Why the whole world detest Bush?

[eastender]

Defined Loses

Would you feel better if the administration said, "Yes, we made a mistake when we thought there were stockpiles of WMD. But now that we're there, we have to see it through or else it will be worse then when we went in."

Or do you think the best solution is to cut our losses and get out now?

Not sure that the Bush administration has defined or perceived any loses.

Since President Bush cannot run for a third term and is not facing scandal like
President Clinton,the public opinion polls do not matter.From a military standpoint they have a base in Iraq for any and all Middle East operations.
What would be gained by giving up such a strategic position?

 

[eastender]

Afghanistan

Am I wrong but Russia had invaded Afghanistan in the early 80's, right? And how does the USA had reacted to that? And the UN? Sorry, I can't remember very well. My failing memory needs help!

Thanks!

W.

The Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan during the last year of the Carter
Administration.The concept of payback for Viet Nam etc is interesting since the note of gratitude from the Muslim world brought the world Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda.

In retrospective the Carter Administration might have liked a mulligan.

 

[bond_james_bond]

Ubl

The Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan during the last year of the Carter
Administration.The concept of payback for Viet Nam etc is interesting since the note of gratitude from the Muslim world brought the world Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda.

In retrospective the Carter Administration might have liked a mulligan.

IIRC, Osama bin Laden left Saudi Arabia to help the Afghans fight the Soviets. At this point, he was most likely on the CIA payroll as a US ally.

After the Soviets were defeated, the US lost interest in Afghanistan and Osama. The Afghanis may have mistakenly believed that they would receive further economic assistance from the USA.

The fact that the USA ignored Afghanistan after the Soviet defeat meant to the Afghanis that they were just a pawn in part of a larger game. At this point, Osama bin Laden viewed the USA as being no better than the USSR. He then began preaching anti-American dogma to other "snubbed" Afghanis and Islamic terrorists. The Middle East, according to Osama, must get rid of all foreigners, especially Westerners like the USA and UK.

The US involvement in the first Gulf War and the continued presence of US troops in Osama's home nation of Saudi Arabia only made Osama's teachings more credible amongst his followers in Al Qaeda. This gave him the manpower he needed to conduct his terrorist campaign on US targets, the first of which was most likely US troops in Somalia in 1993.

 

[HonestAbe]

Boogeyman does exist! In our minds.

Let's say the boogeyman WAS there at one point... but now he's not.

Is it realistic for the child to then ask:

1) Where'd he go? How'd he get out of the closet?
2) How do I know he's really gone? Since he "left" without anyone noticing how can I be sure he won't come back without anyone noticing either?

For further illustration, let's assume you've got some guns in your house. You also have children. To help avoid misuse or accidents, you keep the guns locked in a gun safe.

One day you open the safe and the guns are gone. You ask your children, "what happened to my guns?" And they reply, "I don't know, but they're not there now, so what's the problem?"

I can bet you'd start looking REALLY hard to find your guns before something awful happened. I think we could probably argue minutia for weeks and never resolve anything. So, to change the topic slightly...

Would you feel better if the administration said, "Yes, we made a mistake when we thought there were stockpiles of WMD. But now that we're there, we have to see it through or else it will be worse then when we went in."

Or do you think the best solution is to cut our losses and get out now?

Absolutely realistic to ask the question Nugie,

I think it was fine for us to take a tough stance and tell the UN that we had intentions of taking matters into our own hands if inspections were not allowed to resume. This had its desired effect because inspections began again. Inspectors by their own account, had unfettered access to whatever it was that they wanted to see, with the use of Satellite technology they could check out any particular site (remember those photos' Colin Powell showed us)that the US said was a weapons facility and either confirm or deny it as such.

The US agreed to let these inspections take place as we had to put forth a good face before Bush could do what he had planned to do no matter what the inspections showed(Downing St. memo), which was time and time again, absolutely nothing. The media reported almost daily that WMD's had been found, at last, only to have it be proven false days later with much less fanfare than the original report. The coverage was so horrendous that to this day there are some people who still believe that we actually did find WMD's. How about that liberal media? LOL.

The boogeyman I used as a metaphorical example definitely does exist. Sometimes it actually exists and other times it is a figment of our imagination which is hard for a child to understand since they remember the unpleasantness of being scared. In this instance it was only in our minds however. The fact that it once was there and was supposed to have been gotten rid of was good reason to ask "where did he go" as you put it. We did ask that question and demanded the answer as well, but when we didn't get the desired answer which would support the administrations underlying secret motive we decided to disregard the inspectors reports.

Contrary to popular belief Saddam did NOT kick them out, they left of their own accord because they were warned that military action was imminent so they should evacuate for their safety. They begged for the chance to finish their work but that was not going to happen since the Administration knew if allowed to do that, the evidence would have kept mounting that there were no WMD's. So clinging to the misinformation campaign put forth by our corporate media the Administration marched to war despite its fears of the boogeyman being proven unwarranted.

Good point about the gunsafe and the seriousness of such a situation. I would immediately call the police and report that a cache of firearms had been stolen and a armed dangerous criminal was on the loose. The place would be crawling with police, FBI and ATF agents. I would call them all. I would call my neighbors and alert them too. I guess this would be the call the authorities approach, instead of making assumptions and doing something crazy like assuming the guy down the street did it because I knew he was an ex-con and firebombing his house before the authorities could investigate. Or after the authorities had investigated and told me that the guy down the street, although being an ex-con, had nothing to do with it, and me deciding for myself that I disagreed with their conclusion and firebombing his house anyway. Thats a metaphorical example of what I saw happen in Iraq.

To answer your question about what would make me feel better. Yes any admission of being wrong about conclusions drawn on WMD's would be nice to hear as it would show that the administration has finally decided to stop insulting everyones intelligence and that the truth actually does matter to them. Even if its a twisted truth which that kind of an admission would amount too since we now know that WMD's were just another excuse, (besides 9/11),to inflame passions in the US in an effort to justify the invasion of Iraq which had already been in the planning stages from the moment Bush took office. If we are going to try and be honest lets be completely honest. Then we could discuss what is best to do now that we are there.

The fact that Saddam is gone is a good thing since he was a corrupt and brutal dictator but it has created new problems that the administration was ill prepared to deal with. Having no exit strategy was not the hallmark of efficiency that we were promised when the Bush administration took office and started placing so many former executives in high places. One would think that good executives can see further than right in front of their face. But we are there and Iraq is a mess. I don't personally think that they are ready, maybe they never will be, for Democracy.

They are a totally different culture which is hard for us to understand. If they do want it though its something they will have to fight for on their own. Our military should not be in the business of playing policeman for them. I say we finish training the troops that are being currently trained and wish them luck. If they have bloody civil war for years so be it. Any new government will understand that any attack on us based in their country will result in swift retribution so they will have all the motivation they need to leave us the hell alone.

I would suggest that if US foreign policy in the Middle East took a more respectful hands off approach we might see them warm to us eventually. We should be in the business of helping them feed and care for their poor if anything. We should develop business with them and attempt to bring them into the fold that way rather than forcing ourselves on them like an overbearing drunken husband intent on violating his timid wife. This will not happen overnight as we have royally screwed things up over there but continuing doing what we are doing right now will do nothing other than keep the wheel of self perpetuating violence spinning on and on.

 

[wakeman]

Still need help!

Not sure of the details, but the USA supplied the Mujahadeen, the Afghani resistance, with weapons and advisors to fight the Russians. Many feel that the US aid helped the Afghanis to defeat the Russians.

This was done in payback for the Russians assisting the Vietnamese and the Koreans against the USA.

These days, everyone does everything through the UN. If the USA ignores the UN, how can we expect other nations to abide by the UN?

I realise that my political culture level is very low. I was sure that it was China that were backing North Korea and North Vietnam. Is there somebody to confirm that I am damn wrong?

Thanks again!

W.

 

[bond_james_bond]

Soviet involvement in Korean War

During the Korean War, the North Korean pilots were equipped with the Mig-15, a top of the line Soviet fighter jet which many feel was superior to the American F-86 Sabre. In addition, US pilots often reported hearing Russian voices coming from the cockpits of several of those Mig-15 jets, as well as seeing non-Chinese pilots.

This article discusses the role of the Soviet Union in the Korean War:

http://www.oah.org/pubs/magazine/korea/oneill.html

 

[wakeman]

Korean war

Thank you B_J_B,

The link you gave me is very interesting. It's a crystal clear resume of the implication of the chineses and the soviets it that war.

Thanks

W.

 

[Nugie]

We're there for the long haul

The fact that Saddam is gone is a good thing since he was a corrupt and brutal dictator but it has created new problems that the administration was ill prepared to deal with. Having no exit strategy was not the hallmark of efficiency that we were promised when the Bush administration took office and started placing so many former executives in high places. One would think that good executives can see further than right in front of their face. But we are there and Iraq is a mess. I don't personally think that they are ready, maybe they never will be, for Democracy.

<snip>

I would suggest that if US foreign policy in the Middle East took a more respectful hands off approach we might see them warm to us eventually. We should be in the business of helping them feed and care for their poor if anything. We should develop business with them and attempt to bring them into the fold that way rather than forcing ourselves on them like an overbearing drunken husband intent on violating his timid wife. This will not happen overnight as we have royally screwed things up over there but continuing doing what we are doing right now will do nothing other than keep the wheel of self perpetuating violence spinning on and on.

Abe,

I hope you understand that I really do appreciate you taking the time to write meaningful responses, and that my replies are meant to invoke discourse and not just to state an opinion. Having said that...

1) EVERYONE READ THIS. There is NO EXIT STRATEGY because there is NO EXIT. I will explain more on this later.
2) The US gives tremendous amounts of foreign aid to the middle east every year. Furthermore, we conduct a very healthy business with them (oil).
3) (summary response to postings other than Abe) The UN does what it was designed to do very well: eliminate system-level or great-power war. It is close to being absolutely useless when dealing with just about anything else. It has no power to enforce or legitimize anything without the participation of member states; the quality of its support depends directly on the quality of the supporting members.. What did the UN leave behind in the Sudan besides thousands of illegitimate babies? Gee, that oil-for-food thing sure worked out well, didn't it?

Ok, here's the thing with the non-existent exit strategy:

We didn't have an exit strategy from Germany or Japan. We weren't facing a rebellion, either, but that's because back in the pre-Hague pre-Geneva days we firebombed Tokyo and Dresden and added a few nukes to boot. The USA simply didn't have a problem killing civilians back then. I'm surprised we didn't try to pass out blankets laden with smallpox (oh, wait... we already did that on our own soil...).

The reason there was no "exit strategy" was because they NEVER PLANNED ON LEAVING. Permanent military bases were established in the grand plan to contain and out-wait the Soviet Union (which is essentially what happened, with three proxy wars thrown in for good measure).

That's why there's no timetable for withdrawal. The bases being established in Iraq are going to be there as long as Ramstein, Osan, Geilenkirchen, Kadena, etc. The US had established a presence in those regions for a specific military objective, as stated before: contain the Soviets, get in an arms race, and wait for their economy to collapse. The objective is different, but Iraqi bases are going to be there basically forever for force projection. That's it. We're never leaving. 1,000 Cindy Sheehans won't make a difference.

The ONLY reason why people might have a problem with this is because of the assumption that the USA is a peace-loving nation. It's not. Americans LOVE shooting things, AND bragging about it afterwards!

For some reason, we apparently LIKE picking fights. We think it's our god-given right to stick our noses into ANYONE'S business just because we have lots of guns. We think that getting involved in crap we have no business being involved in somehow makes our expansionist policies MORE legitimate instead of less.

But I love this country, and I would die defending it. I enjoy the Inalienable Right to Gripe as much as anyone, but it's getting to the point where I want to start a thread called, "Why America, for all its faults, is still the Greatest Nation on Earth."

 

[bond_james_bond]

Only one request

Why America, for all its faults, is still the Greatest Nation on Earth.

If the US would just legalize hobbying and SPs in the same model as Canada or Australia, I will gladly tear up my passport, never leave the USA, and perform cartwheels in the streets all night ... backwards. I'd be a flag-waving American, instead of a frustrated American.

 

[500miles]

If the US would just legalize hobbying and SPs in the same model as Canada or Australia, I will gladly tear up my passport, never leave the USA, and perform cartwheels in the streets all night ... backwards. I'd be a flag-waving American, instead of a frustrated American.

Amen to that, brother. I'm a libertarian. It means that I like low taxes, small, efficient government, and the incentives to work hard instead of relying on handouts, but having obtained that economic freedom, I want a commensurate measure of social freedom. If I want to give $200, in exchange for some hot action, to some 19-year-old hottie who reminds me of the head cheerleader from high school, I shouldn't have to worry about my naming ending up in the newspaper. After all, isn't pussy the ultimate reason that we put in 50 - 60 hours a week at the office? Without pussy, what else is there to look forward to?

 

[Nugie]

Amen to that, brother. I'm a libertarian. It means that I like low taxes, small, efficient government, and the incentives to work hard instead of relying on handouts, but having obtained that economic freedom, I want a commensurate measure of social freedom. If I want to give $200 to some 19-year-old hottie who reminds me of the head cheerleader from high school in exchange for some hot action, I shouldn't have worry about my naming ending up in the newspaper. After all, isn't pussy the ultimate reason that we put in 50 - 60 hours a week at the office? Without pussy, what else is there to look forward to?

Speaking of taxes, has anyone actually gone through the trouble of filling out the paperwork to get the Canadian tax back? How does that work?

 

[HonestAbe]

Excellent discussion.

1) EVERYONE READ THIS. There is NO EXIT STRATEGY because there is NO EXIT.
2) we conduct a very healthy business with them (oil).



That's why there's no timetable for withdrawal. The bases being established in Iraq are going to be there as long as Ramstein, Osan, Geilenkirchen, Kadena, etc. The US had established a presence in those regions for a specific military objective, as stated before: contain the Soviets, get in an arms race, and wait for their economy to collapse. The objective is different, but Iraqi bases are going to be there basically forever for force projection. That's it. We're never leaving. 1,000 Cindy Sheehans won't make a difference.

The ONLY reason why people might have a problem with this is because of the assumption that the USA is a peace-loving nation. It's not. Americans LOVE shooting things, AND bragging about it afterwards!

For some reason, we apparently LIKE picking fights. We think it's our god-given right to stick our noses into ANYONE'S business just because we have lots of guns. We think that getting involved in crap we have no business being involved in somehow makes our expansionist policies MORE legitimate instead of less.

Thanks Nugie,

Your observations are right on target again. I'm not sure how "healthy" a business the oil industry can be put off as though seeing as so many people are dying because of it. If Iraq wasn't in the middle of all that oil we would still be supplying Saddam with WMD's to gas those pesky Kurds'.
Seems that the closer you are to the oil the more dangerous your existence is. Perhaps it is a better point to make about doing business with Iraq and the middle east in general that we need to want them for something other than their oil.

Its got to be very irritating to the people of that region when they see us coveting their natural resources to feed our addiction to gas guzzling innefficient engines while we blindly and without question support their arch enemy, Israel. Especially when most of those natural resources are privatized and the proceeds go to the Saudi Royal family and others so lucky as to own a piece of the pie. Very little of that Trillion dollar industry makes its way into the hands of average Arabs. I've seen the way they live and I wouldn't trade places with them. I much prefer western civilization. I like indoor plumbing, clean water out of a faucet(not a bucket), good medical care, and refrigeration, just to name a few things.

As for the "NO exit strategy", I think that is exactly what Bush and his oil mongering friends would like to do. I can absolutely picture everything you said in my mind as if its happening right now. Wait a minute, it is happening right now! I still feel that there is too much opposition for this to become permanent though.

The GOP is now starting to show cracks in the plaster that holds it together. I can't imagine that Americans will elect any nominee in '08 that makes such a suggestion. I think in all likelihood that we will stay there for another year, and then start drawing down til the next election when the final batch of troops will be paraded in front of America with signs of "Mission Accomplished" in an effort to shore up support for the GOP nominee at just the right time. Americans do have a problem with killing civilians and they also have a problem with American troops getting killed.

As much as I know you are right about the intentions/desires of some politicians I have too much faith that Americans over time will realize that this all has to end and dispose of those who do not listen to the will of the people. America is a great country no doubt. My biggest gripe is that sometimes it takes us a while to catch on to our politicians bullshit and apply pressure to them to put an end to it.

How long must we sing this song?

 

[bond_james_bond]

Canada Visitor's Tax Refund

Speaking of taxes, has anyone actually gone through the trouble of filling out the paperwork to get the Canadian tax back? How does that work?

That's called the Canadian Vistor's Tax Refund, Form GST176. You can get the form at your hotel, in the airport, or online here:

http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/E/pbg/gf/gst176/README.html

You get home, fill it out, and mail it in along with your hotel receipts. I did this for the first few trips I took to Canada. It took 3 months for me to get my check back from the Canadian government; it comes all the way from Vancouver. After that, I got lazy and haven't been faithful in claiming the refund.

You can also get the instant tax refund at some border crossings, just before you leave Canada. But I've only seen this at Niagara Falls.

 

[Red Paul]

. . . Iraqi bases are going to be there basically forever for force projection. That's it. We're never leaving. 1,000 Cindy Sheehans won't make a difference.

The ONLY reason why people might have a problem with this is because of the assumption that the USA is a peace-loving nation.

Another reason is that we don't have the manpower and imposing a draft (for this war) would mean political death for the GOP.

For what it's worth, I disagree that Americans are especially belligerent as a people. Like just about anyone, we seen our opportunities and we took 'em. It's just that our opportunities have been much larger than most countries ever encounter.

 

[Nugie]

Another reason is that we don't have the manpower and imposing a draft (for this war) would mean political death for the GOP.

For what it's worth, I disagree that Americans are especially belligerent as a people. Like just about anyone, we seen our opportunities and we took 'em. It's just that our opportunities have been much larger than most countries ever encounter.

I disagree with the notion that we don't have the manpower. My OPINION is that without imposing martial law (which would be easily possible with the manpower currently in place), NO amount of manpower would be able to stem the violence in Iraq.

 

[Red Paul]

Well, martial law was how the occupation started out; that didn't keep the insurgency from reaching full steam by summer 2003.

Not to rehash familiar points, but Shinseki estimated that a secure occupation of Iraq would need several times the number of troops we have there now. Nothing since the invasion suggests he was wrong.

 

[Nugie]

Well, martial law was how the occupation started out; that didn't keep the insurgency from reaching full steam by summer 2003.

Not to rehash familiar points, but Shinseki estimated that a secure occupation of Iraq would need several times the number of troops we have there now. Nothing since the invasion suggests he was wrong.

Shinseki was also concerned more with letting the Army wear black berets then he was with providing troops with proper training and equipment. Whoops, all of a sudden, we're at war, and the Army isn't battle-ready! Hrm...

Full martial law (mandatory curfews, control of all movement, minor infractions result in being shot on sight) was NEVER established. Furthermore, the insurgency had two waves: the disorganized Baath remnants, and then, the foreign fighters from Syria, Iran, and our bestest friends in the universe, Saudi Arabia.

 

[HonestAbe]

Friends forever!

our bestest friends in the universe, Saudi Arabia.

Nice Nugie,

Those guys really do like us don't they? Who would like to give the Saudi Royal family a good kick in the balls and tell them we expect enough free oil to cover the cost of the War? After all we were told that the Iraqi oil would pay for the war. Seeing as that never materialized why not make the Saudis' pay, through the nose. I'm sick of their backdoor funding of terrorist organizations while the Bushes have stroked them off for years to get filthy rich. Just another reason why so many of us detest George Bush.

Gas is $3.20USD a gallon for regular today. Anyone for a fillup? Gasoline is now more expensive than soda, a comparison long used to convince us that the price of gas is "not that bad" when compared to things such as pepto bismol !?!? To those who keep giving us those absurd comparisons, F*** YOU, give me a car that runs on Pepsi and I'll drive it! The market is weakening and the economy is in danger of faltering due to extreme energy prices. Wait til this winter when people start freezing to death because they can't heat their homes. Wait til consumers stop spending because they can barely afford to get to work and back, and still eat. Thanks W. for giving us another reason to detest you.

Must stop now, blood pressure rising rapidly, feeling need to choke the shit out of something.

 

[Nugie]

Those guys really do like us don't they? Who would like to give the Saudi Royal family a good kick in the balls and tell them we expect enough free oil to cover the cost of the War?
Must stop now, blood pressure rising rapidly, feeling need to choke the shit out of something.

Abe,

Sounds like you need a visit to Montreal...

Oh, and FWIW - obviously I was trying to be controversial. Sure got a whole buttload of responses, didn't I?

 

[orallover]

Gas is $3.20USD a gallon for regular today. Anyone for a fillup? Gasoline is now more expensive than soda, a comparison long used to convince us that the price of gas is "not that bad" when compared to things such as pepto bismol !?!? To those who keep giving us those absurd comparisons, F*** YOU, give me a car that runs on Pepsi and I'll drive it! The market is weakening and the economy is in danger of faltering due to extreme energy prices. Wait til this winter when people start freezing to death because they can't heat their homes. Wait til consumers stop spending because they can barely afford to get to work and back, and still eat. Thanks W. for giving us another reason to detest you.

I am not trying to defend anyone since I also hate the high gaz price. However, I also point out that I can point out a car that do not run on pepsi/coke but still runs using a lot less gaz, not like SUVs or any other gaz eating machines which seems to be the favourites in US and also in Canada lately.
What car is that? SMART. I know, it is small and only seats 2. however, instead of buy another SUV as a 2nd car, get one of these or even one of those Hybird from Honda or Toyota. and drive it almost all the time - grocery (damn it you are buying food to eat not in a car display show), rent/return movies, all those little things. and use those gaz eating cars when you really need them. In fact I am looking into getting a SMART for myself. I was thinking of getting SAAB but a few recent events has changed my mind.