Jump to content

The one & only War On Terror thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 451
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest Cancer Marney
Posted

Ahhh yes... those were the good old days. Wait, it's not even a month old. Newbie. ;)

 

And of course we went back to fighting; it's a sign of love.

Guest Cancer Marney
Posted

aww, but you looked so funny in that picture. <g>

Guest Cancer Marney
Posted

It made me laugh. Drunk people usually make me laugh.

Some of the other pictures in that gallery were interesting, too. I might have to become a DJ if that means pretty blondes would show me their nipples.

Guest Cancer Marney
Posted

To get back on topic, the President of the United States will address the UN shortly - his speech is scheduled for 1030 EDT. Anyone reading this thread would be well advised to watch it. The President is a beautiful, beautiful man, and his speech will kick some serious ass.

I almost wish I'd stayed in New York last night; I can barely contain myself.

 

Watch, people. Watch. History is on the move.

 

Everything begins now.

Guest cdstunner66
Posted

I just watched Bush address the UN. No question, we're going in. He sounded pissed and the gist of what he said is either Saddam pulls a complete 180 or it's on.

Guest Cancer Marney
Posted

Absolutely everything I wanted. The draft I saw the other night was actually weaker than the actual speech. Oh, I'm glowing. This was better than sex.

I'm getting dressed now, and I find I simply can't wait to get to work. We've been given SUCH a green light - you can't begin to imagine what this means.

 

Quickly, the high points: after almost two decades, we are rejoining UNESCO - but the United Nations has failed to uphold its charter. Iraq has been allowed to repeatedly flout the will of the General Assembly, and if the the UN refuses to act, it risks becoming irrelevant (that specific word was used) by abdicating its duties and its responsibilities and being held in contempt by a dangerous rogue regime. Inaction is unacceptable in the face of this threat: the first time we know for certain Iraq has a nuclear weapon may be when Iraq uses it.

The principles of the United States demand that we stand against this threat. The UN now has a choice: to stand on the sidelines and watch, or stand by our side.

CNN transcript

 

The President left immediately after making his remarks, less than 7 minutes afterwards, making it absolutely clear that the discussion is closed.

 

God bless and keep you, Mr. President! I'm proud and honoured beyond all description to serve.

Guest NoCalMike
Posted

Bush is weak. He is so tame compared to other conservatives. I don't agree with him on a lot of things, but even for the people that do. He never seems adament about things. Like he gives a speech only to see what people will say, and then he will just fall on the majority side of the fence.

Guest NoCalMike
Posted

"Absolutely everything I wanted. The draft I saw the other night was actually weaker than the actual speech. Oh, I'm glowing. This was better than sex.

I'm getting dressed now, and I find I simply can't wait to get to work. We've been given SUCH a green light - you can't begin to imagine what this means. "

 

Ermmm....ok!?!

Guest danielisthor
Posted
Absolutely everything I wanted. The draft I saw the other night was actually weaker than the actual speech. Oh, I'm glowing. This was better than sex.

I'm getting dressed now, and I find I simply can't wait to get to work. We've been given SUCH a green light - you can't begin to imagine what this means.

 

Quickly, the high points: after almost two decades, we are rejoining UNESCO - but the United Nations has failed to uphold its charter. Iraq has been allowed to repeatedly flout the will of the General Assembly, and if the the UN refuses to act, it risks becoming irrelevant (that specific word was used) by abdicating its duties and its responsibilities and being held in contempt by a dangerous rogue regime. Inaction is unacceptable in the face of this threat: the first time we know for certain Iraq has a nuclear weapon may be when Iraq uses it.

The principles of the United States demand that we stand against this threat. The UN now has a choice: to stand on the sidelines and watch, or stand by our side.

CNN transcript

 

The President left immediately after making his remarks, less than 7 minutes afterwards, making it absolutely clear that the discussion is closed.

 

God bless and keep you, Mr. President! I'm proud and honoured beyond all description to serve.

Thanks for the link Marney.

 

I will say that was one damn good speech, powerful and to the point. The fact that he left immediately after shows that the US will take action whether or not we get thier apporval and/or help. good. He laid out every single reason why we have to go in.

Guest Cancer Marney
Posted
Bush is weak.... He never seems adament about things. Like he gives a speech only to see what people will say, and then he will just fall on the majority side of the fence.
I think you just described Clinton there, jackass. You also don't seem to have listened to the President's address - it was masterful. The delivery was smooth, and the speech was unequivocal.
Guest Agent of Oblivion
Posted

Just read the transcript in the link, and Bush just did what I've been asking for since last year. Instead of promises of holy war, and vague references to "the american way" or whatever, he itemized a list of problems Iraq is directly responsible for, without attacking the people or the culture. In essence, it's:

 

"We should go to war with Iraq, because of

this, this, this, and this."

 

Forgive my lack of paraphrasing.

 

Someone important needed to say that exact phrase, and I'm glad someone finally did so without including "good and evil." or nonsense pertaining to the political support of a certain party. I'm not for warmongering, but since he actually stated examples, I for once actually support Bush, because I don't particularly want to get nuked or gassed, and Hussein has needed to go, considering he lies, funds terrorists, and lets his own people starve while he builds new palaces.

 

Notice he didn't say Islam was the problem.

Posted

Guess what, I thought the speech was good, very good and Bush impressed me.

 

Like Agent of Oblivion said, it was good to see actual reasons for Saddam to go being laid out, although I would like to see some new evidence, although I believe a dossier(sp) is being published soon which I will look foward to reading.

 

I think the UN will support the motion if Iraq continues to flout the sanctions, and with the backing of the UN I will be happier with whatever happens next.

Guest Cancer Marney
Posted
Bush just did what I've been asking for since last year. Instead of promises of holy war, and vague references to "the american way" or whatever, he itemized a list of problems Iraq is directly responsible for
If you've been asking for that since last year, you're illiterate, blind, unmotivated, and ignorant. General Assembly resolutions are a matter of public record and you could have looked them up any time you wanted. And, Iraq's violations of every pledge he's made are common knowledge.

 

without attacking the people or the culture... Notice he didn't say Islam was the problem.
The President has never once attacked Islam, the Iraqi people, or their culture. I have. I can, because I'm not elected.

 

I'm glad someone finally did so without including "good and evil."
What would you call testing chemical weapons on civilians? I'd call it "evil." Just because the word wasn't used doesn't mean it wasn't in the speech.

 

I for once actually support Bush
Better late than never.

 

Note that every foreign official is getting the implications of the speech exactly wrong in order to save face. The President said he'd engage the UN, yes, but he didn't say that America would work with the UN regardless of what the UN did. He said that we know what we're going to do, and it's up to the UN to make the right decision and stand at our side.

 

"We cannot stand by and do nothing while dangers gather. We must stand up for our security and for the permanent rights and the hopes of mankind.

By heritage and by choice, the United States of America will make that stand. And, delegates to the United Nations, you have the power to make that stand as well."

Guest Agent of Oblivion
Posted
Bush just did what I've been asking for since last year. Instead of promises of holy war, and vague references to "the american way" or whatever, he itemized a list of problems Iraq is directly responsible for
If you've been asking for that since last year, you're illiterate, blind, unmotivated, and ignorant.

Hey, unmotivated, I'll definitely give you that, and ignorant to all the info, yeah, that too. But illiterate and blind are two things I am not.

Guest Agent of Oblivion
Posted
without attacking the people or the culture... Notice he didn't say Islam was the problem.
The President has never once attacked Islam, the Iraqi people, or their culture. I have. I can, because I'm not elected.

 

I'm glad someone finally did so without including "good and evil."
What would you call testing chemical weapons on civilians? I'd call it "evil." Just because the word wasn't used doesn't mean it wasn't in the speech.

 

On the first point, I'm thankful for two things. That Bush has never verbally attacked the religion or the people, and that you are in fact not elected.

 

On the second, I'd call it disgusting, morally reprehensible, and absolutely terrible and wrong.

 

Maybe that implies evil, maybe it doesn't. Either way, I'm glad Bush didn't go into abstractions like the "Axis of Evil" directly. it may have been implied, which is fine, but IMO the whole good/evil thing just sounds preachy, right or not. The speech was better off without it.

Guest Cancer Marney
Posted
I'd call it disgusting, morally reprehensible, and absolutely terrible and wrong. Maybe that implies evil, maybe it doesn't.

"Morally reprehensible" and "wrong" are both exact synonyms for "evil."

 

Either way, I'm glad Bush didn't go into abstractions like the "Axis of Evil" directly. it may have been implied, which is fine, but IMO the whole good/evil thing just sounds preachy, right or not. The speech was better off without it.
Given the shrill reactions it elicits in a morally vacuous feel-good world, I'd agree.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...