Bush is at it again...
 

What a loser. He really makes us Europeans sick. :Puke:
He'll start WW3 if he goes on like this!! :mad:

He was doing what now???

Bush is gonna make the U.N. fall. If you have heard lately, some of the Allies support and others don't (Going in and invading Iraq). This will create a feud between the members of the U.N. and eventually they will threaten to leave. We will look back in history and blame Bush for causing the fall of the U.N. and ****ing over even more the chance for peace in the Middle East. IMO

Hmm... the UN won't fall, not yet and not by Bush.

Anyway, he is causing a lot of trouble. Next week his campaign to convince you Americans will start. Expect a lot of patriotism. :green:

His campaign won't work on me. Nothing has, and nothing ever will. I hate Bush. I am a full blown Democrat (even though I'm 17 and haven't registered to vote yet, but I am)

he aint got nothing on me, i'm canadian, that guy should never have been elected IMO. hes just looking for a reason to start a war acusing Sadam of having nukes (even though he probly does) and he wants canadians to back him up. my ass, hes just like his father, always looking for trouble.

*shakes head* I wish he would just leave Iraq alone...

I wish Congress would do something about Bush.. ;)

Man, he's such an idiot.

I swear, if there was peace in the world, everything would be so much better.

I say that we do the JFK stunt on him

*notices evryone looking at him suspiciousy*
*stares back suspiciously at them, gets in limo and drives away*
:D:D:D:D:D

*waves furiously* Wait for me! I wanna come!

Funny. Europeans make me sick.

Anyway, it's quite obvious why some of our allies aren't supporting us. China is supplying Iraq with new fiberoptic technology so they can build better anti-aircraft weapons to use against us. Russia has announce a new trade deal with Iraq. Some of our allies are trading with Iraq for black-market oil.

Others, don't want to get their military involved, because they're pussies and don't want to fight.

I don't blame people for not supporting Bush fully, I myself don't. But I also think we should bomb our allies while we're at it.

The uneducated.

No one is accusing him of anything, or looking for reasons to attack. Way back when we first attacked him he was within months of developing nukes. It's been years since then, we know he has them, or is damn near close.

And honestly, the US doesn't really give a **** if Sadaam nukes the world. Thing is, he'll take over the middle east, still not a big problem. But see, Bush is trying to get world peace here. We could just let it go and have the entire middle east controlled by Iraq. Remember, he can't actually hit America with the nukes.

Ungrateful bastards. We do so much for the world, to only get booed. I really wish we'd just care about ourself. Then we can have these sick Europeans speaking German.

actually it was my history teacher who told me about bush. either way, i think your right, we should just care about ourselves, we shouldnt have to always be the problem solvers for other people's problems. the middle-east has problems and so does northamerica, lets worry about solving our own problems first.

Well, if we just bombed every little country like Iraq and te rest of the Middle East where they seem to wanna fight anyway, then there won't be any of themleft to fight. Then if others get mad and wanna fight, bomb them too. Simple as grade 2. If only I was President of USA...

EVERYBODY HAIL THE LEADER NWOCRISNWO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
*starts kneeling and offers to give all members of GT as sacrifice*
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

Lollipops and gumdrops for all

you aint giving me as a sacrifice!! take crono instead, i know where he lives...

Lol... u guys are so ****in stupid. Bush is not goin to break up the UN just because he wants to get rid of Sadaam. The UN has disagreed on many things before. Bush is not going to break up the UN just because some people dont agree. You guys always find a way to blame all of the world's problems on Bush.

true, but we gotta blame someone right? :D

No, but you gotta admit that Bush is makin some ****ed up decisions, and some even more ****ed up statements, like
"It is ridiculus to sacrifice yourself and kill innocent people over a false religion" I think that thats what he said, but thats just ludicrous, because he can't say that someone elses religion is wrong and his is right, because taht way he won't stay prez for very long.....

Why does anyone give a flying **** about the UN?

What does the UN ever do to benefity the world? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!

All the UN is, is a giant orgnization filled with anti-semites and anti-americans. They have nothing better to do than criticize the US and Israel all day.

Let me ask you this: Where was the UN when 1 million Tutsies (SP?) were murdered in Africa? (I believe it was Rwanda). They were there, but Kofi Annan, just decided to pull out. Why does no one ever accuse HIM of comitting crimes against humanity?

Anyways, as I was saying, the UN is an absolute joke. For god-sake, they even have Syria on the security council!!!

Syria has the most terrorist headquarters of any country in the entire world (especially in Damascus).


Anyways, I for one, could not give a crap about what the UN whines about.

I'm glad Bush is actually taking action against Iraq. I don't see how in the world anyone can not support this.

Ummm.....i'm usually against openly saying that someones opinion is wrong but in this case, ummm....i'm gonna have to make an exception....

HOW THE **** CAN YOU SAY THAT THE UN IS USELESS!!!!!!!!!!
I'll tell you who gives a flying **** about the UN, anybody who wants peace in this messed up world, I mean for Christs sake, the UN is the biggest organizer of charaties around the world for one. Another thing, you know those boxes that they drop from airplanes over oppressed countries full of supplies???? Who the **** do you think drops those??? SANTA CLAUSE?!!?!? THE EASTER BUNNY?!?!?!?!? And Bush is a retard if he thinks that he can just start a war against Iraq without thinking of the consequences!!!!
Does he think that if he takes out Iraq, that'll be all??? That it'll just be over, just *POP* done???? Iraq has allies, they go down, allies go against US, and if the UN is gone, who the **** is going to stop all this s*** from happening??? If UN is gone, say hello to a new set of attacks that'll make 9/11 look like a joke!!!!!!!

If you don't know anything about the situation then please just don't comment. No one knows whether or not Sadaam has weapons of mass destruction (at least the public). And we don't need Canada to help us to attack Iraq. They wouldn't be able to do hardly anything. We would have Great Britain's help and a few other countries. Guess where the majority of your weapons come from DarkMaster? I agree with gekko on most things here, we already had an intelligent discussion about this.

None of the allies want to help us attack Iraq because they are in no position to do so. Saudi Arabia is just a kingdom with oil, they are not a democracy. Iraq is a threat, but none of the neighboring countries want to actually risk their lives to save themselves. That is who Arabs are. They only care about themselves, and won't risk anything until death is knocking on their door. Attacking Iraq for us is really not a problem. The problem is that what Iran and other countries that support terrorism might do. And what even Irsael might do with the weapons we funded them to buy and build. Someone always has to take charge in the world and that is normally the United States, at least for now. We provide finical aid, aid for medications, all over the world. If you want to tell us we are bad people than we can pull all of our troops out of places around the world, stop all the aid, and only care for ourselves. Then there will be World War 3, and we will be doing just great. Several countries are defenseless without us, one being Japan.

Bush will not brake the UN, that is just plain stupid to think that. But hey, where do you think the majority of the funding for the UN comes from? Oh, you guessed it...

its wut i heard, dont call me stupid, i'm just ignorant to the situation.

Actually, coming from a country that's mostly Christians, he would stay president for a while, and I'm pretty sure most of us wouldn't give a damn. But that's not the point.

The point is you need to stop misquoting people. I can garauntee he didn't say that, because I haven't heard of it, and I watch the news channels for hours every day, trust me, it would be on. Now if you want to reword things, it's likely he said something along the lines of a false belief, or even the false religion practice, referring to radical Islam. The Al Qaeda terrorists did this stuff in the name of God, because God told them to do so in the Quaran. Think is, it really don't say that, they're just interpretting it the wrong way, thus we have radical Islam.

You just said it yourself, he said something along the lines of them believing in a "false religion or belief", and I remember when he said it live on CNN......

My brains not awake this early in the morning, and my debating skills are pretty bad anyway. I believe I will just watch...

There you go again misquoting people. Learn to read, or learn to keep your mouth shut.

I could see how people would wanna go and attack Iraq because it seems so obvious he has weapons of mass destruction and the like...

But what if he doesn't? :confused: And we go in and occupy the country and all because we thought something that ended up not being true...

Not to mention Iraq hasn't even done anything to us directly yet, so it's like yeah...

Basically, I could see why it seems people are so split on this issue... :burger:

I personally don't care, but a war would make the news more fun to watch...

:sneaky:

We've had troops in Iraq for the past 3 months. I'm pretty sure we got good intelligence from our recon.

And if all the troops are like CamFu? Then what?

Then God help us all. :D

I'm anti-politician. :D

It's a sad, sad day for humanity to be hearing a statement like this...

I realize that many people are angry over the events of the past year. I also realize that certain groups of people prove to be the ideal scapegoats since so many misinterpretations and bigotry regarding their cultures are evident in the media.

However, the some does not represent the whole. If we limit our perspectives and judgements on a group of people based only on the extremities that we can see (the iceberg effect as I like to call it), it is no more than bigotry and falsity.

If you recall, our country has had its share of shady happenings in the past that would entail some people to dismiss us as an evil empire. The masscre at No Gun Ri during the Korean war (where hundreds of South Korean refugees were slaughtered by the American troops) for one, proves that a country can sometimes be misrepresented by the actions of the bad few.

If you base your judgement on a group of people only by these extremities, it is called a bigotry.

Just stop it.

I'm basing my judgment on history, not this recent year. I don't care if you agree or disagree with my judgement. It is my judgement and that is that.

And what do you call it when you talk before you're acquainted with the full facts?

It's called a false conclusion or sometimes a hasty generalization.

I'm not understanding the point of this post...was it made to educated me that the No Gun Ri massacre was misconstrued (which proves ironic since the official statements from the Pentagon denied any deliberate killings and refused to apologize for the incident, calling it a "tragic occurence") by me? I only ask because you don't provide an explanation. I'm a bit confused.

But if you ARE saying that my views on the No Gun Ri incident is false, provide me some facts supporting your claim. I'll be happy to retract my position should you provide a valid and sufficient supporting data.

In any case, there were more mishaps in the world history caused by the United States than just this incident. Don't get me wrong, we, as a country, did many good things. But not everything we did was just. Even if the No Gun Ri incident is different than my construction of it (which I highly doubt), there are more than enough cases of wrongdoings we committed to prove my original point.

Has it ever occured to you that some people may view us in the same light as you shine on the Arabs? I mean, the descendents of the millions of native Americans the United States eradicated must have a strong feeling about us as well in that regard.

People are people. I think it's about time we get rid of the rudimentary "us" versus "them" mentality. In any case, you are entitled to your opinion and the right to express it - whether I disagree with it or not.

The point of the post was to tell you that you don't have all the information on the No Gun Ri incident. I'm just asking what you would call yourself, accusing people of murdering innocent civilians when you don't know the full facts of the situation. And you bringing this up very soon after the History Channel aired their special about the Korean War Crimes, I really hope that isn't where you're basing this all off of, but it could be coincidental.

Anyway, let's get on to the points here. Making a very long story short, here it goes. The NKPA forces had dressed up like civilians until they got behind enemy lines, then performed guerilla operations on the US troops. In No Gun Ri, the US troops were returning fire, not opening fire. Once a civilian shoots a gun, they no longer are a civilian.

If you were fighting a war, and there had been many instances of the enemy dressing up like civilians and moving with a large group of civilians before they open fire on you. Then, you're watching a large group of civilians, and people started firing upon you. What would you do? Sit there and eat a lollipop?

The bottom line in there is no evidence that US soldiers fired delibertly on Korean refugees. On top of that, there is many reasons to believe that they didn't shoot on the refugees for no valid reason. Considering that you're sitting on your ass in a chair, and they were in the middle of war, it's also very hard to realize the state of mind they were in, and understand why they would do things that they do. You're making assumptions, essentially accusing men who defend your freedom of murder, when you know nothing about it.

Looks to me like you're passing your own judgement on people.

I am a second-generation Korean-American living in the United States. I have lived in the States for over ten years, yet I am fluent in Korean and English. I am fully aware of the culture of both Korean and American societies.

My father, who turned 56 not long ago, lived through the Korean War during his boyhood. My grandfather, with whom I had a great relationship with and regrettably passed away last year, also lived through the Korean War. I have many uncles, aunts, and other reliatives who shared similar experience during the dark times of Korean history.

My paternal as well as maternal family are from Kyung-Sang Do - the county in which the No Gun Ri incident occured. Both families have some ties to some of the survivors of the incident.

With these facts provided, let me just say that the data I have of No Gun Ri could be skewed. It could be incomplete. And it could also be problematic. However, they are far from incomprehensive to render me useless in making the decision as to whether the incident was an accident, massacre or tragedy.

I've heard quite a few stories where American soldiers opened fire on refugees during the incident. granted, they could have been North Korean troops desguised as civilians, but does that suspicion grant the soldiers to open fire without checking them out first?

Some of the survivors had told my grandfather that the shots came without warning. In fact, most of the shots were rendered this way according to what the survivors had told my grandfather.

Perhaps murder was an incorrect term to apply to this situation. Murder entails intent to kill. The gunners may have not had an intent to kill the refugees. But they fired shots at civilians without checking them out to see if they were desguised. And that, to me, is inexcusable. Can you refute this?

But let's get back to my original point: every country has its share of shady history. No country ever does the just thing all the time. I was not generalizing the United States as an evil society due to the No Gun Ri incident. As a matter of fact, I think we're in a just frame of mind despite some lapses we may have bore. However, I was pointing out that every country, whether it'd be Arab, Asian, european or American, commits wrongdoings. viewing a group of people based on these mishaps is wrong, plain and simple.

Just as I did not dismiss America as an evil nation based on the No Gun Ri (whether it'd be legitimate or not), do not dismiss a nation based on what extremities you may see.