deanmass Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 No matter WHO the politiical leader, it always seems like the DUMBER people end up in office. Since we are all potential voters, who is/are the fool(s)? Our voter turnout percentage sucks. Our voting system is outdated. The system for running for political office is FUCKED. Whining about the non-elected leader ain't gonna do DICK. Next election, partiticipate and vote. Get your friends to vote. Get your clients to vote. We can't do much now except protest and deal with the fallout. Mandela would be rotting in prison if it were not for the U.S., but I cannot really argue his points about Bush. But, Mandela has never had much power except for admiration of the public. Put him in GWB's position, and he may commit the same acts or worse ( or not). Right now, it all looks to be a Big Shit Sandwich (The Royale Shiite w/ Cheese), and we all gotta takke a bite. The more bread ya got, the less shit ya taste.....Live and learn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skip_dup1 Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 bombing the crap out of Iraq will have absolutely no influence on that possibility, except to make it more likely. Hussein is not a nice dude-he`s an asshole. That makes him an easy target. But the people yelling loudest about what a danger he is are in the process of rebuilding the black ops/SOG/spook infrastructure that was widely condsidered inappropriate for a nation that believes in peaceful solutions. They`re trying to bring back lisences to kill, fer cryin out loud. These are the people we should be listening to about the other guy being dangerous? And ignoring U.N. resolutions-please. The U.S. killed a resolution against child soldiers! they`re resisting banning land mines, don`t even get me started on the environment. Why don`t they say they want Hussein out because he`s a bigger asshole than they are? at least there would be some truth to it.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rold Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by Salty Tonk: [b]What if someone sneaks into the country with a suitcase nuke or a vial of some biological agent and releases it in a major metro area.I would be willing to bet all of you anti-war folks would be crying "We should have done something".[/b][/quote]I think many, if not most of us agree that [i]something[/i] must be done. Hussein is a monster; I'd hate to see what he'd do to the West if he had the chance given what he has done to his own people. But does that "something" have to be a full out war with all its collateral damage? Me thinks not. I say put the technology and intelligence to use, find the Hussein, take ONLY him and his [i]true[/i] high-level supporters out and go from there. The US is going to gain nothing positive in the eyes of the international community by devasting an entire country in the hopes of installing a cooperative government. Just my 2c. meh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salyphus Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by Salty Tonk: [b]Let's just suppose we do nothing.What if someone sneaks into the country with a suitcase nuke or a vial of some biological agent and releases it in a major metro area.I would be willing to bet all of you anti-war folks would be crying "We should have done something".[/b][/quote]I will be saying that [b]we should have done something to prevent terrorism[/b] rather than pursuing NWO imperialism and further alienating the rest of the world against us, which only encourages terrorism. If this happens, the blame will fall squarely on the Bush Administration. There is absolutely no way that waging war on Iraq can do anything to prevent terrorism. Where is bin Laden? Where is al Queda? Where is the investigation into what the Bush Administration really knew about 9/11? Mass distraction for fun and profit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_dog Posted January 31, 2003 Author Share Posted January 31, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by Salty Tonk: [b]8 european nations signed on to back us up today.Let's just suppose we do nothing.What if someone sneaks into the country with a suitcase nuke or a vial of some biological agent and releases it in a major metro area.I would be willing to bet all of you anti-war folks would be crying "We should have done something".[/b][/quote]hey that happened in 12 Monkeys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midispaceho Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 I hate to even reply to this post, but here we go. Mandella came off like a racist ass. I have no respect for the man anymore. Bush may be too eager for some to go to war, but Sadam must be taken down. Anyone who would torture children in front of their parents to get a forced confession needs to be killed. Not Contained, not exhiled, not jailed...KILLED. He and his whole regime are ruthless barbarians and this modern world should not allow people like that to exhist. Him and any dictator like him should be TAKEN OUT. Fuck em all. There...I'm done. Heeeeeere kitty kitty kitty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salty Tonk Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 We as citizens are not privey to all the intelligence that the administration has.I for one don't want to know all that stuff,because if I knew then you know the enemy knows it as well.Our foriegn policy does not contribute to terrorism.Totalitarian regimes and cultures cause terrorism.Let me just say that I respect everyones opinion.That's what makes this country great is that we have differing opinions and yet we don't kill each other over it.I just happen to believe we are on the right course.I met GW several years ago when he was running for Gov. of Texas.Let me just say that he is not dumb like is said so many times.He is very smart and has a good moral character.Call me redneck if you want.But I believe in the man.At least more so than any other politician I have ever seen.Bottom line is history will be the judge. jgc2002 is not responsible for damages ,injuries and or death as result of above post.Side effects include nasuea,dizziness,dry mouth,vomiting,blurred vision,nervousness,loss of memory and in extreme cases sexual side effects. www.mp3.com/salt_creek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skip_dup1 Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 dude, I respect your opinion too, but our foreign policy doesn`t contribute to terrorism? with all due respect, that is incredibly deluded. It sounds like you haven`t looked at the facts. There are no easy answers, but I can`t believe you actually believe that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaz Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by Salty Tonk: [b]8 european nations signed on to back us up today.Let's just suppose we do nothing.What if someone sneaks into the country with a suitcase nuke or a vial of some biological agent and releases it in a major metro area.I would be willing to bet all of you anti-war folks would be crying "We should have done something".[/b][/quote]I would hope and wish that all humans are inherently anti-war. It's the ones who are not that cause all the trouble. Speaking of "we should have done something", who exactly was in charge when the twin towers were destroyed, and, apparently, there was prior intelligence that was ignored? Who exactly is saying that "we" shouldn't do [i]anything[/i] ? The world has developed systems of due process, something that Americans supposedly believe in, because war and death and killing are horrible things (that's why we're involved in the first place, right?) If the evidence is there, and all other options appear hopeless, than I imagine those who are against this, will support it. To just go gunslinging blindly, and acting like "we" are kings of the world seems like a horrible mistake. Those of you who have a "fuck em all" attitude confuse me, because isn't that the sort of attitude that Saddam has? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark V Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 I have to say I was really surprised by what Mandella was saying,he has blown his credibility big time no matter what the rights or wrongs of what Bush wants to do in Iraq. I once had a quasi-religious experience..then I realised I'd turned up the volume. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan South Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by Salty Tonk: [b]8 european nations signed on to back us up today.Let's just suppose we do nothing.What if someone sneaks into the country with a suitcase nuke or a vial of some biological agent and releases it in a major metro area.I would be willing to bet all of you anti-war folks would be crying "We should have done something".[/b][/quote]Your post implies that Iraq is the world's only source of nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons. Should we invade Russia, China, Israel, France, England, South Africa, Germany, North Korea, Pakistan, India, and all other countries who possess WMD's in a massive pre-emptive strike? That's beyond ludicrous. Look, I detest Saddam for his human rights abuses, and I think that he SHOULD be coaxed out of office one way or another. But I don't understand the focus on this ONE country, and I don't understand why that country has to be toppled immediately. The Black Knight always triumphs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realtrance Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 fromZork: [quote]Always? Without a doubt? What if a Democrat came along who truly had vision, who truly could be trusted, who truly had the abilty to lead? Who truly tried to bring all people together, not just Americans, not just their own party, not just the corporations, not just any one group, but all people. Seems impossible, but don't we have to at least be open to the idea for it to happen? [/quote]zork, you asking me to run? How do I get started? Nothing better to do these days. :D I'll give anyone who's been imprisoned and tortured by an apartheid regime, that committed acts of murder, rape, torture and espionage that would make even Saddam Hussein blanch, a little slack when he lashes out like that. A regime that we very actively supported, funded, did business with, provided techniques and police equipment and surveillance equipment to, all the while it was in power. We deserve much more than that mild rebuke from Mandela. I'm not in Bush's, Rice's, Powell's or Rumsfeldt's shoes, so I can't know what they know; there may be tangible reasons for urgency now. There may not be. We may never know. All I _do_ know is that there has been no government throughout human history which has survived very long via acts of repression, surveillance and with primary concern given to security over liberty. There has been no government throughout human history which has managed to increase liberty through large-scale, systematic acts of military aggression. Not many revolutions over the course of history have proceeded without going through periods of severe repression, absolutism, bloodshed and chaos, all of which, when weighed against the liberation intended, weigh most heavily against liberty's favor. If elected, I would make it American policy to provide help where needed to alleviate mass suffering, through food and medical aid, no strings attached, and leave it at that. All other attempts to influence the politics, economics or sovereignty of any other nation, whether in our interest or not, carry with them too much of the burden of repression, and thus the corruption of what America should stand for, to be safe, secure or reasonable for consideration. As to domestic policy, taxes as needed to support the fundamental infrastructures that make our country go: education, transportation, health, housing. We all benefit from the dedication of part of our labor to the support of all of these, therefore none of us should go comparatively free of the burden of paying for them. Taxation would thus be progressive; those who profit the most from the use of this infrastructure, get to pay the highest share for maintaining and improving it. Those who profit the least, get the benefit of it at lowest cost. The fastest path to domestic security is very simple: opportunity for all, and the dignity of all kinds of labor. The bus driver who gets the kids safely to and from public school every day of the school year, deserves to live in as good, or better, conditions than the doctor who saves one old rich man's life. I would use a variety of both incentives and penalties to more equitably reward the value of labor across society. American businesses that choose to operate in politically and economically risky environments, because the workers oppressed in those environments can be paid a fraction abroad for the same labor done at home, are ON THEIR OWN when it comes to cutting costs that way. They will not take my country's army hostage for the sake of "improving the climate for business." Vote for me in 2004. Vote... REALTRANCE! :love: rt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan South Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 Mr. Mandella's record speaks for itself. He's a hundred times the leader that Bush will ever be. After spending twenty-seven years in prison, Mandella embraced his former oppressors as allies and led his country out of the dark ages, a revolution that was waged without weapons, without threats, without posturing. While he was in prison, Mr. Mandella negotiated with the authorities to establish education and better medical care for the inmates, even a prison library. Imagine what an American President might do with that kind of conviction to higher ideals and dedication to the power of statesmanship. The implication that the U.S. was responsible for Mr. Mandella's achievements is beyond ridicule. The U.S. government took no interest in South Africa's apartheid until a grass roots movement rendered the problem too visible to ignore and inspired consumer boycotts of companies that operated in South Africa. If Mr. Mandella received support from America, it was from the PEOPLE of America. The Black Knight always triumphs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salyphus Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 Very well said Dan. And Realtrance, you have my vote :thu: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skip_dup1 Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 indeed, by leaving so much of the architecture of the former regime in place, Mr. Mandela has taken a huge gamble. There are elements of the former military still on the loose, destabilizing things where they can and gathering funds for more trouble. They even had their own Dr. X, a man who among other things, was researching racially targeted viruses. At least he`s in prison, but his research-well, the Germans and Japan did rather well bargaining theirs off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sign Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 Dan, that was the best post I've read in a long time. Thank you bro! :thu: Peace, Han The alchemy of the masters moving molecules of air, we capture by moving particles of iron, so that the poetry of the ancients will echo into the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tnb Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 Bravo, Dan South. As for you knuckleheads that say "Mandela has lost all credibility with me" or "Mandela would still be rotting in jail without the U.S.", grow up. I don't know what kind of friends you folks have, but my friends tell me when I am doing some fucked up shit. That is what friends are for. Pick your favorite leader, you know, the flawless one. If you agree with everything anyone says, you are a sucker and you are about to get fucked (or you probably have and you just are to stupid to realize it). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knunchucksammy Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 Yeah..... what they said.... "your the candy coated shell Richard...." (anyone guess the quote) Matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Pierce Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by Dan South: [b]Mr. Mandella's record speaks for itself. He's a hundred times the leader that Bush will ever be. After spending twenty-seven years in prison, Mandella embraced his former oppressors as allies and led his country out of the dark ages, a revolution that was waged without weapons, without threats, without posturing. While he was in prison, Mr. Mandella negotiated with the authorities to establish education and better medical care for the inmates, even a prison library. Imagine what an American President might do with that kind of conviction to higher ideals and dedication to the power of statesmanship. The implication that the U.S. was responsible for Mr. Mandella's achievements is beyond ridicule. The U.S. government took no interest in South Africa's apartheid until a grass roots movement rendered the problem too visible to ignore and inspired consumer boycotts of companies that operated in South Africa. If Mr. Mandella received support from America, it was from the PEOPLE of America.[/b][/quote]Without the pressure put on South Africa's white government by the US and other Western nations, one of two possible outcomes would be true today: 1) There would still be apartheid. 2) There would be the results of a bloody and vicious revolution. It's true that it's was a grass roots movement that caused the boycotts against South Africa. And that same grass roots movement forced the governments of the US and other countries to impose economic sanctions. But how is that not the US? Wha? Look, that was [b]me[/b] that was boycotting products. That was [b]me[/b] that was writing my congressman. And that is [b]me[/b] that Mandela now says is responsible for atrocities, etc etc. Fuck him. --Dave Make my funk the P-funk. I wants to get funked up. My Funk/Jam originals project: http://www.thefunkery.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 Thanks you Dan South, your comments are like a breath of fresh air amongst some of the fucked up opinions on this thread. I don't believe I've ever seen so much shit talked, by so many, with such authority :rolleyes: "That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." - Banky Edwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lakeside studios Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 Thanks to Dan and Realtrance for informed opinions and joined-up thinking.I think the keyword here is Statesmanship.Mandela is the Great Statesman.The "Bush" administration is completely devoid of statesmanship,and joined-up thinking.They come across like the dangerous amateurs they are.Everything reduced to incomprehensible soundbites.These people are not real leaders. Big Hat. No Cattle. http://www.theshrinks.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salyphus Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by Dave Pierce: [b] It's true that it's was a grass roots movement that caused the boycotts against South Africa. And that same grass roots movement forced the governments of the US and other countries to impose economic sanctions. But how is that not the US? Wha? Look, that was [b]me[/b] that was boycotting products. That was [b]me[/b] that was writing my congressman. And that is [b]me[/b] that Mandela now says is responsible for atrocities, etc etc. Fuck him. --Dave[/b][/quote]Dave, please read this quote again: [quote]Failing to distinguish between the nation and a specific administration is extremely myopic and dangerous thinking. [/quote]You are blurring the line between the United States and its people and the current Bush Administration. I can assure you they are VASTLY different entities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe McDonough Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 If Mandella wants to combat some evil, he should move back in with his ex-wife and turn her around. In a few months when the US has liberated Iraq and 80% of the people there are finally dancing in the streets, what will he, and all the "war pig" distractors, say then? They probably didn't want us involved in Kuwait but now the people of that country have been free for 10 years. Will you then just move on to the next perceived evil of the US and not mention how we helped the poeple of Iraq? Joe McDonough Music Player Network Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by mcdonough@musicplayer.com: [b]If Mandella wants to combat some evil, he should move back in with his ex-wife and turn her around. [/b][/quote]Ever wondered why she's his ex? :rolleyes: "That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." - Banky Edwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CP Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 What the hell are some of you guys talking about? The United States helped to free Mandela? Do you even know the history of South Africa, aparthied, and the United States reluctance to join the rest of the world in criticizing the South African government? It was because of America, England, Israel, and other countries that the South African government stayed in power so long. The United States only joined the rest of the world when the pressure from within this country and without was mounting. Mandela sat in jail for 27 years and the United States government did nothing about it. They did not want a free South Africa, because it would interfere with the minerals they were taking from the country. Here is a brief history of that time I got from an article: "U.S. policy toward South Africa since 1962 has been shaped largely by strategic and economic concerns, including the preservation of access to South Africa's immense mineral resources and the protection of markets and investments. For three decades, U.S. administrations have consistently resisted calls from within and outside South Africa for economic sanctions and have argued for the importance of trade and investments as a means of encouraging change in South Africa's policy of apartheid. In the mid 1970s, mounting international pressure for U.S. to consider economic sanctions against South Africa was rejected. The Carter administration vetoed U.N. resolutions urging reduction of economic ties with South Africa. Responding to critics of U.S. policy in South Africa, President Carter emphasized the positive side of economic relations and enlightened free enterprise as a positive force for change in South Africa. Throughout his tenure, President Reagan studiously avoided criticizing the South African government, repeatedly praising the Botha Administration for making substantial reforms despite the overwhelming evidence of the continued and extensive exploitation and oppression of the black majority in South Africa. He has directly and openly embraced the Botha Administration as "an ally and friend," demonstrating what critics saw as a callous indifference to world-wide demands for human rights and basic freedoms for the blacks. In the mid-1980s, public concern about the Reagan Administration's policy toward South Africa was rapidly translated into political action by a broad-based anti-apartheid movement across the United States.The movement was marked by protest demonstrations in major cities and on college campuses and by a call for tougher U.S. policies toward Pretoria. This campaign included boycotts of banks that made loans to South Africa, the sale of stock in U.S. firms operating in South Africa and the withdrawal of U.S. firms with subsidiaries there. In response to both these pressures and to a declaration by the Botha Administration of a country-wide state of emergency in July 1985, Congress, led by the Congresional Black Caucus, introduced legislation calling for economic sanctions. The House passed a sanctions bill in May 1985, followed soon after by the Senate. The sanctions bills provided for broad restrictions on trade with South Africa and the complete disinvestment of U.S. companies. However, both bills were pre-empted by the introduction of a series of limited economic sanctions in a Presidential Executive Order issued on September 9, 1985. In a statement accompanying the order, President Reagan explained that he opposed economic sanctions and was issuing the order only to forestall Congress from adopting even harsher measures. The Reagan Administration began a concerted effort to ensure that any sanctions that were implemented would be coupled with new and more aggressive efforts to maintain close relations with the South African government. Fundamental to these efforts was the coordination of a public diplomacy campaign, initiated by National Security Decision Directive 187 (NSDD 187), which outlined the Administration's new course of action to maintain a positive image for its policy of "constructive engagement" and for the South African government itself. Approved by the National Security Council in 1985, the public diplomacy strategy calls for the undertaking of a program to gain better public understanding and support of U.S. policy toward South Africa (NSDD 187 and related documents are contained in this collection. Exactly one year later, Congress passed the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986 over President Reagan's veto. The Act prohibited U.S. trade and other economic relations with South Africa. It anticipated the need for sanctions by other countries and specifically directed the president to seek the cooperation of industrialized democracies as well as South Africa's other trading partners. But because of its opposition to sanctions, the Reagan Administration did little to gain cooperation from other countries and refused to support mandatory international sanctions against South Africa in the United Nations." Some of you have a very short memory of what went on during that time. Mandela is one of the few leaders in this world who speaks freely without worrying about losing money or endorsements. That man has given his life for the freedom of his country and people from oppression. You don't have any respect for him? Gimme a break. Like he gives a damn what you think. And how the hell is his remark racist? Yo Dave P, I agree with you on alot of things, but on this one, I have to respectfully disagree. Peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jotown Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 [quote]Some of you have a very short memory of what went on during that time. Mandela is one of the few leaders in this world who speaks freely without worrying about losing money or endorsements. That man has given his life for the freedom of his country and people from oppression. You don't have any respect for him? Gimme a break. Like he gives a damn what you think. And how the hell is his remark racist? [/quote]Right on. Man you guys! Gettin' all worked up over this stuff, when all the guy asked was: Is George Bush a "War Pig"? Jotown:) "It's all good: Except when it's Great" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick K. Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 No. I don't think he's a 'war pig'. Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jotown Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 [quote]Originally posted by Rick Kreuzer: [b]No. I don't think he's a 'war pig'. Rick[/b][/quote]So what kind of Pig do You think he is? :D Jotown:) "It's all good: Except when it's Great" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick K. Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 He wears blue ties sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick K. Posted January 31, 2003 Share Posted January 31, 2003 He wears dark suits most of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.