0
   

The US, UN & Iraq III

 
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 08:52 am
one of the rather constant refrains from the Bush speakers is that those words were not important anyway, um well if they were not important why were they in what is regarded as the single most important speech the president makes every year?
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 09:26 am
It is called simply, "hypocrisy"!
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 09:39 am
We have all heard the expression "Twisting in the wind". That is exactly what the Bush White House is about at the present time.

As for the State Of the Union Speech. What is it? A true picture of the state of the union or Rah, Rah speech to tell the people what they want to hear or at least to pump up it's loyalists. In reality how meaningful is it? Or has it ever been?
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 09:49 am
Just the same au, there is a sort of sanctity of the State of the Union message that one expects no boldface lies.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 09:55 am
BillWBillW
True but have we ever had such a bold faced liar at center stage? Or is it fool?
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 10:06 am
Me thinks it is the fool, now we need to get a fool's cap for him to wear!
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 10:16 am
How the World views the US government and Americans?
Posted in error
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 01:29 pm
707 Smile
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 02:26 pm
Even with a UN mandate, the decision to send soldiers to Iraq would require considerable political soul-searching for many countries because of widespread opposition to the war.
The failure to find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has reinforced the feeling in Europe and elsewhere that the war should have never been fought. Recent doubts about claims that Iraq had tried to import uranium from Africa, as U.S. President George W. Bush maintained in his State of the Union address in January, have revived debate in Europe over the basis for the war.
That in turn would make it hard for governments to convince their publics of the need to risk the lives of their own soldiers to help America out of a problem of its own making.
"Whatever they may have achieved with their bombs and missiles in Iraq ... is overshadowed by the suspicion, which is being confirmed ever more, that for the sake of the war they grotesquely exaggerated the threat posed by Saddam Hussein," Germany's Sueddeutsche Zeitung said today.
Germany's Berliner Zeitung newspaper said that the governments in Washington and London "rather than those in Berlin and Paris are today finding it most difficult to justify their actions" in Iraq.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1058266370594&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968705899037
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 02:38 pm
Some members of congress are finally questioning the justifications used by this administration to go to war with Iraq. It's about time. c.i.
0 Replies
 
owi
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 02:43 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
Some members of congress are finally questioning the justifications used by this administration to go to war with Iraq. It's about time. c.i.


Why so late?
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 02:57 pm
owi
Quote:
Why so late?


Because it was not politically expedient till now, and most of them are political cowards. With no guts or integrity.
0 Replies
 
owi
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 03:02 pm
au1929 wrote:
owi
Quote:
Why so late?


Because it was not politically expedient till now, and most of them are political cowards. With no guts or integrity.


Does this institution - and its members - represent the American population?
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 03:18 pm
Well it used to , we don't call them 'the American population' now , we call them fat cats, the top 1%, political allies, lobbyist, or any number of expletive endearments.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 03:32 pm
Hey, that's purty un-Merican there, we gots the best government money can buy . . .
0 Replies
 
mamajuana
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 03:34 pm
Depends on who's buying what.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 03:39 pm
owi
Once elected they represent themselves, their party and their pocket book.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 03:48 pm
a
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.
-Benjamin Franklin
0 Replies
 
Kara
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 07:23 pm
G, is that pic really U?
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Tue 15 Jul, 2003 07:42 pm
Well, not really ....... it's my evil twin Skippy.


Sheeeesh , can't a guy have any fun .........
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The US, UN & Iraq III
  3. » Page 158
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.15 seconds on 05/04/2025 at 11:33:04