George Galloway blasts the Senate

I simply think Bush has been over-vilified and that too often your media reinforce nothing but the caricature.

Heh, Under-villified if anything!

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Lord Ellpus wrote:

WhoodaThunk wrote:
JustWonders wrote:
A poll here in the U.S. might reveal that Americans aren't much interested in what Canadians think.

Edit "Britons" for "Canadians" and I believe we've come full circle.

Edit "World" for "Britons", and the circle is complete.

I think that now we are getting to the truth, dont you?

Qualify "Americans" with "50.7% of Americans" and we've positively achieved detente.

0 Replies

WhoodaThunk wrote:

Qualify "Americans" with "50.7% of Americans" and we've positively achieved detente.

I've heard that there was a high number of illiterates in the USA - but thus high ... Shocked

0 Replies

Watch it there, Walter.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

WhoodaThunk wrote:
Qualify "Americans" with "50.7% of Americans" and we've positively achieved detente.

I've heard that there was a high number of illiterates in the USA - but thus high ...

That wacky German humor ...

0 Replies

For a spectacle of blindness and paralysis in the face of obvious challenge, and governments unwilling to tell their voting publics truths they surely know, but more than willing to distract their voters by blaming others for problems of their own making - one need look no farther than the "wise" political leaders of Old Europe. If any of them ever had the stature or moral authority to give us advice, that is surely gone now. Most of the criticisms of the U.S. levied by the governments, media and many people in Europe have been based on the generally unstated assumption that the economic, political and social security they presently enjoy can be sustained, and the unfounded presumption that it is the United States that threatens it.

It is gradually becoming evident that they - on their own - are no longer able to sustain these things. Sadly both electorates and governments are unwilling to face facts that become more obvious with each passing day. As the saying goes, "There is no one so blind as he who will not see." Unhappy facts have a way of finally overwhelming all forms of blindness - Europe has several more major political and economic shocks before it. What is worse their governments are doing nothing to prepare for them. I'm sure they will find a way to blame us for many of them. The only fitting response for that is contempt.

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

Sadly both electorates and governments are unwilling to face facts that become more obvious with each passing day. As the saying goes, "There is no one so blind as he who will not see." Unhappy facts have a way of finally overwhelming all forms of blindness - Europe has several more major political and economic shocks before it. What is worse their governments are doing nothing to prepare for them. I'm sure they will find a way to blame us for many of them. The only fitting response for that is contempt.

Well, I must admit that I feel a bit hurt, when you look at me (and the other Europeans) with contempt.

But of course you still have the oportunity - to alter a bit Brecht's famous quote - not only to change the government but to dissolve the people and elect another another. Or use some different method to get the same result.

0 Replies

George is there any idea person or belief with which you dont agree with that does not fill you with contempt?

Supposing I was to suggest your attitude displays an insufferable arrogance, do you hold that in contempt?

0 Replies

I'll confess to being a bit overbearing in debate. However you should recognize that - even on these threads - the actions of the people and government of this country are the subject of rather frequent and intense criticism, both in terms of their intent and their execution from our European friends. This has been frequently accompanied by expressions of both contempt and condemnation so numerous that they are hardly noticed anymore.

There is relatively little of it here in response - but i try to do my part. I do believe the substance of my post above is particularly accurate, apt. and timely. I bear no malice towards Europe or Europeans. Quite the contrary (except perhaps the French government).. However I do observe that many give with far more alacrity and grace than they take it. The severest form of contempt would be to pretend not to notice that and just sail on.

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

However you should recognize that - even on these threads - the actions of the people and government of this country are the subject of rather frequent and intense criticism, both in terms of their intent and their execution from our European friends. This has been frequently accompanied by expressions of both contempt and condemnation so numerous that they are hardly noticed anymore.

Okay, so I'll have to live on (if you allow such) as a condemned.

(Wondering a bit now, if this makes me feel better than being contempt.)

0 Replies

Presumptions of superiority:

"[the Empire is] under Providence, the greatest instrument for good the world has seen."
George Nathaniiel Curzon, future viceroy of India

"Our nation is the greatest force for good in history." George Bush

"In Britain's case, this presumption of superiority was not lost on the subject races, and their resentment fanned the bonfire that ended Britain's moment." Karl Meyer, from "Forty Years in the Sand...What happened the last time freedom marched on Iraq" Harpers, June 2005

0 Replies

Now, here's an Iraqi official's statement which wouldn't much surprise Galloway (or a whole lot of other folks)...

Quote:

Iraq's justice minister on Tuesday accused the United States of trying to delay Iraqi efforts to interrogate Saddam Hussein, saying ''it seems there are lots of secrets they want to hide.''

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Saddam-Trial.html

0 Replies

blatham, That is just too funny to contemplate. "Secrets the US is trying to hide" will come out sooner than later. This administration will deny everything. In the mean time, there are more insurgency attacks that continue to remind Iraqis and some people in this country that this administration's Iraq goals is a failure. It's no longer a matter of looking for "success," but to figure out how to minimize the cost to Americans.

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Now, here's an Iraqi official's statement which wouldn't much surprise Galloway (or a whole lot of other folks)...

Quote:
Iraq's justice minister on Tuesday accused the United States of trying to delay Iraqi efforts to interrogate Saddam Hussein, saying ''it seems there are lots of secrets they want to hide.''

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Saddam-Trial.html

They're delaying so the Americans can bring in those ruthless Guantanamo interrogators with boxes and boxes of Fruit Loops:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/06/21/saddam.guards.ap/index.html

0 Replies

At 9 tonight, frontline has a documentary on the privatization aspect of the US military's presence in Iraq.

0 Replies

Providing comfort to the enemy - Chuck Hagel. Put the bastard in irons. Broil up his first-born male child and listen to Rush eat him on air. Then drop a small nuke on US News. Goddamn evil-doers are everywhere.

Quote:

Nebraska Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel is angry. He's upset about the more than 1,700 U.S. soldiers killed and nearly 13,000 wounded in Iraq. He's also aggravated by the continued string of sunny assessments from the Bush administration, such as Vice President Dick Cheney's recent remark that the insurgency is in its "last throes." "Things aren't getting better; they're getting worse. The White House is completely disconnected from reality," Hagel tells U.S. News. "It's like they're just making it up as they go along. The reality is that we're losing in Iraq."

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/050627/27bush.htm

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
blatham wrote:

A recent poll in Canada (headlined in the Vancouver Sun) noted that Canadians now consider George Bush and Osama as equally dangerous to world peace. I think what bothers me most about that is my suspicion both men would likely respond to this polling result with a sense of pride and accomplishment.

As difficult as it is to restrain myself in response to this, I shall attempt to do so.

What is there to learn of Canadians from this poll?

1) They have a sophisticated understanding of global politics and recognize that the President of the US has a greater influence on world peace than just about everyone else in the world by virtue of the extreme power of America

2) They are (at least as represented by the majority of those polled by the Sun) absolute idiots

I'm afraid I have to vote for #2

If the poll suggested that Canadians believe that Bush is far more the determinator of world peace than Bin Laden, I would have voted for #1. Instead, they believe that Bush is more dangerous to world peace, and therefore I am, unfortunately, forced to go with #2.

Let's try and examine this rationally.

If Osama Bin Laden surfaces again, it will likely be in connection with an attack on some nation or another (and most likely the US). Will such an attack damage World Peace? This is uncertain. One might argue, however, that without 9/11 there would probably not have been military intervention in Afghanistan or Iraq and so it is quite possible that another Bid Laden moment might precipitate additional military operations, and that to the extent that regional military operations damage World Peace, Bin Laden will be responsible.

On the other hand, President Bush surfaces each and every day (and putting aside Iraq to which I will return) there is simply no reason to believe that he has any policies, notions, wishes or desires to disturb World Peace.

There are several hot spots in the world:

North Korea
The Taiwan Straits
Iran
Palestine

If Canadians, or others, can illustrate to me how the Bush Administration is fanning the flames in these regions, and pushing the situations towards military conflict rather than diplomatic stalemate, if not resolution, I will be more than happy to stand corrected.

If I have missed a hot spot where there is evidence that the Administration is threatening to unleash the Dogs of War, please educate me and I will stand corrected.

The notion that Bush and his minions are war-mongers is unsustainable.

Since Bush has taken office there have been two military operations: Afghanistan and Iraq.

Most of the world (including Canada - I think) have no problem with our military action against Afghanistan given 9/11.

Iraq is, of course, a different story, but despite the dire (and frankly hysterical) predictions of members of The Left, invading Iraq did not result in World War III. There is, in fact, far less than a state of peace in Iraq, but who believes that World Peace hinges on the goings on in Mosul?

As far as this little bon mot:

"I think what bothers me most about that is my suspicion both men would likely respond to this polling result with a sense of pride and accomplishment."

Anyone who truly believes this is the ass of a horse...or moose, as the case may be.

dear vile detestable texas toad

Of course, the Canadian poll doesn't differ measurably from polls of regular folks anywhere else in the world, including jolly England.

But what the heck, if the North Koreans can love their big guy regardless, then how can I indict you for the same.

edit...thought just occured...music-video remake...Osama, Kim Jong-il, Bush and Michael Jackson..."I'm bad, I'm bad, and ya know it."

whadyathink?

I think you need to stick to teaching Canadian students why Canada is actually the brightest hope for a world in disarray, and steer clear of video productions.

And if you are right about worldwide polls, then, sad to say, regular folk anywhere else in the world, including Jolly Old England, are absolute idiots. I don't believe that to be the case because I have too much faith in mankind in general and the Brits in particular. I believe these sort of polls simply reflect a pervasive distaste with GW. Nothing wrong with that, he's not acting in their interests.

[/color]

0 Replies

As for Americans caring what Canadians and Brits et al think, clearly we do because we usually comment upon, rather than ignore, their insults. Not enough to keep us awake at night, but everyone wants to be loved and it is a bit bothersome when it appears so many people around the world do not feel so for us.

I'm not sure, however, how much people in other countries really care about what Americans think.

I guess they care if we all think that their populations are traitorous little vermin that should be wiped from the face of the earth, just as I care if the hulking neanderthal sitting to my right at the local bar is thinking "Hate Finn...MUST SMASH!"

But do they really care about what Americans think about their cultures, their leaders, their scientifically brilliant but politically childish zoologists?

If a poll in the US indicates that 57% of all Americans think that Canadians are inconsequential in the grand scheme of things, do they rend their breasts and run out to protest in the streets for a public works program to improve their relevance and their stature in American eyes?

There are, I believe, nations in the world who do care what Americans think of them, but none of them are in Old Europe or North America. Frankly, I care more about what Ukrainians and Afghans think about Americans than what Canadians, the French, or Brits think of us, but then I am only one American, and cannot possibly speak for all my countrymen.

As far as powerful nations go, I would suggest that the US cares more about what other people think than their predecessors or contemporaries (note, Canada and the UK are not their contemporaries), but understand that for some this not enough.

0 Replies

This is probably best discussed on another thread (have you seen one?) but I heard on the radio this morning that Congress was refusing to let the Bush nominee Bolton go as ambassador to the UN, and more generally, that just a couple of months into his second term, Mr Bush's ability to influence matters was palpably on the wane.
Is this so, from those nearer to the action?

0 Replies

McT, It seems Bush might appoint Bolton when congress goes on recess on July 4. ;(

0 Replies

George Galloway blasts the Senate

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know