that) stupid white man

Haven't read it, is it Michael Moore's autobiography? :p

yeah great, start making fun already
I had to many pro american - anti american flame threads now to bother continueing here.
If you call yourself TheRepublican or clintonsucks, you don't really invite people to start a serious politics conversation.
That's regardless of my perspective or Micheal Moor's book or fox news.

Quote:

---

fox news.

---

Too far left for me!

Bush Chenney 2004 They have pretty much won the comming election, with this last democratic scandle :lol: Iran and Syria "terrorist hot spots" here we come bastards.
Onward! godamn I said onward!

I don't know if Bush is a good president. The only thing I know for sure is that he should have worked together with other NATO allies in Iraq. Think of all guys out there in Iraq it's almost the same story as Vietnam again. Have a good night mister president while all your boys are out there in Iraq...

Quote:

---

Sleep well mister president...

---

cover by de heideroosjes: (dutch)
http://www.heideroosjes.com/multimed...0President.mp3

Binladen holding the french's hand once again!!!
I hope you all sleep well at night cowards

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by cleanbash
I don't know if Bush is a good president. The only thing I know for sure is that he should have worked together with other NATO allies in Iraq. Think of all guys out there in Iraq it's almost the same story as Vietnam again. Have a good night mister president while all your boys are out there in Iraq...

---

we did try to work together with NATO, but good old France, dindn't want anything to do with it. If you recall, we did have several nations supporting us before we did go in. We just couldn't get it passed in the U.N because of those few countries that did not want this.

Quote:

---

we did try to work together with NATO, but good old France, dindn't want anything to do with it. If you recall, we did have several nations supporting us before we did go in. We just couldn't get it passed in the U.N because of those few countries that did not want this.

---

Most countrys who have the veto right said they'd use it if eventually france wouldn't, altough I don't really like the veto system in some cases, there were alot of states totally against the idea or for the idea to attack ONLY if the weapon inspectors found something (wich they still didn't). Ironicly many americans start to bitch about the veto system, wich they used more often themselves then all other countys added up.

However, we still had several countries backing us.

Several countries did back us in the war, and that's great. But the US does not need UN support when it comes to matters of it's own national security. We are a sovereign nation who has the power to declare war if necessary, independant of the opinions of the French. Sure, we don't want the world to be pissed off at America, but in the end it matters very little.

then all treaties etc are powerless and useless because nobody cares about them in the end...
"the french" might decide to invade the US for being a threath to world peace and human rights outside the US... At the moment the US doesn't have much to fear because most people still act civilised and won't attack the US just because it could destroy the world with it's biochemical nuclear massdestruction missiles. The US won't last forever though, like any civilisation or superpower on this planet it will end sometime. If you interfere with the world, the world will interfere with you. The idea Iraq could be a threat to the US existed only because the US already did stuff there that caused hate and anger over there.

That reminds me of a song... dunno what it was called...

Quote:

---

the white man makes the dope, right ? then he gives it to us... then he wants to buy it from us, right ? ... and then he puts us in jail when we sell it to em !!! this world makes no ****ing sence

---

Who supplied weapons to Iraq in the first place ? And how could Saddaam become a dictator ?

Weapons were given to Iraq so Iraq could defend itselft against a dangerous and extreme government. That government is Iran. We chose Iraq for many reasons, one significance was the seizure of our embassy in Iran and the capture and long hostage situation of civilians working there. Read some history. Here is the basics: Iran started arming Kurds in the North of Iraq, with the intent of Overthrowing Saddam. This old sentiment went back to origins in the Arab/Persian dispute. Sadaam dropped a border dispute with Iran so they would stop giving weapons to the Kurds. Then Saddam, hungry for power (my opinion) invaded Iran to reverse it's decision to drop the border dispute. Now why did we support Iraq? Probably because the USSR supported Iran and there was that hostage thing I mentioned. This is definitely the entire affair in a nutshell but sheds light on the question or why US saw fit to give guns to Iraq.

The United States won't last forever. Eventually people will toss out the founding priniples of government and destroy and weaken it from within. When the union falls apart we will be weak, but even then our geographic location is more protective from mass invaders because no powerful forces exist close by. Those countries that do border the US are similar in ideology and our cultures are already intertwined as one collective. It would be like invading a country full of your brothers and sisters. Or going from Good to worse.

It is our scientific capability that keeps us soverign. A critical balance in technology could upset the status of the U.S. It is surprising to me that a society of our magnitude in size and complexity has made it 200 years.

I know my history, some statistics say most US citizens don't, I asked the question in a retorical way for the people to think about.

How the US will end is pure speculation and not really what I wanted to talk about either.

The US only got the powerfull status they have now because of the world wars and the cold war. They were not the 'ubernation' for the past 200 years.

It seems like in this guy's mind(neel), though, it's a closed loop.

He cannot possibly be wrong. In his mind, he's(and the French gov and ppl) automatically won.

French and the German Veto

Have you ever visited any of these memorials you ungratefull BASTARD these men protected your freedom of speech.
http://www.abmc.gov/abmc5e.htm

Yes I agree as many wars within the 200 year period have pointed out. But in each one, we were victorious. It is the technological advances and push for science through both world wars and the cold war that have sustained our "uber" status. Those nations on the cutting edge of Space and Nan/bio technology will perhaps rise to an even greater power in centuries to come. cough - China.

statistics would tell you almost 100 percent of Americans can't comprehend life in it's present state, let alone hisotrical context of what shapes the boudaries of earth and its perpetual debating inhabitants... Outside of Playstation and X-box that is...

RoadClosed
: I think you hit it on the head, if america falls from its place as #1 it will be an eastern nation that takes up the mantal, china is a good canadate but lets not forget the sleeping tiger taht is finaly waking after a major economic depression (Japan).

neel: just because a lot of americans are ignorant of history dosn't meen that we are all, but I would argue that our world power status started with the spanish american war and (seperately) pershings fleet. WW1 and WW2 era germany knew this and beged its allies not to wake the sleeping giant. I would also argu that america dosn't have the sole claim to ignorent citizans (facists riseing in italy and france again, neonatzis in germany, citizans buying into the cerntral european bank crap.) sure we may have more of them but we have more people I bet the percapita numbers a very close to equal.

oh and glacier you are rasing that percapital number in the US, the french and german veto i n the UN (security consul) has nothing to do with us being to stupid to bring our NATO allies with. You see NATO is not the UN...neat how that works huh. Oh and while you are bitching about france and germany useing their veto, how do you feel about the US's veto of sanctions agenst isrial?

Bballad let me say it again. Or let me yell it 911 YOU STUPID *** REMEMBER 911 aka SEPT 09/11/01

French and the German Veto

Have you ever visited any of these memorials you ungratefull BASTARD these men protected your freedom of speech.
http://www.abmc.gov/abmc5e.htm

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by /|Glacier|\
Bballad let me say it again. Or let me yell it 911 YOU STUPID *** REMEMBER 911 aka SEPT 09/11/01

French and the German Veto

Have you ever visited any of these memorials you ungratefull BASTARD these men protected your freedom of speech.
http://www.abmc.gov/abmc5e.htm

---

and what dose taht have to do with iraq...oh ya Nothing, I remember 9/11, I want this country to be stronger agenst terrorism, I would love for that type of tragady to never happen again. You and our president seem to have forgoten and his current polocies are makeing it more likely that we will get hit again. To stop terrorists you need to crush them, the half assed way we handled afganistan, and now our bullying in an unconnected middeleastern country (one that was anti alquida) has strengthened the terrorist groups. This mess is beruti all over again, we come out of it looking like weak inept bullies.