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!