About your poll figures, guess they have more up to date polls in Israel than they do here. My polls say that people do not want war without UN support, a true coalition and only if there are no deaths. And then on the economy, tax cuts, and all domestic issue - he's a fissle. But, I guess we should turn overseas for the actual poll results.............
Quote:Whom? Iraqi dissenters? What for? They are not involved in Saddam's trespasses...
They're gonna be just as dead!!!!! All with many, many of our troops - for what!!!! OILLLLLLLLLLLLLLL and POLITICS
I think, you exaggerate the danger. It seems to me that Saddam's army (including the Republican Guard and whatever else) will become AWOL several hours after the first bombs fall. So there will be very few Iraqi casusalties, and almost none of the American ones.
guernica
BillW, I agree with you. Bush does'nt speak for me either, or for millions of Americans. We need regime changes in both Iraq and the United States.
as soon as i get into the top 8% that benefit from the Bush tax incentive i will let Bush speak for me.
guernica
I don't think you would, Dyslexia. That would not be in your long-term interest.
Rationalizing the curtain over "Guernica" won't hold any water. I should have been protested by U.S. officials if, in fact, it wasn't done by their suggestions behind the scenes (as if this was the first time it every happened in our government). We're suppose to be holding up ideals as exemplary to the world and trying to compare how better off we are because we aren't as bad as another country is ludicrous.
Actually, more than half no longer support Bush's policies according a poll I heard on the radio this morning, a poll with an anomaly. I can't remember the exact numbers, but these are within a couple of points: Bush's general popularity is a 54%; approval of his economic policies is as +/- 37%; approval of his international policies is at +/- 45%. The anomaly is the over-arching "I just like the guy" 54% in the face of considerable disapproval with respect to his policies.
My interpretation of the poll also Tartarin. Seems some people like to say that the 54% approval is for his policy. Some people just like jerks, I like a few myself - they're so, oh, I don't know - ahhhhh, jerky!
Thanks for clearing that up, Bill.
guernica
Yeah, but THIS lacky, dummie, jerk is VERY dangerous!
JLN, scary - ain't it, Henry VIII in control again!
steissd<
It would seem that the people of Israel are steeped in the concept that "violence begets violence."
Americans, on the other hand, have no Palestinians to worry about. We just have a president who models a Texas cowboy, shooting his mouth off in every direction and with no mandate from the American people.
Israel would have been left for others to conquer had it not been for the taxpayers of the United States. I suggest you remember that as you criticize the hand that feeds you.
On the contrary, Williamhenry, I support the U.S. foreign policies, you have obviously misunderstood my postings. I have a reputation on the A2K as the most pro-Bush participant.
Well, that is not a position of which I would be very proud. Does the U.S. have a foreign policy except to bomb Iraq back to the Stone Age?
Don't blame me, however, I voted for Al Gore.
guernica
And it is mind boggling that the Bushies claim this to be a legitimate war because it has a simple majority of support from the American public--I should think that something so horrendous as WAR (with the death of many young Americans and the unknown consequances of post war realities) would require something approaching unanimity--not to mention the lack of international support/agreement regarding our aggressivness. It is going to be an historical phenomenon how the Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice Coalition has managed to hijack and misuse the most powerful country in the world for their own economic interests.
A european protestor was seen on TV carrying a sign, " No More Mad Cowboy Disease", a common sentiment, I'm sure.
guernica
One sign of a protestor says, Let's bomb Texas, they have oil. Another says "Sacrifice our SUVs, not our children".
I surely do not blame you, Williamhenry3. As far as I understand, anyone is free to vote for any candidate he considers to be a right person. I blame U.N. protocol clerks that acted in complete absence of tact while covering the Guernica that, IMHO, has no connection to the current situation. I do not think that anyone plans bombing Iraq into Stone Age. And there will be no necessity to do so. It seems to me that all the Iraqi armed forces personnel will be AWOL several hours after the U.S. military action starts.
steissd, I think you're right insofar that that's what the Bush camp expects -- a quick surrender due to rebellion from within. Most of the horrendous buildup of forces which has taken place is really just an extreme form of saber-rattling. We have to convince them we're serious about an invasion so that, perhaps, a real invasion won't be necessary.
But the problem with that scenario is that such a massive show of force could have the opposite effect from that intended. Iraquis who despise Saddam Hussein privately could well rally to protect Iraq regardless of who's in power there. They may not like the Americans coming in to "help" them unseat Saddam. GW Bush is walking an awfully dangerous tightrope. One misstep could easily lead to a tragic situation, even to a new world war.
This, of course, has nothing to do with Guernica. You're right -- not even Bush has any intentions of bombing Iraq back into the Stone Age. (They're not that far from it anyway, as it is.) And the coverup of the mural, really, was nothing more than an exercise in stupidity.
I continue to read a lot of whistling in the dark in the best scenerio contrivances of those who are definitely not military geniuses.
In all this supposition, did they consult their horoscope today?
