State Of The Union Baby!!!!!!!!!!

[Nohimn]

remember this part?

"Oh yeah.... THE NEW CONGLOMERATE ROCKS!!"
-----George W Bush

[Zatrais]

I hate the gullibility of the Euro leaders aswell, hell i'm ashamed at the spinelessness of my countries (norway) prime minister.. and you'd think that the other leaders of europe would learn from the several terror attacks thats happened in europe..

Go on US, kill the terrorist bastards and remove the dictators and the regimes that oppresses its people. Got my backing for what its worth hehe

[Nohimn]

Terrorism shall die at the hands of the US

[Incompetent]

I missed the SotU but I want to add that i think bush is doing as good a job as possible in the shit situation the country is in now.

Your buddy Hussein has enough anthrax to kill a million people

Actually, he had enough to kill the world three times over, and i think i heard that only a third or so was acounted for by weapon inspectors.

[Lexington_Steele]

Originally posted by {BOHICA}Navaron

"You tread on very shakey ground when you throw out the right to have soverignty."

What about each individuals right to freedom? Does a dictators right to sovereignty surpass it's population's right to freedom? I think not.

Who gave us the right to decide what people in other countries want?

You say there is a difference between genocide and the death penalty, I agree, but exactly where is it that you draw the line between inposing American ideals and preventing moral injustice. Some countries consider any kind of death penalty to be barbaric, regardless of how you feel it is carried out. Who gets to pick which morals are correct and why?

What is the criteria for the US being able to tell others what to do? What makes our values more correct than someone elses values.

Violating a country's right to sovereignty is not something that should be taken lightly.

Politically, I can see why other countrys would sit on the fence with the whole Saddam thing. It is not as simple as they are pro saddam or anti war. It is not cowardice. It has more to do with how will their country benefit or be hurt by the actions they take. It has to do with doing what they think is best for their people. I don't see how America can fault another country for trying to do what is best for their people.

[Sputty]

I think the U.S., if they attack Iraq, will have set an annoying precedent they'll have to follow. In a country that could threaten the U.S. with weapons and have an unjust government they'll have to attack and remove the leaders and install a democracy. I think this could lead to many governments become more isolated and prepare for an "inevitable" war between the U.S. and them. Some small governments aren't a huge problem but what if Chin doesn't like the U.S. in Korea or feels threatened enough to lash out? That could lead to a major war between China and the U.S. bringing other countries in.

[Incompetent]

united states does not help oppressed people,there is lots of places where otrocities

Your country likes to stand in the way, you need to realize that some people have to die to make the world a better place.

Who gave us the right to decide what people in other countries want?

Uh, defecting Iraqi's HATE Saddam, as would any reasonable person, who wants to live under someone who gives out medals for shooting your own children.

if the united states goes against the UN and starts a war on there own I gaurantee that alot of major countries are gonna step in and the united states wont win . anyways im loosing track and I have no idea where I wa sgoing with this

Let me get this straight, we try to help people living in a shithole where the Dictators favorite form of torture is to lock you in a room with acid dripping from the ceiling and other countries help him, and then they turn around and accuse us of letting oppression continue.

[Lexington_Steele]

Originally posted by Incompetent
quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------
Who gave us the right to decide what people in other countries want?
-------------------------------------------------------------

Uh, defecting Iraqi's HATE Saddam, as would any reasonable person, who wants to live under someone who gives out medals for shooting your own children.

So how many people have to hate the leader of a country for the US to be "allowed" to invade? One? Two? The majority? Who get to conduct these surveys of what the people in a country want.

If the US is going into Iraq to save the Iraqis, what is our plan for post Saddam Iraq? Do we even have one? What is going to be the criteria for the person that we prop up? Is it going to be for humanitarian reasons, or is it going to be the person most likely to work with the US economically?

[Incompetent]

So how many people have to hate the leader of a country for the US to be "allowed" to invade? One? Two? The majority?

Everyone, and surprisingly enough thats true about a country that has to have 11 different security agencies spying on each other and the dictator regularly interagates anyone who works anywhere near him, and quite often, executes them while they are sleeping.

If the US is going into Iraq to save the Iraqis, what is our plan for post Saddam Iraq?

Install a goverment with its head out of its ass, thats all they really need, Iraq's oil industry could bring in enough money to rebuild the country and prosper in the future.

[Navaron]

ABRAX - not only are you a true moron. You're a fool and an ignoramus. You are a brainwashed whacko. I'm sure that's the general consencus.

"Who gave us the right to decide what people in other countries want?"

We're not deciding what they won't or don't want. Although I think its safe to say, that being murdered for disagreement isn't right. Incredible amounts of torture, genocide, and slaughter of children is universally accepted as evil. That's when we step in. That is just and moral. We are forcing our views or style of government on anyone. You can't force freedom on anyone. It's just not possible.

"In a country that could threaten the U.S. with weapons and have an unjust government they'll have to attack and remove the leaders and install a democracy"

Any country that poses a direct and deadly threat to the US should and will be dealt with swiftly and deftly. Simple as that. That is a precedent that was set hundreds of years ago with the Barbara pirates.

"but what if Chin doesn't like the U.S. in Korea or feels threatened enough to lash out? That could lead to a major war between China and the U.S. bringing other countries in."

This was a but, so I'll go easy. China is the US's number 1 supporter in the region for the total nuclear disarmament of N Korea. Even the Chinese know the NKoreans are unstable.

"If the US is going into Iraq to save the Iraqis, what is our plan for post Saddam Iraq? Do we even have one? What is going to be the criteria for the person that we prop up? Is it going to be for humanitarian reasons, or is it going to be the person most likely to work with the US economically?"

We will build an infrastructure and army just like we did in SKorea through Afghanistan. It will definately be a democracy or representative republic where the people are in the right, and in power. Freedom. That's what we're after.

[Sputty]

I just hope it doesn't destablize that region. The U.S. could have a major problem on their hands if lot of the middle east decide to act. I know that they may not but that area isn't very happy about any U.S. involvement.

[SandTrout]

Great speach, with the exception of a few slips of the tounge which he corrected. Then again, I'm sure I would forget how a line went if I had to memorize a half-hour speach(compensateing for applause). Bush has become a grade: A politician, though I'm to paranoid of govornment to know if this is a good thing or not.

[Navaron]

"I just hope it doesn't destablize that region. The U.S. could have a major problem on their hands if lot of the middle east decide to act. I know that they may not but that area isn't very happy about any U.S. involvement."

Time for some schoolin, sit back, I'm gonna learn ya one...

It is impossible to destabilize that region. They are all at odds with each other. They are all ready to slit each other's necks.

Also, there are only 3 actual militaries in the mid east, Israel, Iraq, and Iran. The next closest thing is Egypt, and they know enough to sit down and shut up, because even the puss UN is on their ass like white on rice.

Israel - most powerful and elite army in the entire region - 7 day war anyone? - our greates ally
+
Iraq - they folded like a wet napkin on a windy day
+
Iran - they want Hussein dead ASAP
=

We whoop a lot of ass.

[ABRAXAAS]

I may be a morron but think about this .

what is your idea of an evil country

how about a country that bombards its people with nothing but bad media to keep them scared and distracted ,while the government uses that to make money and pass laws that take away peoples freedoms.

what about a country where people are aloud to freely demonstrate Rascism and make money off it publicly .

What about a country where they pit other smaller countrys against them selfs for there bennefit ,and then are stupid enough to let those people turn around attack there own country .

What about a country that was built on slavery .

what about a country that dispite what the world tells them goes ahead and attacks a smaller country to bennefit itslef.

well that to me sounds like an eveil country ....oh wait that soundslike the US

[Sputty]

It's not the armies I'm worried about. It's the chance that some zealous freaks will attack in huge masses and why are you trying to attack me? I never said anything wa wrong with it just that I was worried someting could happen. ABRAXXAS, that's pretty weord. I All your "arguments" are just your personal opinion. BTW, what country wasn't built by slavery? Unluckily, none that I can think of. Slave have only somewhat recently been obolished. That's just some useless history that just tells us things were different then.