Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Faeden

Soldier's mom protests near Bush's ranch

413 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Celumnaz

She's a hack. I feel for her loss, but she obviously never respected her son. Boy how the Leftist Media Sure Love Her and Make Sure everyone hears the tripe they want to push.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
twpdyp

While I also feel for her loss, I am also inclined to restate the argument presented earlier. He joined the military of his own free will knowing that death or injury is always a possibility. I pray that I will not have to face a similar situation when my son enlists in the United States Marine Corp this fall. But he is an adult and if this is the path he chooses then I am in full support of his decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PadawanOsswe

when parents b**** about the death of their child that served, it is in no way doing their child service! infact if her son could hear her now I bet he would be deeply disappointed with her reaction. angry.gif he honorably died for his nation therefore she should not be angry at dubya. be angry at the insurgents! respect him for his sacrifice! disgust.gifangry.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wunarmdscissor

one thing though.

although a soldier in a professional army signs up.

we would expect that it is only just wars which we enter.

NOW clearly soldiers know what could happen, but what if it is more the war in which her son died as a pose to her sons death that she is campaigning against.

Democratically elected officials are meant to act properly when in power, ie : not abuse power to their own ends.

now i am pretty sure , in fact i am 100 % sur ethat when all the fallout settles and we know more about bush we will find out some dodgy dealings about the beloved dubya.

if this is the case and we find that the war was about economical gain not only for america but the presidenbt and his benefactors in particular , THEN does this woman have every right to complain that her son perhaps was killed unlwfully.

After all is it not a soldiers right that he die protecting his country's security and not the wallet of the few richest?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
twpdyp
we would expect that it is only just wars which we enter.

"Just" is in the eye of the beholder same as beauty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Faeden
when parents b**** about the death of their child that served, it is in no way doing their child service! infact if her son could hear her now I bet he would be deeply disappointed with her reaction. angry.gif   he honorably died for his nation therefore she should not be angry at dubya. be angry at the insurgents! respect him for his sacrifice! disgust.gif  angry.gif   

Under the circumstances I think she can be forgiven sheesh!!!!

You know the fallen soldier being that he is now in a better more intellectually advanced place, will almost defiantly realise how evil and pathetic war is, because he has seen its left his mother and family devastated, so I think I can pretty much say he is not disappointed in her one bit, I am sure he is supporting her every step of the way.

All the best

Faeden

Edited by Faeden

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
__Kratos__
when parents b**** about the death of their child that served, it is in no way doing their child service! infact if her son could hear her now I bet he would be deeply disappointed with her reaction. angry.gif   he honorably died for his nation therefore she should not be angry at dubya. be angry at the insurgents! respect him for his sacrifice! disgust.gif  angry.gif   

Under the circumstances I think she can be forgiven sheesh!!!!

You know the fallen soldier being that he is now in a better more intellectually advanced place, will almost defiantly realise how evil and pathetic war is, because he has seen its left his mother and family devastated, so I think I can pretty much say he is not disappointed in her one bit, I am sure he is supporting her every step of the way.

All the best

Faeden

781779[/snapback]

Saying as if he was in the intellectually advanced place.... (you seem to think you are there or something) He DIED for his COUNTRY and his FAMILY. How pathic war is... To fight for you way of life, freedoms and family?

Faeden... open up your ESP channels... i'm sending you a message right now... thumbsup.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Faeden

Hi Kratos

Saying as if he was in the intellectually advanced place.... (you seem to think you are there or something)

Come again!!!!! I still have my feet firmly on the ground thank you very much.

He DIED for his COUNTRY and his FAMILY. How pathic war is... To fight for you way of life, freedoms and family?

Really? Most of the world would say he died because of a oil greedy power obsessed tyrant. And Iraq has never threatened my freedom or family.

Faeden... open up your ESP channels... i'm sending you a message right now...

With psychic vampires out there like yourself I think ill keep my ESP channels firmly closed thank you very much Kratos my old chum....

All the best

Faeden

Edited by Faeden

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JayRob303

He DIED for his COUNTRY and his FAMILY. How pathic war is... To fight for you way of life, freedoms and family?

Really? Most of the world would say he died because of a oil greedy power obsessed tyrant. And Iraq has never threatened my freedom or family.

Faeden - Your opinion of the US can be measured up in one simple word - Ignorance...not calling you names, you simply don't know... no.gif

In this country, most of us consider it an honor to protect and serve our country and families...and we take a great deal of pride in doing so. At least I did when I served. This doesn't mean that we are a hate mongering society, it means that we are proud of where we are from...it means that we want to become the protectors of our way of life...it means, when our brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, children, etc... sleep at night, it is due to our pride in the country. No matter the personal cost... Don't get me wrong, our country has it's share of problems....

I'm not exactly sure where your coming from. It seems that in your mind peace is attainable upon a whim...nobody has to fight for anything, it is just given... Didn't your parents, grandparents, heck...even great-grandparents fight a battle or two to obtain the achievements that they reached?

Peace cannot ever be maintained without the threat of war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Faeden

Hi JayRob303

Faeden - Your opinion of the US can be measured up in one simple word - Ignorance...not calling you names, you simply don't know... 

Perhaps your Ignorant as to what I was saying and just don’t know what I am getting at, and twisted my meanings. Its so typical for someone to think that if you attack your politics or leader then you must be attacking America, half your country Jay is also against Bush. My Post was against Bush, not against America as a whole, I was not commenting against America, but against Bush's reasons for going to war, which is what this thread is about.

Its really become non surprising to me that you and others miss understood what I was trying to say, because your only hear what you want to hear..

In this country, most of us consider it an honor to protect and serve our country and families...and we take a great deal of pride in doing so.

Yes, but that is just what I am trying to say, how where you protecting your country by going to war with Iraq? It was not a threat to your country? (it might be now though) The only thing going to Iraq is serving is your oil levels, so I suppose you are protecting something for America. You really need to get that program out of your head that bush has rammed into it.

Didn't your parents, grandparents, heck...even great-grandparents fight a battle or two to obtain the achievements that they reached?

Yes My grandparents fort in WW2, but they where not invading countries because they wanted there oil, theirs a huge difference.......

Peace cannot ever be maintained without the threat of war.

grin2.gif If there was peace, then there would be no threat of war. The fear of war can cause anger and killing, which is what causes them

All the best

Faeden

Edited by Faeden

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JayRob303
Perhaps your Ignorant as to what I was saying and just don’t know what I am getting at, and twisted my meanings. Its so typical for someone to think that if you attack your politics or leader then you must be attacking America, half your country Jay is also against Bush. My Post was against Bush, not against America as a whole, I was not commenting against America, but against Bush's reasons for going to war, which is what this thread is about.

Its really become non surprising to me that you and others miss understood what I was trying to say, because your only hear what you want to hear.

I could very well be 'ignorant' to what your point was...please be more direct and 'to the point'. blink.gif As for attacking our politics and/or leader...all politics are corrupt, and I don't personally care for the choices that our leader has taken...however, the soldiers that are on duty, are there for the sole purpose of defending this country from foreign and domestic. I took your post as an attack on the soldiers of this country...they don't deserve that.

As far as hearing what I want to hear... Why exactly would I want to hear anything to put down my own country...that's just insane!

Yes, but that is just what I am trying to say, how where you protecting your country by going to war with Iraq? It was not a threat to your country? (it might be now though) The only thing going to Iraq is serving is your oil levels, so I suppose you are protecting something for America. You really need to get that program out of your head that bush has rammed into it.

Currently, my country has no business in Iraq. The original purpose that we went there was due to the WMD's that were being developed, and the failure to allow inspectors into certain key area's.

Trust me...I buy my gas weekly for 2 vehicles, roughly $85 per week at $2.50 a gallon...there is absolutely no barrels of oil from Iraq heading to a refinery in America to "serve my oil levels".

As far as, "removing the program out of my head that Bush rammed into it"...Which program are you referring too? w00t.gif

Yes My grandparents fort in WW2, but they where not invading countries because they wanted there oil, theirs a huge difference.......

That's not the reason we invaded...the failure to comply with UN investigators is the reason that we went in...not their oil...

If there was peace, then there would be no threat of war.

But there's not...so we cope with it the best way that we know how... You don't shoot me, I don't shoot you...but we both got guns at each other's heads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Babs

I'm hearing on the tv that this woman is accusing GB of killing her son....everyone on tv is wondering why she doesn't talk about the terrorists that killed her son. blink.gif

It is sad sad.gif ...people are saying she is misguided.

Edited by Babs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
signman

I hope you all get drafted!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JayRob303
I hope you all get drafted!

782125[/snapback]

I served once, and would happily serve again...just too old... mad.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ALNA70
I hope you all get drafted!

782125[/snapback]

It wouldn't bother me at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ALNA70
IMO, he joined the military knowing full well that he may die for his country.

Although his mother deserves and gets mt full sympathy, what does she expect?

It's not like he was drafted or "snatched up" into the military.

777011[/snapback]

Let's compare that to an automatic death penalty for killing a policeman. Didn't the cop know what he was getting into when he signed his application?

778154[/snapback]

Sorry I overlooked your comment earlier.

Yes, I think that an automatic death penalty is a fair penalty for shooting/killing a police officer. In my eyes, an officer of the law is the same as the military. You apply for the position knowing full well that you may die doing your job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wunarmdscissor
That's not the reason we invaded...the failure to comply with UN investigators is the reason that we went in...not their oil...

are u SO sure about that?

Faeden - Your opinion of the US can be measured up in one simple word - Ignorance...not calling you names, you simply don't know

ah but we arent ignorant of the US , we know what drives your country and it IS economic gain always has been.

is it such a leap of faith to say that the war in Iraq is about that too?

Its not as if America has a history of taking the high moral ground in a hurry is it?

And Faedan, the problem with liberal politics is that is never wants anything, its always this view that if someone doesnt directly hurt me then i wont do nething about it. they never want to strengthen the armed forces, becuase tahts aggressive , yet they say they want to defend themselves, they never want to use excessive force , but what if excessive force is being used upon them and theyve all but disbanded their ability to defend itself.

Lets remember one thing here faedan , no matter what you think about ameirca or the UK , Saddam being toppled no matter for what reason was ALWAYS a good thing. Unlike liberals my leftwing point of view is that if someone is being oprressed i will help them wether they be next door or 10 000 miles away , and for the simple reason that i cannot stand by and allow that to happen. no hidden agenda's just that.

whereas the middle of this world would just stand by and allow these monster's to carry on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bathory
ah but we arent ignorant of the US , we know what drives your country and it IS economic gain always has been.

i can't think of any economic gain from the korean/vietnam wars?

Edited by bathory

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wunarmdscissor

can u not?

well i can.

the war was fought to prevent the USSR and China expanding their territories and increasing their allies, which directly impacts on economy.

it had NOTHING to do with protecting the south vietnamese from communism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bathory
the war was fought to prevent the USSR and China expanding their territories and increasing their allies, which directly impacts on economy.

it had NOTHING to do with protecting the south vietnamese from communism.

well thats a pretty broad definition, i would have thought the vietnam/korean wars were more ideologically driven as opposed to economically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jeceris

Subject: Fw: Worth reading and thinking about

An essay by E. L. Doctorow

Edgar Lawrence Doctorow occupies a central position in the history of

American literature. He is generally considered to be among the most

talented, ambitious, and admired novelists of the second half of the

twentieth century. Doctorow has received the National Book Award, two

National Book Critics Circle Awards, the PEN/Faulkner Award, the Edith

Wharton Citation for Fiction, the William Dean Howell Medal of the American

Academy of Arts and Letters, and the residentially conferred National

Humanities Medal.

Doctorow was born in New York City on January 6, 1931. After graduating

with honors from Kenyon College in 1952, he did graduate work at Columbia

University and served in the U.S. Army. Doctorow was senior editor for New

American Library from 1959 to 1964 and then served as editor in chief at

Dial Press until 1969. Since then, he has devoted his time to writing and

teaching. He holds the Glucksman Chair in American Letters at New York

University and over the years has taught at several institutions, including

Yale University Drama School, Princeton University, Sarah Lawrence College,

and the University of California, Irvine.

================================================================

I fault this president (George W. Bush) for not knowing what death is. He

does not suffer the death of our twenty-one year olds who wanted to be what

they could be. On the eve of D-day in 1944 General Eisenhower prayed to God

for the lives of the young soldiers he knew were going to die. He knew what

death was. Even in a justifiable war, a war not of choice but of necessity,

a war of survival, the cost was almost more than Eisenhower could bear.

But this president does not know what death is. He hasn't the mind for it.

You see him joking with the press, peering under the table for the WMDs he

can't seem to find, you see him at rallies strutting up to the stage in

shirt sleeves to the roar of the carefully screened crowd, smiling and

waving, triumphal, a he-man. He does not mourn. He doesn't understand why

he should mourn. He is satisfied during the course of a speech written for

him to look solemn for a moment and speak of the brave young Americans who

made the ultimate sacrifice for their country. But you study him, you look

into his eyes and know he dissembles an emotion which he does not feel in

the depths of his being because he has no capacity for it. He does not feel

a personal responsibility for the thousand dead young men and women who

wanted to be what they could be.

They come to his desk not as youngsters with mothers and fathers or wives

and children who will suffer to the end of their days a terribly torn

fabric of familial relationships and the inconsolable remembrance of

aborted life.... They come to his desk as a political liability which is

why the press is not permitted to photograph the arrival of their coffins

from Iraq.

How then can he mourn? To mourn is to express regret and he regrets

nothing. He does not regret that his reason for going to war was, as he

knew, unsubstantiated by the facts. He does not regret that his bungled

plan for the war's aftermath has made of his mission-accomplished a

disaster. He does not regret that rather than controlling terrorism his war

in Iraq has licensed it. So he never mourns for the dead and crippled

youngsters who have fought this war of his choice. He wanted to go to war

and he did.

He had not the mind to perceive the costs of war, or to listen to those who

knew those costs. He did not understand that you do not go to war when it

is one of the options, but when it is the only option; you go not because

you want to but because you have to. This president knew it would be

difficult for Americans not to cheer the overthrow of a foreign dictator.

He knew that much.

This president and his supporters would seem to have a mind for only one

thing --- to take power, to remain in power, and to use that power for the

sake of themselves and their friends. A war will do that as well as

anything. You become a wartime leader. The country gets behind you. Dissent

becomes inappropriate. And so he does not drop to his knees, he is not

contrite, he does not sit in the church with the grieving parents and wives

and children.

He is the President who does not feel. He does not feel for the families of

the dead; he does not feel for the thirty five million of us who live in

poverty; he does not feel for the forty percent who cannot afford health

insurance; he does not feel for the miners whose lungs are turning black or

for the working people he has deprived of the chance to work overtime at

time-and-a-half to pay their bills --- it is amazing for how many people in

this country this President does not feel.

But he will dissemble feeling. He will say in all sincerity he is relieving

the wealthiest one percent of the population of their tax burden for the

sake of the rest of us, and that he is polluting the air we breathe for the

sake of our economy, and that he is decreasing the safety regulations for

coal mines to save the coal miners' jobs, and that he is depriving workers

of their time-and-a-half benefits for overtime because this is actually a

way to honor them by raising them into the professional class. And this

litany of lies he will versify with reverences for God and the flag and

democracy, when just what he and his party are doing to our democracy is

choking the life out of it.

But there is one more terribly sad thing about all of this. I remember the

millions of people here and around the world who marched against the war.

It was extraordinary, that spontaneously aroused oversoul of alarm and

protest that transcended national borders. Why did it happen? After all,

this was not the only war anyone had ever seen coming. There are little

wars all over the world most of the time. But the cry of protest was the

appalled understanding of millions of people that America was ceding its

role as the last best hope of mankind. It was their perception that the

classic archetype of democracy was morphing into a rogue nation. The

greatest democratic republic in history was turning its back on the future,

using its extraordinary power and standing not to advance the ideal of a

concordance of civilizations but to endorse the kind of tribal combat that

originated with the Neanderthals, a people, now extinct, who could imagine

ensuring their survival by no other means than pre-emptive war.

The president we get is the country we get. With each president the nation

is conformed spiritually. He is the artificer of our malleable national

soul. He proposes not only the laws but the kinds of lawlessness that

govern our lives and invoke our responses. The people he appoints are cast

in his image. The trouble they get into and get us into, is his

characteristic trouble.

Finally the media amplify his character into our moral weather report. He

becomes the face of our sky, the conditions that prevail: How can we

sustain ourselves as the United States of America given the stupid and

ineffective war-making, the constitutionally insensitive lawgiving, and the

monarchal economics of this president? He cannot mourn but is a figure of

such moral vacancy as to make us mourn for ourselves.

E.L. Doctorow

Eastern Shores School Board

http://www.easternshores.qc.ca

thats the best i've ever heard it all summed up about "w"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Faeden

Hi Jayrob

could very well be 'ignorant' to what your point was...please be more direct and 'to the point'.

Em I do not think its possible for me to get anymore direct and to the point than I all ready have been Bush is a war tyrant, oil hungry, capitalist terrorist that cares about nothing more than control and power........... that cares nothing about his people, only controlling how they think, and profiting from anything he can get his hands on including oil from other countries.

As for attacking our politics and/or leader...all politics are corrupt, and I don't personally care for the choices that our leader has taken...however, the soldiers that are on duty, are there for the sole purpose of defending this country from foreign and domestic.

You should care about corruption in politics, because sooner or later its going to effect your country in time, wait!!! it all ready has done. And again Iraq had nothing to do with defending your country, it wasn’t a threat.

I took your post as an attack on the soldiers of this country...they don't deserve that.

Well you took it wrong then didn’t you? I posted this article because I saw it on the news, and it touched me, I posted it because I felt for your soldiers dying because of bush's oil crusade, I was not attacking your soldiers I was sticking up for them.

As far as hearing what I want to hear... Why exactly would I want to hear anything to put down my own country...that's just insane!

I repeat, I am not putting down your country, just your current politics.

Currently, my country has no business in Iraq. The original purpose that we went there was due to the WMD's that were being developed, and the failure to allow inspectors into certain key area's.

Yeah WMD's that where sold to us all as a justification for going to war, he never had any, nor was he making any, yet we are still there "stabilising the country"

Trust me...I buy my gas weekly for 2 vehicles, roughly $85 per week at $2.50 a gallon...there is absolutely no barrels of oil from Iraq heading to a refinery in America to "serve my oil levels".

Now I am really confused????????

As far as, "removing the program out of my head that Bush rammed into it"...Which program are you referring too? 

Its like a Trojan horse, or spywear, you do not know its there until the damage is done.

That's not the reason we invaded...the failure to comply with UN investigators is the reason that we went in...not their oil...

Really? wasn’t THE UN AGAINST THE IRAQ WAR?

But there's not...so we cope with it the best way that we know how... You don't shoot me, I don't shoot you...but we both got guns at each other's heads.

I have no gun to your head my friend just a pretty flower and the offer of a back massage. wub.gif

If you where referring to America and Iraq there, you have to ask who put the gun to ones head first? Iraq was no threat to America, and never had been, yet America and Britain attacked them, so going on that, it looks like it wasn’t Iraq that threw the first stone. President Bush’s oil hungry dad did a good job of that in the first Iraqi war when he was in power.

Hi Babs

I'm hearing on the tv that this woman is accusing GB of killing her son....everyone on tv is wondering why she doesn't talk about the terrorists that killed her son.

You think the Iraqi soldiers fighting against invaders are terrorists? What if Iraq invaded America, and your troops fort back against them, would that make the American troops terrorists too? Remember the war was illegal. Remember both sides think each other are terrorists, maybe some of them are, but war is all about terror, but most are convinced they are doing it for there freedom, and both sides kill each other which is wrong no matter how you look at it. I can imagine this soldiers mother blames the man that killed him, just as much as Bush.

Hi wunarmdscissor

And Faedan, the problem with liberal politics is that is never wants anything, its always this view that if someone doesnt directly hurt me then i wont do nething about it. they never want to strengthen the armed forces, becuase tahts aggressive , yet they say they want to defend themselves, they never want to use excessive force , but what if excessive force is being used upon them and theyve all but disbanded their ability to defend itself.

Well maybe some "liberals" do, but I think things should be done about terrorists on both sides, Usama and Bush a like, I just do not support killing in order to achieving this, because although killing and blowing up people might be a temporary solution, it just makes things worse, and more dangerous in the long run, because more hate, anger, and more revenge is asked for. Words are more powerful than any gun if they are used by the right people, unfortunately both Bush and Usama do not have the intelligence to talk there way out of a school yard brawl.

Lets remember one thing here faedan , no matter what you think about ameirca or the UK , Saddam being toppled no matter for what reason was ALWAYS a good thing. Unlike liberals my leftwing point of view is that if someone is being oprressed i will help them wether they be next door or 10 000 miles away , and for the simple reason that i cannot stand by and allow that to happen. no hidden agenda's just that.

Ahh cant argue that Saddam being gone is a bad thing because it is a good thing, but if you want to go there lets look around the rest of the world shall we where there are much worse and much more evil dictators doing similar and even worse things, such as in Africa, now you do not see Bush and Blair charging to the rescue them and trying to free the people of them country, why??? It might have something to do with they are not oil rich countries.......

whereas the middle of this world would just stand by and allow these monster's to carry on.

I do not think we should stand by and allow these monsters to carry on, the Bush and Blair and Usama monsters should be stopped, and that goes with all the other corrupt political and religious monsters in the world. I just think we need to use our brains, rather than a bullet or bomb, because as you can see it just keeps going on, and on, and on, and its getting boring, and more tragic every day, you know you can use reasoning and clever psychological tactics in order to subdue the enemy. If we put more effort into developing them type of skills, war would become more and more unnecessary. I am aware conflict in some way or another is always going to be apart of the human persona, but the type of evil and horror on all sides in today’s world, is just unacceptable, and I do not agree with it, and I never will, even if was tied to the back of a truck, and dragged naked over a field of broken glass then dipped in after shave.

All the best

Faeden

Edited by Faeden

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wunarmdscissor

bathory , im glad 2 c ur still about these days. u kno as well as i do that it was ofcourse idealogical, but isnt america's ideology wholly based on economic gain, capatism.

Ahh cant argue that Saddam being gone is a bad thing because it is a good thing, but if you want to go there lets look around the rest of the world shall we where there are much worse and much more evil dictators doing similar and even worse things, such as in Africa, now you do not see Bush and Blair charging to the rescue them and trying to free the people of them country, why??? It might have something to do with they are not oil rich countries.......

well what is tony blair doing in africa right now, you call the man a monster, which in my opinion is disgraceful to say the least, so i challenge you to show me one man in the world right now , who has achieved mor ethan he has on third word debt relief and aid.

he HAD to back america HAD to. can you imagine the mess had america rushed in as quickly as theyw ere going to , look at the state theyre in just now.

he took a hit for the rest of us, him joining in was the only way america would slow down , and stop thje risk of causing far more political unrest than they did.

It was blair who made the ameicans go to the UN.

i mean you call the man a monster, he has a family too. him and HIS govvt are responsible for bringing peace in N.Ireland. Another acheivment.

Yet poeple like yourself call him a mosnter.

I know Iraq isnt perfect , i know BUsh' real reasons for goin, but dont you agree that it is at least useful for a left wing country , with a history of peace brokering and perhaps the best knowledge of counter insurgency on the planet be involved.

Live in the real world, we cant all march down the street shouing for peace, teh world dont work that way.

cutting your nose to spite your face is ultimatley counter productive.

another sound reason to go into the middle east and establish a military presence besides the main fact that saddam was an evil butchering prick is that this is where a threat to OUR national security comes from.

No matter what you liberals say , there is a hardcore element within Islam that thinks we have no right to exist, it isnt a small element either, and its in the middle east.

NO matter what we do they;ll hate us.

Just look at the London bombers 1 of them was living a life of luxury here yet still hated us ,wheres our oprression there???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Faeden

Hi wunarmdscissor

well what is tony blair doing in africa right now, you call the man a monster, which in my opinion is disgraceful to say the least, so i challenge you to show me one man in the world right now , who has achieved mor ethan he has on third word debt relief and aid.

My calling Blair a monster is based on that he followed an even worse monster into an illegal war, I am not saying Blair has not done positive things, and that he doesn’t have some compassion in there somewhere, but he has to, to keep people on his side, and so he can use it to defend him self, just as you have done here. Bush also gives aid to other countries, but it never gets there as fast as his bombs do if he has a problem with them, or wants something that will fatten his political pocket or financial state. America as a whole actually gives more to 3rd world countries than any other, I do not deny that, but I think he does it because he would not get away with not giving. If he could get away with it, he would, the problem with Bush is, he has no understanding what so ever as to the value of human life. He does what will benefit him, and nothing more, even when he is giving to people that need it, its for political gain, not because he cares. Granted Blair is not as bad as Bush, he is more like the pet cat to the villain Bush, like you seen in the Bond movies.

he HAD to back america HAD to. can you imagine the mess had america rushed in as quickly as theyw ere going to , look at the state theyre in just now.

he took a hit for the rest of us, him joining in was the only way America would slow down , and stop thje risk of causing far more political unrest than they did.

It was blair who made the ameicans go to the UN.

You talk as if Blair knew in his heart that the war was wrong, but only went because he had to support Bush, so Blair only supported Bush because he knew it was wrong, and that it would have slowed down Bush’s progress, I thought Blair still supports the war?.... And again the UN was against the war.

i mean you call the man a monster, he has a family too. him and HIS govvt are responsible for bringing peace in N.Ireland. Another acheivment.

Yet poeple like yourself call him a mosnter.

All the soldiers have families to, so did all the innocent people that died in Iraq and in the twin towers have families, tragic isn’t it on all sides? The fact that Blair has a family should have been enough to make him understand that so do the ones he is about to slaughter.

Live in the real world, we cant all march down the street shouing for peace, teh world dont work that way.

Unfortunately you are correct here, but I can always hope, I believe anything is possible, and just because I know the world doesn’t work like that doesn’t mean I do not believe its possible, and I am not going to support violence just because violence is the way of so many.

No matter what you liberals say , there is a hardcore element within Islam that thinks we have no right to exist, it isnt a small element either, and its in the middle east.

NO matter what we do they;ll hate us.

Just look at the London bombers 1 of them was living a life of luxury here yet still hated us ,wheres our oprression there???

Well Islam seemed to have no interest in us until we started pushing out values on them, and invading there countries just because we did not agree with the way they lived. You know they think how we live is equally as evil, and you do not see them invading our countries and imposing laws on us, just because they think it will better our way of life.

Yes there are a lot of evil Muslims that are ignorant, and I do not agree with there way of life, but I do not think we should go charging in there, and tell them they are wrong and killing them, because its not my country, we have no right to play world police, we had problems of our own, and now we have even more problems because we refuse to recognise what I just talked about. OK maybe calling Blair a monster was a little over the top, but he is certainly stupid, and i do not support him one bit.

All the best

Faeden

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bathory
bathory , im glad 2 c ur still about these days. u kno as well as i do that it was ofcourse idealogical, but isnt america's ideology wholly based on economic gain, capatism.

perhaps, but there is a significant difference between fighting an ideological war and a war alledgedly (just to be clear i do disagree with your cited reason for the war in iraq) to procure natural resources. At least thats how i see it anyways:P

And again the UN was against the war.

so what? do you even realise the extent of curruption within the UN? Libya headed the UN Human rights commision for gods sake

Well Islam seemed to have no interest in us until we started pushing out values on them, and invading there countries just because we did not agree with the way they lived.

such as? which countries did the US invade pre 9/11?

Kuwait maybe? i can really see how stopping that secular Saddam from invading Kuwait must have really irked those religious fundamentalists! stop attributing the blame towards the west and actually look at fundamentalist islam for what it is.

why oh why don't we get moonbat lefties defending neo-nazis and other such far right groups when they are more than comfortable defending the actions of islamic fascists, i think its the brown skin

Edited by bathory

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.