The Bush Legacy, As Seen From London

[midcan5]

The Bush Legacy, As Seen From London

By Ken Silverstein

From The Independent:

"So perhaps Mr. Bush’s most significant legacy, as far as Britain is concerned, will be the destruction of the instinctive trust of America and its leaders that once prevailed here. It is no exaggeration to say that Mr Bush has done more damage to relations between our two nations than any president in living memory…

And whatever the future holds for transatlantic relations, there will be very few in this country who watched President Bush’s plane depart yesterday without a feeling of profound relief that the end of this disastrous presidency is finally in sight."

http://harpers.org/subjects/WashingtonBabylon

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/leading-articles/leading-article-the-tragic-legacy-of-a-disastrous-president-848511.html

[darin]

The Bush Legacy as seen from Iraq:

http://www.dailyfrappe.com/Portals/0/images/stories/NEWS/2006/May/iraqi_voter.jpg

(shrug).

[glockmail]

So the Brits have stoopid Liberal pundits too? Whouda thunk? :lame2:

[namvet]

The Bush Legacy, As Seen From London

By Ken Silverstein

From The Independent:

"So perhaps Mr. Bush’s most significant legacy, as far as Britain is concerned, will be the destruction of the instinctive trust of America and its leaders that once prevailed here. It is no exaggeration to say that Mr Bush has done more damage to relations between our two nations than any president in living memory…

And whatever the future holds for transatlantic relations, there will be very few in this country who watched President Bush’s plane depart yesterday without a feeling of profound relief that the end of this disastrous presidency is finally in sight."

http://harpers.org/subjects/WashingtonBabylon

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/leading-articles/leading-article-the-tragic-legacy-of-a-disastrous-president-848511.html

your pardon. from the liberal party in london. do your homework. we're sick of doing it for you

[stephanie]

They ought to worry about their legacy they are leaving for their children, and we'll worry about ours..

[namvet]

they are infested and over run by muslims.

[midcan5]

You do realize you are all becoming equivalent to the dodo bird, pretty much extinct. Heard yesterday 84% oppose the way Bush is managing the country. But you will all have the odd distinction of having voted for and supported the worst president in our history, odd bragging right, but for the empty headed it is something.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/profile/story/9961300/the_worst_president_in_history

[namvet]

You do realize you are all becoming equivalent to the dodo bird, pretty much extinct. Heard yesterday 84% oppose the way Bush is managing the country. But you will all have the odd distinction of having voted for and supported the worst president in our history, odd bragging right, but for the empty headed it is something.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/profile/story/9961300/the_worst_president_in_history

your in the minority here. but of course we are all wrong and your the leader. right. is that link for real??? the rolling stone heads??????:laugh2:

[midcan5]

your in the minority here. but of course we are all wrong and your the leader. right. is that link for real??? the rolling stone heads??????:laugh2:

"Historians are loath to predict the future. It is impossible to say with certainty how Bush will be ranked in, say, 2050. But somehow, in his first six years in office he has managed to combine the lapses of leadership, misguided policies and abuse of power of his failed predecessors. I think there is no alternative but to rank him as the worst president in U.S. history."

http://hnn.us/articles/48916.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/01/AR2006120101509.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/01/politics/main1673345.shtml

http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north477.html

[namvet]

"Historians are loath to predict the future. It is impossible to say with certainty how Bush will be ranked in, say, 2050. But somehow, in his first six years in office he has managed to combine the lapses of leadership, misguided policies and abuse of power of his failed predecessors. I think there is no alternative but to rank him as the worst president in U.S. history."

http://hnn.us/articles/48916.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/01/AR2006120101509.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/01/politics/main1673345.shtml

http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north477.html

the worst was Klinton and Carter. democratic failures. and lets throw in another democrap for starting a war - LBJ.

[Hagbard Celine]

The Bush Legacy as seen from Iraq:

http://www.dailyfrappe.com/Portals/0/images/stories/NEWS/2006/May/iraqi_voter.jpg

(shrug).

Oh what a rosey view we are presented with :rolleyes:

This is more realistic:
http://www.thelastminuteblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/bush-faces-of-the-dead.jpg

This is by far one of the more tame images that can be gleamed from the simple Google search "Iraq photos." Sorry if reality is a little harder to swallow.

[namvet]

Oh what a rosey view we are presented with :rolleyes:

This is more realistic:
http://www.thelastminuteblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/bush-faces-of-the-dead.jpg

This is by far one of the more tame images that can be gleamed from the simple Google search "Iraq photos." Sorry if reality is a little harder to swallow.

that is just halarious. what liberal moron came up with that anyway. its been around for years. hahaha:laugh2:

[Hagbard Celine]

that is just halarious. what liberal moron came up with that anyway. its been around for years. hahaha:laugh2:

It's the faces of the soldiers Bush sent to their deaths so that we can effectively police Iraq while the Iraqi "government" treads water indefinately.
If you want, I can post pictures of all the grotesquely maimed bodies this war has left in its wake. That might upset some of the conservatives on this site though, ya'll do enjoy pretending that it's all been a bed of roses over there since Prince Dubya marched-in and "liberated" the place. :rolleyes: Confronting ya'll with reality always seems to get me negatively repped for some reason.

[namvet]

It's the faces of the soldiers Bush sent to their deaths so that we can effectively police Iraq while the Iraqi "government" treads water indefinately.
If you want, I can post pictures of all the grotesquely maimed bodies this war has left in its wake. That might upset some of the conservatives on this site though, ya'll do enjoy pretending that it's all been a bed of roses over there since Prince Dubya marched-in and "liberated" the place. :rolleyes: Confronting ya'll with reality always seems to get me negatively repped for some reason.

of couse having served you've seen it up close right???? right???? go ahead post em. but if you don't mind post what they found in the concentration camps. the Bataan death march. the human butch shops of Japan. or is this not worth your time/politics ?????

[Hagbard Celine]

of couse having served you've seen it up close right???? right???? go ahead post em. but if you don't mind post what they found in the concentration camps. the Bataan death march. the human butch shops of Japan. or is this not worth your time/politics ?????

Oh, so the fact that I haven't had a military job means I'm not entitled to an opinion? That's horsesh*t man. Plain and simple. I can look at a picture of a child with his leg blown off and tell you that this war is bullsh*t without ever having worked in the military. It's not rocket science--or did your grunt work in the military require a rocket science degree? No, no it didn't. If you can read, then you're qualified enough to know that this military misadventure has overstepped the bounds of sanity, legality, humanity and intelligence.
The horrors of past wars should be lesson enough for us to not march into this stuff willy-nilly. You'd think. If you really want me to post son-sequitur photos from past wars on this thread (about the Bush Legacy) then let me know and I will. In the meantime, I'll stick to the subject of the thread if you don't mind.

[April15]

The Bush Legacy as seen from Iraq:

http://www.dailyfrappe.com/Portals/0/images/stories/NEWS/2006/May/iraqi_voter.jpg

(shrug).And that was how many years ago? And what has been the outcome of a jubalent freed people?

[namvet]

Oh, so the fact that I haven't had a military job means I'm not entitled to an opinion? That's horsesh*t man. Plain and simple. I can look at a picture of a child with his leg blown off and tell you that this war is bullsh*t without ever having worked in the military. It's not rocket science--or did your grunt work in the military require a rocket science degree? No, no it didn't. If you can read, then you're qualified enough to know that this military misadventure has overstepped the bounds of sanity, legality, humanity and intelligence.
The horrors of past wars should be lesson enough for us to not march into this stuff willy-nilly. You'd think. If you really want me to post son-sequitur photos from past wars on this thread (about the Bush Legacy) then let me know and I will. In the meantime, I'll stick to the subject of the thread if you don't mind.

over reacting are we???? post the pics and stop complaining.

[Hagbard Celine]

over reacting are we???? post the pics and stop complaining.

Haha, that was kinda pissy wasn't it? :-P

[avatar4321]

You do realize you are all becoming equivalent to the dodo bird, pretty much extinct. Heard yesterday 84% oppose the way Bush is managing the country. But you will all have the odd distinction of having voted for and supported the worst president in our history, odd bragging right, but for the empty headed it is something.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/profile/story/9961300/the_worst_president_in_history

James Buchanan is the worst President in History.

Although, if Obama wins he might be able to challenge.

[avatar4321]

Oh, so the fact that I haven't had a military job means I'm not entitled to an opinion? That's horsesh*t man. Plain and simple. I can look at a picture of a child with his leg blown off and tell you that this war is bullsh*t without ever having worked in the military. It's not rocket science--or did your grunt work in the military require a rocket science degree? No, no it didn't. If you can read, then you're qualified enough to know that this military misadventure has overstepped the bounds of sanity, legality, humanity and intelligence.
The horrors of past wars should be lesson enough for us to not march into this stuff willy-nilly. You'd think. If you really want me to post son-sequitur photos from past wars on this thread (about the Bush Legacy) then let me know and I will. In the meantime, I'll stick to the subject of the thread if you don't mind.

You are straying from the liberal playbook. Because the liberal talking point for years is that you aren't entitled to an opinion if you haven't been in the military. But then i guess that only applies to conservatives

However, if you'd like to present a better argument than "You're stupid if you don't agree with me." I am sure we could have an interesting discussion.

[avatar4321]

And that was how many years ago? And what has been the outcome of a jubalent freed people?

Increase security, freedom, and posperity. What's wrong with that?

[April15]

Increase security, freedom, and posperity. What's wrong with that?Not as much as they had before we went in though!

[diuretic]

You'd have to have your head firmly up your arse to not realise the damage Bush has done to the reputation of the US internationally. I know you don't care, but that doesn't alter the fact that the US is now seen as more of a threat to world peace than the guarantor of world peace that she used to be. That's a terrible legacy and it's just one reason that Bush will be judged harshly by history.

[Gaffer]

You'd have to have your head firmly up your arse to not realise the damage Bush has done to the reputation of the US internationally. I know you don't care, but that doesn't alter the fact that the US is now seen as more of a threat to world peace than the guarantor of world peace that she used to be. That's a terrible legacy and it's just one reason that Bush will be judged harshly by history.

Could you expand on that? How is the US seen as a threat to world peace? Do you feel threatened by us? Do the Brits feel threatened? How is taking down dictators a threat to the world? The only ones that need to feel threatened are those that are doing evil things that threaten our security. Kinda like a criminal feels threatened by the police.

[diuretic]

Could you expand on that? How is the US seen as a threat to world peace? Do you feel threatened by us? Do the Brits feel threatened? How is taking down dictators a threat to the world? The only ones that need to feel threatened are those that are doing evil things that threaten our security. Kinda like a criminal feels threatened by the police.

Come on, let's dump the discredited "take out the dictator" argument. If that was it was about then how come there are so many dictators still dictating in the world?

Why is Mugabe still slaughtering people in Zimbabwe? He's a dictator. It would be easy to take him out, take over Zimbabwe, start to help it recover. No oil though. No advantage. No invasion to stop the dictator.

You can put sugar on shit but you still can't eat it.

Right, now, to the question. The invasion of Iraq destabilised a good part of the Middle East, a locale not known for being exactly calm. That was either evil policy or bloody stupid policy. Either way it was bad policy. But the message to the rest of the world was, "if we want it, we'll take it".

[manu1959]

when france quits for the third time in 100 years and your country is at risk of being overrun again ... don't call us we will call you......

i really wish the us would close all foreign military bases and cut off all foreign aid.....

[diuretic]

when france quits for the third time in 100 years and your country is at risk of being overrun again ... don't call us we will call you......

i really wish the us would close all foreign military bases and cut off all foreign aid.....

France quits what? And whose country is at risk of being overrun? As for your foreign bases, the ones in my country (Australia) have done nothing for us, they were part of your defence and we were okay with letting you have the bases here because we had a treaty to help one another.

But really that's a dummy spitting attitude, just as well foreign relations aren't conduct by dummy-spitters. Try and tuck that bottom lip back in and pay attention.

It's about the Bush Administration. For the last 8 years they've fucked you over and fucked everyone else over. We know that. Read the articles again.
Blowjob Bill might have been a bit greasy but he knew that it's in America's interests to be a good world citizen and not the planetary bully. BushCheney kicked sand in everyone else's faces, what else did they expect?

Anyway, time to repair things all round early next year.

[glockmail]

You'd have to have your head firmly up your arse to not realise the damage Bush has done to the reputation of the US internationally. I know you don't care, but that doesn't alter the fact that the US is now seen as more of a threat to world peace than the guarantor of world peace that she used to be. That's a terrible legacy and it's just one reason that Bush will be judged harshly by history. Only pussies would think that.

[glockmail]

And that was how many years ago? And what has been the outcome of a jubalent freed people?
An increase in personal freedom, wealth and security.

[Nukeman]

. But the message to the rest of the world was, "if we want it, we'll take it".

I'll play, What did we take??? What have WE gained by this war?? How have we improved OUR lives by this fighting??

I love how the rest of the freaking world says we did this for US and yet we gained NOTHING by removing this vile evil dictator....

Please answer my questions if you would!!!!

[stephanie]

You'd have to have your head firmly up your arse to not realise the damage Bush has done to the reputation of the US internationally. I know you don't care, but that doesn't alter the fact that the US is now seen as more of a threat to world peace than the guarantor of world peace that she used to be. That's a terrible legacy and it's just one reason that Bush will be judged harshly by history.

What has President Bush done to Australia for you to feel this way about him???

It's funny seeing the liberal BDS from other countries who have not been harmed in any way by President Bush, yet they spew the same ole, same ole..

And you're right about one thing, most of us here in the U.S., don't care what you all think about us..:cheers2:

[Hagbard Celine]

You are straying from the liberal playbook. Because the liberal talking point for years is that you aren't entitled to an opinion if you haven't been in the military. But then i guess that only applies to conservatives

However, if you'd like to present a better argument than "You're stupid if you don't agree with me." I am sure we could have an interesting discussion.

I don't play by the "liberal playbook," whatever that is. :rolleyes: I'm not a partisan hack like you :eek:

[Hagbard Celine]

Could you expand on that? How is the US seen as a threat to world peace? Do you feel threatened by us? Do the Brits feel threatened? How is taking down dictators a threat to the world? The only ones that need to feel threatened are those that are doing evil things that threaten our security. Kinda like a criminal feels threatened by the police.

Everyone does. By invading Iraq with no basis or reason other than "preemption," we opened Pandora's box, meaning we showed the world that we're willing to flout international opinion and/or law and invade whoever the hell we want with the blanket excuse of preemptively stopping a future, speculative attack. It would be like if the government suddenly issued a law that said it could arrest and imprison anyone who an officer suspected could commit a crime in the future.

[avatar4321]

I don't play by the "liberal playbook," whatever that is. :rolleyes: I'm not a partisan hack like you :eek:

You have me dying of laughter here.

[glockmail]

Everyone does. By invading Iraq with no basis or reason other than "preemption," we opened Pandora's box, meaning we showed the world that we're willing to flout international opinion and/or law and invade whoever the hell we want with the blanket excuse of preemptively stopping a future, speculative attack. It would be like if the government suddenly issued a law that said it could arrest and imprison anyone who an officer suspected could commit a crime in the future.
I love this "international law" shit, like it matters in war. But even by that measure, the US was entirely justified because Saddam broke his agreement with us to end Gulf War 1.

[April15]

An increase in personal freedom, wealth and security.The Kurds in the north have what you describe but they did that even with saddam in power. Now without saddam the Turks are challenging the Kurds.
For my money the invasion of Iraq was off by a letter or two, Iran. But with all the high mucky mucks pushing bush to invade Iran what else could he do? Like a rock only dumber!

[Hagbard Celine]

I love this "international law" shit, like it matters in war. But even by that measure, the US was entirely justified because Saddam broke his agreement with us to end Gulf War 1.

Oh yeah! It's really smart to just say "f*ck you" to the rest of the world. That's always smart. Who needs allies anyway right?

[namvet]

Oh yeah! It's really smart to just say "f*ck you" to the rest of the world. That's always smart. Who needs allies anyway right?

why don't you go to eatshitamerica.com they would love to hear your rants. which don't get raves here BTY

[Hagbard Celine]

why don't you go to eatshitamerica.com they would love to hear your rants. which don't get raves here BTY

Sorry, never been there, but then again I don't feed my brain the information equivalent of excrement like you seem to do. (shrug) I mean how else would you be so familiar with such an obviously anti-American website anyway unless of course you were a frequent visitory in the first place? :dunno:

[namvet]

Sorry, never been there, but then again I don't feed my brain the information equivalent of excrement like you seem to do. (shrug) I mean how else would you be so familiar with such an obviously anti-American website anyway unless of course you were a frequent visitory in the first place? :dunno:


well i need someone to slam. tag. your it...................:laugh2:

[glockmail]

The Kurds in the north have what you describe but they did that even with saddam in power. Now without saddam the Turks are challenging the Kurds.
For my money the invasion of Iraq was off by a letter or two, Iran. But with all the high mucky mucks pushing bush to invade Iran what else could he do? Like a rock only dumber!


Yes the Kurds had a nice, peaceful existence under Saddam. :slap:

[actsnoblemartin]

they are infested and over run by muslims.

no :slap:, sand niggers :laugh2:

[glockmail]

Oh yeah! It's really smart to just say "f*ck you" to the rest of the world. That's always smart. Who needs allies anyway right? When the Germans and French are selling shit to Saddam "illegally" and don't want to get caught so stall efforts to get the UN lined up against Saddam then yes I say FU to the Germans and the French.

[namvet]

When the Germans and French are selling shit to Saddam "illegally" and don't want to get caught so stall efforts to get the UN lined up against Saddam then yes I say FU to the Germans and the French.

the frenchies were selling him military replacement parts. the Germans high tech military electronics and putin was drilling for oil.

all on the Klinton watch. and UN was up to their ass in it to. gee. no wonder they refused to fight........................

[Hagbard Celine]

Yes the Kurds had a nice, peaceful existence under Saddam. :slap:

That's not what she meant and you know it man. Why's everything got to be an extreme with you? If we criticize the Iraq invasion, it doesn't mean that we think life under Saddam was all roses and buttercups. You need to stop reading things into our comments that aren't there.

[Hagbard Celine]

no :slap:, sand niggers :laugh2:

Why not just get the word "Ignoramus" tatooed on your forehead if you're going to go around saying racist garbage like this?

[Hagbard Celine]

When the Germans and French are selling shit to Saddam "illegally" and don't want to get caught so stall efforts to get the UN lined up against Saddam then yes I say FU to the Germans and the French.

That's not why they wanted to stall our invasion. They wanted to stall our invasion because they both used to import a sh*tload of oil from Iraq--not to mention, if they'd succeeded in stopping our invasion, they would've done us all a favor. Don't tell me you were one of the morons pouring French wine out into the streets and eating "freedom" fries :rolleyes:

[Hagbard Celine]

the frenchies were selling him military replacement parts. the Germans high tech military electronics and putin was drilling for oil.

all on the Klinton watch. and UN was up to their ass in it to. gee. no wonder they refused to fight........................

Ooh. I like how you used a "K" instead of "C" for Clinton. Hmm. Very clever. Think of that all by yourself? I doubt it. Pppbbbbttt.

[glockmail]

That's not why they wanted to stall our invasion. They wanted to stall our invasion because they both used to import a sh*tload of oil from Iraq--not to mention, if they'd succeeded in stopping our invasion, they would've done us all a favor. Don't tell me you were one of the morons pouring French wine out into the streets and eating "freedom" fries :rolleyes: That was one reason but the main reason was the shit that they were selling them in return for that oil. I noticed that you didn't deny that they were doing that.

So now someone who protests peacefully is a moron? That would make most libs morons.

[Hagbard Celine]

That was one reason but the main reason was the shit that they were selling them in return for that oil. I noticed that you didn't deny that they were doing that.

So now someone who protests peacefully is a moron? That would make most libs morons.

When the protest is unwarranted, wasteful and stoopid, yes, protesting peacefully makes a person a moron. Judging the act without also judging the motivation is short-sighted glock.

[Yurt]

When the protest is unwarranted, wasteful and stoopid, yes, protesting peacefully makes a person a moron. Judging the act without also judging the motivation is short-sighted glock.

how 1st amendment of you to judge that speech...do you support obscene speech, like FUCK THE DRAFT, or PORN?

saying the word fuck is unwarranted, unnecessary, wasteful and stoopid, could have just said - DRAFT IS HARMFUL

are you jiggy wit it?

smith cracks me up

[glockmail]

When the protest is unwarranted, wasteful and stoopid, yes, protesting peacefully makes a person a moron. Judging the act without also judging the motivation is short-sighted glock.

Well to answer your ealier question I wasn't pouring out any French wine, and if I had any I would have just drunk it on not re-bought. The fact is that I have been boycotting French products for years because their stuff sucks, and tye French politicans suck even worse. The only exception is French vodka which I buy once a year or so to get those nice Martini glasses.

And I made my judgement based on their motivation, which was to screw the US and line their own pigeon-eating pockets.

[April15]

Yes the Kurds had a nice, peaceful existence under Saddam. :slap:After the 91 war not before.

[Yurt]

After the 91 war not before.

are you stupid or something?

[red states rule]

When the protest is unwarranted, wasteful and stoopid, yes, protesting peacefully makes a person a moron. Judging the act without also judging the motivation is short-sighted glock.

That applies to all the idiots who show up at anti war/pro terrorist rallies. Check out the liberal moonbats who show their "support" for the troops

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/protestphotos.html

[red states rule]

You do realize you are all becoming equivalent to the dodo bird, pretty much extinct. Heard yesterday 84% oppose the way Bush is managing the country. But you will all have the odd distinction of having voted for and supported the worst president in our history, odd bragging right, but for the empty headed it is something.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/profile/story/9961300/the_worst_president_in_history

I have also noticed the Reid/Pelosi run Congress has an approval number of about 18%

[diuretic]

What has President Bush done to Australia for you to feel this way about him???

It's funny seeing the liberal BDS from other countries who have not been harmed in any way by President Bush, yet they spew the same ole, same ole..

And you're right about one thing, most of us here in the U.S., don't care what you all think about us..:cheers2:

I don't have to suffer something to see the deleterious effect it can have on others. I abhor what the dictator Mugabe is doing in Zimbabwe but it doesn't touch me or my country personally.

[red states rule]

I love this "international law" shit, like it matters in war. But even by that measure, the US was entirely justified because Saddam broke his agreement with us to end Gulf War 1.

Libs will tell you 9/11 was more like an air traffic violation, you know kind of like running a stop sign and then hitting a mail box.

A stiff fine and stern warning would have solved the issue

[diuretic]

Since Saddam is being brought up here I have to ask when did he become a dictator who had to be removed? Was it when he stopped cooperating with the US? Was it okay for him to be a dictator provided he was hand in glove with US interests? I think it was. That photograph of Rumsfeld glad-handing the dictator just won't go away will it?

[Hagbard Celine]

how 1st amendment of you to judge that speech...do you support obscene speech, like FUCK THE DRAFT, or PORN?

saying the word fuck is unwarranted, unnecessary, wasteful and stoopid, could have just said - DRAFT IS HARMFUL

are you jiggy wit it?

smith cracks me up

You act like you've "caught" me at something :rolleyes: Adhering to the first amendment doesn't restrict me from having an opinion. Do I really have to explain this stuff?

[red states rule]

Since Saddam is being brought up here I have to ask when did he become a dictator who had to be removed? Was it when he stopped cooperating with the US? Was it okay for him to be a dictator provided he was hand in glove with US interests? I think it was. That photograph of Rumsfeld glad-handing the dictator just won't go away will it?

Got this from a friend via email, and it sums up how libs see dealing with evil


A Special Message of Hope from Barack Obama

Dear Friend

You may feel this is a time for celebration, you may feel that finally, at long last, our crippled and divided nation, where the scars of racism and oppression are branded deep into the mean, shrivelled souls of the 450 million unhappy people who shamefacedly call themselves “Americans”, we are at last on the long road to becoming the country that our college professors, our rock musicians, our Hollywood megastars and George Soros have long believed we could be – and I am not saying you are wrong.

No, that’s not what I’m saying. That kind of confrontation is not my way. For too long our anguished and Bush-ridden nation has taken the path of confrontation, has put on its Angry Face, when all along there was another way, a way of reasonable negotiation and an honest search for understanding

Imagine, if President Roosevelt had shown the courage to sit down with Adolf Hitler and seek for a common ground, had FDR just come right out and said “Mein Fuhrer, what is it exactly that I can do for you and how soon may I do it?”, instead of rushing blindly into an illegal and unprovoked war, maybe millions of young Germans would be alive today and our country would not have tasted the bitter ashes of defeat. It’s this other way, a non-threatening and non-confrontational way, which I’ll bring to my frank personal negotiations with the Iranians when I fly to Iranistania with the surrender documents under my sinewy arm.

Where was I? Oh yeah – party time. Anyway, sure you can celebrate now. I mean, look at Michelle. If I’d known that this is what it would take to finally put a smile on that sour little face of hers, I’d have started running as soon as I was legal. You think Hillary’s bad tempered? Hillary’s like Gidget compared to Michelle, believe you me. But I digress. My point is, hey, let’s not go nuts with the victory celebrations, that’s all I’m saying.

Let’s remember how much work still needs to be done. While I honor my opponent’s service to this country, no matter how misguided, morally dubious or, indeed, criminal that service may have been, I still feel that I, not a white-haired, doddering, drooling, half-senile old man who has God only knows how many things medically wrong with him but whom I respect profoundly as a friend and colleague, since the politics of personal attack have never been my way, is able to deliver the sort of change our bitter, angry and confused people want and deserve.

The only person who can deliver that change, whether you want it or not, is me. As long as our laziest and most stupid citizens are denied the fruits of the American Dream, as long as we continue to refuse to accept our deserved defeat and humiliation in Iraq, as long as we continue to think of ourselves as “something special”, instead of as the sullen collection of planet-raping, minority-oppressing, gun-hugging and sexually inadequate nobodies that you all are, well, the need for change will be there and so will I.

So, to sum up: America bad, Barack good. Enjoy the fruits of my victory now but remember to vote in November and, once that formality is out of the way, we can really get down to the serious business of making this a country Michelle and I can finally be proud of.
Have a nice day

Your pal

Barack

[namvet]

That applies to all the idiots who show up at anti war/pro terrorist rallies. Check out the liberal moonbats who show their "support" for the troops

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/protestphotos.html

well lets how they do at the DNC convention. Denver is ramping up for a knock down drag out............:slap:

[red states rule]

well lets how they do at the DNC convention. Denver is ramping up for a knock down drag out............:slap:

and the Denver Police are stocking up on riot gear. We could see another Chicago '68, as the peace loving libs gather to tear down the city to make their points

[namvet]

Ooh. I like how you used a "K" instead of "C" for Clinton. Hmm. Very clever. Think of that all by yourself? I doubt it. Pppbbbbttt.

my my. we are pissy today. you know i love the quicksand you walk on.

[namvet]

Why not just get the word "Ignoramus" tatooed on your forehead if you're going to go around saying racist garbage like this?

there are boards that will ban for saying that. and you won't even know your gone !!!!!!!!!!

[red states rule]

my my. we are pissy today. you know i love the quicksand you walk on.

Hag is the boards gentle ray of sunstroke

[namvet]

I have also noticed the Reid/Pelosi run Congress has an approval number of about 18%


no kiddin???? that high????

[red states rule]

no kiddin???? that high????

The Dem Congress is about 10 points LOWER then Pres Bush :laugh2:

[Hagbard Celine]

there are boards that will ban for saying that. and you won't even know your gone !!!!!!!!!!

Settle down Nancy, you aren't going to get rid of me that easily. We happen to have a very gracious staff working for us here at DP and they don't ban people for life unless you call them at home and threaten them with biker gang violence.:cheers2:

[namvet]

Settle down Nancy, you aren't going to get rid of me that easily. We happen to have a very gracious staff working for us here at DP and they don't ban people for life unless you call them at home and threaten them with biker gang violence.:cheers2:

i wasn't talking about you. this time............

[namvet]

and the Denver Police are stocking up on riot gear. We could see another Chicago '68, as the peace loving libs gather to tear down the city to make their points

I missed the 68'. i was in nam. but i hope they put up one hell of a fight. I alway wanted to see a convention riot. hopefully......................

[red states rule]

I missed the 68'. i was in nam. but i hope they put up one hell of a fight. I alway wanted to see a convention riot. hopefully......................

It will be the most entertaining part of the convention

Recreate ‘68 threatens Democrat convention in Denver
By Michelle Malkin • March 21, 2008 09:46 AM “When things blow up because the police have to enforce a permit that the Democrats got, don’t blame us for that.”

Remember that quote. Protest organizers from “Recreate ‘68″ are throwing a tantrum over the Democrat Party’s permit process. Will they ignore it as an idle threat? Or, keeping in mind the history of left-wing violence against law enforcement, will they take the nutballs seriously for once? Via the Rocky Mountain News (hat tip - reader Katharine):


Denver could face a “dangerous situation” on the first day of the Democratic National Convention, war protesters said Thursday, after losing a coveted permit for Civic Center to the convention host committee.

“When things blow up because the police have to enforce a permit that the Democrats got, don’t blame us for that,” said Glenn Spagnuolo, an organizer for the Re-create 68 Alliance.

“Blame the Democrats for trying to silence dissent in the city of Denver.”

The lottery for permits to protest, pray or hold other events in city parks during the DNC Aug. 24 through 28 resumed Thursday after the city bungled the drawing Tuesday by accidentally leaving out some of the applicants’ names.

The do-over went smoothly.

But when Jenny Anderson, event planner for the Denver 2008 Convention Host Committee, won the permit for Civic Center for a kick-off Aug. 24, Spagnuolo accused the committee of creating a “very serious, dangerous situation . . . for everybody.”

Re-create 68 - which has promised demonstrations that will rival those at the bloody 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago - will be at Civic Center on Aug. 24, with or without a permit, he said.

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/03/21/recreate-68-threatens-democrat-convention-in-denver/



Again, thank you for your service sir

[Hagbard Celine]

i wasn't talking about you. this time............

Oh, my bad. I guess I was thrown-off by the fact that you quoted me when you wrote that. Go fig! :cuckoo::poke:

[Sitarro]

Oh, so the fact that I haven't had a military job means I'm not entitled to an opinion? That's horsesh*t man. Plain and simple. I can look at a picture of a child with his leg blown off and tell you that this war is bullsh*t without ever having worked in the military. It's not rocket science--or did your grunt work in the military require a rocket science degree? No, no it didn't. If you can read, then you're qualified enough to know that this military misadventure has overstepped the bounds of sanity, legality, humanity and intelligence.
The horrors of past wars should be lesson enough for us to not march into this stuff willy-nilly. You'd think. If you really want me to post son-sequitur photos from past wars on this thread (about the Bush Legacy) then let me know and I will. In the meantime, I'll stick to the subject of the thread if you don't mind.

Your crying for Iraqi children seems just a wee bit disingenuous from one that will stand up for the right for mothers to kill their babies by the millions. The liberal legacy is trillions spent on useless welfare projects and the murder of over 40,000 million totally innocent lives at the hands of abortion practitioners.

I would like to see a campaign to reelect President Bush for a third term, he would certainly be a better choice than what we have. It would be worth it just to see liberal clown's heads exploding in rage.

[namvet]

Oh, my bad. I guess I was thrown-off by the fact that you quoted me when you wrote that. Go fig! :cuckoo::poke:

no no. my bad. you were referring to someone who used the term sand N...r's. I should have said 'member's' instead of 'you'. please forgive me. i need someone to pick on............HA:laugh2:

[red states rule]

Your crying for Iraqi children seems just a wee bit disingenuous from one that will stand up for the right for mothers to kill their babies by the millions. The liberal legacy is trillions spent on useless welfare projects and the murder of over 40,000 million totally innocent lives at the hands of abortion practitioners.

I would like to see a campaign to reelect President Bush for a third term, he would certainly be a better choice than what we have. It would be worth it just to see liberal clown's heads exploding in rage.

It libs like Hag did not have their double standards, they would have no standards at all

[namvet]

Your crying for Iraqi children seems just a wee bit disingenuous from one that will stand up for the right for mothers to kill their babies by the millions. The liberal legacy is trillions spent on useless welfare projects and the murder of over 40,000 million totally innocent lives at the hands of abortion practitioners.

I would like to see a campaign to reelect President Bush for a third term, he would certainly be a better choice than what we have. It would be worth it just to see liberal clown's heads exploding in rage.

a third term. id buy that for a dollar.................

[glockmail]

After the 91 war not before.
Was that when Saddam gassed them or when he used helicopters to bomb them?

[namvet]

Was that when Saddam gassed them or when he used helicopters to bomb them?

Life Under Hussein link (link)

[Sitarro]

Life Under Hussein link (link)

Now that is just unfair namvet. Actual Iraqis speaking out against the peaceful and benevolent regime of Saddam, he was such a kind and sharing leader that loved his people as if they were all his children......... at least that is what I would think if all I heard was the cries of the "progressives" of the world outside of Iraq. :laugh2::laugh2::salute:

[namvet]

Now that is just unfair namvet. Actual Iraqis speaking out against the peaceful and benevolent regime of Saddam, he was such a kind and sharing leader that loved his people as if they were all his children......... at least that is what I would think if all I heard was the cries of the "progressives" of the world outside of Iraq. :laugh2::laugh2::salute:

I remember the last day of his trial. incredible. he went straight from the court room to the gallows. wow. now thats justice served big time !!!!!

[diuretic]

Got this from a friend via email, and it sums up how libs see dealing with evil


A Special Message of Hope from Barack Obama

Dear Friend

You may feel this is a time for celebration, you may feel that finally, at long last, our crippled and divided nation, where the scars of racism and oppression are branded deep into the mean, shrivelled souls of the 450 million unhappy people who shamefacedly call themselves “Americans”, we are at last on the long road to becoming the country that our college professors, our rock musicians, our Hollywood megastars and George Soros have long believed we could be – and I am not saying you are wrong.

.......... <snippped>

I don't see how this answered my question RSR.

Anyone? When did the dictator Saddam become the unwelcome dictator Saddam?

[Joe Steel]

of couse having served you've seen it up close right???? right???? go ahead post em. but if you don't mind post what they found in the concentration camps. the Bataan death march. the human butch shops of Japan. or is this not worth your time/politics ?????

You don't have much respect for the Americans of the WWII era if you're comparing their sacrifices to the horrors and outrages Bush has wrought.

[Joe Steel]

Got this from a friend via email, and it sums up how libs see dealing with evil
A Special Message of Hope from Barack Obama

Dear Friend

...

Imagine, if President Roosevelt had shown the courage to sit down with Adolf Hitler and seek for a common ground, had FDR just come right out and said “Mein Fuhrer, what is it exactly that I can do for you and how soon may I do it?”, instead of rushing blindly into an illegal and unprovoked war, maybe millions of young Germans would be alive today and our country would not have tasted the bitter ashes of defeat. It’s this other way, a non-threatening and non-confrontational way, which I’ll bring to my frank personal negotiations with the Iranians when I fly to Iranistania with the surrender documents under my sinewy arm.



Truly stupid and typical for conservatives.

[Sir Evil]

You do realize you are all becoming equivalent to the dodo bird, pretty much extinct. Heard yesterday 84% oppose the way Bush is managing the country. But you will all have the odd distinction of having voted for and supported the worst president in our history, odd bragging right, but for the empty headed it is something.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/profile/story/9961300/the_worst_president_in_history

:laugh2:

I dunno dickinthecan5, you sure have some cool resources. What are you like 15 or something? Rollingstone for a good source of political news?:lol:

[Sir Evil]

That's a terrible legacy and it's just one reason that Bush will be judged harshly by history.
:lame2:
Good idea diahorrea, let history judge seeing as Bush has not quite left office yet, and a legacy is something not quite obtained so soon.

[namvet]

You don't have much respect for the Americans of the WWII era if you're comparing their sacrifices to the horrors and outrages Bush has wrought.

funny how the libs went after FDR for decalring war on Japan.

[Sir Evil]

Right, now, to the question. The invasion of Iraq destabilised a good part of the Middle East, a locale not known for being exactly calm. That was either evil policy or bloody stupid policy. Either way it was bad policy. But the message to the rest of the world was, "if we want it, we'll take it".

Get it right diahorrea, Iran is more of the problem when speaking of the destabilizing of the middle east. And saying "a locale not known for being exactly calm" is just plain assinined! Thats as good a spin as I have heard in a long time.
Not known for being exactly calm? :laugh2:

But yeah the message "if we want it, we'll take it" makes good sense, I mean everyone else comes a knocking when they need it, the aid, the protection of neighboring countries possibly invading, and so on, but when on the outside looking in it's always a different story. :rolleyes:

So yeah "if we want it, we'll take it" whatcha gonna do about it when the biggest name of your country is a deceased crocodile hunter?

Gotta love all the the stone throwing morons.....:rolleyes:

[diuretic]

:lame2:
Good idea diahorrea, let history judge seeing as Bush has not quite left office yet, and a legacy is something not quite obtained so soon.

And he's going to change how? :laugh2:

[diuretic]

Get it right diahorrea, Iran is more of the problem when speaking of the destabilizing of the middle east. And saying "a locale not known for being exactly calm" is just plain assinined! Thats as good a spin as I have heard in a long time.
Not known for being exactly calm? :laugh2:

But yeah the message "if we want it, we'll take it" makes good sense, I mean everyone else comes a knocking when they need it, the aid, the protection of neighboring countries possibly invading, and so on, but when on the outside looking in it's always a different story. :rolleyes:

So yeah "if we want it, we'll take it" whatcha gonna do about it when the biggest name of your country is a deceased crocodile hunter?

Gotta love all the the stone throwing morons.....:rolleyes:

I'm sorry, I trawled through all the crap in your post hoping to find something worthwhile and all I found was...several layers of crap. Did I miss something? :laugh2:

[GW in Ohio]

The Bush Legacy, As Seen From London

By Ken Silverstein

From The Independent:

"So perhaps Mr. Bush’s most significant legacy, as far as Britain is concerned, will be the destruction of the instinctive trust of America and its leaders that once prevailed here. It is no exaggeration to say that Mr Bush has done more damage to relations between our two nations than any president in living memory…

And whatever the future holds for transatlantic relations, there will be very few in this country who watched President Bush’s plane depart yesterday without a feeling of profound relief that the end of this disastrous presidency is finally in sight."

http://harpers.org/subjects/WashingtonBabylon

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/leading-articles/leading-article-the-tragic-legacy-of-a-disastrous-president-848511.html

Most Americans also feel a profound relief that the disastrous Bush administration is coming to an end.

There seems to be a hard core of about 20% of Americans who have bought iinto the whole Republican thing and they are sticking by Bush no matter what.

Many of them can be found here. It's a very hard row to hoe, justifying this sorry-ass administration, and the arguments they make to justify President Shithead's Iraq invasion are extremely lame.

[Sir Evil]

And he's going to change how? :laugh2:

Bigger moron than I originally anticipated. Who said anything about him changing? I'm pretty sure the idea was to see what history has to say when the time comes as you have already given the premature legacy tag.

[Sir Evil]

I'm sorry, I trawled through all the crap in your post hoping to find something worthwhile and all I found was...several layers of crap. Did I miss something? :laugh2:

Yes, you totally missed it, it's diahorrea, not crap.... :D

But really, I can see how it would be easy to make a reply such as this, it's always easier. Now when you can post something legitimate showing the U.S as a bigger destabiling force than Iran in the middle east then we can get back to what you call "trawling" through a post...:rolleyes:

[stephanie]

Most Americans also feel a profound relief that the disastrous Bush administration is coming to an end.

There seems to be a hard core of about 20% of Americans who have bought iinto the whole Republican thing and they are sticking by Bush no matter what.

Many of them can be found here. It's a very hard row to hoe, justifying this sorry-ass administration, and the arguments they make to justify President Shithead's Iraq invasion are extremely lame.

It's not any harder than you all justifying the Blowjob Clinton.:poke:

[GW in Ohio]

It's not any harder than you all justifying the Blowjob Clinton.:poke:

stephanie: I was a Republican during the Clinton years and I was delighted when his scandals came to light and he got impeached.

[GW in Ohio]

It's not any harder than you all justifying the Blowjob Clinton.:poke:

But when we talk about justifying Bush and Clinton, Clinton embarrassed his wife, his country and his party by behaving like a middle-aged fraternity boy. But the economy was good during his tenure and he did not engage us in any disastrous foreign entanglements.

No one was killed because Clinton behaved badly. Over 4,000 Americans....our finest young people...have died, and many more have been maimed and injured because Bush was totally out of his depth in the White House and didn't have a fucking clue.

Big difference.

[namvet]

But when we talk about justifying Bush and Clinton, Clinton embarrassed his wife, his country and his party by behaving like a middle-aged fraternity boy. But the economy was good during his tenure and he did not engage us in any disastrous foreign entanglements.

No one was killed because Clinton behaved badly. Over 4,000 Americans....our finest young people...have died, and many more have been maimed and injured because Bush was totally out of his depth in the White House and didn't have a fucking clue.

Big difference.

no one was killed Gracey???? 7500 soldiers died during Clinton's 8 years. looks like Klinton still has the record???? plus 3000 on on 9-11 to his credit and incompetence. had a chance to kill bin laden. explain to us why he took a pass???? the economy was a toal disaster when he left by the back door. the biggest fuck up since the peanut farmer.

[diuretic]

Bigger moron than I originally anticipated. Who said anything about him changing? I'm pretty sure the idea was to see what history has to say when the time comes as you have already given the premature legacy tag.

That's a bit tough, I wouldn't call him a moron. Wrong, venal, evil, but not a moron. I'm a bit of a softie though, I've got this feeling that others will judge him far more harshly.

[diuretic]

Yes, you totally missed it, it's diahorrea, not crap.... :D

But really, I can see how it would be easy to make a reply such as this, it's always easier. Now when you can post something legitimate showing the U.S as a bigger destabiling force than Iran in the middle east then we can get back to what you call "trawling" through a post...:rolleyes:

Destabilising? US? Iran? Middle East? :laugh2:

You want me to go back and explain just how the US (among others) has destabilised the Middle East and in particular Iran? Does the name "Pahlavi" ring a bell? Do you know how Pahlavi got to rule Iran? Do you know why he got to rule Iran? Mossaddeq? Nationalisation of oil? Saddam? Nationalisation of oil? Really?

[midcan5]

You can put sugar on shit but you still can't eat it.

Loved that line, we have many here trying that tough task.

[midcan5]

Most Americans also feel a profound relief that the disastrous Bush administration is coming to an end.

There seems to be a hard core of about 20% of Americans who have bought iinto the whole Republican thing and they are sticking by Bush no matter what.


Yes, amazing, Hitler still has fans too. Not that I am comparing them. :laugh2:

[midcan5]

no one was killed Gracey???? 7500 soldiers died during Clinton's 8 years. looks like Klinton still has the record???? plus 3000 on on 9-11 to his credit and incompetence. had a chance to kill bin laden. explain to us why he took a pass???? the economy was a toal disaster when he left by the back door. the biggest fuck up since the peanut farmer.

:link::link:

[midcan5]

It's not any harder than you all justifying the Blowjob Clinton.


Let me see if I have this straight, blowjob = dead same thing? Dead = blow job, same thing. Somehow my mental scale is having a hard balancing act here. You need to explain how an illegal invasion that has caused thousands of deaths is equivalent to a married man lying about a blow job?

[Hagbard Celine]

It's not any harder than you all justifying the Blowjob Clinton.:poke:

It's not the same things stephanie, jeez. 4,000 US casualties and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead and you try to make parallels between that and an insignificant sex act? :cuckoo:

[glockmail]

:link::link::lame2:

[GW in Ohio]

no one was killed Gracey???? 7500 soldiers died during Clinton's 8 years. looks like Klinton still has the record???? plus 3000 on on 9-11 to his credit and incompetence. had a chance to kill bin laden. explain to us why he took a pass???? the economy was a toal disaster when he left by the back door. the biggest fuck up since the peanut farmer.

I don't remember 7500 American soldiers being killed during the Clinton years. Could you provide some details, namvet?

[Hagbard Celine]

:lame2:

Well? When you make outrageous claims, some of us appreciate it when you prove it. :dunno: I know it's a revolutionary concept.

[namvet]

I don't remember 7500 American soldiers being killed during the Clinton years. Could you provide some details, namvet?

7500 soldiers died during Clinton's 8 years, according to factcheck.org
here (here)

to here:
link (link)


http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7050/620/1600/clinton%20verses%20iraq.jpg

to here:
link (link)

2,318 Clinton years @13,417 deaths

1,007 7 BUSH years @ 9,016 deaths...........these probably include civilians

[glockmail]

Well? When you make outrageous claims, some of us appreciate it when you prove it. :dunno: I know it's a revolutionary concept. Depends on who's requesting the evidence. If that same person never backs his shit up, then to request that someone else do so is lame.

[Hagbard Celine]

7500 soldiers died during Clinton's 8 years, according to factcheck.org
here (here)

to here:
link (link)


http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/7050/620/1600/clinton%20verses%20iraq.jpg

to here:
link (link)

2,318 Clinton years @13,417 deaths

1,007 7 BUSH years @ 9,016 deaths...........these probably include civilians

What did they die of? Heart disease or Car accidents? It doesn't count if they died of natural causes genius. Not to mention, I question these "facts" of yours. A one-line sentence on a website called "answers.com" with no links to back it up is hardly what I'd call a reliable source.
If you can't understand the difference between dying of natural causes and dying needlessly and prematurely in an unnecessary and illegal war then you're a lost cause.

[glockmail]

What did they die of? Heart disease or Car accidents? It doesn't count if they died of natural causes genius. ..... Why not? Isn't it a legitimate argument that young men may be safer on the battlefield than living in South Chicago of driving the LA freeway? Aren’t we talking about such things as statistics, or risk and safety, both relative concepts?

[Hagbard Celine]

Why not? Isn't it a legitimate argument that young men may be safer on the battlefield than living in South Chicago of driving the LA freeway? Aren’t we talking about such things as statistics, or risk and safety, both relative concepts?

Not at all. The risk of death is much higher on a battleground man. I can drive to work every day of my life and the risk of being blown up by an IED is zero or one in a billion. If my road to work was in Baghdad, that risk would skyrocket. It probably goes up to like one out of every five drives. Not to mention stray bullet fire, mortar explosions, suicide bombers. The statistical risk of death is much higher on a battlefield man. C'mon. :slap:

[namvet]

What did they die of? Heart disease or Car accidents? It doesn't count if they died of natural causes genius. Not to mention, I question these "facts" of yours. A one-line sentence on a website called "answers.com" with no links to back it up is hardly what I'd call a reliable source.
If you can't understand the difference between dying of natural causes and dying needlessly and prematurely in an unnecessary and illegal war then you're a lost cause.

read on mcduff

Why Were Dead Soldiers OK When Clinton Was in Charge?
link (link)


http://bp1.blogger.com/_L6pDyjqqsvY/RivFpY-rndI/AAAAAAAADmo/oTEd2LpH1h0/s1600/clinton%2Bvs%2Biraq.JPG


http://bp3.blogger.com/_L6pDyjqqsvY/Rius24-rnbI/AAAAAAAADmY/2yB4Nxh8ro4/s1600/clinton%2Bvs%2Bwar%2Bon%2Bterror.JPG

Military Deaths - Clinton vs Bush
link (link)

its a known fact Klinton was totally sound asleep at the security wheel. for 8 years !!! he ws prez. NOT CinC

[Hagbard Celine]

read on mcduff

Why Were Dead Soldiers OK When Clinton Was in Charge?
link (link)


http://bp1.blogger.com/_L6pDyjqqsvY/RivFpY-rndI/AAAAAAAADmo/oTEd2LpH1h0/s1600/clinton%2Bvs%2Biraq.JPG


http://bp3.blogger.com/_L6pDyjqqsvY/Rius24-rnbI/AAAAAAAADmY/2yB4Nxh8ro4/s1600/clinton%2Bvs%2Bwar%2Bon%2Bterror.JPG

Military Deaths - Clinton vs Bush
link (link)

its a known fact Klinton was totally sound asleep at the security wheel. for 8 years !!! he ws prez. NOT CinC

Again, where are you getting these numbers and what did they die of? Are these numbers the combined number of deaths of all military service men and women from both natural/accidental death and casualties of war? If so, are you including the number of natural deaths as well as those of the Iraq War under Prez. Bush?
Also, I don't recollect Clinton preemptively and illegally invading any foreign countries. I don't know, if he did, maybe I forgot? :eek: That's the difference. It makes a lot of difference when soldiers die because they were furthering US ambitions abroad and when they die unnecessarily in a failed boondoggle they should've never been sent to in the first place.

[namvet]

Again, where are you getting these numbers and what did they die of? Are these numbers the combined number of deaths of all military service men and women from both natural/accidental death and casualties of war? If so, are you including the number of natural deaths as well as those of the Iraq War under Prez. Bush?
Also, I don't recollect Clinton preemptively and illegally invading any foreign countries. I don't know, if he did, maybe I forgot? :eek: That's the difference. It makes a lot of difference when soldiers die because they were furthering US ambitions abroad and when they die unnecessarily in a failed boondoggle they should've never been sent to in the first place.

more died under Klinton. that was my point which today seems to go right over head. lets see your numbers.

[stephanie]

Let me see if I have this straight, blowjob = dead same thing? Dead = blow job, same thing. Somehow my mental scale is having a hard balancing act here. You need to explain how an illegal invasion that has caused thousands of deaths is equivalent to a married man lying about a blow job?

you got one thing right..your mental scale is having a hard balancing act.:poke:

[Hagbard Celine]

more died under Klinton. that was my point which today seems to go right over head. lets see your numbers.

That's obviously wrong. It makes no sense for a peacetime force to have more deaths than a wartime force. I smell propaganda. Obviously what they're doing is adding up all the deaths of anyone in the military including WWII vets, Vietnam vets, etc. and then comparing that to the number of soldiers killed in Iraq. FALSIFIED DATA. Here's the proof:http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_military_deaths.htm

[namvet]

That's obviously wrong. It makes no sense for a peacetime force to have more deaths than a wartime force. I smell propaganda.

no. today you just plain smell

[Hagbard Celine]

no. today you just plain smell

Ignore the truth. Great policy :rolleyes: Typical though. (shrug)

[namvet]

Ignore the truth. Great policy :rolleyes: Typical though. (shrug)

these nr may not include death's from accidents. war or peace. in Kilintons case his admin was a lock box. no one will probably know for sure. so much was hidden from the public.

1996 ........ 2,318 Clinton years @13,417 deaths. this is appalling

[Hagbard Celine]

these nr may not include death's from accidents. war or peace. in Kilintons case his admin was a lock box. no one will probably know for sure. so much was hidden from the public.

1996 ........ 2,318 Clinton years @13,417 deaths. this is appalling

No, no, they definately do. All this "more deaths during Clinton" talk is a load of bullsh*t. See my link above.

[namvet]

No, no, they definately do. All this "more deaths during Clinton" talk is a load of bullsh*t. See my link above.

you mean this one:
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_military_deaths.htm

that says 1996 ......... 2,318 Clinton years @13,417

Comments: The claim that there were more U.S. military fatalities during the Bill Clinton administration than there have been to date under George W. Bush is false. Moreover, that erroneous conclusion was based on falsified statistics.

Using the actual figures from the Congressional Research Service report cited above, the total military deaths under each of the two administrations are as follows:

Bill Clinton (1993 - 2000) ............. 7,500 deaths

George W. Bush (2001 - 2006) .... 8,792 deaths

KLINTON 7,500 DEATHS


this the one????

[Hagbard Celine]

you mean this one:
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_military_deaths.htm

that says 1996 ......... 2,318 Clinton years @13,417

Comments: The claim that there were more U.S. military fatalities during the Bill Clinton administration than there have been to date under George W. Bush is false. Moreover, that erroneous conclusion was based on falsified statistics.

Using the actual figures from the Congressional Research Service report cited above, the total military deaths under each of the two administrations are as follows:

Bill Clinton (1993 - 2000) ............. 7,500 deaths

George W. Bush (2001 - 2006) .... 8,792 deaths

KLINTON 7,500 DEATHS


this the one????

Yeah, that one genius. If you'll notice, Bush had 1,292 more than Clinton and that's not even counting 2007 or 2008. And, it doesn't even mention the number of actual combat deaths--it only mentions all military deaths. Since we didn't have a major war during he Clinton administration, obviously the Bush numbers eclipse those of the Clinton admin. Your whole concept here is laughable.

[glockmail]

Not at all. The risk of death is much higher on a battleground man. I can drive to work every day of my life and the risk of being blown up by an IED is zero or one in a billion. If my road to work was in Baghdad, that risk would skyrocket. It probably goes up to like one out of every five drives. Not to mention stray bullet fire, mortar explosions, suicide bombers. The statistical risk of death is much higher on a battlefield man. C'mon. :slap:
You side-stepped the question. Is it legitimate to compare the "peace time" military death rate with the war time? If not then why not?

[Hagbard Celine]

You side-stepped the question. Is it legitimate to compare the "peace time" military death rate with the war time? If not then why not?

No, I addressed that. I didn't sidestep anything Glock. :rolleyes: What do you think I was talking about when I wrote "Not at all."
Stop trying to change the subject with your lame little straw men for a second.
It's not legitimate to compare peacetime death rates to war time rates. The peacetime rates will always be lower than the wartime ones for obvious reasons. There are also factors you have to consider such as the size of the military in question.

[gabosaurus]

The Bush Legacy, as it will be seen by history:

http://i25.tinypic.com/fllflj.jpg

http://i25.tinypic.com/rviknp.jpg

http://i30.tinypic.com/j5a8aq.jpg

http://i26.tinypic.com/sxktwx.jpg

[glockmail]

No, I addressed that. I didn't sidestep anything Glock. :rolleyes: What do you think I was talking about when I wrote "Not at all."
Stop trying to change the subject with your lame little straw men for a second.
It's not legitimate to compare peacetime death rates to war time rates. The peacetime rates will always be lower than the wartime ones for obvious reasons. There are also factors you have to consider such as the size of the military in question.
I think its totally legitimate to compare per active duty soldier death rates during peace time with per active duty soldier death rates during war time. Wouldn't you agree?

[namvet]

No, I addressed that. I didn't sidestep anything Glock. :rolleyes: What do you think I was talking about when I wrote "Not at all."
Stop trying to change the subject with your lame little straw men for a second.
It's not legitimate to compare peacetime death rates to war time rates. The peacetime rates will always be lower than the wartime ones for obvious reasons. There are also factors you have to consider such as the size of the military in question.


looks others disagree with your ASSessment. and laffs are on you:fu:

[Hagbard Celine]

looks others disagree with your ASSessment. and laffs are on you:fu:

It's not an assessment, it's fact. Numbers are a little difficult to "assess." They either are or they aren't. In your case, they aren't. More soldiers have died in Bush's illegal and unnecessary war than did during Clinton's peace. It's common f*cking sense. Nevermind the actual numbers I linked to that prove my position.

[namvet]

It's not an assessment, it's fact. Numbers are a little difficult to "assess." They either are or they aren't. In your case, they aren't. More soldiers have died in Bush's illegal and unnecessary war than did during Clinton's peace. It's common f*cking sense. Nevermind the actual numbers I linked to that prove my position.

ever wonder what would have happened if 9-11 had happened on Klintons watch??? hmmm

[April15]

ever wonder what would have happened if 9-11 had happened on Klintons watch??? hmmmOsama would have been caufgt by now!

[stephanie]

Osama would have been caufgt by now!

:lmao:

[midcan5]

:lame2:

Why? Can meatheads post any nonsense that pops into their head in your world.

[midcan5]

When reading many of the propagandist posts on DP a sensible citizen has to fear for their country. Is this really the level of education today? Are people so partisan that common sense flies out the window? I know I repeat these quotes but they fit so well. "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" Winston Churchill. Please see charts 4 and 5 if truth and reality is a concern of yours.

"Question - What are the average yearly military deaths in years that we are not involved in a war or a conflict?

Answer - Hi Frank,

It's a little difficult to answer your question with precision since there are many years that the US is involved in minor military conflicts.

The military does keep a breakdown of deaths due to accidents, disease, or other non-combat reasons. In the 1980's this was usually around 2000 per year. In the 1990's, this number fell to under 1000 per year. Much of this was due to the fact that the total size of the military shrank when the Cold War ended.

The Congressional Research Service released a pretty thorough report on this. You can view it here:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf

Take a look at the chart on page 12. It gives a pretty good year by year breakdown based on cause of death."

[midcan5]

ever wonder what would have happened if 9-11 had happened on Klintons watch??? hmmm

But guess whose watch it occurred on and guess what he was doing with all the reports concerning terrorism. The first attack did occur on Clinton's watch, shortly after he got in office, using your logic that is Reagan/Bush's fault right. But Clinton was smart enough to not just point fingers.

[stephanie]

When reading many of the propagandist posts on DP a sensible citizen has to fear for their country. Is this really the level of education today? Are people so partisan that common sense flies out the window? I know I repeat these quotes but they fit so well. "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" Winston Churchill.

bla bla bla.
was that intelligent enough for you.:dance:

[namvet]

But guess whose watch it occurred on and guess what he was doing with all the reports concerning terrorism. The first attack did occur on Clinton's watch, shortly after he got in office, using your logic that is Reagan/Bush's fault right. But Clinton was smart enough to not just point fingers.

well im glad it was on Bush's watch. Clintons death count would be in the millions by now. IF we could find him. Bush got NO document from Klinton tin can. and Klinton mudered thousands on 9-11. so look at you hands. can you wash off the blood????

[namvet]

But guess whose watch it occurred on and guess what he was doing with all the reports concerning terrorism. The first attack did occur on Clinton's watch, shortly after he got in office, using your logic that is Reagan/Bush's fault right. But Clinton was smart enough to not just point fingers.

what would have happened if 9-11 had happened on Klintons watch???

[Sir Evil]

Destabilising? US? Iran? Middle East? :laugh2:

You want me to go back and explain just how the US (among others) has destabilised the Middle East and in particular Iran? Does the name "Pahlavi" ring a bell? Do you know how Pahlavi got to rule Iran? Do you know why he got to rule Iran? Mossaddeq? Nationalisation of oil? Saddam? Nationalisation of oil? Really?

Wow, and I actually considered you semi intelligent at one time diahorrea but obviously you are very good at answering questions with more questions that are not pertaining to the original question. Typical flip-flop but no real surprise on that.....:salute:

[April15]

Wow, and I actually considered you semi intelligent at one time diahorrea but obviously you are very good at answering questions with more questions that are not pertaining to the original question. Typical flip-flop but no real surprise on that.....:salute:Perhaps this can help?
The Pahlevis were the last dynasty to hold court in Iran. Reza Shah was the last of them. ThE Pahlevis come from a land where the royalty has always been stupid rich. They all had lush lifestyles. The shift to a globalized economy degraded their economy. Reza Shah’s predecessor began selling Iranian assets in an attempt to live the lush lifestyle leaders had always enjoyed. They sold control of many key trades, including the rights to oil. It was 1901 Mozzafer al-Din Shah Qajar sold the rights to extract and sell oil in Iran to a company known as the Burmah Oil Company. When they found a reserve in 1909 the Anglo Persian Oil Company (APOC) was created.

The venture in Iran represented the last time a nation would use such a solid crack the whip mentality. After the fall of Mozzafer al-Din Shah Qajar, Reza Shah came to power. By this time the refinery that APOC built was beginning to look like a southern plantation. The British workers were lived in beautiful homes built for them. They had lawns and resorts. Hotels and restaurants. The Iranian workers were given a mat to live on. Their whole family had to live on it. They had no sewage and no running water. There was no electricity. Disease was rampant, and the Iranians were never trained to do the managerial or technical jobs. They could only be roughnecks, thereby assuring that they could not revolt. A revolt would shut down the plant and it would not be able to be opened back up by Iranians.

APOC lied about its profits and came through with even less than they promised to give Iran. Which was a drop in the bucket anyways. Mossadegh was the emerging leader. He was told to run for office by his friends in the neighborhood. He never suggested he should work in government, but what his people asked him he did. He rode a tidal wave of success in government. He never backed down from his morals. He left government all together a couple of times because he would not compromise what he believed was right and wrong. Reza Shah was his enemy. Mossadegh fought for the average Iranian. His biggest platform began as a fifty fifty profit split with APOC, as well as the right to audit their books. Brittan Laughed. Every time there were talks Brittan would insult the Iranians and crack the whip even harder.

Mossadgeh was a secularist who believed that government and religion had a necessary divide. Although he was also devout. Reza Shah was pro west. He sought the favor of the West because he wanted its lifestyle for himself. Everytime Brittan got tough with Iran they cried to America for help. And they got it. By the 40s it was getting bad. Mossadgeh by now was fighting for nationalization of Iranian oil. Anglo Persian Oil had been changed to Anglo Iranian Oil. FDR had been trying to get Brittan to adopt a policy more open to fairness. This was the last time the government of Brittan would work so diligently on the behalf of a private firm. He never managed to convince them.

Iranians were tired of the sweatshop conditions and began to show dire unrest. By now in America the Dulles brothers had managed to attain the posts of Secretary of Defense and director of the CIA. Between the two of them they had control over the covert and overt operations of the military might of America. Kermit Roosevelt was the odd ball Roosevelt. He had been in Iran finding ways to get rid of Mossadegh. Mossadegh by this time had emerged as one of the greatest leaders in Persian history. Not modern Persian history, but the entirety of Persian history. All around the world he was admired. After be recalled by his people after a self imposed exile he was appointed Prime Minister by his enemy Reza Shah. Shah means king. By political power only he would later force Reza Shah into peaceful exile. The King. FDR denied any requests by the Dulles brothers to launch a coup. Iranians looked to America as their saving grace. We helped them out a lot. But when FDR was done Ike came in. Right away he granted permission to run operation Ajax. Mossadgeh was overthrown and the people never knew why.

1953 is when Mossadgeh was overthrown by the US and the pro western exiled King was brought back. America continued to send aid to the Iranians. Millions of dollars. Tons of food. But of course they never mentioned that they were the ones who overthrew Mossadegh. The American people were proud. They neither knew of Operation Ajax. They felt good to be doing such a nice thing for such an unlucky country. The Iranians loved the US because of the help. By the 70s Reza Shah had become amazingly oppressive. Dissention was quashed by the SAVAK. Reza Shah had become a dictator. Many fought him, but his power had been consolidated by the US and he was damn near bullet proof.

In the 70s is when the news of Ajax leaked. The Iranians were dumbfounded. They could not believe that the US did it. It was like finding out that your favorite uncle had sold you into slavery. In 1979 hostages were taken. A group of college kids stormed an embassy and held Americans captive. The college kids were mad and wanted to do something, but after they realized that they were face to face with real people they got scared. During the incident, none of the hostages were beaten, starved, or mistreated. After the drama was over the workers were brought back to the US. Before their arrival the White House gave memos to the press asking them to begin to mention Munchausen’s syndrome. They should talk about relating to ones captors, and how they begin to sympathize because they go crazy. As soon as the workers were landed they were whisked away to a mental care facility. Their credibility had been destroyed.

The American people were pissed. How could our little Iranians bite us like this? They have to be stupid and wars began.

Now the point of all this is that while all the maneuvering was going on the Iranian people, as well as the American people were lied to. The Ajax leaders manipulated public opinion for a quarter century. The Embassy workers had nothing to do with it. The College kids had nothing to do with it. They floated in their bubble believing what their leaders said was the truth. Just like today, but the leaders were practiced politicians who knew the dirty deed that had taken place. This is what they do. they have been groomed in politics. I am not saying Mossadegh was right. Neither Reza Shah. Neither Kermit Roosevelt. Neither FDR. Neither Ike. Neither the Dulles brothers. What I am saying is that their little game of politics took the lives of the residents of Iran who were unaware of any of it. It cost the Embassy workers more than a year of their lives and they were unaware.

Next time you stand up to support your leaders why don’t you make sure they deserve it. Politicians from all over the world will do what ever it takes to mold public opinion into a thing that will benefit their lifestyle. Rarely does this end up being good for their nation, but they usually don’t care. FDR was different. But as soon as he left and Ike came in we went after South America Africa and the Middle East. The fear many have of America is its bi polar attitude. This is evident now. We are coming off a president who used diplomacy. He also had many military plans, but was unable to persue them. The world only saw the diplomacy. Then when people get tired of that the current administration came in and shocked and awed the world. Now when this one is done we will be back to diplomacy. FDR would not allow the coups anywhere. Then the next administration was coup coup for cocoa puffs. How the hell CAN any other nation trust us? We will be your best friend during one presidency, then the next we are mauling you. I am not promoting. I am not spinning. This is simple history. By the way APOC became British Petroleum the year after Mossadeghs overthrow.

[Sir Evil]

Perhaps this can help?


Read back to the original question to diahorrea, and perhaps you won't have to be categorized as just another limp dick answering a question that had nothing to do with the original question. :rolleyes:

Now to the war in Iraq, is it the US or Iran that is a bigger problem when it comes to the destabilizing of the country?

It's not really a tough question, hell, opinion is simple enough to get it done, or is it just easier to go on a roundabout over the topic?

[April15]

The country of Iran was destabilized by the US many years ago. The Iraq Iran war gave raygun the chance to use diplomacy for peace but he chose to aid the war effort of Saddam with training, weapons and money. Then later he tried to correct his error by dealing arms to Iran for cash to give to the contras of Nicaragua.
All of these things and more have brought the world and mideast to the point it is today. America has forgotten the history of medaling in other peoples affairs.

[Sir Evil]

The country of Iran was destabilized by the US many years ago. The Iraq Iran war gave raygun the chance to use diplomacy for peace but he chose to aid the war effort of Saddam with training, weapons and money. Then later he tried to correct his error by dealing arms to Iran for cash to give to the contras of Nicaragua.
All of these things and more have brought the world and mideast to the point it is today. America has forgotten the history of medaling in other peoples affairs.

Negative, it's people such as yourself that use this particular argument that are the ignorant bastards. What about the history of problems of both Iraq & Iran, I guess they are all direct results of our meddling in their business?

Just another example of a simple question turning into a clusterfuck because some halfwit has to find a reason to make it about our fault for their distain for the administration.

Dude are you just still pissed because you're on the no-fly list? :laugh:

[April15]

Negative, it's people such as yourself that use this particular argument that are the ignorant bastards. What about the history of problems of both Iraq & Iran, I guess they are all direct results of our meddling in their business?

Just another example of a simple question turning into a clusterfuck because some halfwit has to find a reason to make it about our fault for their distain for the administration.

Dude are you just still pissed because you're on the no-fly list? :laugh:

If raygun had kept out of the wars between them things might be better now. I wouldn't fly anyway.

[diuretic]

Wow, and I actually considered you semi intelligent at one time diahorrea but obviously you are very good at answering questions with more questions that are not pertaining to the original question. Typical flip-flop but no real surprise on that.....:salute:

Well, fuck, I'm broken hearted :laugh2:

[Sitarro]

If raygun had kept out of the wars between them things might be better now. I wouldn't fly anyway.

Sure, I'm positive Iran would be the world's vacation paradise if it wasn't for the bad old U.S.A. screwing things up. Scared of flying? Do you drive a car or is that too scary for you also? Why am I even asking you questions, you are an imbecile.

[Sitarro]

Perhaps this can help?
The Pahlevis were the last dynasty to hold court in Iran. Reza Shah was the last of them.

In the 70s is when the news of Ajax leaked. The Iranians were dumbfounded. They could not believe that the US did it. It was like finding out that your favorite uncle had sold you into slavery. In 1979 hostages were taken. A group of college kids stormed an embassy and held Americans captive. The college kids were mad and wanted to do something, but after they realized that they were face to face with real people they got scared. During the incident, none of the hostages were beaten, starved, or mistreated. After the drama was over the workers were brought back to the US. Before their arrival the White House gave memos to the press asking them to begin to mention Munchausen’s syndrome. They should talk about relating to ones captors, and how they begin to sympathize because they go crazy. As soon as the workers were landed they were whisked away to a mental care facility. Their credibility had been destroyed.



Where ever you copied this from, they are full of shit. And it isn't Munchausen's syndrome ace, it's Stockholm Syndrome.

[hjmick]

Where ever you copied this from, they are full of shit. And it isn't Munchausen's syndrome ace, it's Stockholm Syndrome.

No kidding, not even a link to the author, who obviously doesn't bother with research opting to instead throw around terms he doesn't understand thinking the reader is a bigger moron than he.



"Munchausen syndrome is a psychiatric disorder in which those affected fake disease, illness, or psychological trauma in order to draw attention or sympathy to themselves. It is in a class of disorders known as factitious disorders which involve "illnesses" whose symptoms are either self-induced or falsified by the patient. It is also sometimes known as hospital addiction syndrome."

"Stockholm syndrome is a psychological response sometimes seen in an abducted hostage, in which the hostage shows signs of loyalty to the hostage-taker, regardless of the danger (or at least risk) in which the hostage has been placed. The syndrome is named after the Norrmalmstorg robbery of Kreditbanken at Norrmalmstorg, Stockholm, Sweden, in which the bank robbers held bank employees hostage from August 23 to August 28 in 1973. In this case, the victims became emotionally attached to their victimizers, and even defended their captors after they were freed from their six-day ordeal. The term Stockholm Syndrome was coined by the criminologist and psychiatrist Nils Bejerot, who assisted the police during the robbery, and referred to the syndrome in a news broadcast.

It should be taken into account that according to Namnyak the Stockholm Syndromis 'is not a recognized Medical Subject Heading (MeSH), that most sources of information for widely publicized cases were of varying reliability in terms of the events that lead to the diagnosis of Stockholm syndrome; the authors had no access to primary sources and identification of a pattern of features exhibited in Stockholm syndrome may be due to reporting bias.'"

[Sir Evil]

If raygun had kept out of the wars between them things might be better now. I wouldn't fly anyway.

Yeah, and you may of had a chance to pork Marilyn Monroe if you actually knew her. :rolleyes:

[Said1]

Where ever you copied this from, they are full of shit. And it isn't Munchausen's syndrome ace, it's Stockholm Syndrome.

a couple of posts down. Hahahaha. Isn't there rules about copying and pasting without proper reference? It isn't even a good copy and paste. That alone is at least worth ridicule, no?

http://www.arguewitheveryone.com/lobby/13565-welcome-cia.html :laugh2:

[April15]

Sure, I'm positive Iran would be the world's vacation paradise if it wasn't for the bad old U.S.A. screwing things up. Scared of flying? Do you drive a car or is that too scary for you also? Why am I even asking you questions, you are an imbecile.Homeland security feels I am a threat to the nation so I am on the no fly list. Exposing the truth is not good for America and it's fascist leaders.
The article came from Time magazine 1950 something.

[April15]

Yeah, and you may of had a chance to pork Marilyn Monroe if you actually knew her. :rolleyes:If I had known her I would have porked her!

[April15]

a couple of posts down. Hahahaha. Isn't there rules about copying and pasting without proper reference? It isn't even a good copy and paste. That alone is at least worth ridicule, no?

http://www.arguewitheveryone.com/lobby/13565-welcome-cia.html :laugh2:Crow on a post's item is very similar.

[Said1]

Crow on a post's item is very similar.

Huh?

[Gaffer]

Homeland security feels I am a threat to the nation so I am on the no fly list. Exposing the truth is not good for America and it's fascist leaders.
The article came from Time magazine 1950 something.

I consider you a threat as well. I guess me and HS think alike.

Your poorly done copy and paste article left a lot out, not to mention a lot of history revision. You, or rather the author, conveniently left out the communist factor involved in the fall of the shah and the russian influence involved in it all. And to say the embassy people were not mistreated is an outright lie.

It was your boys, the communists, that ousted the shah, they were in turn ousted by the islamists. Those that were unable to flee were captured and executed. It put a big dent in the iranian communist party.

For your information Reagan did not supply anything to iraq except some intelligence information. All the iraqi equipment was of soviet origin.

All alliances and giving of money had to do with countering the soviets as part of the cold war. Though they weren't your enemy, they were the enemy of the rest of us.

[hjmick]

The article came from Time magazine 1950 something.

From 1950 something? What? Were they working with Nostradamus? The article clearly makes references to events in the '70s.


Crow on a post's item is very similar.

Very similar? Really? Let's compare...

Yours:


The Pahlevis were the last dynasty to hold court in Iran. Reza Shah was the last of them. The Pahlevis come from a land where the royalty has always been stupid rich. They all had lush lifestyles. The shift to a globalized economy degraded their economy. Reza Shah’s predecessor began selling Iranian assets in an attempt to live the lush lifestyle leaders had always enjoyed. They sold control of many key trades, including the rights to oil. It was 1901 Mozzafer al-Din Shah Qajar sold the rights to extract and sell oil in Iran to a company known as the Burmah Oil Company. When they found a reserve in 1909 the Anglo Persian Oil Company (APOC) was created.

Crowonapost's:


The Pahlevis were the last dynasty to hold court in Iran. Reza Shah was the last of them. The Pahlevis come from a land where the royalty has always been stupid rich. They all had lush lifestyles. The shift to a globalized economy degraded their economy. Reza Shah’s predecessor began selling Iranian assets in an attempt to live the lush lifestyle leaders had always enjoyed. They sold control of many key trades, including the rights to oil. It was 1901 Mozzafer al-Din Shah Qajar sold the rights to extract and sell oil in Iran to a company known as the Burmah Oil Company. When they found a reserve in 1909 the Anglo Persian Oil Company (APOC) was created.

Yours:


The venture in Iran represented the last time a nation would use such a solid crack the whip mentality. After the fall of Mozzafer al-Din Shah Qajar, Reza Shah came to power. By this time the refinery that APOC built was beginning to look like a southern plantation. The British workers were lived in beautiful homes built for them. They had lawns and resorts. Hotels and restaurants. The Iranian workers were given a mat to live on. Their whole family had to live on it. They had no sewage and no running water. There was no electricity. Disease was rampant, and the Iranians were never trained to do the managerial or technical jobs. They could only be roughnecks, thereby assuring that they could not revolt. A revolt would shut down the plant and it would not be able to be opened back up by Iranians.

Crowonapost's:


The venture in Iran represented the last time a nation would use such a solid crack the whip mentality. After the fall of Mozzafer al-Din Shah Qajar, Reza Shah came to power. By this time the refinery that APOC built was beginning to look like a southern plantation. The British workers were lived in beautiful homes built for them. They had lawns and resorts. Hotels and restaurants. The Iranian workers were given a mat to live on. Their whole family had to live on it. They had no sewage and no running water. There was no electricity. Disease was rampant, and the Iranians were never trained to do the managerial or technical jobs. They could only be roughnecks, thereby assuring that they could not revolt. A revolt would shut down the plant and it would not be able to be opened back up by Iranians.

Yours:


APOC lied about its profits and came through with even less than they promised to give Iran. Which was a drop in the bucket anyways. Mossadegh was the emerging leader. He was told to run for office by his friends in the neighborhood. He never suggested he should work in government, but what his people asked him he did. He rode a tidal wave of success in government. He never backed down from his morals. He left government all together a couple of times because he would not compromise what he believed was right and wrong. Reza Shah was his enemy. Mossadegh fought for the average Iranian. His biggest platform began as a fifty fifty profit split with APOC, as well as the right to audit their books. Brittan Laughed. Every time there were talks Brittan would insult the Iranians and crack the whip even harder.

Crowonapost's:


APOC lied about its profits and came through with even less than they promised to give Iran. Which was a drop in the bucket anyways. Mossadegh was the emerging leader. He was told to run for office by his friends in the neighborhood. He never suggested he should work in government, but what his people asked him he did. He rode a tidal wave of success in government. He never backed down from his morals. He left government all together a couple of times because he would not compromise what he believed was right and wrong. Reza Shah was his enemy. Mossadegh fought for the average Iranian. His biggest platform began as a fifty fifty profit split with APOC, as well as the right to audit their books. Brittan Laughed. Every time there were talks Brittan would insult the Iranians and crack the whip even harder.

Yours:


Mossadgeh was a secularist who believed that government and religion had a necessary divide. Although he was also devout. Reza Shah was pro west. He sought the favor of the West because he wanted its lifestyle for himself. Everytime Brittan got tough with Iran they cried to America for help. And they got it. By the 40s it was getting bad. Mossadgeh by now was fighting for nationalization of Iranian oil. Anglo Persian Oil had been changed to Anglo Iranian Oil. FDR had been trying to get Brittan to adopt a policy more open to fairness. This was the last time the government of Brittan would work so diligently on the behalf of a private firm. He never managed to convince them.

Crowonapost's:


Mossadgeh was a secularist who believed that government and religion had a necessary divide. Although he was also devout. Reza Shah was pro west. He sought the favor of the West because he wanted its lifestyle for himself. Everytime Brittan got tough with Iran they cried to America for help. And they got it. By the 40s it was getting bad. Mossadgeh by now was fighting for nationalization of Iranian oil. Anglo Persian Oil had been changed to Anglo Iranian Oil. FDR had been trying to get Brittan to adopt a policy more open to fairness. This was the last time the government of Brittan would work so diligently on the behalf of a private firm. He never managed to convince them.

Yours:


Iranians were tired of the sweatshop conditions and began to show dire unrest. By now in America the Dulles brothers had managed to attain the posts of Secretary of Defense and director of the CIA. Between the two of them they had control over the covert and overt operations of the military might of America. Kermit Roosevelt was the odd ball Roosevelt. He had been in Iran finding ways to get rid of Mossadegh. Mossadegh by this time had emerged as one of the greatest leaders in Persian history. Not modern Persian history, but the entirety of Persian history. All around the world he was admired. After be recalled by his people after a self imposed exile he was appointed Prime Minister by his enemy Reza Shah. Shah means king. By political power only he would later force Reza Shah into peaceful exile. The King. FDR denied any requests by the Dulles brothers to launch a coup. Iranians looked to America as their saving grace. We helped them out a lot. But when FDR was done Ike came in. Right away he granted permission to run operation Ajax. Mossadgeh was overthrown and the people never knew why.

Crowonapost's:


Iranians were tired of the sweatshop conditions and began to show dire unrest. By now in America the Dulles brothers had managed to attain the posts of Secretary of Defense and director of the CIA. Between the two of them they had control over the covert and overt operations of the military might of America. Kermit Roosevelt was the odd ball Roosevelt. He had been in Iran finding ways to get rid of Mossadegh. Mossadegh by this time had emerged as one of the greatest leaders in Persian history. Not modern Persian history, but the entirety of Persian history. All around the world he was admired. After be recalled by his people after a self imposed exile he was appointed Prime Minister by his enemy Reza Shah. Shah means king. By political power only he would later force Reza Shah into peaceful exile. The King. FDR denied any requests by the Dulles brothers to launch a coup. Iranians looked to America as their saving grace. We helped them out a lot. But when FDR was done Ike came in. Right away he granted permission to run operation Ajax. Mossadgeh was overthrown and the people never knew why.

Yours:


1953 is when Mossadgeh was overthrown by the US and the pro western exiled King was brought back. America continued to send aid to the Iranians. Millions of dollars. Tons of food. But of course they never mentioned that they were the ones who overthrew Mossadegh. The American people were proud. They neither knew of Operation Ajax. They felt good to be doing such a nice thing for such an unlucky country. The Iranians loved the US because of the help. By the 70s Reza Shah had become amazingly oppressive. Dissention was quashed by the SAVAK. Reza Shah had become a dictator. Many fought him, but his power had been consolidated by the US and he was damn near bullet proof.

Crowonapost's:


1953 is when Mossadgeh was overthrown by the US and the pro western exiled King was brought back. America continued to send aid to the Iranians. Millions of dollars. Tons of food. But of course they never mentioned that they were the ones who overthrew Mossadegh. The American people were proud. They neither knew of Operation Ajax. They felt good to be doing such a nice thing for such an unlucky country. The Iranians loved the US because of the help. By the 70s Reza Shah had become amazingly oppressive. Dissention was quashed by the SAVAK. Reza Shah had become a dictator. Many fought him, but his power had been consolidated by the US and he was damn near bullet proof.

Yours:


In the 70s is when the news of Ajax leaked. The Iranians were dumbfounded. They could not believe that the US did it. It was like finding out that your favorite uncle had sold you into slavery. In 1979 hostages were taken. A group of college kids stormed an embassy and held Americans captive. The college kids were mad and wanted to do something, but after they realized that they were face to face with real people they got scared. During the incident, none of the hostages were beaten, starved, or mistreated. After the drama was over the workers were brought back to the US. Before their arrival the White House gave memos to the press asking them to begin to mention Munchausen’s syndrome. They should talk about relating to ones captors, and how they begin to sympathize because they go crazy. As soon as the workers were landed they were whisked away to a mental care facility. Their credibility had been destroyed.

The American people were pissed. How could our little Iranians bite us like this? They have to be stupid and wars began.

Crowonapost's:


In the 70s is when the news of Ajax leaked. The Iranians were dumbfounded. They could not believe that the US did it. It was like finding out that your favorite uncle had sold you into slavery. In 1979 hostages were taken. A group of college kids stormed an embassy and held Americans captive. The college kids were mad and wanted to do something, but after they realized that they were face to face with real people they got scared. During the incident, none of the hostages were beaten, starved, or mistreated. After the drama was over the workers were brought back to the US. Before their arrival the White House gave memos to the press asking them to begin to mention Munchausen’s syndrome. They should talk about relating to ones captors, and how they begin to sympathize because they go crazy. As soon as the workers were landed they were whisked away to a mental care facility. Their credibility had been destroyed.

The American people were pissed. How could our little Iranians bite us like this? They have to be stupid and wars began.

Yours:


Now the point of all this is that while all the maneuvering was going on the Iranian people, as well as the American people were lied to. The Ajax leaders manipulated public opinion for a quarter century. The Embassy workers had nothing to do with it. The College kids had nothing to do with it. They floated in their bubble believing what their leaders said was the truth. Just like today, but the leaders were practiced politicians who knew the dirty deed that had taken place. This is what they do. they have been groomed in politics. I am not saying Mossadegh was right. Neither Reza Shah. Neither Kermit Roosevelt. Neither FDR. Neither Ike. Neither the Dulles brothers. What I am saying is that their little game of politics took the lives of the residents of Iran who were unaware of any of it. It cost the Embassy workers more than a year of their lives and they were unaware.

Crowonapost's:


Now the point of all this is that while all the maneuvering was going on the Iranian people, as well as the American people were lied to. The Ajax leaders manipulated public opinion for a quarter century. The Embassy workers had nothing to do with it. The College kids had nothing to do with it. They floated in their bubble believing what their leaders said was the truth. Just like today, but the leaders were practiced politicians who knew the dirty deed that had taken place. This is what they do. they have been groomed in politics. I am not saying Mossadegh was right. Neither Reza Shah. Neither Kermit Roosevelt. Neither FDR. Neither Ike. Neither the Dulles brothers. What I am saying is that their little game of politics took the lives of the residents of Iran who were unaware of any of it. It cost the Embassy workers more than a year of their lives and they were unaware.

Yours:


Next time you stand up to support your leaders why don’t you make sure they deserve it. Politicians from all over the world will do what ever it takes to mold public opinion into a thing that will benefit their lifestyle. Rarely does this end up being good for their nation, but they usually don’t care. FDR was different. But as soon as he left and Ike came in we went after South America Africa and the Middle East. The fear many have of America is its bi polar attitude. This is evident now. We are coming off a president who used diplomacy. He also had many military plans, but was unable to persue them. The world only saw the diplomacy. Then when people get tired of that the current administration came in and shocked and awed the world. Now when this one is done we will be back to diplomacy. FDR would not allow the coups anywhere. Then the next administration was coup coup for cocoa puffs. How the hell CAN any other nation trust us? We will be your best friend during one presidency, then the next we are mauling you. I am not promoting. I am not spinning. This is simple history. By the way APOC became British Petroleum the year after Mossadeghs overthrow.

Crowonapost's:


Next time you stand up to support your leaders why don’t you make sure they deserve it. Politicians from all over the world will do what ever it takes to mold public opinion into a thing that will benefit their lifestyle. Rarely does this end up being good for their nation, but they usually don’t care. FDR was different. But as soon as he left and Ike came in we went after South America Africa and the Middle East. The fear many have of America is its bi polar attitude. This is evident now. We are coming off a president who used diplomacy. He also had many military plans, but was unable to persue them. The world only saw the diplomacy. Then when people get tired of that the current administration came in and shocked and awed the world. Now when this one is done we will be back to diplomacy. FDR would not allow the coups anywhere. Then the next administration was coup coup for cocoa puffs. How the hell CAN any other nation trust us? We will be your best friend during one presidency, then the next we are mauling you. I am not promoting. I am not spinning. This is simple history. By the way APOC became British Petroleum the year after Mossadeghs overthrow.

They seem identical to me. The point of this exercise is simple. Either you are Crowonapost, which is fine but I suggest you let people know this to avoid confusion and accusations of plagiarism, or you simply stole an article that is five and a half months old and failed to link it as your source. This of course means you are indeed a plagiarist which then goes to your credibility in all things. The third option is, you and Crowonapost read the same articles and you both stole without source references which leads us back to issues of credibility.



Huh?

Double huh?


Edit: I see you are a member over at the same board with Crowonapost. Stealing a fellow member's post and passing off as your own? Cute.

Credibility: Zero.

[Yurt]

[QUOTE=hjmick;262524]From 1950 something? What? Were they working with Nostradamus? The article clearly makes references to events in the '70s.



Very similar? Really? Let's compare...

QUOTE]


i so love a good pwnd, nice job


http://www.superdimension.net/gifs/memes/03/pwnd.jpg

[April15]

HJMICK,
I am sure I got it from Time magazine.

[Sir Evil]

Homeland security feels I am a threat to the nation so I am on the no fly list. Exposing the truth is not good for America and it's fascist leaders.
The article came from Time magazine 1950 something.

I guess if you connect the dots it's somehow all realted, right? See this is what many people without answers to a simple question do.

How a quoted 1950 something article has to do with my question is a bit unclear but if you feel a warm & fuzzy about, well good for you.

[Sir Evil]

If I had known her I would have porked her!

No you wouldn't of either! Marilyn would never keep company with a member of the no-fly list! :laugh2:

[April15]

No you wouldn't of either! Marilyn would never keep company with a member of the no-fly list! :laugh2:OK. I'll give ya that.

[midcan5]

bla bla bla.
was that intelligent enough for you.:dance:

Well yes, that has given me pause for thought.