Picture of the Day - "Progress" in Iraq / Update

Changed his mind over what ? He made a reality check on the situation and acted accordingly.

Junior's decisions, by comparison, are like a gambler's addictive sins. Let's go manly and see what happens...

i meant that junior's decisions might not be his decisions....

No doubt his decisions are the sum of the "think tank" of his gangster group of chickenhawks. I wonder how much weight his own willpower (supposing he has any) really drags.

I heard somewhere that tying down US military forces in the middle east might be actually a point on AQ's agenda. Hell, not at all impossible.

tying down the us military?

what next?

Pricking them with a rusted spoon

As for tying it down, assuming it was an AQ objective, it's largely done. The shadow of the draft is already looming in the air.

No offense, but you guys talk about American politics and its policies like you have a direct phone line to the White House.....
Especially you, Chandernaogre

Just keep in mind that the European press is rabidly anti-american and they twist the news in one direction just like the American press twists them in the other direction.

This post has been edited by mabadesc on September 30, 2004 03:19 am

But…but .. I do !

Poppycock. In this matter the European press merely echoes the general feeling and is anti Bush. "Rabidly" is questionable, while labeling it anti-American is just a Republican trick to confuse things with misplaced patriotism. Of course it infuriates them to see that the EU is politically closer to the Democrat party. Thats' the real crime of "Old Europe" (haha) and the reason for the venom spitted by the current occupiers of the White House on the Franco German axis.

This is another of those "Monroe" arguments, mabadesc. For example, we have no proof that you have a direct link to Bush's head, yet we respond to your arguments as if they would reflect in totality the policies of your government. When the Iordanian king says that elections in Irak are impossible at this time, because of the instability, and the American government refuses even to acknowledge the realism of the argument, coming from one of the states that, thank God, is not islamic, nor fundamentalist, I have to wonder if Bush or his collaborators have brains. When everyone sees the situation in Israel, which is quite similar, in evolution, with Irak, yet no one takes any measures (apparently, Clinton was the last president who thought that world peace is appropriate for an american president to handle), it's quite clear that what we are all facing is something far more dangerous than during the Cold War. Incertainity... right now, the political attitude of your government made sure that the plutonium and uranium of the soviets has enough islamic personal, thanks to Bush more and more countries (like Iran or North Korea) announced the intensification of their nuclear program...

It's time to sacrifice one man for the sake of the whole hive.

It's one of ours? One from the forum? ... i vote for "XXXXXXXXXXX"


So, your way of thinking is a romanian, maybe a non-american one. But americans, what do they want? Is obvious, all of them liked the "american way" - a position of kings of the world, and i think this mans liked a lot when a new zero-brain is elected. Off course, from time to time, americans take measure/action against his up-highest-white house mans! To rare, im afraid! And this Bush, re-builds an situation ... a good one from them - "el chefe" finds new adversary, a thing necessary for ... "american way" and "american dream".
We shall thanks to all nation who treatened USA for USA existence!


Iama: Go iraqians! Go North Koreeans! Go for all, if you not want to have a "karma" like american natives, really american ones!

Iama

Looks like somebody misses the good old days of Ceausescu.

Go where ? Poor folk can't shake the iron fist of their pseudo-communist masters, can't speak, can't eat, can't live. Yeah, go North Korea ! Thanks Bush for accelerating the "nuclearization" of the country and thus garanteeing long live to the regime. For the undying glory of comrade Kim Shit Punk Li, go North Korea !

Oh well... one would like to share some of their distress and cry "I am Spartacus ! "

But that would sound like Hollywood

This post has been edited by Chandernagore on September 30, 2004 06:06 pm

don't we all??

Well, let me give you guys an example of not speaking so freely and confidently. It's also an example of how the European press is indeed anti-american (by the way, this fact is acknowledged by Kerry supporters alike).

The issue of the military draft being re-instituted in the US. I've seen this mentioned quite a few times on the forum, as if it were a real possibility. Do you guys know what you are talking about with regards to the draft or are you just repeating what you read in the press?

Here is the truth (check it out on the US congress site). There is indeed legislation in Congress asking for reinstating the draft. It was proposed and written by 2 Congressmen - Charles Wrangel and Ernest Hollinger. Surprise!!! Both are left-wing, liberal democrats, and currently if a vote were to be taken in congress, the bill would fail 433 (opposing) and 2 (favoring).

The reason these 2 guys introduced this bill in congress is so the democratic party, mainly Kerry, can keep mentioning in his election campaign that under President Bush the draft will be reintroduced. They're simply trying to scare people so they vote for Kerry.

And, besides the point, historically speaking conservative republicans and the US military have always been against the draft, for the simple reason that they favor a better-trained professional army to an inefficient amateur army. Some of you may remember that President Nixon was the last US president who cancelled the military draft.

On the other hand, once again historically speaking, far-left liberals (usually black)favor the draft because they feel that in a professional army the low-income social classes as well as blacks are over-represented (most peple who enroll in a professional army come from poor and middle class families, and a great deal from black families). By introducing the draft, high-income (rich) classes and proportionally more whites would be forced to participate in the army.

Somehow I doubt that European newspapers go into this much detail when mentioning the military draft in the US. They just feed you alarmist, exaggerated, and in this case false information without going into details. This is not an insult towards you guys, if anything you're the victims.

Now that you know exactly who introduced the draft initiative in Congress (2 black liberal congressmen who openly support Kerry), what the vote actually is (433-2 against the draft), and the reason the bill was introduced (to scare people into voting for Kerry), please try to find these details in the European press. Is this the way it was described in the articles you read?

Heck, it's hard to find this information in the US media as well, since most US journalists are liberals or have a liberal bias. But at least here, even though they didn't mention the details of the "draft bill", they don't have the balls to take it seriously or to talk about it much because even the most liberal US journalists know it's a bunch of crap and they don't want to lose their credibility. You'll only hear this from Hollywood celebrities like Michael Moore and Barbra Streisand and Spielberg who will say just about anything to see Bush defeated.

By the way, you DID know that the vast, vast, majority of Hollywood are liberals, actually some of the most radically liberal people in the US, didn't you?
So keep in mind that next time you criticize Hollywood, you're criticizing the most aggressive pro-Kerry, anti-Bush people in America.

One more European misperception about American politics. Europeans criticize Republicans of kissing Israel's ass.

In actuality, the Republican party has been much more critical and less supportive of Israel than the Democratic party. For this reason, by far the large majority of American jews vote for democrat politicians - and this is a statistical fact!

12 years ago, during the Bush-Clinton election campaign, Bush (the elder) threatened to greatly reduce the financial aid America gives to Israel each year. He did this because Israel was opposed to all American peace talks with Palestine.

A few days after Bush made this statement, I saw an interview on TV with the leader of New York's Jewish Association. The guy said that Bush was going to "pay" for his statement and the jewish community will make sure that he was not going to be re-elected. Sure enough, even though Bush was leading in the polls by 18 points (it was just after the end of the Gulf War), by the time the elections came through a few months later, Bush lost.

You come up with your own conclusions.

The key word here is "than"...

I have talked to so many Israelis and American and Canadiens jews that critisize US as a whole (no matter the party or the both parties) for doing "that kissing activity"...

No matter the party, some things (including that kissing activity) will never change... Regarding the difference between the two parties, I think that (in many respects) it is just cosmetics (IMHO)...

Isn't it any difference between actors and producers- I mean those who actually control the Hollywood ???

I found a very interesting site http://www.raisrael.org/index.aspx on this matter...
"Top 5 Reasons why Most Americans in Israel are Voting to Re-Elect President Bush" ... And about the European misperception look at the point 5.

This post has been edited by johnny_bi on October 01, 2004 12:27 am