Thread: Assasination of Bush

Nadar probably gets good money just to run for president (by the other candidates). In fact I wouldn't be surprised if he jumped in front of Bush during an assasination to protect his own financial interests....

It is all as it is said in Waking Life: They are two sides of the same coin, you can either choose the puppet on the left or the one in the right, but that fact is you are really not making much of a choice...

None of the candidates will do what is needed, none will take us where we need to go. The outcome, although different in the details, is going to be quintessencially the same...

Check this out:
www.bushgame.com

Originally posted by Truthbearer
None of the candidates will do what is needed, none will take us where we need to go. The outcome, although different in the details, is going to be quintessencially the same...

You bring up an interesting point. Why is it that American's continue to search for the "One"? For some reason, we think that each president we elect will be the Great Hero to lead us into some golden age where life is grand. That isn't true, nor will it ever be true.

The government isn't "by the people, for the people" anymore. Now it's "by the rich, for themselves". I would be surprised if there is even one human being in our government structure right now who actually gives a damn what happens to the real people in this country.

then why not become rich?

I think most do care. Everyone thinks different though, so while they do what they think is best, it might not always be the same as you. I don't think anyone really believes the president is going to lead us into a golden age. Though some times I think people expect to much. A president can only do so much. People seem to always blame the president when half the time the stuff is out of his control.

Originally posted by A Lost Soul
You bring up an interesting point. Why is it that American's continue to search for the \"One\"? For some reason, we think that each president we elect will be the Great Hero to lead us into some golden age where life is grand. That isn't true, nor will it ever be true. *

The government isn't \"by the people, for the people\" anymore. Now it's \"by the rich, for themselves\". I would be surprised if there is even one human being in our government structure right now who actually gives a damn what happens to the real people in this country.

Exactly, the government is now completely out of control. Leaders were supposed to represent the views of the masses, now they only represent their own desires and interests. There is no hope for politics in the world unless the people that govern do it not because of money, power, fame or any other personal interest, but instead choose to make their country a better one, to give a better life to the people.

It pisses me off when we go to wars that the people do not want, for it is our money that pays for the destruction and the rebuilding of that country, and it is our people that pay with their lives the price of some political abstract ideology. I would love to see Bush himself going to fight in a war with the same effusiveness that he declares it.

Alric, I all can tell you is this: If the government invested half the money they invest trying to conquer the world, in the people themselves this would be a much better world. Believe US would become richer beyond belief, and there would be no need for poverty. If the government was for the people, then the people would need not suffer...

Some people are against the war, however there are tons who while never want to see war support the decision to do it. I am one of them and I can tell you now I didn't make any money off it. To say that is the reason is irresponsible.

Originally posted by WerBurN+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(WerBurN)</div>

then why not become rich?[/b]

[sarcasm]Because it's just so easy to get rich in this country! And it's easiest in the state of Maine! What would be the fun in that?[/sarcasm]

Maybe I can. When I was little, I did have a passing thought to go into business as an assassin. Or I could find the mob and join them! Or perform a sexual innuendo on a cigar for the president. Or I could simply go to jail where for the rest of my life I'd have three squares a day, cable tv, a library, computer, open gym, heated pool, etc, etc. No wonder our prisons are overcrowded.

Anyway, I'm getting away from the topic here.

<!--QuoteBegin-Truthbearer
It pisses me off when we go to wars that the people do not want, for it is our money that pays for the destruction and the rebuilding of that country, and it is our people that pay with their lives the price of some political abstract ideology. I would love to see Bush himself going to fight in a war with the same effusiveness that he declares it.

And if I had a dime for every time I said that myself, I wouldn't have to worry about money ever again. I despise that Bush is splitting up families, sending whole families to war (anyone read about the couple who were forced to leave behind their two small children? Nice, huh?). All for what? Yes, Iraq may have needed an aenema. It certainly got one. So why is the fighting still going on? Why are our soldiers still dying? These soldiers are younger than I am for crissakes! It's not fair.

I want to see Bush pick up a gun and go fight his own damn battle. He isn't thinking about the waste of human life he's causing. He isn't thinking about the American people or our "security". Think about this: in the event of a massive world-destructive event (think WW3 here), who will be sheltered and protected? The government. Will they be thinking about the people? Nope. Apparently they feel that they are the shining hope for humanity in a post-apocalyptic world.

Along the same line of thought: I wanted to see Bush down there with the rescue workers who were digging survivors from what remained of the World Trade Center. He went down there and did nothing. So he gave a pretty speech. Big deal. He didn't even pick up a fucking shovel! Had I been president, you bet your asses I would have been down there, digging with all my heart. I would have told my vice to take over for a while; I would be busy with something far more important than politics at that moment. I would have been hugging the families of the lost, and mourning with them. Those are my people.

And I am so ranting. That's what happens when I get tired. Sorry about that guys.

Hell ya. He's an asshole and is reponsible for thousands of deaths. He's a crazy ass to me.

Ok I am not trying to be rude because this is kind of a sensitive topic but its not his fault if any families are split up. If you join the army its your job to fight, no one forces you to join the army so its your own choice. If you decided to join and are sent into war, its no ones fault but your own.

You have a valid reason to be against the war however, you can even say they are doing a bad job if you want, but you can't blame him for who is sent there.

In a case of massive world destruction, it is very important to keep a working government. Believe it or not, that is what is best for everyone. Though I am sure they would try and save as many people as they can, which they couldn't help anyone if they where dead.

If anyone has a legitimate thing to say about us going to war, would be the ones who were sent over there. I was one of the soldiers that gave Sadam the aenema. (nice expression, sis) I believe that it was worth while to help those people, I saw the way they were forced to live. Was the way the information handed proper, probably not, but this was a long time in coming. I don't know whether the whole thing was a good idea, but I like to believe that some good came out of it, even though it wasn't handled the greatest.

As for the people getting rich in this country, that does make me sick. There are people out there playing a game, making millions. While a soldier dies on the battlefield for poverty level pay.

Originally posted by Alric
You have a valid reason to be against the war however, you can even say they are doing a bad job if you want, but you can't blame him for who is sent there.

You are absolutely right. I said that because, to me, it seems like he's using humans in a great assembly line ending in death. Yeah, war isn't pretty or fair but it just seems to me that he's wasting lives as though they were quarters being stuffed in a slot machine.

I could be wrong in this, but isn't there a law against sending families off to war together?

Congress voted for the war too. I really don't believe anyone wants to see anyone die. I really don't see where you get that from. You can make an arguement that the didn't have a good plan for after the war, or they overestimated themself, but making a mistake is hardly "wasting lives as though they were quarters being stuffed in a slot machine."

It's not about the fact that they made military inteligence mistakes, it is about what it is all about. What business did the U.S. have sending troop to a foreign country half around the world to "liberate" its people?

Am I mistaken or isn't that a job for the UNITED NATIONS????????

U.S doesn't have a god given right to "free" the world, and although some good may have come out of it, I do believe it was injustified. Thousands of Iraquies, some just innocent civilians, died, and all for overthrowing an ideology, an abstract concept.

A dictatorship like that is an awful thing, but it is up to the people themselves to revolt. If they are unable to do so, and enough express that they wish to discard their government to the UN, then this organism would be in charge of assisting them.

The fact that the U.S. is the most powerful nation in the world does not make it in charge of ruling it and being able to threaten whoever they wish, just because....

They made a peace treaty with us saying they would get rid of all their weapons of mass destructions during the last war. They didn't or hid the fact that they did and we warned them many times. That is what gives us the right to attack them.

The UN wouldn't have helped them because sadam bribed a ton of them. Thats why we had such a hard time getting people to help us, none of them want to because they where all making money.

Its really hard to revolt in places when you can be dragged out of your house and murdered if you even make a joke about the leader of the country. Sadam killed tons of people its no "abstract concept".

1. Where are your weapons of mass destruction now? That was just an excuse to invade the country without having any particular reason to do so

2. Do you know that Saddam bribed member of the U.N for a fact, or is it mere speculation and hearsay?

3. I am not talking about Iraq in particular when I say that we are liberating them from an abstract concept. That is why I said that dictatorships like Saddam's are a terrible thing. Remember the domino effect and the cold war with the USSR? That is what I mean with "abstract concept".

4. Regarding how hard it is to revolt: I know it is not an easy task, but a rather hard and risky one. The problem is: Who decides that these people are miserable and must be liberated? We can assume, but we really cannot channel the desire of the people like that...

All I am saying is that the U.S has a history of meddling in other people's business. If you have seen Bowling for Columbine they list most of them there in a mind blowing segment...

I also don't only mean this stuff for the U.S. only. I would be saying the same thing if any other country of the world did the same. Let people be, help them when they ask, but please don't try to control the world...

A lot shipped over the boarder. Chances are a lot is buried some where. They did find that one they tried to use on our troops, was only one shell but it shows the stuff is around some where. Plus the fact that they found tons of other illegal weapons, which while are not WMDs are still breaking the treaty they had with us, and reason enough to attack.

They are looking into the bribing now. I think they already know some of the people who took bribes, and chances are there are more. Plus we found weapons of from the other countries who were selling them to iraq while saying they didnt.

With the cold war there was a vaild concern with the dangers that come with the spread of communism.

The people can't ask for help because they get killed when they do. Except for the people who fleed out of the country, all who which say its really bad and we should help them. They lived there, they saw what happened, if they tell us he needs to be stopped why shouldn't we listen to them? Because they don't count since they don't live there anymore?

my big problem with Bush is his arrogance, especially when he said "either you're with us, or you're against us". then he gets all whiney and bitchey when france doesnt decide to fight, but its not france's fight, nobody ever did squat to them.

did any of you guys see that special on HBO with Lewis Black "Black on Broadway". i remember him saying how annoying the U.S. government was, like how they always claim to be the greatest country in the world- its like an annoying guy at the office that goes around saying "without me, you're all f*cked!"

Might not be the greatest but we are the biggest. I don't think any like france. Its not even because they didn't want to fight but they are are against us in other stuff.

1. I am not going to argue this point any further, as it is easy to say that they haven't found any, yet, but there are still hidden somewhere. Even if they do find them, what gives the U.S. that right to create such a treaty? Shouldn't the United Nations be the ones that should have intervened during the Gulf War too? The U.S only intervened due to its petroleum based alliances.

Also, does the fact that Iraq has some illegal weapons justify the death of thousands of civilians?

2. If you believe the United Nations is so corrupted, then do you believe the U.S(of all countries) should suddenly take its place or just pass right over it? Or would it be much more productive and logical to just renew it's corrupt members after further investigation?

3. What were the "valid concerns" of communism? It is still a ideological war, of "abstract concepts". What about the domino effect policy inforced in Vietnam?

4. I know this is perhaps the hardest of all points and you may be right about many things. Those that leave obviously leave because they hate it. Some that stay might like it(the minority I admit). The problem doesn't lie as if they deserve to be freed, or if the want to, but it comes back to: Why must we think that we are the ones that have to do this???? Why do we think that we represent all the good in the world and are the super heroes that will save everyone from everything???(not only applicable for the U.S, but any nation with this misconception)

I'll show you some of what I saw.





The last picture is SSG. Austin giving a child a MRE because he was hungry. I watched children running around naked and starved. I saw the devastation that Sadam brought onto his people. Others may be content with watching some one waste away because they have nothing. I cannot. I may not agree with everything that happens in war. War is ugly, its vulgar, and I hate to ever take the life of another, but sometimes it is necissary. I bare scars both physical and emotional from that experience, things that will haunt me to my dying day. I do so, so others don't have, too. It's not up to the US to police the world, sometimes we even step in where we best shouldn't, but at least we are trying to help others. Other countries can sit back, and watch genocide happen. We won't. I thank the Brits, Aussies, Koreans, and other countries that I met over there for the help.

Yes, some civilians died, but be sure some of those were terrorist hide among them and would shoot or blow themselves up. I almost shot a man because he failed to follow my directions. I was in the process of pulling my trigger, when he realised that I was going to shoot him and stopped. Which is the greater evil though, letting a man destroy his people, or helping them even though some may die?

I may not like President Bush, but he is my Commander and Chief. He gave an order, I followed it. He may have had other concerns, but we knew that we could try to help these people while we were there.

Strenth in Honor!

Wow, it is when someone who actually was there expresses his opinion and tells you how things were like, that you truly see the forest for the trees. You make a good point, in the end the U.S. is ultimately helping out, in this case in particular, no matter what ulterior motives they might have. Although as you said it best, it might not be up to them which in the end is what bothers me. That way you put it(being a witness of it all) if people were really suffering from starvation and such, then perhaps to some extent it was worth it. I have to be honest and tell you that helping these people was not the principal purpose of this war, but its nice to see that some good has come from it.

It just really pisses me off to see the devastation and the brutality that is brought by someone who doesn't have to live that. It wonder how many wars there would be if those war kings that use to exist(leaders that went into battle themselves) still existed. Perhaps we wouldn't be so hasty into going in to war.

There are a lot of things to take into account for this and any other war. The motives, the positive, the humanity, the brutality, foreign policies, power abuse, etc. that ends up making everything such a intricate mess. I wish it was all just about "Are the positive consequences of this war enough to justify the negative ones? Or should things be better left alone?

Finally, I would like to say that I really do admire you Daeraug, and, although the governments intentions and proceedings(which I am against) might not be the same as yours(you represent the human factor of it all), it is an honorable thing you do and I have a great admiration for your job. You are at Bush's service, you must do as he commands, but the fact that you have the best of intentions and really wish to help the world is something worth praise...

Thank you, Truthbearer. You do me a great honor with your words.