|
Question for all the Bush apologists out there (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| NYCTrancefan |
| quote: | Originally posted by St_Andrew
Good posts NYCTrancefan :)
I was actually thinking about writing pretty much exactly the same thing myself, there is a reason that there currenty is so much hate/misstrust against USA.
How do you know? here i can speak 100% from my own experience. I live in a part of "the world" which is not america, where people mostly used to be very pro american perhaps not in the sense that we support you poltical policies but it has never been a problem that you are far more right than we are. People liked america anyway, but the last years (during the bush era) i have seen a big hate/misstrust comming up. Especially since the iraqwar (mosly due to actually) people have no trust at all in america, and just see it as something that WANT war no matter what, and also just want money (oil). Bush is also considered by most people here like a war criminal/idiot. This admin IS doing to your reputation, and there must be a reason for it!
One more funny thing, how come that none of the australians here have defended their countries iraq policies, and very few of the UK ones either... |
For someone like myself who studies International Relations and Foreign Policy it really leaves me puzzled when people truly believe that America is not viewed in a very negative light because of the events surrounding Iraq especially. I would love to know how many of these individuals that think America's standing in the world has not been affected have travelled elsewhere or even pays attention to or cares about other media outlets in other nations.
I refuse to put on blinders and march in two step to the Bush administration's current path. Remember how America ran roughshot over everyone leading up to the Iraq war in its pursuit of it. It is for this reason that I felt it was imperative that the weapons in Iraq be found or your primary case for war becomes severely weakened. Any reasonable thinking American would be disgusted that we went into a nation and cannot verify the primary claims we made against them, yet Bush continues to utter the same words, "Saddam Hussein was a threat to the region" sorry but Kim Jong-Il, the mullahs of Iran are more of a threat to their region than Hussein was. What do we do now
Common sense dictates that America is left with few options in dealing with the likes of North Korea and Iran, they could never attack those nations without drawing the wrath of people after the events in Iraq. America's foreign policy strength has thus been weakened by Iraq, you cannot invade every nation on Earth that is not to the liking. How many nations would now support the policies proposed by America. By the way the Ukraine are finalizing to get out of Iraq, one less from the Coalition of the Willing. |
|
|
| BadBadNeil |
Everyone always hates the US, regardless of the administration. We always have the most industrialized society and therefore cut the most trees, cause the most pollution, have the most cars, are seen as the most materialistic, will have a bigger military, will have more nuclear weapons, will cause more harm to the environment, will be seen as arrogant, will be seen as militarist because of posts around the world, seen as overly patriotic because we love our country, having a horrible society because we have a higher murder rate, evil people because we have a death penalty, seen as bullies because we remove dictators, seen as backers of Israel because we support the only democracy in the region, and never seen as equals in the eyes of europe because we don't have as long a history.
Can't wait till November so there can be something to discuss, probably why the chosen president sucks and why America is despised in the world part II. |
|
|
| Cyrus King |
| quote: | Originally posted by BadBadNeil
Everyone always hates the US, regardless of the administration. We always have the most industrialized society and therefore cut the most trees, cause the most pollution, have the most cars, are seen as the most materialistic, will have a bigger military, will have more nuclear weapons, will cause more harm to the environment, will be seen as arrogant, will be seen as militarist because of posts around the world, seen as overly patriotic because we love our country, having a horrible society because we have a higher murder rate, evil people because we have a death penalty, seen as bullies because we remove dictators, seen as backers of Israel because we support the only democracy in the region, and never seen as equals in the eyes of europe because we don't have as long a history.
Can't wait till November so there can be something to discuss, probably why the chosen president sucks and why America is despised in the world part II. |
You forgot to mention the catastropihic bombing of many third world nations, the use of chemical weapons (agent orange), and the funding of rogue coups that have murdered millions in developing nations that chose not to adhere to the US's hegemonic structure of obedience. Lets not forget the "mistakes" that your Governement supported (Taliban, binladen, and your good ol friend Saddam hussein) |
|
|
| NYCTrancefan |
| quote: | Originally posted by BadBadNeil
Everyone always hates the US, regardless of the administration. We always have the most industrialized society and therefore cut the most trees, cause the most pollution, have the most cars, are seen as the most materialistic, will have a bigger military, will have more nuclear weapons, will cause more harm to the environment, will be seen as arrogant, will be seen as militarist because of posts around the world, seen as overly patriotic because we love our country, having a horrible society because we have a higher murder rate, evil people because we have a death penalty, seen as bullies because we remove dictators, seen as backers of Israel because we support the only democracy in the region, and never seen as equals in the eyes of europe because we don't have as long a history.
Can't wait till November so there can be something to discuss, probably why the chosen president sucks and why America is despised in the world part II. |
I would like to believe that by now we would have learnt from the past experiences that you mentioned in some of your statements. Instead we venture into the heart of the Middle East, start a war, can't find the weapons and have to make the best of a bad situation and its okay. Have you ever thought that maybe people are just sick and tired of being interferred with by American action. I know that as an American I certainly am. If we are going to play the game of power politics we should at least be prudent in our actions, something currently lacking in innumerable ways under this administration. If we are going to go around the world acting like worldbeaters then I wish us the best of luck because far more enemies will be created than defeated ultimately. |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cyrus King
You forgot to mention the catastropihic bombing of many third world nations, the use of chemical weapons (agent orange), and the funding of rogue coups that have murdered millions in developing nations that chose not to adhere to the US's hegemonic structure of obedience. Lets not forget the "mistakes" that your Governement supported (Taliban, binladen, and your good ol friend Saddam hussein) |
agent orange was a defoliant you pubescent retard:rolleyes: |
|
|
| Cyrus King |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
agent orange was a defoliant you pubescent retard:rolleyes: |
You misinformed kunt.. Agent orange is a CHEMICAL too.. that was used as both a defoliant and WEAPON!
get your yankee head out of your ass and stop sucking bush's cock.
ITs just a "defoliant" aaahahahhaahah in idiot
| quote: |
Agent Orange, Veterans and the New Jersey Mud Dump
by Michael Eckstein
New Jersey State Council
Vietnam Veterans of America
[This article reports on cumulative effects of the herbicide Agent Orange and its deadly by-product dioxin on the soldiers, marines and sailors and airmen exposed to it during the Vietnam War and of the environmental disasters that dioxin has wrought upon our society.]
In response to The Agent Orange Act of 1991, the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) requested the Washington, D.C. based National Academy of Sciences (NAS) Institute of Medicine's to conduct an extensive study of herbicide exposure in Vietnam Veterans.
On July 27, 1993 the NAS report was released and concluded that there was a positive association between exposure to herbicides and the following illnesses:
soft tissue sarcoma, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma
Hodgkin's disease
Chloracne and
porphyria cutanea tarda (a liver disorder)
The NAS also concluded the following Limited/Suggestive Evidence of an Association -
respiratory cancers (lung, larynx, trachea)
prostate cancer
multiple myeloma.
Inadequate/Insufficient Evidence was available to Determine Association with -
Cancers
hepatobiliary
nasal/nasopharyngeal
bone
female reproductive
renal
testicular
or
leukemia
spontaneous abortion
birth defects
neonatal/infant deaths and stillbirths
low birth weight
childhood cancer in offspring
abnormal sperm parameters and infertility
cognitive and neuropsychiatric disorders
motor coordination/dysfunction
peripheral nervous
system disorders
metabolic and digestive disorders
immune system disorders
circulatory disorders
respiratory disorders
There was Limited/Suggestive Evidence of No Dioxin Related Disorders on:
skin cancer
gastrointestinal tumors
bladder Cancer
brain tumors
Just after release of the NAS report, the DVA immediately "service connected" those illness where a positive association to exposure existed (service connected benefits allow veterans to receive compensation for illnesses). In September, 1993 the DVA added Respiratory cancers (lung, larynx, trachea) and Multiple myeloma to its list of benefits that were deemed to be "service connected". The NAS has a continuing obligation for a period of ten years to give reports as to whether additional illnesses can be linked to herbicide exposure. We hope that the NAS will seriously look at the illnesses where there is not yet enough evidence but it is suggested that that those illness are a result of herbicide exposure. We also urge that studies be either continued or started by organizations, physicians and governmental agencies for those suggested illnesses.
In New Jersey, dioxin has created a serious problem for the Ports in Newark and Elizabeth. The harbors need to be dredged of sediments so that large ships do not scrape the bottom of the harbor. Should the sediments build up too much, shipping into these ports might be curtailed.
Normally, the dredged material is dumped into the ocean six miles off shore at a location called the Mud Dump. However, as of today, most dredging/dumping permits are on hold due to the fact that Dioxin has been found in the harbor's sediments.
The quandary is that the harbors need to be dredged but no one knows what to do with the contaminated sediments. Due to the level of contamination, ocean dumping is not allowed.
Most political and business representatives are calling for ocean disposal while environmental, fishing and our veterans organization is looking for alternative methods. We agree that port slowdown or even shutdown could be extremely harmful to the economy of the region. The Port area generates thousands of jobs and industrial strength.
However, we cannot jeopardize our health and the health of our children by allowing Dioxin contaminated sediments to be dumped into the ocean. The alternatives to ocean dumping include containment islands, "borrow" pits (deep pits dug out of the harbor area where materials can be dumped and covered) or upland disposal. These alternative methods are currently under review by the Federal, State and local authorities. We feel that the best alternative is the borrow pit.
One cause of the Port's dioxin contamination is from the old Agent Orange production facility on the Passaic River in Newark, NJ.
Contaminated soil from the facility leeched into the river and eventually found its way into the port area. That production facility is now a federal Superfund cleanup site.
During a recent tour of the site, I was advised that certain areas within the facility can only be entered if you wore a complete hazardous materials suit covering all parts of your body.
Additionally, the contaminated buildings, barrels of herbicides and tons of soil will probably be encased in a concrete mountain. Evidently it cannot be moved off the site. Our real and emotional concerns for the port is that not only is it contaminated with dioxin, but it is the dioxin from Agent Orange that has caused the contamination.
Vietnam veterans in New Jersey cannot allow that contamination to be dumped into the ocean.
The U S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is currently undergoing a "Reassessment of Dioxin". This reassessment was originally called for by the chemical companies and pulp and paper industry to stop the negative exposure dioxin was receiving. The pulp and paper industry, in its paper bleaching process produces dioxin.
However, to the chagrin and consternation of these industries, preliminary findings by the EPA are showing that trace amounts of dioxin are much more harmful than previously thought. There is a suggestion by the EPA that not only cancers, but birth defects and immune disorders can be resultant from Dioxin exposure. As I noted earlier, the NAS report also suggests birth defects and immune disorders result from dioxin exposure.
At the public hearings conducted by the EPA, these industries, tried to refute many accepted studies that showed the harmful effects that dioxin has on humans and animals. The industry lobby in support of easing restrictions on dioxin is very powerful. It will take strong will by government regulators to stand up to this lobby and allow the truth about dioxin to be told.
In 1984, in the Southern District Court in New York, a Class Action Suit (MDL-381) by Vietnam veterans brought against seven chemical companies who produced Agent Orange was settled for the paltry sum of $180 million. The settlement was extremely soft on the chemical companies while severely restrictive on the veterans. In order for a veteran to collect, that veteran must have been 100% disabled. A veteran with cancer caused by exposure to Agent Orange, but who was still able to be employed, would not receive one dime from the Class Action Suit.
One veteran I spoke to, who has tracheal cancer and also lost a kidney, could not collect due to the fact that he wanted to stay active and earn a living. I suppose I'm sounding naive when I say that our courts should not be pawns of the chemical company lobby. All attempts to sue the chemical companies in state courts have been thrown out and referred back to the Class Action Suit.
The Supreme Court also refused to hear the argument. |
|
|
|
| St_Andrew |
| quote: | Originally posted by BadBadNeil
Everyone always hates the US, regardless of the administration. We always have the most industrialized society and therefore cut the most trees |
that is somewhat true, there's always people who will hate america just because it is the biggest, but there's something that is different now compared to how it used to be. There's a major differenceof people's general idea of america, the number of i-hate-america/they-only-do-stupid-things people have raise extreamly much the latest years.
| quote: | | cause the most pollution |
that is per capita too, so the criticism actually make sense.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T...car_dio_per_cap
| quote: | | have the most cars, are seen as the most materialistic, will have a bigger military, will have more nuclear weapons |
I don't think anyone has any problems with that, as long as you don't misuse it.
| quote: | | will cause more harm to the environment |
if you were actually trying to deal with the problems as the EU i think very few would whine.
| quote: | | will be seen as arrogant |
that is indeed hard to deal with, the biggest is always the most arrogant. the people from stockholm are the most arrogant in sweden, the germans are the most arrogant in europe etc. That is something you have to live with... sorry :p
| quote: | | evil people because we have a death penalty |
like you see the arabs cause they cut each other hands off if they brake the law?
really death penalty is kinda old, but yeah that's a totally different discussion...
| quote: | | seen as bullies because we remove dictators |
who you first put in power, support the ones that's best for your intests atm.... :rolleyes:
| quote: | | seen as backers of Israel because we support the only democracy in the region |
you cannot deny that you support israel pretty much whatever happens? :conf:
| quote: | | and never seen as equals in the eyes of europe because we don't have as long a history. |
never heard anyone think like that. |
|
|
| BadBadNeil |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cyrus King
You forgot to mention the catastropihic bombing of many third world nations, the use of chemical weapons (agent orange), and the funding of rogue coups that have murdered millions in developing nations that chose not to adhere to the US's hegemonic structure of obedience. Lets not forget the "mistakes" that your Governement supported (Taliban, binladen, and your good ol friend Saddam hussein) |
I didn't mention any harm caused to any third world nation because even if death did occur I believe the world including the US has tried to do as much good as you can with money, food, supplies, and medical aid.
You can't know who you support will come back to haunt you. Who knows maybe in 100 years Canada will have a war with us. Do we then say we should have never been friends with Canada because they had a war with us 100 years later? There are reasons for backing people, Saddam because we were against Iran, Bin Laden because we were against the soviets. Sure they were the wrong people to ally with but its easy to say that knowing what we know now 30 years later.
| quote: | Originally posted by NYCTrancefan
I would like to believe that by now we would have learnt from the past experiences that you mentioned in some of your statements. Instead we venture into the heart of the Middle East, start a war, can't find the weapons and have to make the best of a bad situation and its okay. Have you ever thought that maybe people are just sick and tired of being interferred with by American action. I know that as an American I certainly am. If we are going to play the game of power politics we should at least be prudent in our actions, something currently lacking in innumerable ways under this administration. If we are going to go around the world acting like worldbeaters then I wish us the best of luck because far more enemies will be created than defeated ultimately. |
Hey, I'd like to be out of the Middle East and other countries as much as you. In fact if it was up to me we wouldn't have our military forces anywhere in the world other than a couple strategic locations perhaps in a few islands in the ocean. We would save a lot of money and people could live without the US at all. However I also believe if we do not interfere we should not interfere at all and that means with aid as well. I would just like to know that if our forces leave and stay close at home that Korea won't fall apart, that terrorists won't run more rampant because of no policing, that arms and technologies wouldn't get into the wrong hands, and that the world would have to know that with no US quick reaction forces in the world they would have to refrain from ever asking for our help. So when something like Kuwait happens and there are no forces in SA or in the Indian ocean and Japan as were last time, then too bad. We would also refrain from taking the most prominent role militarily in any UN missions and they should be divided evenly so as the US isn't having the biggest to risk. We will let the middle east and Europe handle the situation as it is on their doorstep, not ours.
My point wasn't to go into depth about the US in the world but more that Kerry I don't believe will fix a lot of the problems of why the US is hated as they have been around for decades. He will still have to finish Iraq and we will still have troops all around the world. Unless he pulls all of our troops from the world we will still be seen as an interfering influence and a bully no matter who is in charge. Even before the Gulf War II many in the middle east disliked us even though with a coalition we went in to liberate Kuwait. |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cyrus King
You misinformed kunt.. Agent orange is a CHEMICAL too.. that was used as both a defoliant and WEAPON! |
right:rolleyes: i'm sure thats what you ment
reach you little backpedaler, REACH! |
|
|
| Cyrus King |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
right:rolleyes: i'm sure thats what you ment
reach you little backpedaler, REACH! |
It was more of a weapon than a defoliant... too bad you cant stand the fact that you were proven wrong. |
|
|
| Q5echo |
well then genius it was the least effective chemical weapon in history because it takes about 20 years to kill the enemy:rolleyes:
dumbass |
|
|
| Cyrus King |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
well then genius it was the least effective chemical weapon in history because it takes about 20 years to kill the enemy:rolleyes:
dumbass |
Its not only about killing the enemy you flapping labia... it ruined the farming infrastructure and food prodcution of thousands of people... just so that there was path for your terrorist nation to walk through....makes me sick how you cant see the implications of these actions. |
|
|
|
|
