[jimmydean]

Disclaimer:
I have not validated these statements, just found them interesting considering where I pulled them from.

Click

From the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers: Local Union 932

Can we really handle another 4 years? Read on...

"Bush's central accomplishments as the first "appointed" president:

Shattered record for biggest annual deficit in history;

Set economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12 month period;

Set all-time record for biggest drop in the history of the stock market;

First year in office set the all-time record for most days on vacation by any president in US history;

After taking the entire month of August off for vacation, presided over the worst security failure in US history;

In his first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their jobs;

Cut unemployment benefits for more out of work Americans than any president in US history;

Appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions than any president in US history;

Signed more laws and executive orders amending the Constitution than any president in US history;

Presided over the biggest energy crises in US history and refused to intervene when corruption was revealed;

Cut healthcare benefits for war veterans;

Set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously take to the streets to protest a sitting American President, shattering the record for protest against any person in the history of mankind;

Dissolved more international treaties than any president in US history;

Presided over the biggest corporate stock market fraud of any market in any country in the history of the world;

First president in US history to order a US attack and military occupation of a sovereign nation;

Created the largest government department bureaucracy in the history of the United States;

Set the all-time record for biggest annual budget spending increases, more than any president in US history;

First president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the human rights commission;

First president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the elections monitoring board;

All-time US (and world) record holder for most corporate campaign donations;

Biggest life-time campaign contributor presided over one of the largest corporate bankruptcy frauds in world history (Kenneth Lay, former CEO of Enron Corporation);

Spent more money on polls and focus groups than any president in US history;

Took worldwide sympathy for the US after 911, and in less than a year made the US the most resented country in the world (possibly the biggest diplomatic failure in US and world history);

With a policy of 'disengagement' created the most hostile Israeli-Palestine relations in at least 30 years;

Fist US president in history to have a majority of the people of Europe (71%) view his presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and stability;

First US president in history to have the people of South Korea more threatened by the US than their immediate neighbor, North Korea;

Changed US policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded government contracts;

Set all-time record for number of administration appointees who violated US law by not selling huge investments in corporations bidding for government contracts;

Failed to fulfill his pledge to get Osama Bin Laden 'dead or alive';

Failed to capture the anthrax killer who tried to murder the leaders of our country at the United States Capitol building. After 18 months he has no leads and zero suspects;

In the 18 months following the 911 attacks he successfully prevented any public investigation into the biggest security failure in the history of the United States;

Entered office with the strongest economy in US history and in less than two years turned every single economic category straight down."

 

[mplutodh1]

He's a politician, do that to any president and you can come up with a list just as long, who cares.

 

[Ridemonkey]

Originally posted by mplutodh1
He's a politician, do that to any president and you can come up with a list just as long, who cares.

I'd be interested to see that list for any other president. Proceed.

 

[mplutodh1]

Originally posted by Ridemonkey
I'd be interested to see that list for any other president. Proceed.

Oh come on man, haha I am not going to waste my time like some Bush hating moron has already done. Yes heck maybe that stuff is true but lets be realistic, can you say that every election year there isnt the same mud slinging lists of things this person did wrong or that person did wrong? It's the nature of our democratic system.

Not defending Bush, just stating that a list like that COULD be made for any president.

 

[RhinofromWA]

Originally posted by mplutodh1
Not defending Bush, just stating that a list like that COULD be made for any president.

Clinton:
Only president found to be lying under oath and stayed in office.

Left office with the economy spiraling down out of control with no care in the world

Committed sexual harassment on while on the job. On more than one occassion with more than one person.

"lost" records from business dealings that would seem less than appropriate.

Hindering a investigation, you pick wich one.

Rode the economic boom of the 90's failing to try and slow it down to temper any future colapse.

In the last months in office initiated the biggest threat to public acess to the federal land and wilderness, under the eye of environmental jugernauts such as the Sierra Club and Green Peace

Allowed forestry managment to neglect the forrest leaving them to rot and die. Forrest fires and bug infestations ensued.

Neglected foriegn affairs, except for a couple cruise missles



Should I keep going?

BUT he could play the sax and was a hit with the ladies.......

 

[mplutodh1]

haha my point exactly, much appreciated Rhino!

 

[T0mo]

Originally posted by mplutodh1
He's a politician, do that to any president and you can come up with a list just as long, who cares.

It's about f***in' time someone said that. I never did 'cause (unlike rhino there) I wouldn't be able to back it up. But it's true.

 

[RhinofromWA]

Originally posted by T0mo
It's about f***in' time someone said that. I never did 'cause (unlike rhino there) I wouldn't be able to back it up. But it's true.

I just let me fingers fly on those and I wouldn't call myself a person who followed Clinton that closely. I am sure if I cared to I could find lots more.....

I just thought it would be funny to see Rhino (of all people) make a list that is just as viable as the list given about Bush.

 

[BostonBullit]

first off, if it came from a labor union I don't trust it...no matter which "side" they are taking.

second off, what rhino said, or typed as the case may be.

 

[jimmydean]

I just thought it made some good points. All that in only 4 years is kinda scary to me. I'm sure there are some scary things you can dig up about any president, I just found these while looking at new career options (because technology sure aint where it's at right now).

 

[Skookum]

Originally posted by RhinofromWA
I just let me fingers fly on those and I wouldn't call myself a person who followed Clinton that closely. I am sure if I cared to I could find lots more.....

I just thought it would be funny to see Rhino (of all people) make a list that is just as viable as the list given about Bush.

Yah haha good point man, makes me wonder if Paul von Hindenburg got a little nook nook under the desk before Hitler took office.

 

[Lexx D]

Originally posted by RhinofromWA
Clinton:
Committed sexual harassment on while on the job. On more than one occassion with more than one person.

Yeah I love that, bush spent billions and people are always like "but clinton got blowjobs". He's not the first prestident to get a little play, just the first to get caught.
I know there's a list for all of them, but lets not ignore the shyty things Bush has done. Just because others make mistakes in no way justifies his.

 

[golgiaparatus]

Oh yay! Lets compare Rhino's Clinton screw ups to bushs screw ups:

BC: Left office with the economy spiraling down out of control with no care in the world.

GW: Set all-time record for biggest drop in the history of the stock market & Shattered record for biggest annual deficit in history & Set the all-time record for biggest annual budget spending increases, more than any president in US history

BC: Committed sexual harassment while on the job. On more than one occassion with more than one person.

GW: Appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions than any president in US history & Biggest life-time campaign contributor presided over one of the largest corporate bankruptcy frauds in world history (Kenneth Lay, former CEO of Enron Corporation)

BC: "lost" records from business dealings that would seem less than appropriate.

GW: Presided over the biggest energy crises in US history and refused to intervene when corruption was revealed

BC: Hindering a investigation, you pick wich one.

GW: Presenting false evidence to congress and the UN, you pick which time.

BC: Rode the economic boom of the 90's failing to try and slow it down to temper any future colapse.

GW: In his first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their jobs & Set economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12 month period

BC: In the last months in office initiated the biggest threat to public acess to the federal land and wilderness, under the eye of environmental jugernauts such as the Sierra Club and Green Peace

GW: Set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously take to the streets to protest a sitting American President, shattering the record for protest against any person in the history of mankind

BC: Allowed forestry managment to neglect the forrest leaving them to rot and die. Forrest fires and bug infestations ensued.

GW: Fist US president in history to have a majority of the people of Europe (71%) view his presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and stability

BC: Neglected foriegn affairs, except for a couple cruise missles

GW: First president in US history to order a US attack and military occupation of a sovereign nation

Keep going Rhino its like comparing grapes to watermellons.

 

[RhinofromWA]

Originally posted by golgiaparatus
Oh yay! Lets compare Rhino's Clinton screw ups to bushs screw ups:

BC: Left office with the economy spiraling down out of control with no care in the world.

GW: Set all-time record for biggest drop in the history of the stock market & Shattered record for biggest annual deficit in history & Set the all-time record for biggest annual budget spending increases, more than any president in US history

BC: Committed sexual harassment while on the job. On more than one occassion with more than one person.

GW: Appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions than any president in US history & Biggest life-time campaign contributor presided over one of the largest corporate bankruptcy frauds in world history (Kenneth Lay, former CEO of Enron Corporation)

BC: "lost" records from business dealings that would seem less than appropriate.

GW: Presided over the biggest energy crises in US history and refused to intervene when corruption was revealed

BC: Hindering a investigation, you pick wich one.

GW: Presenting false evidence to congress and the UN, you pick which time.

BC: Rode the economic boom of the 90's failing to try and slow it down to temper any future colapse.

GW: In his first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their jobs & Set economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12 month period

BC: In the last months in office initiated the biggest threat to public acess to the federal land and wilderness, under the eye of environmental jugernauts such as the Sierra Club and Green Peace

GW: Set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously take to the streets to protest a sitting American President, shattering the record for protest against any person in the history of mankind

BC: Allowed forestry managment to neglect the forrest leaving them to rot and die. Forrest fires and bug infestations ensued.

GW: Fist US president in history to have a majority of the people of Europe (71%) view his presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and stability

BC: Neglected foriegn affairs, except for a couple cruise missles

GW: First president in US history to order a US attack and military occupation of a sovereign nation

Keep going Rhino its like comparing grapes to watermellons.

Well you could go one and they are green grapes to red grapes......

I just let a few well known facts fly against the dems beloved Clinton. If you think Clinton was the force driving our countries good fortune you give him way to much credit. Now a stock market crash....recession a big one is not really reversible by the president alone. It was coming when Clinton was in office...everyone knew it. How long could you invest in no-nothing tech companies and make money fist over fist? People in the 90's were in for a ride in the 2000's it started to end and end badly.

But please go ahead and blindly beleive that Clinton had the allmighty control lever giving the economy a boost... Just like Bush personally cut all the stocks out there and reducedyour retirement account....muhahahahahah, please.

If you are thinking the two are sooooo different you are right. Clinton stood back and did little and left the world feeling all warm and fuzzy while it was really step to explode.

You think all these terrorist were created since Bush came to office? again.

 

[RhinofromWA]

Originally posted by Lexx D
Yeah I love that, bush spent billions and people are always like "but clinton got blowjobs". He's not the first prestident to get a little play, just the first to get caught.
I know there's a list for all of them, but lets not ignore the shyty things Bush has done. Just because others make mistakes in no way justifies his.

Actually abusing his position as president (the most powerful man in the world) and lying about it in court while under oath IS SERIOUS.

The fact that he lied about getting some tail is the funny part.


If you really go thru the list can you honestly say all the "facts" given there are a result of Bush being in office? Could there be other factors at work? Are many of the items listed a result of the recession that NO PRESIDENT (bush or gore) could have avoided. This blind rage is almost comical if it weren't so sad. Sure you don't like him but since you don't like him all that bull sh!t listed above is directly attributable to Bush.......

Reality check time.

And when is Kerry going to give his ideas about improving things? Everytime I see him he is blowing smoke up the nations skirt......give some examples MR kerry. Since you can change things tell us how you will do it. All I have heard is Bush is doing bad and Kerry is not Bush. Maybe a little empty political crap along side.

Kerry is going to "fix" the gas problem. Hmmm how is he going to do that? Drill in AK? No. Play OPEC's skin flute? Doubt it. Yet he blames Bush for the money leaving America's families thru high gas prices. Face it he has no plan, he can't change it realistically, yet he can slam bush for it.

To Kerry:

Kerry, give me something to vote for and you could win me over.

You don't need me though because everyone has confused disgust with Bush as a need for you. It is probably a smart game plan but you have not showed your cards, and for that you won't get mine.

Running as a "Not Bush" candidate is your thing. But you have shown me nothing that tells me you have a plan for the county's future other than to get yourself into office. For that you gain no repect from me. When does the real Kerry show up? The guy with a real plan.

Rhino

 

[golgiaparatus]

Originally posted by RhinofromWA
Well you could go one and they are green grapes to red grapes......

I just let a few well known facts fly against the dems beloved Clinton. If you think Clinton was the force driving our countries good fortune you give him way to much credit. Now a stock market crash....recession a big one is not really reversible by the president alone. It was coming when Clinton was in office...everyone knew it. How long could you invest in no-nothing tech companies and make money fist over fist? People in the 90's were in for a ride in the 2000's it started to end and end badly.

But please go ahead and blindly beleive that Clinton had the allmighty control lever giving the economy a boost... Just like Bush personally cut all the stocks out there and reducedyour retirement account....muhahahahahah, please.

If you are thinking the two are sooooo different you are right. Clinton stood back and did little and left the world feeling all warm and fuzzy while it was really step to explode.

You think all these terrorist were created since Bush came to office? again.

The Dems love clinton? Thats news to me. As for him being a driving force, at least he wasnt a driving the country directly into the ground.

Stock market crash? Saw it coming? I dont think anyone saw the Enron scandal coming. And as far as I can remember the stock market was doing okay before that.

Anyway I am in no way giving clinton credit for being a stand up guy or a good president. And I certainly have zero blind faith in him, or anyone else for that matter. Maybe he did sit back and do jack chit and thats not cool... however, pissing off the entire world and making the US look like a lying cheating evil empire MUCH is worse.

Also... I dont think the terrorists were created because of bush, I think they have been around for a LONG time. I do think that Bush is not helping though, I think he is creating reasons for people of the region (you know what region I mean) to hate America and thus terrorism.

People hate America far more than they have ever have... just in the last 3 years... Tell me thats not true!

Stop thinking republican and democrat, stop thinking liberal and conservative... look at what the hell is happeniing.

 

[mplutodh1]

We are looking at what is happening, the problem is you are blaming one person for that, yes he is the deciding factor in a lot of decisions but honestly can you say that if Gore was in office the 9/11 crap wouldnt have happened? hmmm yeah I don't think you can, how would Gore have handled it? Who knows, and I am not here to play "what if politics" all I am saying is you can make a list about presidents/candidates every damn election year. If you don't like a candidate all you have to do is exactly what started this post, create a list of negative things that the individual (or his administration) has been a part of, then state that it was that individual who caused it all. I am with Rhino, the economy was going down hill before Bush got in office. Not sure when the last time you studied the economy was but I had a look at it just a few months ago (the benefits of being in college) and it was pretty clear that the economy was going down hill. And for everyone who blames the economy on the president, again, study some economics folks, yes the government does have a bit to do with the status of the economy but in reality they cant do jack ****. The FED is where a lot of the control is, and even there its the public that control the economy. We did it to ourselves, one man sitting in a chair in the oval office cant change the minds of the millions of citizens of this country.

And I dont think your whole arguement on Bush making the problem with terrorism so much worse are 100% valid. Ultimately it was Osama who created all the hatred, he made it public. What were we supposed to do sit on our overweight lard asses and say oh, its ok because they hate us so they can kill thousands of innocent people on our soil and get away with it, we shouldnt do anything about it because we might create more hatred for going over and trying to stop sick acts like that. BUSH DIDNT CREATE 9/11. Let's get that through everyones heads.

As for the way terrorism is being handled, now yes there are some problems but in what war hasnt there been problems? In the past wars were a little bit more, well "structured" it was military against military. This time its sick bastards against military, they aren't organized, they aren't fighting for a cause, they are fighting because of hate. It isn't easy for an organized military to fight against a militia (heck its not even that), a bunch of tards who have no respect for human life.

 

[Serial Midget]

If the Iraqi resistance wins they are going to want to prosecute George Bush for war crimes.

 

[Serial Midget]

Originally posted by mplutodh1
...how would Gore have handled it?

He would have written a book.

 

[golgiaparatus]

No ne said bush created 9/11 and he dealt with it in afganistan when he turned the taliban into a crater.

He did however create operation Iron Fist and he is taking down the reputation of the US with it.

He damages the reputation of the country every time ha makes a speech and starts spouting off his list of enemies in the Axis of evil. The man is a childish reactionary ass and he has us to bring along on his ride. Its been quite a ride so far. GW scares me because he continually pisses off other governments and he doesnt give a chit, If he stays in office for another 4 years and continues on his rediculous crusade then the US is going to have more enemies than friends.

Personally I want him out because I think he is bad for the country. I could care less about his stance on economy right now. I only posted that stuff (which was all part of the original post mind you) to show that Rhino's list, which also included stuff about the economy, wasnt even comparable and proved nothing.

 

[RhinofromWA]

Originally posted by golgiaparatus
I only posted that stuff (which was all part of the original post mind you) to show that Rhino's list, which also included stuff about the economy, wasnt even comparable and proved nothing.

Than you missed the point of my list, and your scale of camparability is simply opinion at best. Clinton had very little to deal with in comparison to Bush....if you are talking scale. Clinton rode teh economic ride of a lifetime and sat on his hands in many world affairs. Maybe his world affairs approach (do nothing) is the better choice? It worked for him, but left a mess to clean up later.

RM asked for a list, I hashed out one. Give me a progect and a month and you could have a pretty brutal list....for any president.

 

[Serial Midget]

Originally posted by RhinofromWA
Clinton rode the economic ride of a lifetime...

So he was basically a downhiller? All of the fun, none of the work? Core dude, core.

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by mplutodh1
Not sure when the last time you studied the economy was but I had a look at it just a few months ago (the benefits of being in college) and it was pretty clear that the economy was going down hill. And for everyone who blames the economy on the president, again, study some economics folks, yes the government does have a bit to do with the status of the economy but in reality they cant do jack ****. The FED is where a lot of the control is, and even there its the public that control the economy. We did it to ourselves, one man sitting in a chair in the oval office cant change the minds of the millions of citizens of this country.

you are wrong on so many levels... no, don't go away. Just stop thinking in B&W.

For example, what does an insane deficit do to the economy? Who's in charge of said budget? And yes, the PotUS can significantly influence consumer and business confidence.

Wow, dude, if your teacher taught you all that, well, go ask your prof if he was just scratching the surface. If so, ask him to elaborate. If he can't, your teacher needs a boot upside his head!

 

[jimmydean]

Originally posted by RhinofromWA
<snip>
Running as a "Not Bush" candidate is your thing. But you have shown me nothing that tells me you have a plan for the county's future other than to get yourself into office. For that you gain no repect from me. When does the real Kerry show up? The guy with a real plan.

Rhino

I say the same about Bush as well. As far as I've seen, he's had more focus on Iraqs future than mine and ours.

Am I a Kerry fan, no, not really. But if there was a "none of the above" vote, or an "anyone else take a turn" vote, you can bet that's the lever I'd be pulling this year.

I don't like what Bush has done (or has not done) with my industry (tech sector), nor do I like what he has done with my military (the National Guard is not designed or trained to fight as an active offensive force).

So the bottom line is, I would vote a Ham Sandwich into office before I let GWB have another 4 years at the helm.

 

[RhinofromWA]

Originally posted by jimmydean
I say the same about Bush as well. As far as I've seen, he's had more focus on Iraqs future than mine and ours.

Am I a Kerry fan, no, not really. But if there was a "none of the above" vote, or an "anyone else take a turn" vote, you can bet that's the lever I'd be pulling this year.

I don't like what Bush has done (or has not done) with my industry (tech sector), nor do I like what he has done with my military (the National Guard is not designed or trained to fight as an active offensive force).

So the bottom line is, I would vote a Ham Sandwich into office before I let GWB have another 4 years at the helm.

I can atleast understand that view point.

Difference is we can see what Bush is doing(not doing) and criticize or attack him. Kerry, rightly so, is doing that but I have yet to see more than empty political ideas of what people want to hear.............

...and that many foriegn officials told him he would make a better president. dbl haha

I would have more respect if he gave us some bits of his master plan (insert maniacle laugh here) so we can judge for himself.

I think I heard someting last light to this effect on the news. He did say that he would turn over much or Iraq's handling to a united world group. He didn't say the UN but WTF? Yeah they were doing great before. A babysitter that had lost all control of a house full of unruley kids.

But I can respect that he gave more than a "I will do better than Bush" speach.

 

[Jr_Bullit]

Okay, well after reading an interesting article about N.Korea and their Nuclear readiness and potentially having supplied Libiya with Uranium rather recently...Essentially they ARE the nation we thought Iraq was....

I wanna know what the next guy is gonna do about that...cuz Bush's camp is avoiding confrontation with Korea like crazy because he's overcommitted our forces in Iraq, leaving a nice big empty hole for another group of people who feel NO love for the US to jump through.

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by RhinofromWA
But I can respect that he gave more than a "I will do better than Bush" speach.

but why should Kerry do anything but sit there and let Bush beat himself?

 

[jimmydean]

I know a lot of people that feel the very same way. Instead of Kerry pointing out what Bush has done wrong, I would rather see him take a stand and say "Here is what I have in mind moving forward..." rather than "I would have done it better, different, something".

I know I may be the only fool that feels this way, but I would have rather seen Edwards and Clark together as an option. I think Edwards has some great ideas about how he would move forward and I would love to see the military in Clarks hands (as a vice pres role).

Clark said he didn't feel doing into Iraq when we did was a good idea. Wow, an Army General who failed to see just cause, go figure.

Times like these, I wish we had a TRUE three party system.

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by Jr_Bullit
Okay, well after reading an interesting article about N.Korea and their Nuclear readiness and potentially having supplied Libiya with Uranium rather recently...Essentially they ARE the nation we thought Iraq was....

I wanna know what the next guy is gonna do about that...cuz Bush's camp is avoiding confrontation with Korea like crazy because he's overcommitted our forces in Iraq, leaving a nice big empty hole for another group of people who feel NO love for the US to jump through.

how does invading NK help US?

 

[jimmydean]

Originally posted by Jr_Bullit
I wanna know what the next guy is gonna do about that...cuz Bush's camp is avoiding confrontation with Korea like crazy because he's overcommitted our forces in Iraq, leaving a nice big empty hole for another group of people who feel NO love for the US to jump through.

It would be a whole different story if there was some oil in North Korea...

 

[RhinofromWA]

Originally posted by LordOpie
but why should Kerry do anything but sit there and let Bush beat himself?

TO win an election? he shouldn't do anything.

To earn the position of president of the united states he should give the voting public something to chew on. He has given little to nothing in the way of fixes only uncomplete political garbage.

If he is "Mr. Fix it" as he says he hasn't exactly shown us anything that says he can. That is scary. The fact that people will vote for Kerry for the simple fact they don't like Bush.

Kerry hasn't stood up like a man and given the voting public a reason to vote for him. I would think that more now than ever that would be important! People think we got shafted when we got Bush, yet they are gambling on a vote for someone who can't talk about his real plans. I want some real ideas from Kerry before I even consider him for president. If he can't step up why should I choose him?

How do you know he is better? Oh, I know, he can't be any worse, right? makes no sense.

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by RhinofromWA
I want some real ideas from Kerry before I even consider him for president.

YOU want! I want too, but most people don't care.

Don't you think that Kerry should run the campaign in a way that's best for him to win?

Fact is, I'm still undecided.

I'm am truly afraid of what may happen if the evil Bush doesn't continue his evil plan. I think any half-ass attempt at this point would be a critical and massive mistake.

If Kerry can't convince me by election time that he is going to fight just as thoroughly, but with a slightly different game plan -or- proves he's got a great diplomatic solution, I'm voting for Bush.

 

[Jr_Bullit]

Okay, before the thread turns into things about NK...here's a link to the article I read on the NYTimes:

Clicky

And while we may know/suspect/think that we went into Iraq "really" because of the oil, and because of economics, this was not the justification for it given to the world to get their "buy in" or approval, which like it or not, we do need. N.Korea is actually demonstrating the very things we verbally feared/suspected Iraq of.

The article does go into some economic information as well and somewhat compares the two nations. N.K. doesn't have oil reserves to keep its population from starving, but it does have nukes and missles it can sell...

And, while I'm a little young to know Anything first hand about vietnam, from the little I've read, the leaders in N.K. view their populace as a means to an end, not as individual people they serve and provide for.

 

[Jr_Bullit]

So to continue, if the US leadership feels it is more important to look externally at other nations' business and make it our own, then darnit I wanna know what the next administration plans on doing about N.K., even if it's nothing, I think we have a right to know.

Personally, I'd like to hear what their plans are for within the US, like better education, and better funding, and what they're planning on doing with things like No Child Left Behind to make it a viable requirement for districts to adhere to...I'd like to see what they plan on doing with Social Security, the Budget, and welfare (eliminate or seriously change please!)...but you see what I mean? I care about my life, my local world, the rest of the world becomes a part of mine because I'm interested in it, not because it has a lot of impact on my day to day...but education of children for the future when the rest of the world will have a greater impact..and I admit it...the decision I make is going to be based on what's in it for me...mememe :devil: just because I'm interested in the rest of the world and want to keep up on it, does not mean that's what's going to sway my decision. I'd like to see our troops come home, I'd like to see proper diplomatic talks taking place and the US become a valid partner in world affairs that is respected and liked by the rest of the world for the decisions it makes for it's own citizens and not for the megalomaniacs running the govt.

Sorry - rant...in true Jr_B style

 

[RhinofromWA]

Originally posted by Jr_Bullit
I'd like to see our troops come home, I'd like to see proper diplomatic talks taking place and the US become a valid partner in world affairs that is respected and liked by the rest of the world for the decisions it makes for it's own citizens and not for the megalomaniacs running the govt.

Sorry - rant...in true Jr_B style

Jr_B, I think you give diplomats to much credit. Have they solved or created more problems? You think diplomats weren't working overtime toget Saddam in line for over a DECADE since he invaded Kuwait.? Diplomats have their place but to often are moslty warm bodies that don't change anything at the bargaining table.

The rest of the world is affraid of itself.....they lack the fortitude to enforce the rules they lay down (like we enforce ours... ) The current partners in world affairs (UN) was unable to handle Saddam....when push came to shove the UN ended up on it's back. All talk and no reality of enforcement = a joke of a council that others laugh at....it isn't respected.

I have lost respect for the UN. They haven't done a "better" job than the US, they have done "less" of a job than the US, in enforcing it's own rules laid down to allow Saddam to stay in power (specifically)

Diplomats are effective when they can reach a middle ground, but they are much less effective when they have no means to "influence" the other side. Maybe I am screwed up in the head?

The UN to me is "All Hat No Cattle" (Texas term)

 

[Jr_Bullit]

Originally posted by RhinofromWA


Jr_B, I think you give diplomats to much credit. Have they solved or created more problems? You think diplomats weren't working overtime toget Saddam in line for over a DECADE since he invaded Kuwait.? Diplomats have their place but to often are moslty warm bodies that don't change anything at the bargaining table.

The rest of the world is affraid of itself.....they lack the fortitude to enforce the rules they lay down (like we enforce ours... ) The current partners in world affairs (UN) was unable to handle Saddam....when push came to shove the UN ended up on it's back. All talk and no reality of enforcement = a joke of a council that others laugh at....it isn't respected.

I have lost respect for the UN. They haven't done a "better" job than the US, they have done "less" of a job than the US, in enforcing it's own rules laid down to allow Saddam to stay in power (specifically)

Diplomats are effective when they can reach a middle ground, but they are much less effective when they have no means to "influence" the other side. Maybe I am screwed up in the head?

The UN to me is "All Hat No Cattle" (Texas term)

Aight darlin...as said in a separate thread...I'm not sure yet just how offended I'm going to be by you slamming the very organization of individuals within the US that I interned for, have looked up to my entire life, and support with the fullest extent of my being.

Now, there are those in this world that believe might=right, and those people often are considered to be bullies. Bullies usually only learn their lesson when they get a true and complete smack down and loss of face and the tables are turned. But if they are a true bully unable to study themselves and learn from the experience, they remain the weakling they originally were.

War may begin because one side or both sides feel they are in the right to attack one another. War comes to an end...when? when the diplomats come to the table and lay out the terms for creating peace. If you can't lay out agreeable terms for continued peace then you haven't completed the war.

Perhaps my faith in diplomats also explains how I play chess. I always use my Bishops and Knights as my power pieces. The ones that come at you from an angle, the ones that maneuver into their positions. They are just as important in war as is your military. The loss of lives, resources, materials is just as costly to the winner as to the loser of any war....and it doesn't necessarily mean the victor was in the right to begin with.

Additionally, if we're to refer to the US and the rest of the world...it's not us vs. them...we're part of that world too. Now the UN has never been allowed to be effective, it has been a toy of the US since WWII, we control it even if we don't pay our dues. We have never granted or given it's members the fullest courtesy they deserve. However, make no mistake that the rest of the world has the power within it to join forces against the US - if we chose an US vs. Them mentality.

Your diplomats (and yes, they work for you even if you don't vote for them they come from our basest ranks so do be sure that they understand the regular folks of the US far better than our leadership does) work to maintain and hold steady tenuous relationships with nations that don't necessarily like us. They do business with us because we have diplomats there to pave the way, we're allowed to vacation there and work there because we have diplomats in place to pave the way.

Diplomats are not big noisy players in the game, they are quiet, and effective. They are trustworthy individuals who have dedicated their lives to giving the US the appearance of a "good guy". They are trustworthy individuals who will make sure that you are taken care of, to the best of their ability, when you are in a foreign nation.

Sorry if hte above doesn't make sense...you got me a little heated there Rhino by slamming the very organization of individuals that I have supported and wanted to be a part of since I was about 4 years old.

 

[golgiaparatus]

Originally posted by RhinofromWA
I can atleast understand that view point.

Difference is we can see what Bush is doing(not doing) and criticize or attack him. Kerry, rightly so, is doing that but I have yet to see more than empty political ideas of what people want to hear.............

...and that many foriegn officials told him he would make a better president. dbl haha

I would have more respect if he gave us some bits of his master plan (insert maniacle laugh here) so we can judge for himself.

I think I heard someting last light to this effect on the news. He did say that he would turn over much or Iraq's handling to a united world group. He didn't say the UN but WTF? Yeah they were doing great before. A babysitter that had lost all control of a house full of unruley kids.

But I can respect that he gave more than a "I will do better than Bush" speach.

Question:
A dude has a gun to your head and says, Im gonna blow your head off, but if you want you can choose this other guy who has something behind his back... could be a bazooka, could be a fly swatter, could be a ham sandwich...

Which would you choose?

I feel (from reading all your posts) that this is how you see the election. I also feel that (from what you have said) that you would probably choose hot lead to the head.

 

[Just Lookin'...]

Originally posted by RhinofromWA


Jr_B, I think you give diplomats to much credit. Have they solved or created more problems?

holy crap. did you ever get any schooling in world history?

You think diplomats weren't working overtime toget Saddam in line for over a DECADE since he invaded Kuwait.? Diplomats have their place but to often are moslty warm bodies that don't change anything at the bargaining table.

so, skip the bargaining table (since only diplomats do the bargaining) and move right on over to bloodshed and violence.

The rest of the world is affraid of itself.....they lack the fortitude to enforce the rules they lay down (like we enforce ours... ) The current partners in world affairs (UN) was unable to handle Saddam....when push came to shove the UN ended up on it's back. All talk and no reality of enforcement = a joke of a council that others laugh at....it isn't respected.

actually, two things - 1) why are we patting ourselves on the back for invading Iraq and neutralizing a tyrant? because it looks good on paper? there in no evidence that there was ever any direct link between Iraq/Saddam and actual terrorist activities against the US.

2) the UN is respected a lot more than you assert in both the US and abroad. oh, right, abroad is just a woman. sorry to bring that up.

I have lost respect for the UN. They haven't done a "better" job than the US, they have done "less" of a job than the US, in enforcing it's own rules laid down to allow Saddam to stay in power (specifically)

whereas we actually did a better job of trashing the entire infrastructure of the whole country, an on top of which, we both actively supported and sold weapons to Saddam.

that's basically a crooked cop brutally beating up a coke-dealer he used to sell drugs to because he needed a promotion.

Diplomats are effective when they can reach a middle ground, but they are much less effective when they have no means to "influence" the other side. Maybe I am screwed up in the head?

you can't beat the shyt out of someone in order to get them meet you half way.

The UN to me is "All Hat No Cattle" (Texas term)

you ain't no texan.

 

[RhinofromWA]

Jr_B,
Saddam was above all diplomatic solutions....they were tried. The fighting comes after talks breakdown.

Saddam doesn't respect a empty threat.

When bad things go down, it means that diplomatic talks failed. I know talks go on all the time and I should never know (thank god) what goes down.

Yeesh!

Just looking,...,
But to think this world is always going to be able to sit down and talk things out is absolute fairy tail material. I hope even you can accept that. Talking should still be done, but it just isn't enough some times.

Yes, after fighting the diplomats come in and write things down and strike deals. AFTER fighting, that happens AFTER talks broke down! Japan surrendered because we were knocking on thier door and dropped a nasty bomb that scared the sh!t out of them....not because someone was bargaining the whole time....but the bargaining became a nice alternative to Japan over more bombings. Now the diplomat had leverage....even if he didn't use it.

So, yes you can beat the **** out of someone to meet you half way. Manytime when it comes to fighting that is the only way.

A diplomatic solution FAILED in Iraq. It was given a chance...well unless you need more than a DECADE! How many generations should diplomacy be allowed to be stagnant? How many generations until the talking has ceased to be usefull. Doesn't mean they shouldn't stop talking and trying to find that diplomatic solution, but eventually as a last resort a little force is needed. Saddam wasn't working with the UN. He still didn't to the end. How would another decade have changed that? We will never know but if he was willing to live the rest of his life in a shallow grave over being handled by the UN than I am guessing...never.

The UN is respected? Why? They talk things out. I can accept that. But they are a union that prides it self in monitoring and safegaurding the world agains future Hitlers. They have little to influence true "future Hitlers" with. Hitlers ultimately don't go for diplomatic solutions. Yes I paid attention in history....did you?

The US is doing in Iraq what the UN should have done sometime in the last decade. Nevermind Saddam breaking the aggreement is what ultimately got him in trouble.....he was a tyrant that was allowed to stay in power because we knew fighting would get nasty if we went all the way to Bagdad.....well guess what, it does, and has. No eye opener there. The diplomat (not your diplomats) from both sides couldn't keep Saddam in line. The UN failed to finish the job they started in the Gulf war. What does that tell others wishing to ignore the UN?

The US is not the bad cop in the coke-dealer painting you pictured....it is enforcing what teh UN couldn't do out of fear...or lack of acceptance that Saddam would not work with them. Can they admit they made a mistake? They are happy shaming the US right now....so I doubt it.

For your information I have spent time is TX. Well a bout 6 hours in teh Houston airport. And I know my cowboy hats.

 

[RhinofromWA]

Originally posted by golgiaparatus
Question:
A dude has a gun to your head and says, Im gonna blow your head off, but if you want you can choose this other guy who has something behind his back... could be a bazooka, could be a fly swatter, could be a ham sandwich...

Which would you choose?

I feel (from reading all your posts) that this is how you see the election. I also feel that (from what you have said) that you would probably choose hot lead to the head.

Modify the analogy to make Bush holding a gun to my head and the swap being to Kerry. Bush I know what he is capable of.....Kerry just says he will do it better than Bush. Kill me better? Is he a better shot? He might put the gun down...but then I would kick him in the nads and stomp on him for even having a gun to my head.