What terrifies us Europeans about Bush
We greatly admire the energy of your young nation. Your "go get it" attitude is an example to us all. The trouble is that we are all living with the mistakes that we made when we had empires/wars. The UK is guilty of partitioning countries (divide and rule) and we daily live with consequences of Northern Ireland (sadly, only one example).
What really frightens us is that crossbows and cannons could not make the world totally uninhabitable, whereas nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons can. Humanity's survival is too fragile to indulge in pubescent posturings with WMD.
We greatly admire the energy of your young nation. Your "go get it" attitude is an example to us all. The trouble is that we are all living with the mistakes that we made when we had empires/wars. The UK is guilty of partitioning countries (divide and rule) and we daily live with consequences of Northern Ireland (sadly, only one example).
What really frightens us is that crossbows and cannons could not make the world totally uninhabitable, whereas nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons can. Humanity's survival is too fragile to indulge in pubescent posturings with WMD.
Has Anyone posted this yet ?
Lighthearted but it sums up a lot
'Letter to the Observer
Sunday January 26, 2003
The Observer
I'm really excited by George Bush's latest reason for bombing Iraq: he's running out of patience. And so am I! For some time now I've been really p*ssed off with Mr Johnson, who lives a couple of doors down the street. Well, him and Mr Patel, who runs the health food shop. They both give me queer looks, and I'm sure Mr Johnson is planning something nasty for me, but
so far I haven't been able to discover what. I've been round to his place a few times to see what he's up to, but he's got everything well hidden. That's how devious he is. As for Mr Patel, don't ask me how I know, I just know - from very good sources - that he is, in reality, a Mass Murderer. I have leafleted the street telling them that if we don't act first, he'll pick us off one by one. Some of my neighbours say, if I've got proof, why don't I go to the police? But that's simply ridiculous. The police will say that they need evidence of a crime with which to charge my neighbours.
They'll come up with endless red tape and quibbling about the rights and wrongs of a pre-emptive strike and all the while Mr Johnson will be finalising his plans to do terrible things to me, while Mr Patel will be secretly murdering people.
Since I'm the only one in the street with a decent range of automatic firearms, I reckon it's up to me to keep the peace. But until recently that's been a little difficult. Now, however, George W. Bush has made it clear that all I need to do is run out of patience, and then I can wade in and do whatever I want!
And let's face it, Mr Bush's carefully thought-out policy towards Iraq is the only way to bring about international peace and security. The one certain way to stop Muslim fundamentalist suicide bombers targeting the US or the UK is to bomb a few Muslim countries that have never threatened us.
That's why I want to blow up Mr Johnson's garage and kill his wife and children. Strike first! That'll teach him a lesson. Then he'll leave us in peace and stop peering at me in that totally unacceptable way.
Mr Bush makes it clear that all he needs to know before bombing Iraq is that Saddam is a really nasty man and that he has weapons of mass destruction even if no one can find them. I'm certain I've just as much justification for killing Mr Johnson's wife and children as Mr Bush has for bombing Iraq. Mr Bush's long-term aim is to make the world a safer place by eliminating 'rogue states' and 'terrorism'. It's such a clever long-term aim because how can you ever know when you've achieved it? How will Mr Bush know when he's wiped out all terrorists? When every
single terrorist is dead? But then a terrorist is only a terrorist once he's committed an act of terror.
What about would-be terrorists? These are the ones you really want to eliminate, since most of the known terrorists, being suicide bombers, have already liminated themselves. Perhaps Mr Bush needs to wipe out everyone who could possibly be a future terrorist? Maybe he can't be sure he's achieved his objective until every Muslim fundamentalist is dead? But then
some moderate Muslims might convert to fundamentalism.
Maybe the only really safe thing to do would be for Mr Bush to eliminate all Muslims?
It's the same in my street. Mr Johnson and Mr Patel are just the tip of the iceberg. There are dozens of other people in the street who I don't like and who - quite frankly - look at me in odd ways. No one will be really safe until I've wiped them all out. My wife says I might be going too far but I tell her I'm simply using the same logic as the President of the United States. That shuts her up.
Like Mr Bush, I've run out of patience, and if that's a good enough reason for the President, it's good enough for me. I'm going to give the whole street two weeks - no, 10 days - to come out in the open and hand over all aliens and interplanetary hijackers, galactic outlaws and interstellar terrorist masterminds, and if they don't hand them over nicely and say 'Thank you', I'm going to bomb the entire street to kingdom come. It's just as sane as what George W. Bush is proposing and, in contrast to
what he's intending, my policy will destroy only one street.
Terry Jones (monty python)'
316a
Lighthearted but it sums up a lot
'Letter to the Observer
Sunday January 26, 2003
The Observer
I'm really excited by George Bush's latest reason for bombing Iraq: he's running out of patience. And so am I! For some time now I've been really p*ssed off with Mr Johnson, who lives a couple of doors down the street. Well, him and Mr Patel, who runs the health food shop. They both give me queer looks, and I'm sure Mr Johnson is planning something nasty for me, but
so far I haven't been able to discover what. I've been round to his place a few times to see what he's up to, but he's got everything well hidden. That's how devious he is. As for Mr Patel, don't ask me how I know, I just know - from very good sources - that he is, in reality, a Mass Murderer. I have leafleted the street telling them that if we don't act first, he'll pick us off one by one. Some of my neighbours say, if I've got proof, why don't I go to the police? But that's simply ridiculous. The police will say that they need evidence of a crime with which to charge my neighbours.
They'll come up with endless red tape and quibbling about the rights and wrongs of a pre-emptive strike and all the while Mr Johnson will be finalising his plans to do terrible things to me, while Mr Patel will be secretly murdering people.
Since I'm the only one in the street with a decent range of automatic firearms, I reckon it's up to me to keep the peace. But until recently that's been a little difficult. Now, however, George W. Bush has made it clear that all I need to do is run out of patience, and then I can wade in and do whatever I want!
And let's face it, Mr Bush's carefully thought-out policy towards Iraq is the only way to bring about international peace and security. The one certain way to stop Muslim fundamentalist suicide bombers targeting the US or the UK is to bomb a few Muslim countries that have never threatened us.
That's why I want to blow up Mr Johnson's garage and kill his wife and children. Strike first! That'll teach him a lesson. Then he'll leave us in peace and stop peering at me in that totally unacceptable way.
Mr Bush makes it clear that all he needs to know before bombing Iraq is that Saddam is a really nasty man and that he has weapons of mass destruction even if no one can find them. I'm certain I've just as much justification for killing Mr Johnson's wife and children as Mr Bush has for bombing Iraq. Mr Bush's long-term aim is to make the world a safer place by eliminating 'rogue states' and 'terrorism'. It's such a clever long-term aim because how can you ever know when you've achieved it? How will Mr Bush know when he's wiped out all terrorists? When every
single terrorist is dead? But then a terrorist is only a terrorist once he's committed an act of terror.
What about would-be terrorists? These are the ones you really want to eliminate, since most of the known terrorists, being suicide bombers, have already liminated themselves. Perhaps Mr Bush needs to wipe out everyone who could possibly be a future terrorist? Maybe he can't be sure he's achieved his objective until every Muslim fundamentalist is dead? But then
some moderate Muslims might convert to fundamentalism.
Maybe the only really safe thing to do would be for Mr Bush to eliminate all Muslims?
It's the same in my street. Mr Johnson and Mr Patel are just the tip of the iceberg. There are dozens of other people in the street who I don't like and who - quite frankly - look at me in odd ways. No one will be really safe until I've wiped them all out. My wife says I might be going too far but I tell her I'm simply using the same logic as the President of the United States. That shuts her up.
Like Mr Bush, I've run out of patience, and if that's a good enough reason for the President, it's good enough for me. I'm going to give the whole street two weeks - no, 10 days - to come out in the open and hand over all aliens and interplanetary hijackers, galactic outlaws and interstellar terrorist masterminds, and if they don't hand them over nicely and say 'Thank you', I'm going to bomb the entire street to kingdom come. It's just as sane as what George W. Bush is proposing and, in contrast to
what he's intending, my policy will destroy only one street.
Terry Jones (monty python)'
316a
316a,
That was really funny.
The problem is there are way too many literal people in the world.
Cheers
That was really funny.
The problem is there are way too many literal people in the world.
Cheers
speaking on the legitimacy of forcing a regime change in another country:
how soon can we expect you americans to get rid of George Bush? many of us (people in the rest of the world - remember the rest of the world? we live here on this planet, too.) don`t like him and think that he is A BAD MAN. a lot of us worry that he has nuclear, biological and chemical weapons (we don`t need the UN to tell us that - nor do we need the nebulous 'proof' of colin powell) and a penchance for invading other countries. we worry that his calls for homeland security are just a thinly veiled excuse for increasing the level of repression in your country. some of us don`t like the way he is playing games with the UN.
so, when are you going to get rid of him? the sooner the better. thanks.
how soon can we expect you americans to get rid of George Bush? many of us (people in the rest of the world - remember the rest of the world? we live here on this planet, too.) don`t like him and think that he is A BAD MAN. a lot of us worry that he has nuclear, biological and chemical weapons (we don`t need the UN to tell us that - nor do we need the nebulous 'proof' of colin powell) and a penchance for invading other countries. we worry that his calls for homeland security are just a thinly veiled excuse for increasing the level of repression in your country. some of us don`t like the way he is playing games with the UN.
so, when are you going to get rid of him? the sooner the better. thanks.
joe dick said:
I'll be sure to have all my friends and family throw away their conscience and vote only with your approval from now on. Maybe you could start a newsletter which tells us who to vote for and what issues to support on national and local levels. When can you get on it? The sooner the better!
Until the next election I'll keep honking my horn for peace. Do you feel better now?
Help! Help! I'm being repressed!
You guys are killing me!!
Homeland security is a guise for a program of repression? George Bush is a wild cowboy with nuclear weapons?
I can only shake my head in disgust at that. I thought education had really gone down hill here in the States...I guess it is a global problem.
Ah, one more thought: isn't Hussein the one playing the real games with the UN? Will the next "resolution" end with the words: "so there!" or "we really really mean it!"?
Bob 🙄
You guys are killing me!!
Homeland security is a guise for a program of repression? George Bush is a wild cowboy with nuclear weapons?
I can only shake my head in disgust at that. I thought education had really gone down hill here in the States...I guess it is a global problem.
Ah, one more thought: isn't Hussein the one playing the real games with the UN? Will the next "resolution" end with the words: "so there!" or "we really really mean it!"?
Bob 🙄
Re: Help! Help! I'm being repressed!
Let me spell it out.
You don't have the right to be an armchair dictator.. Bush doesn't have the right to invade Iraq. You don't have the right to foul the world with your immoral strategies.
European people now see the USA as an immoral country. You couldn't find Osama... so you invade Iraq.. way to go America...
I think September 11th will likely happen again for you..
Neutron Bob said:
Let me spell it out.
You don't have the right to be an armchair dictator.. Bush doesn't have the right to invade Iraq. You don't have the right to foul the world with your immoral strategies.
European people now see the USA as an immoral country. You couldn't find Osama... so you invade Iraq.. way to go America...
I think September 11th will likely happen again for you..
I haven't received a single, serious reply to this. So I thought I'd repeat my request. I refuse to believe that none of the US posters here are unmotivated to communicate their objections to their representatives. Citizens are responsible and accountable for their Gov's actions, in a democracy.
One of the unfortunate defects with most democracies, is that a Government is elected for a term. Decisions are made by them, rather than by concensus. This can leave a widening gap (as in the UK) between public opinion and Goverment policy. Apart from a revolution, I see little else that can be done here🙁
I have canvassed: There is not a single person who I know, or who they know, who supports the war. Of course TV shows debating the issue seem to invite equal numbers from both camps, but how representative is that?
Most of the cartoons I posted came via the armed forces...
I have canvassed: There is not a single person who I know, or who they know, who supports the war. Of course TV shows debating the issue seem to invite equal numbers from both camps, but how representative is that?
Most of the cartoons I posted came via the armed forces...
I'm certain that this war is about oil. But, as any big war, it's also about selling weapons.
Bush really needs this war and the "war on terrorism", to justify spending loads of money on weapons (of mass distruction 🙂).
There's some hard times ahead for the average american.
It really makes me sick when I hear him talking about things like "freedom". It's sad that most americans really think they live in a free country.
Bush really needs this war and the "war on terrorism", to justify spending loads of money on weapons (of mass distruction 🙂).
There's some hard times ahead for the average american.
It really makes me sick when I hear him talking about things like "freedom". It's sad that most americans really think they live in a free country.
Saddam admits to a mistake
quote from Tim Russert -- "Meet the Press" on Imus this a.m. -- Saddam admits that his only mistake in invading Kuwait was not having the nuclear bomb first.
quote from Tim Russert -- "Meet the Press" on Imus this a.m. -- Saddam admits that his only mistake in invading Kuwait was not having the nuclear bomb first.
traderbam said:
Actualy, I did post a reply to this, I believe. I agree a lot with you on many of these things. Unfortunately, I am not sure if anyone really has any answers. The middle east is one big bag of worms.
Re: Re: Help! Help! I'm being repressed!
Who has the right to decide the political course of a nation?
Does Saddam have the right? I mean, did he ask for a majority vote of the Iraqi's if he could be their leader? If not, then why is Bob not qualified to be a dictator and Saddam is? Just what are you saying the qualifications are for someone to be a dictator?
Stryder said:
Who has the right to decide the political course of a nation?
Does Saddam have the right? I mean, did he ask for a majority vote of the Iraqi's if he could be their leader? If not, then why is Bob not qualified to be a dictator and Saddam is? Just what are you saying the qualifications are for someone to be a dictator?
Re: Re: Re: Help! Help! I'm being repressed!
Maybe the qualifications of a dictator have to be broadened these days. You could not really say from Bush he is a dictator on an American scale, though on a world scale I think he is...
Jeff R said:
Maybe the qualifications of a dictator have to be broadened these days. You could not really say from Bush he is a dictator on an American scale, though on a world scale I think he is...
If anybody acts in crime, does this imply the right for all the others to act the same way and it isn´t crime anymore?
Yea, american politics at kindergarten niveau -
Yea, american politics at kindergarten niveau -
Re: Saddam admits to a mistake
A very intellegent post. You are quite correct.
But, we can't magically turn back the clock, and allowing more and more countires/despots to acquire nuclear weapons doesn't seem the best way. Again, look at North Korea. No one has yet given a reasoned arguement that Iraq will not turn into another North Korea if we let Saddam off the hook. Sanctions will not work to stop him from getting a nuclear capability - North Korea may even sell it to him, and how would we prevent it?
EC8010 said:
jackinnj said:
A very intellegent post. You are quite correct.
But, we can't magically turn back the clock, and allowing more and more countires/despots to acquire nuclear weapons doesn't seem the best way. Again, look at North Korea. No one has yet given a reasoned arguement that Iraq will not turn into another North Korea if we let Saddam off the hook. Sanctions will not work to stop him from getting a nuclear capability - North Korea may even sell it to him, and how would we prevent it?
over here we have a republic,
the electoral system is designed so that smaller states have an influence on the course of events. Over here we respect the law, unlike some of our European allies who bend it to their wishes. Didn't the French just tell the ECB to take a hike btw?
nota bene -- the dems only wanted to recount the votes in the counties of Florida where they held sway, on every recount Bush won.
nota bene -- the Clintonista's would not allow the Bush team access to national security apparatus, or even brief them
nota bene -- the deal which Clinton brokered with Korea in 1994 was violated from the beginning.
I guess if you throw out Wayne County Michigan and Cook County Illinois, and probably most of Eastern Missouri, Bush did get a majority of the "legal" votes.
the electoral system is designed so that smaller states have an influence on the course of events. Over here we respect the law, unlike some of our European allies who bend it to their wishes. Didn't the French just tell the ECB to take a hike btw?
nota bene -- the dems only wanted to recount the votes in the counties of Florida where they held sway, on every recount Bush won.
nota bene -- the Clintonista's would not allow the Bush team access to national security apparatus, or even brief them
nota bene -- the deal which Clinton brokered with Korea in 1994 was violated from the beginning.
I guess if you throw out Wayne County Michigan and Cook County Illinois, and probably most of Eastern Missouri, Bush did get a majority of the "legal" votes.
"going to War without France
is like going to war without an accordian". -- quote from Sen. Zell Miller.
is like going to war without an accordian". -- quote from Sen. Zell Miller.
Re: Re: Saddam admits to a mistake
Do you really think Saddam is the only "bad" guy out there? You can't control everything and everyone.
I don't consider North Korea to be a dangerous nation. India, Pakistan, Israel... They all have nuclear weapons.
People like Saddam are not as crazy as the US wants us to think they are. They can be stopped without a war.
Jeff R said:
Do you really think Saddam is the only "bad" guy out there? You can't control everything and everyone.
I don't consider North Korea to be a dangerous nation. India, Pakistan, Israel... They all have nuclear weapons.
People like Saddam are not as crazy as the US wants us to think they are. They can be stopped without a war.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.