Great: Bush seeks Iran regime change

[Clayton.]

That be cool if i was the president.

[Sir_K]

The US tried to send in attack helicopters in the 1980s to only rescue 6 marines.

A sandstorm came along and destroyed every single helicopter and all the pilots were killed. Long live the Iran contra affair.

If the US goes into Iran, now that would most certainly be Bush's Vietnam, without a doubt.

And while the young and educated Iranian public isnt completely thrilled by their religious theocracy, they are even less thrilled by the US.

If Bush and Rumsfeld want a regime change in Iran, their best option would be to stay the hell out of it. Intervention would only plant the roots of the theocracy deeper, and help them garner more support from their own people.

[Harlem Cripz]

Best part of politics...

Whoever is running, is always locked into Political Controversy, heated with nothing but "Broken Promises", "Failed Outcomes", and "Unjustified Mistakes" lol..

Our own prime minister was in his own controversy, political hickups n the funny thing is every single time In our own country when it comes to wanting something new, for the majority of the running Candidates race, they are "Dead-Locked" until the country either realizes change either takes time, n switching over to a different type of goverment will either Hinder the progress done, starting a new or itll have a shift up..

Look who came out with not a strong majority but a strong "Enough" majority to completly anul following a public poll opinions, a person holds there opinion but it can be changed in a instant..

There is a bunch of shit that should have been covered Through the clinton Adminstration, ranging from "Four" different aspects of security to prevent a threat..

There have been "Six" instances in the Bush adminstration that have been traced to the "Failed" attempt on Security, however since Both have "National Security" as there number one focus of there Election and it is the majority of Americans biggest concern, eventually something "Had" to be done, changes "Have/Need" to be done, the economy regardless of how you look on it, in the last quarter for the US has gone up, Security Has been increased, it has opened up a whole new outlook on how the US is to handle Every form of National Inteligence, and Positive changes have come forward..

For every positive though, there is at least some negatives, but at the same time to sum it up, America is going to not want to shift there style of goverment due to the fact that in case another attack happens, they are under the leadership of someone who has handed it already and "Even" if "Bush" isnt the best choice, Kerry has qualities that due excel Bush, especially in the Economy along with when it comes to Healthcare, but there going to be too worried about a change, and Give another nominee the chance to unseat bush when the world is "Safer"..

Everything has its mix ups, even the former national adviser to Clinton along with now being kerrys advisor stepped down due to documents relating to 9/11..

Like him or Hate him, Bush just really took a step that was already needed and if he didnt, and the 9/11 attack happened four years later in the kerry adminstration, Republicans would be reaming on the democrats for around the exact same aspects that you just cant control, polls would be locked however it would probally end up with the democrats winning due to the fact that once its voting time, the majority of americans/canadians/any eligible voter, either wants fast change, or to just keep it the way it is and sicne you dont get fast change, they just like to work not from the bottom up anymore, however a couple of steps up n keep working from there, thats the way its gonna end up in the coming election to, peace

[Sir_K]

Nice response Cripz

While I agree with you that the previous Clinton administration has it's own skeletons in it's closet, and that we have our own questionable government issues up here, I think that the fact that you have obviously taken enough time to think about these issues of the day is commendable.

Anybody who follows what is going on in the world and politics unless blind notices that every government has its strengths, as well as it's faults, and that it is usually the faults reported to the public quickly, and the strengths rarely get reported until the person who did the work in office is dead.

However, with Bush individually (not even so much his father HW Bush, although they share many of the same ideologies) the big fear is the "with us or against us" mentality and the casual and hypocritical manner with which he decides which regimes "should be changed" and which regimes "do not need changing".

A glaring example of this is to be found in the Iraq war itself;

- The US has more weapons of mass destruction than any other country in the world. North Korea posesses nuclear weapons, which are worse than he beleived Saddam posessed, yet the pressure was applied to Iraq. Pakistan is a dictatorship with nuclear (and probably chemical!) weapons whos president rose to power through a bloody military coup much like Saddam, yet Pakistan is a "valuable ally" of the United States.

- Bearing in mind that hindsight is 20/20, all kinds of experts in the field indicated that there was no known link between Al Queda and Iraq. Even after a thorough review of all of the intelligence, and after Tony Blair has accepted full responsibility for the intelligence failure, Mr. Bush continues to assert that there was a link, and that the war was justified based on that link.

- Prior to the war, Hans Blix, an expert inspector on the ground indicated that the inspections process was working, and that he had found no evidence of covert weapons programmes. His expert advice was ignored, and after the war he has been proven an expert as the weapons have never been found and even Bush has given up on looking for them.

- It was Al-Queda, not Iraq, Iran, Syria, or any other country that orchestrated the attacks. Yet Mr. Bush has diverted massive amounts of attention and resources to these causes, while Osama Bin Laden has not been found. He has used the Al-Queda threat extensively to prop support for these other initiatives.

It is these things that scare people globally about George W Bush. Outside of the US, Bush receives less than 20% approval, showing that the world as a whole is a lot more scared of Bush than US citizens, who are giving approval wavering in the high 40s to low 50s, neck and neck with Kerry.

And considering the tremendous responsibility of the United States, harboring more weapons and weapons of mass destruction and raw firepower than any other country in the world, it is most certainly understandable that peoiple all around the earth, would put aside their own issues (ie. What motive drove Paul Martin to push out a good 3 term Prime Minister in an internal party coup) to watch intently what the man with his finger on the trigger to all that power, who has shown the itch to use it without carefully verifying all of the facts.

[Harlem Cripz]

Originally Posted by Sir_K

Nice response Cripz

While I agree with you that the previous Clinton administration has it's own skeletons in it's closet, and that we have our own questionable government issues up here, I think that the fact that you have obviously taken enough time to think about these issues of the day is commendable.

Anybody who follows what is going on in the world and politics unless blind notices that every government has its strengths, as well as it's faults, and that it is usually the faults reported to the public quickly, and the strengths rarely get reported until the person who did the work in office is dead.

However, with Bush individually (not even so much his father HW Bush, although they share many of the same ideologies) the big fear is the "with us or against us" mentality and the casual and hypocritical manner with which he decides which regimes "should be changed" and which regimes "do not need changing".

A glaring example of this is to be found in the Iraq war itself;

- The US has more weapons of mass destruction than any other country in the world. North Korea posesses nuclear weapons, which are worse than he beleived Saddam posessed, yet the pressure was applied to Iraq. Pakistan is a dictatorship with nuclear (and probably chemical!) weapons whos president rose to power through a bloody military coup much like Saddam, yet Pakistan is a "valuable ally" of the United States.

- Bearing in mind that hindsight is 20/20, all kinds of experts in the field indicated that there was no known link between Al Queda and Iraq. Even after a thorough review of all of the intelligence, and after Tony Blair has accepted full responsibility for the intelligence failure, Mr. Bush continues to assert that there was a link, and that the war was justified based on that link.

- Prior to the war, Hans Blix, an expert inspector on the ground indicated that the inspections process was working, and that he had found no evidence of covert weapons programmes. His expert advice was ignored, and after the war he has been proven an expert as the weapons have never been found and even Bush has given up on looking for them.

- It was Al-Queda, not Iraq, Iran, Syria, or any other country that orchestrated the attacks. Yet Mr. Bush has diverted massive amounts of attention and resources to these causes, while Osama Bin Laden has not been found. He has used the Al-Queda threat extensively to prop support for these other initiatives.

It is these things that scare people globally about George W Bush. Outside of the US, Bush receives less than 20% approval, showing that the world as a whole is a lot more scared of Bush than US citizens, who are giving approval wavering in the high 40s to low 50s, neck and neck with Kerry.

And considering the tremendous responsibility of the United States, harboring more weapons and weapons of mass destruction and raw firepower than any other country in the world, it is most certainly understandable that peoiple all around the earth, would put aside their own issues (ie. What motive drove Paul Martin to push out a good 3 term Prime Minister in an internal party coup) to watch intently what the man with his finger on the trigger to all that power, who has shown the itch to use it without carefully verifying all of the facts.

With a response showing the different apsects of both adminstrations, along with the contrasts/similarities, you can defininatley be content in the fact that you can more than justify your opinion at the same time, which most individuals struggle since there riding the medias image. However, as we both already brought up, that mentalility is held until the point where when the medias gone and it comes down to the individual vote, based either on facts, media, or however one comes at it...most generally just arnt ready for change unless like yourself, they are rooted in how they come at it, and in turn if they did have the facts and a turning point was needed, I would only hope they would come with the same opinion..

Props on the response homie, deffinatly was feelin the way it came out, its pretty much been laid out like a double edged sword, facts with facts and the center as fiction, and whoever is bringing is down holds the ultimate decision, keep it real holmes, peace

[Sir_K]

:-)

You too.

[cheebus420]

For all you Kerry lovers out there please don't be blinded by media glitz. He's a member of the Skull&Bones ( just like George Bush ). Also is in favour of continuing operations in Iraq.

I'm all for voting against Bush, but like every American election, there's not a great alternative, just an alternative.

"I guess it's the lesser of two evils" "You mean the evil of two lessers?"

[Sir_K]

Originally Posted by cheebus420

For all you Kerry lovers out there please don't be blinded by media glitz. He's a member of the Skull&Bones ( just like George Bush ). Also is in favour of continuing operations in Iraq.

I'm all for voting against Bush, but like every American election, there's not a great alternative, just an alternative.

"I guess it's the lesser of two evils" "You mean the evil of two lessers?"

No doubt. Seen "My Land" on www.jibjab.com ?

I think that about sums it up.