Gab, I was joking. I mean, you'll notice that most of my particular responses agreed with what you said. Surely you didn't take the "raving lunatic" second paragraph of my post seriously.

Strongly disagreeing with Dubya's policies doesn't equal hate.

[ 03-17-2004, 01:26 PM: Message edited by: Grojlach ]

Huh? I don't quite understand what you mean Grojliach?

He is saying is is possible for people to disagree with Bush's tactics and policies and want to see him ousted without actually rabidly hating the guy. Hate is too violent an emotion to ascribe to the millions of people (like myself) that would be entirely happy to see Bush lose the next election.

<font color=skyblue>Just so people will know, Ziroc's rule of no usage of the "F" word is still in effect. That is one of two taboo vulgarities that is not allowed.

Yorick, I believe you are mistaking Ironworks for another website or something.
Calm it down tough guy. If you will not obey this rule, how can we expect others to obey the same rule that applies to the usage of the other one that you particularly would not allow to pass notice?</font>

How slippery a slope.... running for pro-war "moral high ground" by stating how evil Saddam was because he killed innocent people. If he is evil for killing innocents, then <font size = 4>so are we.</font>

Gab,

I understand the point your trying to make. The focus is generally on the current president at any given time, but I think the thing that most thinking people "hate" is the foreign policy that has been generated over the years by the US Govt. as a whole. It would seem that foreign policy in the states has been heavily influenced by simply what would gain the US more wealth and had nothing to do with the needs of poor countries throughout the world. In fact, it seemed that if a certain country had nothing to offer the US, their plight was simply ignored. They made all the right noises in the media, but when it came down to helping sort out problems it was out of the question. Not only was the US guilty of this over the years but the UK and Europe as well. In my opinion, a lot of the problems that we are facing today have been caused by the neglect of the poor populations of these oil rich countries. For decades we have turned a blind eye to the treatment of the populations of Arab countries by their leaders. As long as the oil flowed, at a reasonable price, the US and Europe ignored the plight of the people living in these countries.

Obviously Bush and the US has an interest in the oil in Iraq. But at least a bi-product of that interest for a change, has been the liberation of the people of Iraq. Yes, it will be a long time before anything is considered normal in this country. But at least they are getting the opportunity. So for this reason alone, I think all the suffering will have an outcome that will justify the means.

This is also the reason why I feel that Spains election is a serious blow to the efforts of the US and the UK and other members of the coalition to bring about peace and stability in the middle east, and indirectly at the moment, the rest of the world.

Oh, just to set the record straight as well, I think Bush is a really bad representative guys. I mean the bloke is bearly coherent most of the time. I don't hate him. I just think he should talk as little as possible. :D

Rambling?? Of course! Don't worry, you'll get used to it eventually. Or you won't! :D

There is no proof that Bush lied about WoMD. He may have rather stupidly believed intelligence reports from intelligence sources who were inept, but I don't believe he lied.

Back on topic, it would appear Spain is setting an example;

Warsaw says it was misled on Iraqi WMD

The bloodletting in Iraq is not Washington's only worry. One of its staunchest European allies has dropped a diplomatic bombshell. Poland's President Alexander Kwasniewski said he had been misled over Saddam's alleged weapons of mass destruction. "We were taken for a ride," he told reporters in Warsaw. Poland runs one of Iraq's stabilisation zones and has 2,500 troops in the country. Daily violence has dented support for the mission and opposition parties are demanding troops be withdrawn.

Kwasniewski ruled out that possibility but the timing of his remarks on WMD is likely to upset Washington, already smarting from the new Spanish government's pledge to pull its forces out of Iraq. Spain's contingent of 1,300 troops is considered to be among the best trained and most effective in the multi-national force. And the prospect of their withdrawal from the Polish sector by June 30 has only added to Warsaw's fears of isolation as Madrid aligns itself with France and Germany.

[ 03-19-2004, 01:06 PM: Message edited by: Dreamer128 ]

No I didn't, I just thought that it was bite inappropriate. Futhermore, while I agree with many of the things you say, I don't know your feelings on George Bush. You keep taking different stances on him and issues.

[ 03-19-2004, 04:26 PM: Message edited by: Gab ]