George W. Bush

[Daevren]

Yes, the last few years the US has changed, tried to change or helped change about 40 sovereign governments. In much cases with violence.

In most cases it doesn't turn out very pretty.

I have not read that book but I have researched a bit in history. Most of those things happened before I was born or when I was a child so I had to catch up with history.

The thing is that the US doesn't act the way it does because it is the US(ie, the US is bad/evil). They act the way every superpower has acted before. They use and abuse their power, only for their own interest. The most powerful nation has the power to do the most bad things.

And about national politics. The problem is that both parties, democrats and republicans, need the support of multnationals to get money for the campaign. If they don't get support then they won't get elected.

Now business invests in both political parties, its almost a lobby tactic. The end of the story is that both of them serve big business. And that is not always good for the economy, for the poor, for small business, for the middle class etc.

[jr11]

As a non-American, I am watching this election very carefully. It's outcome will confirm whether the American people are really Barbarians, or it is just their government.

[liszmaninopin]

Yeah, America's intervention record post WWII is not really very good-Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Nicaragua, Vietnam, Grenada... you get the point.

[dinosaurtales]

OK.  I'll be the first to admit that I am NOT an expert in international politics (probably neither is anybody else on this board - it's for PIANISTS you know).  But I have been on this planet long enough to know human nature and long term strategy in various capacities.

I am guessing that W has information that I am not privvy to, and that the Iraq thing was step 1 of a very long term strategic move - with what al in mind, we may never really know.

I am also guessing that if we *kick out* the president who is agressively dealing with terrorists when no one else really is (except maybe Britain), then we will send a very bad message to the rest of the world.  Human nature will be saying *look they are lazy, fat, and dumb.  Let's go get them!*  in whatever capacity they think they can.

[liszmaninopin]

True, I'm not an expert in foreign relations by any means, but I have studied a fair amount about geography, and read numberous books about the subject, if that means anything.

I'm certain he has information that he doesn't share with us.  But the point is-he told us things that have turned out to be simply untrue.

Actually, I feel that kicking out Bush will have the opposite affect.  True, he reacts strongly, but rather blindly, lashing out at a country that had basically nothing to do with 9/11 or bin Laden.  Bush, from what I've gathered, is not a respected leader against terrorism in the world; but rather viewed as rather dumb and a menace to world security.  The majority of foreign opinions I am aware of indicate a feeling that if Bush were reelected, it would lower their opinions of the American people's ability to make good decisions.

[liszmaninopin]

Might I ask those who support Bush-what exactly do you like about him?

[ahmedito]

You say that the United States is the only country fighting terrorism seriously, but you are mistaken. Long before september 11th, countries all over the world had terror problems. Spain, Italy, Israel, Egypt and Turkey just to name a few. In the 60s the leaders in those countries did exactly what Bush did now. Invaded, attacked and killed... only to realize that the only thing they did was heighten the terrorism threats. The war on terror in the world has been going on for decades. Bush, after the september 11th attacks, acted like a scared toddler and lashed out blindly completely wrecking any long term strategy the war on terror in the rest of the world has. Iraq may be invaded, but as the rest of the world found out 20 years ago, all he did is triple the terrorist groups' power in the next 10 years. The solution is NOT what Bush did, as Spain found out when it invaded the Basque homelands of ETA, and Israel and Egypt found out with the Palestinians. The number of fanatics will triple in the future.

[Hmoll]

As a non-American, I am watching this election very carefully. It's outcome will confirm whether the American people are really Barbarians, or it is just their government.

Bush might win, and Bush might lose. It has nothing to do with what Americans are like. Americans tend to vote on their pocketbook, and their perception of how things are going for them. The typical American cares about their family and their community. They could care less about what's happening on the other side of the world.

Is that right or wrong? I don't know. I suspect the typical American voter has a lot in common with voters in lots of other countries.

Using words like "barbaric" about the citizenry of another country is simplistic, and shows an incapacity to understand people.

[Daevren]

I know how alot of Americans think about it. I even saw a quote of an american like "I am just an ordinary man, I can't have an opinion about politics".

But those 'innocent' votes cause bad things on the other side of the world.

The point is, if american civillians don't care about things on the other side of the world, then why do the politicians care so much about it. They should only represent their people.

We can really speak about a gap in democracy.

And also, international politics are important. The ordinary man should know something about it, otherwise democracy can't work. Things like economics, war, terrorism, import/export, trade, treaties, are all very important. US voters who shove those issues away still carry responsibility. The people in the US are responsible for their government.

Don't give me the "wir haben das nicht gewusst."-excuse. Politicians should be controlled and criticized, otherwise they will abuse power.

[xvimbi]

I am guessing that W has information that I am not privvy to, and that the Iraq thing was step 1 of a very long term strategic move - with what al in mind, we may never really know.

Are you kidding me? Anybody could have known it long before the 2000 election. Foreign newspapers reported on it, but nobody in the U.S. seemed to care: Check out

https://www.newamericancentury.org

Go to the Letters/Statements and read the Letter to President Clinton on Iraq from 1998 as well as the "Statement of Principles" right underneath it. Look at the list of people who signed this letter.

All this was known for almost a decade. Anybody who says "I did not know they would do things like that" should get a good reality check.

[Daevren]

Paul Wolfowitz said that the reason for the war in Iraq was to get a strong military force in the heart of the middle east/oil producing region.

[dinosaurtales]

Are you kidding me? Anybody could have known it long before the 2000 election. Foreign newspapers reported on it, but nobody in the U.S. seemed to care: Check out

https://www.newamericancentury.org

Go to the Letters/Statements and read the Letter to President Clinton on Iraq from 1998 as well as the "Statement of Principles" right underneath it. Look at the list of people who signed this letter.

All this was known for almost a decade. Anybody who says "I did not know they would do things like that" should get a good reality check.

Actually, I was thinking more about information that the president and a few select people have that NONE of us have, not the press, not NOBODY.  Clandestine stuff.

[Daevren]

Like they already have Bin Laden and are just waiting for the elections?

Don't be so naive. Blair also claims he has evidence and can't show anyone. Blair showed 'the evidence' to our prime minister. And no one else in our country knew about it. Not the minister of foreign affairs, no one. Let alone what the evidence was.

And just have to believe that they are honest, fair and know what ther are doing? Hasn't history proven politicians and leaders are not to be trusted. They should not be given the benefit of the doubt.

[xvimbi]

Actually, I was thinking more about information that the president and a few select people have that NONE of us have, not the press, not NOBODY.  Clandestine stuff.

That is and has historically almost always been a very bad situation to be in as a nation. The difference between a democracy and and a dictatorship (not necessarily a bad thing) or an oligarchy is, that in modern democracies, the people should have all the information to make educated decisions. They should then get involved in the decision making processes and decide which way the country goes. Saying "my leaders have more information than I do, and I trust my leaders will make the right decision" gives the leaders a carte blanche to do whatever they wish to do. All they need to say is "I know more than you do, trust me, I know what I am doing". These leaders are then only accountable when it's too late. The historical fact is that under those circumstances, leaders are more prone to abuse their powers rather than to use them in a constructive and just way. The US is a prime example for that. There are many leaders that had to fold when it became apparent that they were abusing their powers, yet the US citizens still don't have the desire to get involved more. The citizens of a nation should make sure that their leaders don't abuse their powers in the first place, not just kick them out after the fact when the damage is done. In other democracies, the citizens are indeed much more involved. They wanted to know the exact reasons why they should go to war against Iraq. Their leaders didn't have good reasons, so they said "no". In the UK and Spain, the leaders ignored their citizens' decision and had to face the consequences. Spain flatly did not re-elect their leaders.
Cheney keeps saying he knows things that nobody else knows. Rumsfeld, on the other hand, says there is no new information that the Clinton administration (or the UK, or the Russians, or anybody else for that matter) didn't already have. That information was only re-interpreted. What is it? If a country goes to war with thousands of people dying and millions uprooted, permanent damage, etc., I, as a citizen who may actually suffer from going to war, would want to know EXACTLY why I should go. I would not want to go, just because somebody says "I know things that you don't know, but I don't know what I am doing, however God told me to go to war".

[jr11]

Bush might win, and Bush might lose. It has nothing to do with what Americans are like. Americans tend to vote on their pocketbook, and their perception of how things are going for them. The typical American cares about their family and their community. They could care less about what's happening on the other side of the world.
quote]

That's exactly what I suspected, and exactly what I was afraid of. Unfortunately they'd darn well better care about the other side of the world, because their govt is killing innocent people by the thousands. If the American people consider this murder to be trivial enough to re-elect this madman, what are those in the rest of the world supposed to think of US citizens?

"With great power comes great responsibility", says a recent famous quote. The American people hold great power in their ballot. To simply vote with their wallets equates to criminal negligence causing genocide.

[Spatula]

Check out his "Bush-isms"

https://www.pianoforum.net/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=nopi;action=display;num=1095985848

[Nightscape]

I think I've asked this before, but what did he lie about?  How did you know he was lying - i.e. what did you know for a fact that he lied about?  I hear the liar thing all the time, but nobody ever says anything specific, except quoting from newspapers or others, which doesn't count.  

I personally have no particular knowledge of the intricacies of central intelligence, so I wouldn't know if he was lying or not.  He strikes me as an honest person trying to do the best job he can with a lousy situation.

No lies!!!  What about the whole Weapons of Mass Destruction propaganda bit?  Did everybody just forget why America went to war in the first place?  Didn't somebody say that Saddam Hussien was an eminent threat to the US and that there was ample evidence - nay, proof that he was harboring WMDs?

[trunks]

Bushit begotten from Bushit. 
GW's grandparents had sex once too often.
His parents likewise. 

[pianonut]

christians often have more children because they believe God meant for us to procreate.  those who choose not to, become jealous because they see they are outnumbered.

ps i don't believe any government, politician, or action taken in war is necessarily always guided by God.  we have to continuously pray for His direction as a whole nation.  (we are told to pray for our rulers - and we cannot forget to pray for their wisdom, protection, and direction in critical times such as now).  otherwise, we may be taking steps away from His word and into our enemies hands.  if we are cruel, we will recieve cruelty.  i think the world will learn peace by the mistakes that all have made and the return of Christ.

[Barbosa-piano]

 Well, he seems to have a good "dream" of ending terror... (if it is ever possible). But during the election I would vote for him, just because he was the best of two idiots...
(Kerry had plans that would endanger the country greatly. Ex: Getting tougher on Russia- the owner of most of the world's nuclear weapons- on the Nuclear Weapons deal... They wouldn't give a crap for him! He was going to increase tensions with friendly countries). I believe that Bush was too focused on the war while 2 in every 10 Americans where in chaotic state of poverty (there and 295,734,134 Americans), the healthcare system remained untouched, pollution too.Invading the wrong country is fatal for him... Although the world without Saddam Hussein is a better place. He has the old view that so much anexes the church and state. But overall, he is a tough leader when it comes to spreading his policy. It is odd that the president has so many speech problems and no regard for correct English pronunciation. He enforces other countries to fight terrorism, seen as the leader of the war against terror... As Fernandito said, Europe has been struggling with terrorism from Islamic Groups for a while now...
Well, he is not that bad. We have some extra jobs... As I said previously, it is better to have 4 more years of what we already know, than putting Kerry on control praying for the best... He was too insecure and had dangerous propositions...
Only my opinion...

                                                             Mario Barbosa

[Dazzer]

i found this amusing


https://jeffiscool.com/films15/Voting_Machine.wmv