Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 32 of 32

Thread: Why do you hate George Bush?

  1. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,152
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=zUdjhKbImwE

    Obama wants to lift the ban on talking to Terroristss. He plans to go talk to them himself.
    SCAR Tutorials: The Form Tutorial | Types, Arrays, and Classes
    Programming Projects: NotePad | Tetris | Chess


  2. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,492
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alach11 View Post
    Dude WWII and the War in Iraq are completely different. Pearl Harbour was a direct attack on our country by Japan. The WTC attacks were not done by Hussein or Iraq, they were perpetrated by Osama Bin Laden/Al Qaeda. Us attacking Iraq has distracted us from the original goal of stopping the terrorists that destroyed the lives of nearly 3000 civilians.
    From the beginning we knew that it was a war fighting terrorists and the people who harbor them *cough*TALIBAN*cough*... so dont act like we are "distracted" show some foresight and see what good we are bringing for the next generation.

    Quote Originally Posted by alach11 View Post
    Think about this. 8 million children in the US are uninsured. So far 526 billion dollars have been spent on the War in Iraq. This does not account for money that will go to veterans later, or if the war continues for longer with McCain as president. With this money spent on the war we could insure 8 million children for 28 years.
    Any proof for this figure or are you just pullin it out of your ass? Oh wait thats where your head is!

    Quote Originally Posted by alach11 View Post
    And we've lost over 4000 military lives in the war in Iraq. This does not include about 100 suicides of soldiers per year, or the many who have been permanently crippled by injuries. An estimated 150,000 to 655,000 Iraqi civilians have died during the war, much more than under Saddam.
    Holy shit that is a large spread... Once again bring some evidence to back up your claims when you bring up numbers.... http://wais.stanford.edu/Iraq/iraq_d...sein42503.html
    Look at that and if you dont say "holy crap" then something is wrong with you . If you look at http://www.iraqbodycount.org/ and calculate how many have happened per day from that is a massive 45-55 or so... But the difference is that the US soldiers didnt make those attacks, Terrorists are making those attacks and blatantly targeting civilians to make out movement look bad because of the ignorant people saying "they wouldnt do that if we werent there"... Guess what? There were terrorists in iraq before we got there!


    Quote Originally Posted by alach11 View Post
    Finally, around 65% of Iraqi civilians favor an immediate pullout of us troops. 61% say the troohttp://www.srl-forums.com/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=415867
    SRL-Forums - Reply to Topicps make them feel less safe, and around 41% believe attacks on US soldiers are justified. Sounds like it's time to leave.

    Sources:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...092601721.html
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/6040054.stm
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/7300115.stm
    All those polls except for the last are out of date by YEARS, and the last one they asked this question
    how things are going in your life these days
    Wow, and you are picking information you want to pick...
    67% of Sunni Iraqis replied overwhelmingly in the negative.
    Shia Iraqis, however, answered very positively, with 62% saying quite good or very good.
    Kurds were the happiest, with 73% saying quite good or very good.
    After all that beatdown of ideas how can you not like president bush if this is the only thing you can find wrong with him? Also all the "he is incompetent" crap is not true because some of the things he does like, skipping ahead a bit in speeches and tripping over himself is a sign of intelligence, as his brain moves faster than his mouth and he is always thinking ahead. He is not the best speaker but I for one love his speaking style, I feel like I can sit down and talk to him and he would enjoy it. While this is not a reason to like his policies and whatnot we are talking about liking him in general. I hope this has changed someones mind

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    408
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sirlaughsalot View Post
    From the beginning we knew that it was a war fighting terrorists and the people who harbor them *cough*TALIBAN*cough*... so dont act like we are "distracted" show some foresight and see what good we are bringing for the next generation.
    Surely there are more tactful ways to fight terrorism than to invade an entire country and occupy it. Occupying forces are always vulnurable to terrorists and tend to be viewed in a negative light, potentially causing more problems.

    Quote Originally Posted by sirlaughsalot View Post
    Any proof for this figure or are you just pullin it out of your ass? Oh wait thats where your head is!
    Ok here's a quick breakdown of how to figure this out.
    First start with the cost of the war from one of these websites. Most websites say around $500 billion to $600 billion has been spent in Iraq as of today. Estimates for the long term go as high as 3 trillion.
    http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home
    http://egan.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/0...r/?ref=opinion

    Now we take $500 billion and divide it by the 8,000,000 uninsured children. Then we divide that by the $1500 a year it costs for the government to insure a child. This gives us 41.6 years of insurance for 8,000,000 children. I guess my original figure was too small.

    Quote Originally Posted by sirlaughsalot View Post
    Holy shit that is a large spread... Once again bring some evidence to back up your claims when you bring up numbers.... http://wais.stanford.edu/Iraq/iraq_d...sein42503.html
    Look at that and if you dont say "holy crap" then something is wrong with you . If you look at http://www.iraqbodycount.org/ and calculate how many have happened per day from that is a massive 45-55 or so... But the difference is that the US soldiers didnt make those attacks, Terrorists are making those attacks and blatantly targeting civilians to make out movement look bad because of the ignorant people saying "they wouldnt do that if we werent there"... Guess what? There were terrorists in iraq before we got there!
    There were terrorists in Iraq before we were there, but there weren't suicide bombings every day. If we had to get rid of Saddam couldn't we have assasinated him instead of causing so much anti-US sentiment and terrorism?
    Also other estimates of civilian casualties go much higher. Some unreliable estimates as high as 600,000 and more reliable ones around 150,000.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/10/wo...asualties.html
    http://rochestercitynewspaper.com/ne...bers+(6+4+08)/


    Quote Originally Posted by sirlaughsalot View Post
    All those polls except for the last are out of date by YEARS, and the last one they asked this question
    Wow, and you are picking information you want to pick...
    Ok here's another poll from march 2008.
    http://www.globalpolicy.org/security...308opinion.pdf
    46% of Iraqi's have "No confidence at all" in us forces compared to 4% which have a great deal of confidence.
    35% think US forces have done a "very bad job" compared to 6% think we did a "very good job".
    7% strongly support troop presence in Iraq versus 41% strongly oppose it.
    When asked if America left Iraq today the situation would get better or worse 46% said better and 29% said worse.



    Quote Originally Posted by sirlaughsalot View Post
    After all that beatdown of ideas how can you not like president bush if this is the only thing you can find wrong with him? Also all the "he is incompetent" crap is not true because some of the things he does like, skipping ahead a bit in speeches and tripping over himself is a sign of intelligence, as his brain moves faster than his mouth and he is always thinking ahead. He is not the best speaker but I for one love his speaking style, I feel like I can sit down and talk to him and he would enjoy it. While this is not a reason to like his policies and whatnot we are talking about liking him in general. I hope this has changed someones mind
    No the war in Iraq is not the only reason I disagree with Bush. Here are a few other reasons

    1. Tax cuts for the wealthy.
    Bush has consistently favored the top 1% when passing tax cuts, see sources.
    http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...5BC0A9629C8B63
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/...in636398.shtml

    2. Government deficit
    Bush took us from a $5.6 trillion deficit to a $9 trillion deficit. Why again is he cutting the taxes for the rich again? Why is he spending an estimated trillion plus dollars in Iraq? Check out the second source for a chart showing how clinton reduced the deficit and bush pushed it back up again.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/bonds...54579020071107
    http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

    3. Endorsing torture
    He has voted against bills banning waterboarding and other forms of torture. Torture is not even an effective interrogation technique because people will give false information to escape the pain.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critici...._Bush#Torture

    4. Handling of Katrina
    A Canadian search and rescue team was helping trapped residents in a new orleans suburb 5 days before the US military.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critici...ricane_Katrina
    http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0908-02.htm

    5. Treatment of the Enviroment
    Bush has supported dumping of raw sewage into waterways, during his presidency mercury contamination has increased, toxic releases are up, and more.
    http://www.nrdc.org/legislation/rollbacks/execsum.asp
    http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/2005.asp




    Edit:
    I don't hate him as a person, just to clarify. He may very well have thought this was the right thing for him to do. I just strongly disagree with his policies.

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,492
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alach11 View Post
    Surely there are more tactful ways to fight terrorism than to invade an entire country and occupy it. Occupying forces are always vulnurable to terrorists and tend to be viewed in a negative light, potentially causing more problems.


    Ok here's a quick breakdown of how to figure this out.
    First start with the cost of the war from one of these websites. Most websites say around $500 billion to $600 billion has been spent in Iraq as of today. Estimates for the long term go as high as 3 trillion.
    http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home
    http://egan.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/0...r/?ref=opinion

    Now we take $500 billion and divide it by the 8,000,000 uninsured children. Then we divide that by the $1500 a year it costs for the government to insure a child. This gives us 41.6 years of insurance for 8,000,000 children. I guess my original figure was too small.
    While it is sad and I feel for those children, would it be better to have them be insured or our entire country being attacked?

    Quote Originally Posted by alach11 View Post
    There were terrorists in Iraq before we were there, but there weren't suicide bombings every day. If we had to get rid of Saddam couldn't we have assasinated him instead of causing so much anti-US sentiment and terrorism?
    Also other estimates of civilian casualties go much higher. Some unreliable estimates as high as 600,000 and more reliable ones around 150,000.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/10/wo...asualties.html
    http://rochestercitynewspaper.com/ne...bers+(6+4+08)/
    But there were terrorists there, look at the big picture, we are fighting the War on TERROR. We are trying to uproot Terrorists wherever they may be, and we could not have just done that because it was not that simple as it being only one man.

    Ok here's another poll from march 2008.
    http://www.globalpolicy.org/security...308opinion.pdf
    46% of Iraqi's have "No confidence at all" in us forces compared to 4% which have a great deal of confidence.
    35% think US forces have done a "very bad job" compared to 6% think we did a "very good job".
    7% strongly support troop presence in Iraq versus 41% strongly oppose it.
    When asked if America left Iraq today the situation would get better or worse 46% said better and 29% said worse.

    Well, if they really believe that way then we should pull out... thats right! we dont want to loose the progress we have made so far! Anyone remember Vietnam? Less than 2 years after we pulled out, Saigon fell and Vietnam went into communist rule. While we may have "lost" that war, it was not our soldiers, but the people here at home (mainly politicians) who lost us that war...

    Quote Originally Posted by alach11 View Post
    No the war in Iraq is not the only reason I disagree with Bush. Here are a few other reasons

    1. Tax cuts for the wealthy.
    Bush has consistently favored the top 1% when passing tax cuts, see sources.
    http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...5BC0A9629C8B63
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/...in636398.shtml
    They have the most to rebate >_<


    Quote Originally Posted by alach11 View Post
    2. Government deficit
    Bush took us from a $5.6 trillion deficit to a $9 trillion deficit. Why again is he cutting the taxes for the rich again? Why is he spending an estimated trillion plus dollars in Iraq? Check out the second source for a chart showing how clinton reduced the deficit and bush pushed it back up again.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/bonds...54579020071107
    http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
    Wait, i thought it was 500 Billion we had invested in iraq? Also Bush had Katrina, 9/11, and this war. All HUGE holes for government spending... OH! and are we forgetting the fact there are THREE branches of the government? hence checks and balances? Congress had to approve the spending, you cannot blame something on one man, if you are going to blame it on anyone, you can blame it on Hillary and, Obama as well as they are a part of congress.

    Quote Originally Posted by alach11 View Post
    3. Endorsing torture
    He has voted against bills banning waterboarding and other forms of torture. Torture is not even an effective interrogation technique because people will give false information to escape the pain.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critici...._Bush#Torture
    Waterboarding is not real torture, it is giving you the sensation that you are drowning, not actually drowning you. What is torture on the other hand is pulling people's fingernails out, ripping out their teeth, and so on. We have waterboarded 2 people and both times it worked...

    Quote Originally Posted by alach11 View Post
    4. Handling of Katrina
    A Canadian search and rescue team was helping trapped residents in a new orleans suburb 5 days before the US military.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critici...ricane_Katrina
    http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0908-02.htm
    You know who noone questions when it comes to Katrina? The local government, who should have been getting people out and getting people to safety. Instead their governor makes racist comments about New Orleans being a "Chocolate" city.

    Quote Originally Posted by alach11 View Post
    5. Treatment of the Enviroment
    Bush has supported dumping of raw sewage into waterways, during his presidency mercury contamination has increased, toxic releases are up, and more.
    http://www.nrdc.org/legislation/rollbacks/execsum.asp
    http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/2005.asp
    I guess he undermines his wife's efforts? http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/environment/

    Quote Originally Posted by alach11 View Post
    Edit:
    I don't hate him as a person, just to clarify. He may very well have thought this was the right thing for him to do. I just strongly disagree with his policies.
    Well thats good, kinda, and i personally dont agree with all of his policies either (we would still disagree im pretty darn sure lol)

  5. #30
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    210
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    All I searched was ''Idiot'' and this popped up http://youtube.com/watch?v=pCnjuJ1pbmc

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    437
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    I am sorry but alach11 has definitely got me. He just went and pulled all those numbers and several reasons and sirlaughsalot while you have several good counterpoints, I still have my personal reason of all the times he contradicts himself <see my post a little ways back> so I am slightly biased in that regard. Both of you seem to have all aspects of this argument covered, I am just here to say great job to both of you lol.

    Waterboarding is not real torture, it is giving you the sensation that you are drowning, not actually drowning you. What is torture on the other hand is pulling people's fingernails out, ripping out their teeth, and so on. We have waterboarded 2 people and both times it worked...
    Oh yeah, torture is:
    Quote Originally Posted by dictionary.com
    the deliberate, systematic, or wanton infliction of physical or mental suffering by one or more persons in an attempt to force another person to yield information or to make a confession or for any other reason
    So the fact is that when you are under the sensation of drowning, they are giving you mental and physical suffering (if you do not think waterboarding causes pain, you have never looked it up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding).

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    408
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sirlaughsalot View Post
    While it is sad and I feel for those children, would it be better to have them be insured or our entire country being attacked?
    Since when was Iraq going to attack us?! I thought our reason for invading was to liberate the Iraqi people? Iraq had no more connections to Osama bin Laden than any other middle eastern country.


    Quote Originally Posted by sirlaughsalot View Post
    But there were terrorists there, look at the big picture, we are fighting the War on TERROR. We are trying to uproot Terrorists wherever they may be, and we could not have just done that because it was not that simple as it being only one man.
    Can you win a war on terror the way we are fighting it? Even if American troops aren't responsible for bombings they end up taking the blame in the minds if Iraqi's who's families are killed.
    We are creating the terrorists by occupying Iraq, like Britain created terrorists by occupying America. They think their cause is just.


    Quote Originally Posted by sirlaughsalot View Post
    Well, if they really believe that way then we should pull out... thats right! we dont want to loose the progress we have made so far! Anyone remember Vietnam? Less than 2 years after we pulled out, Saigon fell and Vietnam went into communist rule. While we may have "lost" that war, it was not our soldiers, but the people here at home (mainly politicians) who lost us that war...
    You're right that their opinions shouldn't be the deciding factor on war decisions. It's just there is a common misconception propagated by the media *cough* fox *cough* that the Iraqi people are thrilled that the US troops are present.

    Quote Originally Posted by sirlaughsalot View Post
    They have the most to rebate >_<
    what?

    Quote Originally Posted by sirlaughsalot View Post
    Wait, i thought it was 500 Billion we had invested in iraq? Also Bush had Katrina, 9/11, and this war. All HUGE holes for government spending... OH! and are we forgetting the fact there are THREE branches of the government? hence checks and balances? Congress had to approve the spending, you cannot blame something on one man, if you are going to blame it on anyone, you can blame it on Hillary and, Obama as well as they are a part of congress.
    First we've put 500 billion plus into Iraq as of today. Tons more money will be spent paying for veterans going to college or treatment of the wounded, reconstruction of Iraq after we leave. And the war may continue for another 8 years if McCain is elected.

    As for the invasion of Iraq and Congress approval, Obama voted against the invasion, so I don't see how it's his responsibility. Also, Congress was lied to about Iraq's intentions and weapons capabilities. The Bush Administration had been advised by the CIA that there were no weapons of mass destruction but they did not tell this to congress. The administration also claimed Iraq had UAV's ready to attack us, which was untrue.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Wa...ss_destruction
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_R..._Iraq#Legality

    Quote Originally Posted by sirlaughsalot View Post
    Waterboarding is not real torture, it is giving you the sensation that you are drowning, not actually drowning you. What is torture on the other hand is pulling people's fingernails out, ripping out their teeth, and so on. We have waterboarded 2 people and both times it worked...
    What is torture then? Waterboarding causes extreme pain, and sometimes damage to the lungs, brain damage caused by oxygen deprivation, injuries (including broken bones) due to struggling against restraints, and even death.

    Read this if you want to know a little more about our government and torture:
    http://www.newyorker.com/archive/200...050214fa_fact6

    Quote Originally Posted by sirlaughsalot View Post
    You know who noone questions when it comes to Katrina? The local government, who should have been getting people out and getting people to safety. Instead their governor makes racist comments about New Orleans being a "Chocolate" city.
    The local government was completely overwhelmed by the scale of the disaster. While their effort may not have been perfect, one city doesn't have the resources to deal with a disaster of that magnitude.

    Quote Originally Posted by sirlaughsalot View Post
    I guess he undermines his wife's efforts? http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/environment/
    The whitehouse website is possible the least reliable source if you want unbiased information about the president.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Lmfao! Bush Dodged 2 Shoes !!!!
    By P1nky in forum News and General
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 12-20-2008, 01:13 PM
  2. George Sampson?
    By Dusk412 in forum Music, Movies and TV
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-03-2008, 02:40 PM
  3. George Lopez
    By `Jett in forum Music, Movies and TV
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-11-2008, 10:34 PM
  4. George W Bush - Is he fucked up?
    By yanix in forum Discussions & Debates
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 11-03-2007, 10:50 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •