Europe? what is it good For?

[Tom]

Absolutely nothing!
France and Belgium????? Against the war?
Well, since anytime there has ever been a war, both of these
third rate nations have fallen, it seems logical. Cowards or weaklings? Both? Probably. Leeches for sure. Historical losers.
Seems to me that no one was bitchin when we went over and saved their sorry ass countries from the nazis. Now they are lined up with GERMANY???? Let's see, Germany's history with the Jews....hmmmm. I have no doubt that land of war criminals is in cahoots with the muslem world...same type of people.
Hey, once an outlaw nazi nation, always an outlaw nazi nation. Wouldn't trust germany as far as I could thorw it. Remeber the Berlin air lift? Apparently they don't, those sickening ingrates. We should have let them starve back then.
Come to think of it, who the hell needs any of Europe?
A totally worthless bunch of cowards and killers, they can go to hell all of them.
America dosen't need a damn thing from Europe, and we should not ever send one red cent of foreign aid to any of those despicable losers. I can only hope if Sadamm lets loose with chemical weapons, the wind carries it over Europe where it will do some good. When they are dying in the streets by the thousands, we can tell them, "Let's wait and see what happens. Action now is not justified! We need to consult with Britain and we will get back to you."

[JustRalph]

France= Snail Eating Surrender Monkeys!

"the French delegate threw his hands in the air"

The same thing they do whenever anyone mentions a war!

[Tom]

...there could be a slap-fest between France and Italy trying to surrender first! But you are right, that Frank-ferter really looked natural with his arms waving around. Imagine "de Gaul" of that guy <G>
Belgium.....wasn't that the country Hitler rolled over while he was warming up the tank's engines?
Kind of like a prep-conquer?
I heard they fell so fast the Nazis had to turn around and go back - damn near missed the whole country!
What help would Belgium or France be in a war with Iraq?
Well, if we needed speed bumps........

HeHeHe.....go Belgium! We really give a sh*t what you think!
And BTW, pancakes beat waffles anyday!

[superfecta]

that the majority of those folks like it over there,can you imagine what would happen if they didn''t?We would be overrun by every lazy euro that has figured out how good we have it here.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by superfecta
that the majority of those folks like it over there,can you imagine what would happen if they didn''t?We would be overrun by every lazy euro that has figured out how good we have it here.

Thats why the don't come over here. They would have to work for a living. I read somewhere that in Sweden you work 6 hour days and get 8 weeks vacation a year. Its the law? Or something close to that.

[canuck]

The French developed a 5 gear tank for combat--

4 reverse gears and one forward--in case they are attacked from behind!!!

[Tom]

Charles DeGaul was only 5'2" tall.
He looked so tall because his hands were always in the air surrendering!

Q-Why does the new French navy has glass bottomed boats?
A-so they can look at the old French navy!

Q-How many Frenchmen does it take to change a light bulb?
A-The French don't change light bulbs - not until the UN inspectors verify that the bulb is actually burned out, and they do not want to rush the inspectors on this. They will put in a UN light-shinning force to provide their lighting needs until the inspectors finish their jobs.

Q-Why did the chicken cross the road?
A-To join the French army.

[superfecta]

Originally posted by JustRalph
Thats why the don't come over here. They would have to work for a living. I read somewhere that in Sweden you work 6 hour days and get 8 weeks vacation a year. Its the law? Or something close to that. Over here they are called teachers...Ralph:D

[Lindsay]

Tom wrote: "Charles DeGaul was only 5'2" tall.
He looked so tall because his hands were always in the air surrendering!"

I realize there are people who consider it great fun to sit in front of a keyboard and make fun of soldiers like Charles DeGaulle, but I believe you picked the wrong Frenchman to ridicule. DeGaulle refused to surrender to the Nazis. He led the Free French movement in the second world war. Please find a better target, OK?

[Tom]

Political humor, Lindsay. Lighten up.
If it offends you, please use the ignore button.
That's what it's there for.

[cj]

Now we have to be sensitive to our enemy the French...get a life and get real. This is the same country that wouldn't let us use there air space to attempt to rescue our hostages in Iran. Joke away about those smelly bastards!

CJ

[Hosshead]

They also wouldn't let us use their airspace to get to Lybia. So Reagan went around France. Wonder what France would be saying if it would have been the Effiel Tower instead of the WTC ? Even John Lennon said- " the smelly French "!

[canuck]

Hey Lindsay--didya hear that deGaulle only needed 2 pallbearers at his funeral??
A trashcan only has 2 handles!!

[Lindsay]

CJ wrote:

"Now we have to be sensitive to our enemy the French...get a life and get real."

CJ,

I guess reading is not your bag.

Tom,

Now that you're done making fun of the Oakland "crack ho," why don't you read a book about the American Revolution? The problem with your DeGaulle joke is that it will get laughs only from people who know absolutely nothing about history.

[cj]

Originally posted by Lindsay

CJ,

I guess reading is not your bag.



When I'm not busy defending our country as I have been for the last 18 years, I'm an avid reader.

CJ

[Lindsay]

CJ wrote: "When I'm not busy defending our country as I have been for the last 18 years, I'm an avid reader."

That is why you of all people should be offended when anonymous armchair clowns make fun of soldiers like DeGaulle. As for reading, I was talking about reading my post. Your reply did not follow from what I wrote. Your reply had nothing to do with what I wrote.

[cj]

I read what you wrote Lindsay. I'm sure DeGaulle isn't reading the PA board, so I can't offend him. As for the rest of France, I don't care if they get offended. I am offended every time I see the tape of American soldiers remains put on public display in Iran after the failed hostage rescue attempt. I was young, but I'll never forget it. Did the French actions cause these deaths? I don't know, but it sure didn't help. I am offended every time the very people who owe there existence as a nation to the United States thumb their noses at us. Maybe someday France can be our ally again, but until that day, screw them.

CJ

[Lindsay]

CJ wrote: "I'm sure DeGaulle isn't reading the PA board, so I can't offend him. "

I think you will better understand my point if you leave DeGaulle and France out of it. Something rubs me the wrong way when anonymous people sit at keyboards and ridicule men who were brave in battle. Disagree?

" Did the French actions cause these deaths? I don't know,"

DeGaulle was not president of France at the time. I understand your point. I'm trying to make you understand mine.

[cj]

Point taken.

CJ

[Doug]

Heres a classy guy that threatens his neighbors with exclusion if they don't agree with his views.

The more I hear, the more I am convinced that when this war is over, the French and Germans are going to be made to look like fools for their involvement with Saddam.

BRUSSELS, Belgium - French President Jacques Chirac launched a withering attack Monday on eastern European nations who signed letters backing the U.S. position on Iraq, warning it could jeopardize their chances of joining the European Union (news - web sites).



Latest news:
• American U-2 Plane Makes 1st Iraq Flight
AP - 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
• U.S., Britain Push for Iraq Resolution
AP - 1 hour, 45 minutes ago
• U.S. Considers New U.N. Iraq Resolution
AP - Mon Feb 17,12:19 PM ET
Special Coverage





"It is not really responsible behavior," he told a news conference. "It is not well brought up behavior. They missed a good opportunity to keep quiet."


Chirac was angered when EU candidates Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic joined pro-U.S. EU members such as Britain, Spain and Italy last month in a letter supporting Washington's line on Iraq against the more dovish stance of France and Germany.


Paris was further upset when 10 other eastern European nations signed a similar letter a few days later.


France argued that the moves aggravated splits in the 15-nation EU and backed the ideas put forward by U.S. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld who had earlier spoke of France and Germany as "old Europe" in contrast to the easterners seeking to join the EU and NATO (news - web sites).


"Concerning the candidate countries, honestly I felt they acted frivolously because entry into the European Union implies a minimum of understanding for the others," Chirac told reporters after an emergency EU summit on Iraq.


He warned the candidates the position could be "dangerous" because the parliaments of the 15 EU nations still have to ratify last December's decision for 10 new members to join the bloc on May 1, 2004.


Chirac particularly warned Romania and Bulgaria, who are still negotiating to enter the bloc in 2007.


"Romania and Bulgaria were particularly irresponsible to (sign the letter) when their position is really delicate," Chirac said. "If they wanted to diminish their chances of joining Europe they could not have found a better way."


Britain, Spain and other EU nations had suggested the candidate nations attend Monday's emergency summit on Iraq, but France and Germany opposed the idea.


Although Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar and British Prime Minister Tony Blair (news - web sites) were the driving forces behind the letter backing America and EU members Italy, Denmark and Portugal also signed up, Chirac saved his wrath for the candidates.


"When you're in the family you have more rights than when you're knocking on the door," he said.


Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Cyprus and Malta are set to join in May 2004. Lagging behind economically, Romania and Bulgaria were told to wait three more years.


Instead of attending the EU summit, the candidates are due to travel to Brussels Tuesday for a briefing on its outcome by Greece, which currently holds the EU presidency.


Greek Prime Minister Costas Simitis denied they had been excluded from the summit because of their backing for Washington, insisting rules require the treaties be signed first.


"We will not discuss pro-American or anti-American positions," Simitis told a news conference. "The candidate countries will be members" soon, and "we have to proceed together."

Doug

[Lindsay]

Doug writes: "Heres a classy guy that threatens his neighbors with exclusion if they don't agree with his views."

Could be worse. He could threaten them with war if they don't agree with his views.

"the more I am convinced that when this war is over, the French and Germans are going to be made to look like fools for their involvement with Saddam."

Kind of like Reagan and Bush One for helping Saddam after he used chemical weapons against his own people and the Iranians.

[Doug]

LINSAY WROTE,

Could be worse. He could threaten them with war if they don't agree with his views

Could be. So does that excuse him?

Kind of like Reagan and Bush One for helping Saddam after he used chemical weapons against his own people and the Iranians.


Kind of like that. Got to pick your dog in a fight, stand in the middle and your likely to get hurt. Guess ole Jacque has picked his dog.

Doug

[Lindsay]

Doug wrote:

"Could be. So does that excuse him?"

That was a joke, Doug. Take a look at what the US has done to countries it disagrees with. Start with Nicaragua.

"Kind of like that. Got to pick your dog in a fight, stand in the middle and your likely to get hurt. Guess ole Jacque has picked his dog."

Reagan sold weapons to BOTH sides in a war that left over a million people dead. Are you defending Reagan's decision to help Saddam Hussein after he used chemical weapons to slaughter thousands of his own people?

[Doug]

Linsay wrote,

That was a joke, Doug. Take a look at what the US has done to countries it disagrees with. Start with Nicaragua.

This is a joke:

Jauque takes 17 other folks with him to the movies.
When he goes up to get the tickets the cashier remarks that it is very nice of him to bring 17 other folks with himto the movie. Ole jaques (Can't spell this guys name for sh*t) points over to a sign that reads "under 18 not allowed".

So does that excuse him?

Reagan sold weapons to BOTH sides in a war that left over a million people dead. Are you defending Reagan's decision to help Saddam Hussein after he used chemical weapons to slaughter thousands of his own people?

Not defending anybody. So because Reagan did that then its ok for Jacque to do something similiar?

Doug

[Lindsay]

Doug wrote: "Not defending anybody. So because Reagan did that then its ok for Jacque to do something similiar?"

Please explain how they are "similar."

[Doug]

Please explain how they are "similar."

$$MONEY$$...........POLITICS.

So, after all that has been posted above , do you think Ole Jacque should be excused?


Doug

[Lindsay]

Doug writes: "So, after all that has been posted above , do you think Ole Jacque should be excused?"

Yes, to the same extent Colin Powell should be excused for twisting arms to form a coalition. Foreign policy is not missionary work, Doug, as that noted war criminal Henry Kissinger once said.

[Doug]

Yes, to the same extent Colin Powell should be excused for twisting arms to form a coalition. Foreign policy is not missionary work, Doug, as that noted war criminal Henry Kissinger once said.


Don't quite understand the caveat attached to the yes?
If you feel like it could you please dumb that down a little for me?

Why do you consider Henry Kissinger a war criminal?

Doug

[Lindsay]

Doug writes: "Don't quite understand the caveat attached to the yes?
If you feel like it could you please dumb that down a little for me?"

If Chirac thinks the benefits to France and the world justify strongarming other countries, and if he's correct, then he should be excused for pulling out all the stops. I don't understand your pique, Doug. This sort of thing is not unusual. One's response to it depends on one's view on the issue involved. The US bribed many countries to join the 1990 coalition against Iraq, and Jordan was punished for not joining.

"Why do you consider Henry Kissinger a war criminal?"

For his actions in Vietnam, Cambodia, East Timor, and Chile. This is an excellent site: http://www.enteract.com/~peterk/henry.html

[Doug]

LINDSAY,

For his actions in Vietnam, Cambodia, East Timor, and Chile. This is an excellent site: http://www.enteract.com/~peterk/henry.html

What is Kissinger doing now? Is he out on parole or something? I just saw him on TV tonite. Is that what happens to a convicted war criminal, they let him go out and make TV appearences?

I do like Christopher Hitchens though. Always interested in his stuff. What do you think of him?

Doug

[Lindsay]

Doug writes:

"What is Kissinger doing now? Is he out on parole or something? I just saw him on TV tonite. Is that what happens to a convicted war criminal, they let him go out and make TV appearences?"

Be careful where you go with this one, Doug. Saddam Hussein makes TV appearances, too. Kissinger is wary about travelling abroad these days--lest he end up fleeing a country under a hail of writs.

"I do like Christopher Hitchens though. Always interested in his stuff. What do you think of him?"

I think he's the best political writer alive. The best debater, too. His recent move to the right has been hard for me to watch. He has been a huge influence on me for many years. I actually got to speak to him on the phone once. The call lasted only about half a minute, but I got a big kick out of it.

[Lefty]

Yeah, we made a trade: We got Hitchens and you got Huffington.

[Tom]

What is the French word for victory?

There isn't one! LOL

Did you know that Istanbul used to be known as Constantinople?
Did you know that Iran used to known as Persia?
did you know that France used to be known as... Germany?

[PaceAdvantage]

Without the French, we'd all still be speaking with a British accent.....right??

[Tom]

That was a long time ago....they have changed. Granted, if they went to war with Indians today, they might stand a chance, but then again, I wouldn't go deeper that place on them <G>

[Doug]

TOM WROTE,

did you know that France used to be known as... Germany?
Wasn't that supposed to be followed by:

"Until the US saved their ass"

Doug

[hcap]

The problem may be we have a president thats an embarrassment to the rest of the world and to many here at home. I think he has gotten a free ride from the mainstream media.

And now we are expected to buy the necessity of a major war from a man who reminds me of a failed used car salesman?

Don't agree?
Here are some classic Bushisms.



"The problem with the French is that they don't have a word for entrepreneur." —George W. Bush, discussing the decline of the French economy with British Prime Minister Tony Blair

"Do you have blacks, too?" —George W. Bush, to Brazilian President Fernando Cardoso, Nov. 8, 2001, as reported in an April 28, 2002, Estado Sao Pauloan column by Fernando Pedreira, a close friend of President Cardoso

"The war on terror involves Saddam Hussein because of the nature of Saddam Hussein, the history of Saddam Hussein, and his willingness to terrorize himself." —George W. Bush, Grand Rapids, Mich., Jan. 29, 2003

"I understand that the unrest in the Middle East creates unrest throughout the region." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., March 13, 2002

"More and more of our imports come from overseas."G.W. Bush

"Nigeria is an important continent." - GW Bush

"Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?"- George W. Bush, Florence, South Carolina, January 11, 2000, quoted from Michael Klein via Humour-Nette

"I believe we are on an irreversible trend toward more freedom and democracy, but that could change."

"The Holocaust was an obscene period in our nation's history. I mean in this century's history. But we all lived in this century. I didn't live in this century."

"Verbosity leads to unclear, inarticulate things."

"Public speaking is very easy."

"They want the federal government controlling Social Security like it's some kind of federal program." - George W. Bush, St. Charles, Missouri, November 2, 2000

[JustRalph]

I have seen this before.....if you cut up and analyze everything someone says, every day of the week, month, year, you can come up with some good ones. I am aware of some of these and they way you posted them is out of context. A couple were said as you wrote them. The problem is he corrected what he said immed. and rephrased. You leave that part out. I bet some of what you say in a four year period could end up this way too. Now if we take 8 yrs of Clinton and Gore speeches etc you could come up with some pretty dumb things too. Understand, G.W. has yet to lie under oath. Big difference between him and Clinton in my eyes. I think the definition of "is" says it all.

Here are some classic hcapisms:

"The problem may be the mainstream media, we are expected to buy a free ride from the rest of the world".

See what happens when I take bits and pieces of what you said and put them together without context. It doesn't make much sense.

Now tell me how many "Failed" used car salesman do you know that have a degree from Yale and an MBA from Harvard? How many of them do you know graduated 2nd in their class in Air Force Pilot School? You can spout that Liberal Bullsh*&t all day long. You can cut and paste all the crap you want from Bush bashing web sites etc. The bottom line is that 66% percent of Americans polled within the month after 9-11 said they were glad G.W. was in office instead of Al Gore. Even some of Gore's cronies said the same thing. He is looking more and more like Reagan, and that's a good thing. You complain about a War that isn't needed. You fail to understand the more broad implications of dethroning Saddam. The invocation of the U.S. military to take this action is exactly what is needed in this post 9-11 climate. If you don't think we need a show of strength in this climate, you are naive. There are more broad implications than just changing Iraq. Afghanistan was just the start. When we show a repeated willingness to act in a proactive manner towards those who can pose a threat against us, we deter the half hearted and seriously hamper the operation of the dedicated enemies of this country. The face of those enemies has changed and will never be the same. Witness the U.S. citizens arrested yesterday. Members of the Jihad, in this country. Things will never be the same here. There are 2800 dead people from N.Y. city. Bring them back for 1/2 hour and ask them if they think we should be out showing our strength and participating in active pursuit of those who may threaten us in the future. I hazard to guess that most would be behind the President. Too many have already forgotten the tragedy that occurred. It's a different world. Get used to it. The profile you would advocate invites a repeat of 9-11. I think the majority of this country understands that. You are not against the war effort. You are against Bush. In 1998 most of the dems were saying the same thing about Saddam that Bush is saying today. They were backing Clinton. Now that Bush is using almost the exact same words as Clinton, the dems seem to have amnesia. Its partisan politics and it's playing politics with our future. :cool:

[Lefty]

And of course just one of Bill Clinton's famous quotes: "Black people watch TV like regular people do." said it right on BET TV but cght no flack

One more: "My mama told me never to make a speech after 7pm when i'm tired." This was right after he told a group of wealthy texans he agreed he had raised their taxes too much.

[Tom]

I did not have sex with that woman!

[Doug]

HCAP,

You may want to keep an eye on the successful used car salesman (meaning the extreme libs), they are probably selling you a "LEMON".

Do you actually believe that these little "Bushisms" that you posted make a difference to anybody who has an once of sense?

If you used this type of BS when selling a used car, you would be the one that is unsuccessful. Folks would just look at eachother and chuckle .

Clinton sat right there on national TV, wagged his finger and lied. Then Lied to the court. Now if you want to parse his words and play what is the definition of "is" is, then you deserve all the lemons you get.

Just because you purchase a lemon are you trying to sell it to someone else to make you feel better? Disgusting at best.

Doug

[hcap]

JustRalph, Lefty, Doug et al

My main point was that a good portion of the world will hear the same bushisms as I and others hear.

To watch Mr Bush stumble through a pressing question at a news conference borders on painful.
To argue he is "bold" or "direct", is to ignore the doubt, that perhaps the mind behind the fractured sentences, the simplistic "good vs evil", the swaggering tone-- perhaps that mind is lacking clarity
You may claim his intellect intact due to his admission into Harvard and the earning of a MBA and his piloting abilities (may be argued ), but would you
equally excuse Clintons’ failings because he was a Rhoades scholar at Oxford?

The world is moved by words before actions are taken and the words I
posted should not be construed as out of context. Unless all the bushisms
I quoted were made up and manipulated by angry peace advocates, I think the fact that they are real quotes should be allowed to stand on their own-no matter if the clarification eventually comes- whether from his own lips or more likely those of-Ari Fleischers’.

In fact Dubya himself acknowledged his verbal frailities.
Are these bushisms out of context?

"I stand by all the misstatements that I've made." to Sam Donaldson, 8/17/93

"I've coined new words, like, misunderstanding and Hispanically."- George W. Bush, plugging (and unwittingly providing material for the second edition of) Weinberg's book, The Complete Bushisms, at the Radio-Television Correspondents Association dinner, Washington, D.C., March 29, 2001. Bush probably meant to say "misunderestimating," a word that he has used in public speech. Quoted from Jacob Weinberg, "The Complete Bushisms."


If I post "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong." Voltaire
Is this out of context?

Or how about "I believe there's something out there watching over us. Unfortunately, it's the government.” Woody Allen

Or, ''You can fool too many of the people too much of the time.'' James Thurber

Or, "Until lions have their historians, tales of the hunt shall always glorify the hunter." African proverb

Or, "A little rebellion now and then is a good thing." Thomas Jefferson

Or "Noise proves nothing--often a hen who has merely laid an egg cackles as if she had laid an asteroid." Mark Twain

Or "Don’t follow leaders
Watch the parkin’ meters." Bob Dylan

I do not have to clarify, or cite the paragraphs that may follow each thought. I do not have to give an extensive biography of the author. Or his education, or lack thereof.
They stand on their own, because the mind originating the thought is apparent and lucent.

Would you buy a used war from this unclear salesman? Maybe, but 10 million wolrldwide have some pertinent questions about the cost.

Kick the tires and caveat emptor!

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by hcap
JustRalph, Lefty, Doug et alWould you buy a used war from this unclear salesman? Maybe, but 10 million wolrldwide have some pertinent questions about the cost. Kick the tires and caveat emptor!

According to the latest polls, based on 280 million Americans, 200 Million agree with the president. I understand they are not
"around the world". I don't care what the others think. The others don't have the perspective of freedom and they don't make decisions based on being the most powerful, and probably the most vulnerable at the same time. Don't argue that there are more that don't agree. You can inflate the numbers all you want. In San Francisco they claimed 200K protesters and the San Francisco Chronicle revealed the protesters folly. There were 65k protesters. In my old home town of Columbus Ohio we get twice that many for an OSU football game. Don't go that route. That dog won't hunt. I won't quote any famous philosphers. End of discussion.

[Doug]

HDCAP WROTE

To watch Mr Bush stumble through a pressing question at a news conference borders on painful.
To argue he is "bold" or "direct", is to ignore the doubt, that perhaps the mind behind the fractured sentences, the simplistic "good vs evil", the swaggering tone-- perhaps that mind is lacking clarityTo watch Mr Bush stumble through a pressing question at a news conference borders on painful.
To argue he is "bold" or "direct", is to ignore the doubt, that perhaps the mind behind the fractured sentences, the simplistic "good vs evil", the swaggering tone-- perhaps that mind is lacking clarity

Perhaps a little clarity of mind would help you. TRY EXLAX.

Doug

[Lefty]

Try this: My daddy said actions speak louder than words. Geo W. is a man of action.
Or this: When you see Geo. W what you see is what you get.
With Clinton ypu never knew what "face" he was going to use.

[hcap]

JustRalph

You said
“According to the latest polls, based on 280 million Americans, 200 Million agree with the president.”
That works out to be 71% according to your figs

This the latest Gallup poll
Note that support without a UN resolution is only 30%!

February 21, 2003 PRINCETON, NJ -- The latest Gallup Poll finds that overall public support for military action against Iraq has faded slightly from the recent high point registered shortly after Secretary of State Colin Powell's speech to the U.N. Security Council on Feb. 5, but remains in solid majority territory at 59%. However, Americans continue to want international cooperation for such action.

Support for war without a new U.N. vote authorizing it is only 30%, down 9 points from a poll conducted Feb. 7-9.

The poll also shows that Americans opposed to a war with Iraq are more intense in their beliefs than are those who favor military action. This results in a situation in which the number of Americans who feel intensely that war should be avoided is roughly equal to the number who are intensely in favor of war.

You said
“In San Francisco they claimed 200K protesters and the San Francisco Chronicle revealed the protesters folly. There were 65k protesters”

From the Chronicle-same article-some doubt on the new technology that was used to calculate 65k. “Greg Suhr, the San Francisco deputy police chief who calculated the police figure, said of the Chronicle's estimate, "I can tell you for a fact that's an enormously low number.”

And even if it were only 65k, there were over 100k (very conservative) in New York.

And have you bothered to total the pro war rallies. What are we talking about, maybe a ratio of 1000 to 1 anti-war protester to pro war??.

Also are you aware of the number of Cities that have passed anti-war resolutions? At this point 107 U.S. cities and counties have now passed resolutions opposing the war, along with both houses of the Maine state legislature and the Hawaii House of Representatives.
This list includes among other smaller municipalities,
Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Des Moines, Baltimore, Ann Arbor, St Paul, Jersey City, Ithaca, Cleveland, Philadelphia, Austin, Burlington, Seattle,Washington DC, Milwaukee

Bush compared the protests to a “focus group” and said “The role of a leader is to decide policy based upon security-in this case, the security of the people."

I think he better start listening to the focus group called the American people

[Tom]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by hcap
[B]JustRalph


And have you bothered to total the pro war rallies. What are we talking about, maybe a ratio of 1000 to 1 anti-war protester to pro war??.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meaningless comparison - and incorrect label - I am not a pro war person, I am a pro-security, anti-terror person. Isupport a war if needed, but I also have also posted that Iwould be against a war if Sodamn Insane is killed or otherwise removed from Irag (pro-murder, sure!) But people like me aren't about to go out an march in protests or support marches.

[Lefty]

Hcap, since there are more in favor of Bush's decision then i'd say he is listening to the American Public. You just want him to listen to your side of the issue.
I still don't get it, these people have been fomented to support a decision that will lead to more terrist attacks by Sadaam and Bin Ladin, who are prob. in cahoots; don't doubt it for a 2nd. It's only a matter of time.
But, we elected this guy to do a job. Should he listen to himself and the other informed people of his staff or the uninformed, misinformed public.
And if this is really an annt-war rally why no signs pleading with Sadaam to do the right thing.
This section of knee-jerk, celebrity worshipping public has been fomented into an anti-Bush campaign. The signs say it all.

[hcap]

Tom

Why is a anti-war vs pro war rally a meaningless comparison?

And wouldn't a poll based on actions from both sides be a more accurate poll than a "scientific" sampling the pollsters use?
Are 1000 or 2000 selected individuals as Gallup uses more indicative of real feelings, or is willingness to get up of your butt and physically demonstrate, a better measure of conviction?

The Gallup poll I posted shows equal fervor on both sides. How come the "pre-emptive warriors" didn't brave 20 degree temps to show their support like their counterparts 100,00 strong in NYC?
You may be anti- terror pro security, I believe most of us are, and so are the peace protesters-but they just may have a different view of what is needed than the "pre-emptives".


Lefty

You wrote

"Hcap, since there are more in favor of Bush's decision then i'd say he is listening to the American Public. You just want him to listen to your side of the issue."

I repost the Gallup finding

Support for war without a new U.N. vote authorizing it is only 30%, down 9 points from a poll conducted Feb. 7-9.

Isn't what may happen too dangerous to be left to a one man whose judgement may not really reflect the will of the people?
Bush may be right but many on my side aren't convinced. Remember we have not always found the truth out until after wars have been waged and lives have been lost.

"Until lions have their historians, tales of the hunt shall always glorify the hunter." African proverb

[Lefty]

Hcap, it's not one man. He has a lot of advisors.
Did you protest when Clinton heaved all those missiles into Baghdad?
I didn't see any protests.
The only thing diff is the name of the Pres.
Admit it, most are anti-Bush not anti-war.
I could care less about the UN they're ineffective. I think it's time we pulled out of the UN.
We had the U.N. with us last time and they wouldn't let Geo Bush go all the way. The same people who say we shouldn't go it alone condemn Bush for not removing Sadaam, but as I said, the U.N. said no. Now the same people want us to have the U.N. blessing. How many ways do you want it?

[hcap]

Lefty

My mistake let me re-phrase
my statement

"Isn't what may happen too dangerous to be left to a few men whose judgements may not really reflect the will of the people?

Does this change your mind?
No? I didn't think it would.

Ok I admit it I am anti-war
Ok I admit it I am also anti-Bush

Ok your turn How about you stop ranting
and try to make an intelligent case for your side?


To see what is in front of one's nose requires a constant struggle.
--George Orwell

[Lefty]

That's why we elect them, to make these difficult decisions. We the people don't know what's going on the world as much as they do, that's their job while we go to our jobs.
I have asked somew intelligent questions but when you libs run out of answer you call names and make accusations.
Like I say, there are no anti-war demonstrations, just anti-Bush, fomented by Hollywood libs, the liberal press and liberal Dems.
Believe it or not.
Did you protest when Clinton bombed Baghdad? I've asked this question 3-4 times no lib wants to answer....there ya go.

[hcap]

Hey Lefty

I called you no names, and made no accusations.

"Did you protest when Clinton bombed Baghdad? I've asked this question 3-4 times no lib wants to answer....there ya go."

To be honest I did not. Until Clinton started outright lying about Monica I was pretty much apolitical. Didn't care who was in office, went about my own buisness. I started paying attention however around the time of his midnight pardons and got pretty disgusted.
Went back to my Libertarian roots and started to wonder about things.
Being a skeptic is not unwise.
Whether a Dem or Repub is in office

[Lefty]

H'cap, you said, stop ranting and make an intelligent case for your side. This kinda means to me that i've been ranting unintelliglble gibberish and I have not.
I said something to the effect if we free these people from an oppresive dictator and save millions of lives down the road can that mean we hate them.? I am paraphrasing myself but I think it's an intelligent observation.
If you ant-war protestors can't see that Sadaam takes heart and hope in these protests and that you are doing America harm, then i'm flummoxed. I think most of you are sheep following some mighty unamerican wolves in these protests.
I think the facts are clear that sadaam is a merciless dictator that will be a danger to the world if he gets his hands on a delivery system for the weapons he has and is hiding.
One of his own scientists was here a few months ago and interviewed by Shawn Hannity for one, and he said Sadaam is working on nuclear devices. With that and everything else the man has done what else do you need?

[hcap]

Lefty

These may not be intelligent arguments.

Rant 1a
"Admit it, most are anti-Bush not anti-war."

Does this statement of yours prove peace marchers are un-american, or show anything else subversive? I thought under the constitution peaceful assembly and expression of speech are guranteed? And even if this is true how does it somehow invalidate a peaceful demonstration?

Rant 1b
"Like I say, there are no anti-war demonstrations, just anti-Bush, fomented by Hollywood libs, the liberal press and liberal Dems."

Ditto my fiirst answer. Also if you think holywood is conspiring with the press, and therefore the Gallup findings that,

"Support for war without a new U.N. vote authorizing it is only 30%, down 9 points from a poll conducted Feb. 7-9."

I, and all of us have to start watching more war movies to achieve a more balanced world view.


Recently Carl Bernstein of Watergate fame, addressed his fellow journalists


"Carl Bernstein reserved his most stinging criticism for fellow journalists - accusing them of abandoning the search for the best obtainable version of the truth for news that sells.
"Our stake in maintaining the myth and the attendant self-image that we are doing a great job is every bit as great a fiction as that of the American Congress serving the people," Bernstein said. "The gravest threat to the truth today may well be within our own profession."
He cited American media's coverage of worldwide peace demonstrations last weekend as an example of news without proper context.
"Whether we agree with those demonstrations or whether we believe they were out of line or wrong headed, these were huge events that are helping to shape what is happening in the United Nations and whether we go to war," he said. "Yet on television those demonstrations . . . were treated dismissively, condescendingly and patronizingly as if they were not important news.""

Lets go back to the Civil war to look at another danger, that concerns me more than Sadaam

“I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavour to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.”
- Abraham Lincoln-

[Lefty]

My so called Rant is an intelligent argument whether you want to say so or not. If this was an anti-WAR demonstration there would be many anti-Sadaam signs saying things like Saddam Free your people. Sadaam step down and prevent this war. Sadaam give up your weapons.
No such signs just all Anti-Bush. Some of you better wake up and read the writing on the signs.
Bernstein is a liberal who I wouldn't pay attention to in a desert if he gave me directions to water.
If these are rants so be it but you're the one ignoring the danger of Sadaam when all the signs are there. How may U.N. resolutions has he flaunted? About 17? Wanna go for 77? It appears you do.
You said you protested Clinton sending missiles into Iraq. Ever notice you were alone out there? Where were all the Anti-War protesters then? And you say when I call this an Anti-Bush protest I'm ranting?
Guess you will never see the light. Not my fault.

[hcap]

Lefty

"You said you protested Clinton sending missiles into Iraq. Ever notice you were alone out there? Where were all the Anti-War protesters then? And you say when I call this an Anti-Bush protest I'm ranting?
Guess you will never see the light. Not my fault."

I said
"To be honest I did not. Until Clinton started outright lying about Monica I was pretty much apolitical"

Lefty
"My so called Rant is an intelligent argument whether you want to say so or not. If this was an anti-WAR demonstration there would be many anti-Sadaam signs saying things like Saddam Free your people. Sadaam step down and prevent this war. Sadaam give up your weapons."

This was a demonstration against
war to be executed by our gov. against Iraq. If Iraq said it was going to invade the US, and massed 150,000
troops along our border, I'm sure I would do more than protest!

[Lefty]

Hcap, I pretty much give up. You're not going to get it. Sadaam bad, Bush good.
In another post I blve you said we should all watch more movies to get a balanced view of the world.
What? Watch the distorted unfact based movies of the Hollywood left for balance?
You gotta be kidding.
And you quote Bernstein one of those american hating radicals who thinks we should have signed the Kyoto(spelling may not be correct)treaty. Once again another leftist who wants us to be dictated to and robbed by the rest of the world.
But I keep on repeating myself.
You apparantly did not realize when you finally protested Clinton's heaving missiles into Baghdad that you were totally alone. No protesters against Clinton, huge protests against Bush, same enemy and you don't come to the conclusion that these are not anti-war demonstrations but anti-Bush. And you call my arguments unintelligent?
Well, i'm getting e-mails telling me i'm wasting my time with you and thy're right. I find myself answering your same tired arguments so Hcap, just keep rereading my posts as needed and hopefully one day the truth will seep through.
Now get out there with your sign against Bush and give more hope, aid and comfort to America's enemies.

[hcap]

Lefty

"Hcap, I pretty much give up. You're not going to get it. Sadaam bad, Bush good. "

No argument. But is war the best course of action?

"In another post I blve you said we should all watch more movies to get a balanced view of the world.
What? Watch the distorted unfact based movies of the Hollywood left for balance?"

My posted answer

Also if you think holywood is conspiring with the press, and therefore the Gallup findings that,
"Support for war without a new U.N. vote authorizing it is only 30%, down 9 points from a poll conducted Feb. 7-9."

"I, and all of us have to start watching more war movies to achieve a more balanced world view."

I thought that said --if hollywood somehow is effective enough to "create" peace marchers, by all of us watching war movies, we would become more hawkish-get it???


Lefty as far as protesting Clinton I said 2 times I did not!!!

"You apparantly did not realize when you finally protested Clinton's heaving missiles into Baghdad that you were totally alone."

Me again

To be honest I did not. Until Clinton started outright lying about Monica I was pretty much apolitical.

If you can't state facts please at least read my posts correctly.

"Giving comfort to our enemies" is uncalled for and verges on Mcartyism

Bernstein broke watergate and help remove an out of control presdent.
Decent credentials, to question the validity of the news.

You know in my posts I tried to support my argument through enough facts and establish a reasonable doubt. Skeptisim, whether you are testing claims of a horse racing "system" or a political point of view is really a good idea.

Another thing you might find interesting. We all are familiar with the
mantra repeated over and over again by the mainstream media, that Iraq "kicked out" the UN inspectors in 1998. Well not so. But I guess even the following quotes from the very papers who claim now Sadaam kicked em out contrasted with what they reported in 1998 will not make you question your view.

What a Difference Four Years Makes Why U.N. inspectors left Iraq--then and now - FAIR

1)a The U.N. orders its weapons inspectors to leave Iraq after the chief inspector reports Baghdad is not fully cooperating with them. -- Sheila MacVicar, ABC World News This Morning, 12/16/98

1)b To bolster its claim, Iraq let reporters see one laboratory U.N. inspectors once visited before they were kicked out four years ago -John McWethy, ABC World News Tonight 8/12/02

2a) The Iraq story boiled over last night when the chief U.N. weapons inspector, Richard Butler, said that Iraq had not fully cooperated with inspectors and--as they had promised to do. As a result, the U.N. ordered its inspectors to leave Iraq this morning- Katie Couric, NBC's Today, 12/16/98/

2b) As Washington debates when and how to attack Iraq, a surprise offer from Baghdad. It is ready to talk about re-admitting U.N. weapons inspectors after kicking them out four years ago.--Maurice DuBois, NBC's Saturday Today, 8/3/02

3a) The chief U.N. weapons inspector ordered his monitors to leave Baghdad today after saying that Iraq had once again reneged on its promise to cooperate--a report that renewed the threat of U.S. and British airstrikes. --AP, 12/16/98

3b) Information on Iraq's programs has been spotty since Saddam expelled U.N. weapons inspectors in 1998. --AP, 9/7/02

4a) Immediately after submitting his report on Baghdad's noncompliance, Butler ordered his inspectors to leave Iraq. --Los Angeles Times, 12/17/98

4b) It is not known whether Iraq has rebuilt clandestine nuclear facilities since U.N. for a bomb and the capability to make weapons.--Los Angeles Times, 9/10/02

5a) The United Nations once again has ordered its weapons inspectors out of Iraq. Today's evacuation follows a new warning from chief weapons inspector Richard Butler accusing Iraq of once again failing to cooperate with the inspectors. The United States and Britain repeatedly have warned that Iraq's failure to cooperate with the inspectors could lead to air strikes.--Bob Edwards, NPR, 12/16/98

5b) If he has secret weapons, he's had four years since he kicked out the inspectors to hide all of them. --Daniel Schorr, NPR, 8/3/02

6a) Russian Ambassador Sergei Lavrov criticized Butler for evacuating inspectors from Iraq Wednesday morning without seeking permission from the Security Council. --USA Today, 12/17/98
6b) Saddam expelled U.N. weapons inspectors in 1998, accusing some of being U.S. spies. -USA Today, 9/4/02

Now I guess you can say I am splitting hairs, but this how words can be used to "manufacture consent" The pr and advertising industries have learned quite a bit about manipulating public opinion. Words are power. Whoever has the spotlight can sublety direct and change your mind Do you believe that our government is not equally aware of these techniques. Thankfully they are not at the point of really effective manipulation yet. But living in a dumnbed down "1984" is not my idea of liberty.
Well alot of us aren't buying it.

Does the name Pavlov ring a bell???

[Lefty]

well, you did say you protested after Clinton lied about Monica. we'll say you didn't and that's my point.
Why didn't you leftists and peacniks protest against Clinton when he heaved 450 Cruise Missiles into Baghdad? But you mightily protest Bush. Same enemy. Coclusion: You are ant-Bush not anti-war.
Pavlov's dog....hmmm, couldn't have said it better myself. Looks like the liberal press and liberal Hollywood ringing the bell you answer to.
You keep saying is war really the best solution? We've tried everything else. The dictator broke 17 U.N. resolutions, shoots at our planes in the agreed upon no-fly-zone, and a defector scientist tells us he's working on Nukes.
What more do you need?
I'm tired of repeating myself. You won't listen to common sense, so be it.

[Tom]

Originally posted by hcap
Tom

Why is a anti-war vs pro war rally a meaningless comparison?



Because anti-war people tend to demonstrate and people who are not so politically inclinded tend not to, that's all. You can't judge public opinion by one group doing something the other isn't.
No way would I waste my time marching in a protest. Even if I were anti-war (which I am, really - but I support doing what needs to be done, and that means war, fine, but it does't mean I support war for war's sake).

[hcap]

Well, time to get with the progam.
Goin' right down to video store to rant-oops, rent some war flicks.

See yous on the handicapping posts,
but if you think I'm goin' to buy into Tom C's program(s), boy have you got the wrong peacenik!

Hcap