I was wondering what you guys think about President Bush saying: "Everyone who's not supporting America, is supporting the enemy"
IMHO I think it's pretty harsh to hear that from someone American, especially from the president. America has tried not to pick sides in wars for a long time (impeacement policy) and suddenly being neutral is wrong.. I wonder..

A very stupid statement made by a very stupid individual! (sorry, that's the nicest way I could put it)

[ 11-12-2001: Message edited by: Ryanamur ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ryanamur:
A very stupid statement made by a very stupid individual! (sorry, that's the nicest way I could put it)

[ 11-12-2001: Message edited by: Ryanamur ]<hr></blockquote>

Phew! I was kinda worried that I would get loads of angry replies here, but it seems that no one is willing to reply, except for Ryanamur! Anyway, I totally agree with ya! [img]smile.gif[/img]

Being neutral in a conflict between nations is quite different from being neutral regarding terrorism. Neutral would mean it doesn't matter which "side" wins and the nations in questions want to continue to interact with both sides.

"Osama is just as entitled to kill innocents as the US is to retaliate, so let them work it out" is the kind of thing this is aimed at, and more specifically at those who continue to harbor terrorists.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Link:
I was wondering what you guys think about President Bush saying: "Everyone who's not supporting America, is supporting the enemy"
IMHO I think it's pretty harsh to hear that from someone American, especially from the president. America has tried not to pick sides in wars for a long time (impeacement policy) and suddenly being neutral is wrong.. I wonder..<hr></blockquote>


Well, the Taliban have sort of said the same thing.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:
Being neutral in a conflict between nations is quite different from being neutral regarding terrorism. Neutral would mean it doesn't matter which "side" wins and the nations in questions want to continue to interact with both sides.
<hr></blockquote>

Well said but I believe that Bush meant it that if we didn't support US actions in all this endeavour that we would be siding with terrorists.

Personally I think that Bush is even crazier and stupider than Bin Ladden but then again, that's just my opinion! :D

Too bad this world only seems to put lunatics in positions of great influence and power! :(

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Ryanamur ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ryanamur:


Well said but I believe that Bush meant it that if we didn't support US actions in all this endeavour that we would be siding with terrorists.

Personally I think that Bush is even crazier and stupider than Bin Ladden but then again, that's just my opinion! :D

Too bad this world only seems to put lunatics in positions of great influence and power! :(

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Ryanamur ]<hr></blockquote>

The implication is that nations which oppose the effort against terrorists actually are helping terrorists.

I am sorry you feel that way about President Bush, but I obviously don't agree with you. Comparing him to Bin Laden is bad enough, but saying he's worse doesn't fit. Lunatic is also a pretty strong word that I don't think applies. I don't expect everyone to like him or his policies any more than I expect everyone to like America, but he isn't a madman. I actually agree with his actions regarding terrorism and Afghanistan, as do most Americans (at least for the moment).

If he's a madman, so am I :(

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]</p>

sometimes you have to feel the emptions behind each every statement

of course, Bush as a leader should always think and talk rationally instead of letting emotions getting in his way.

the comment by itself is a perfect reflection of his intelligence :D

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by 250:
sometimes you have to feel the emptions behind each every statement

of course, Bush as a leader should always think and talk rationally instead of letting emotions getting in his way.

the comment by itself is a perfect reflection of his intelligence :D <hr></blockquote>

I kind of doubt it was an "off the cuff" remark. I imagine it was planned and said to achieve a certain reaction. Some don't like the way it "came off", others think it's a good. Kind of like the war in general, no one completely agrees.

Remember his "old west, wanted dead or alive" poster comment? This I thought came off very stiff, and too obvious. That's the kind of statement you have to say like you mean it, or not say at all. I was behind the idea, but the statement didn't "bring me in".

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:


The implication is that nations which oppose the effort against terrorists actually are helping terrorists.

I am sorry you feel that way about President Bush, but I obviously don't agree with you. Comparing him to Bin Laden is bad enough, but saying he's worse doesn't fit. Lunatic is also a pretty strong word that I don't think applies. I don't expect everyone to like him or his policies any more than I expect everyone to like America, but he isn't a madman. I actually agree with his actions regarding terrorism and Afghanistan, as do most Americans (at least for the moment).

If he's a madman, so am I :(

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]<hr></blockquote>

Don't worry Ronn, I don't think, that you're a madman and I do believe that you are much more intelligent than your president. I just don't like the guy and I sure don't expect (or blame anyone) for not sharing my point of view.

I too believe that it wasn't an off-the-cuff remark. He said it because he wanted to pass a message: you are with us in all of it or you are against us. That is really narrow minded thinking that quite frankly is just as bad as Bin Ladden wanting to bring America and it's friends down.

I think that most leaders in this world are supporting Bush because they are afraid of him more than they are afraid of Bin Ladden. The guy is a moron and he is recongnized as such internationnally (and I can say that because I don't live in the USA). At least with Bin we know what his reaction (and course of action is). Bush is stupid, unpredictable and has the most powerfull nation in the world to back him... a very dangerous combination if you ask me.

Am I scare of Bin Ladden? Of course not. Am I scared of Bush? Of course I'm for the very reasons that I pointed out above. Which is worse, to have an idiot or an intelligent madman, I don't know. Napoleon, Bin Ladden, Alexander the Great, Julius Ceasar, Tito, Mao, Hitler, Stalin are exemples of intelligent madman who held views similar to those of Bush (narrow mindness and superiority)... I think that Bush is the first of his kind and that scares the **** out of me!

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:


I kind of doubt it was an "off the cuff" remark. I imagine it was planned and said to achieve a certain reaction. Some don't like the way it "came off", others think it's a good. Kind of like the war in general, no one completely agrees.

Remember his "old west, wanted dead or alive" poster comment? This I thought came off very stiff, and too obvious. That's the kind of statement you have to say like you mean it, or not say at all. I was behind the idea, but the statement didn't "bring me in".

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]<hr></blockquote>

Very little if anything in Bush's planned speeches are "off the cuff". You can see that by the way he keeps using the same phrases over and over. I tend to dislike it because phrases like "get him dead or alive", "smoke'em out of their holes", "they are evildoers", "bring them to justice", and others become little more than catch phrases. I'd like hear something different so that it least it sounds legit and real.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ryanamur:


Don't worry Ronn, I don't think, that you're a madman and I do believe that you are much more intelligent than your president. I just don't like the guy and I sure don't expect (or blame anyone) for not sharing my point of view.

I too believe that it wasn't an off-the-cuff remark. He said it because he wanted to pass a message: you are with us in all of it or you are against us. That is really narrow minded thinking that quite frankly is just as bad as Bin Ladden wanting to bring America and it's friends down.

I think that most leaders in this world are supporting Bush because they are afraid of him more than they are afraid of Bin Ladden. The guy is a moron and he is recongnized as such internationnally (and I can say that because I don't live in the USA). At least with Bin we know what his reaction (and course of action is). Bush is stupid, unpredictable and has the most powerfull nation in the world to back him... a very dangerous combination if you ask me.

Am I scare of Bin Ladden? Of course not. Am I scared of Bush? Of course I'm for the very reasons that I pointed out above. Which is worse, to have an idiot or an intelligent madman, I don't know. Napoleon, Bin Ladden, Alexander the Great, Julius Ceasar, Tito, Mao, Hitler, Stalin are exemples of intelligent madman who held views similar to those of Bush (narrow mindness and superiority)... I think that Bush is the first of his kind and that scares the **** out of me!<hr></blockquote>


I really don't get your point. How are Bush's views similar to Hitler's or any of the others you mentioned? You don't like him and that's fine, but those examples really don't add to your point. Also terms like idiot, moron, and stupid don't help. He is neither an idiot, moron, or stupid and nothing he has done in his 10 months in office support that.

Has he been unpopular on the international level? Yes, but none of those other things apply, and I don't see how they help the debate.

I guess it's my views on the man and his actions. It's hard to formulate, but that's the way I rate him. Sorry I can't be more argumentative than that.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ryanamur:
I guess it's my views on the man and his actions. It's hard to formulate, but that's the way I rate him. Sorry I can't be more argumentative than that.<hr></blockquote>

Not liking him is A-OK! [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]

Lots of American's don't like him either. I'm just not one of them, but even I don't think he's a "rocket scientist". [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img]

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:



I really don't get your point. How are Bush's views similar to Hitler's or any of the others you mentioned? You don't like him and that's fine, but those examples really don't add to your point. Also terms like idiot, moron, and stupid don't help. He is neither an idiot, moron, or stupid and nothing he has done in his 10 months in office support that.

<hr></blockquote>

*Cough*KyotoTreaty*Cough* Sorry, just had a really bad cough there [img]smile.gif[/img]

That's one of the things that makes me dislike him, as well as him raising the limits on various unhealthy things in the american drinking water.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Neb:


*Cough*KyotoTreaty*Cough* Sorry, just had a really bad cough there [img]smile.gif[/img]

That's one of the things that makes me dislike him, as well as him raising the limits on various unhealthy things in the american drinking water.<hr></blockquote>

*offers Neb a lozenge realizing his lozenge supply is running low* :eek:

Good point and I don't believe he's perfect either.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:

...I'm just not one of them, but even I don't think he's a "rocket scientist". [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img]

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]<hr></blockquote>

Again, we agree. I don't think he's a "rocket scientist" either :D

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Neb:


*Cough*KyotoTreaty*Cough* Sorry, just had a really bad cough there [img]smile.gif[/img]

That's one of the things that makes me dislike him, as well as him raising the limits on various unhealthy things in the american drinking water.<hr></blockquote>

Neb, I don't think that Bush is the only one to blame for Kyoto. It was trully not in the best interest of American multi-nationals and thus, not in the best interest of the USA to ratify this treaty. Even if Bush would have signed it (I don't even think that Clinton would of), I don't think it would have passed Congress. Politics is politics! :(

Ronn will be proud of me, I'm actually defending him (Bush) :D I guess my signature is fitting after all [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Ryanamur ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by skywalker:


Very little if anything in Bush's planned speeches are "off the cuff". You can see that by the way he keeps using the same phrases over and over. I tend to dislike it because phrases like "get him dead or alive", "smoke'em out of their holes", "they are evildoers", "bring them to justice", and others become little more than catch phrases. I'd like hear something different so that it least it sounds legit and real.<hr></blockquote>

I think he sounds best when he's not in a scripted enviroment and he "comes across" like a regular guy. His initial visit to "ground zero" was a prime example.

Some presidents have been great at turning phrases like
Ronald Reagan's "There he goes again!"(referring to Jimmy Carter in a 1980 debate), and "Tear down this wall!"(in Berlin). Reagan had a great ability to make both "off the cuff" remarks and scripted remarks sound natural and conversational, while others, like Bush, don't.

Charisma can be a dangerous thing, too! People judging you on your personality and not your actions isn't really good for public office.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ryanamur:


Neb, I don't think that Bush is the only one to blame for Kyoto. It was trully not in the best interest of American multi-nationals and thus, not in the best interest of the USA to ratify this treaty. Even if Bush would have signed it (I don't even think that Clinton would of), I don't think it would have passed Congress. Politics is politics! :(

Ronn will be proud of me, I'm actually defending him (Bush) :D I guess my signature is fitting after all [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Ryanamur ]<hr></blockquote>

Agreement isn't our problem, it's consistancy of agreement...lol. [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img]

As the constitution is written, treaties have to be ratified by a 2/3 majority of the Senate, and they refused to do so under Clinton. When Clinton realized he couldn't get it passed, he planned to manipulate the EPA (Enviroment Protection Agency) to initiate the Kyoto Accords' standards. The Senate passed legislation to block his "back door" approach, and it passed 95-0.

Bush refused to accept Kyoto on the grounds of protecting businesses and the economy, but it's really a moot point, because even if he had wanted to, he couldn't get it done.

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:


Agreement isn't our problem, it's consistancy of agreement...lol. [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img]

As the constitution is written, treaties have to be ratified by a 2/3 majority of the Senate, and they refused to do so under Clinton. When Clinton realized he couldn't get it passed, he planned to manipulate the EPA (Enviroment Protection Agency) to initiate the Kyoto Accords' standards. The Senate passed legislation to block his "back door" approach, and it passed 95-0.

Bush refused to accept Kyoto on the grounds of protecting businesses and the economy, but it's really a moot point, because even if he had wanted to, he couldn't get it done.

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]<hr></blockquote>


What doya know, I'm a Canadian that actually understands US politics (well, sorta anyway) :D

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ryanamur:



What doya know, I'm a Canadian that actually understands US politics (well, sorta anyway) :D <hr></blockquote>

If you really understand it, you're probably better off than 99% of US citizians and government officials. Most American's just "grab holt to somethin' and hang on!" (to quote Brisco Darling from "The Andy Griffith Show") :D

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:


If you really understand it, you're probably better off than 99% of US citizians and government officials. Most American's just "grab holt to somethin' and hang on!" (to quote Brisco Darling from "The Andy Griffith Show") :D

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]<hr></blockquote>

I know the following could be considered a vicious hit in the balls, but I'm using the analogy as a joke...

How could you expect a population to understand politics when 63% of it can't even point out the city they live in on the map of their state let alone that of the country? [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Ryanamur ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ryanamur:


I know the following could be considered a vicious hit in the balls, but I'm using the analogy as a joke...
<hr></blockquote>

Wow!

Actually, it was completely a joke! I was poking fun at Americans, not you. (hence my quote from the "Andy Griffith Show")

I honestly did not mean this as a jab!

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:


Actually, it was a completely a joke! I was poking fun at Americans, not you. Seriously!<hr></blockquote>

I know you weren't I'm just pushing the joke to irony of extremes! :( [img]smile.gif[/img]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ryanamur:


I know you weren't I'm just pushing the joke to irony of extremes! :( [img]smile.gif[/img] <hr></blockquote>

Ok, as long as you know, it wasn't a joke on you, but instead, on me! :D

Well, I guess we could agree that I have a really dark, sick, weird and sarcastic sense of humour :D [img]smile.gif[/img] [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Ryanamur ]</p>