Man Throws Shoes at Bush

[dixon]

Quote by: Electric Hermit A weapon placed in his hands by the US. Saddam being by no means the first dictator to benefit from such largesse.

No, before the sanctions Saddam had the same weapon. All oil revenue went through Saddam.

[key wish]

Quote by: Electric Hermit Virtually all that has been achieved in Iraq has been achieved despite the efforts of the US, not because of it. The agreement on the status of US forces and their eventual withdrawal is proof enough of this. Saddam's regime would have fallen anyway if the US had not been propping it up. This was, in fact, the major worry of the US administration. That a new Abd al-Karim Qasim would arise and gain legitimacy before they could implement their plan to make Iraq a US "protectorate" and the base from which US imperialist power could be extended to the entire region. Now, even that devious plan is in tatters and, so long as the US abides by its solemn obligations - something nobody can take for granted - the US will leave Iraq with nothing but the blood on its hands.

We started to give up support for iraq after its war with Iran back in the eighties so I have no idea how you think america supported Iraq.

How do you connect US forces leaving Iraq as proof of "anything achieved" would have happened without the same Us forces? Thats like saying the tree would have fallen down without the chainsaw anyway.

Saddam would have lost power and it would have been gained by one or both of his sons very easily so the same regime would have been in place.

We have no imperialist power. Imperialist governments do not allow countries they control to have their own elections. We got rid of a genocidal tyrant and left a democracy that is getting more stable by the day. That may have only been a side objective and not the original but it is in no way nothing.

We left them with the freedom to protest.

We left them with a vote and a say in their politics.

We stayed long enough to make that happen but it is up to the iraqi's to make it flourish. As for the spilled blood of the iraqi's. Much more of it was do to other arabs and persians who were more interested in Iraq's failure than they were in having peace.

Many of them do not know enough to appreciate what we have done for them but many do. It would be foolish to think otherwise. I doubt there would be any country that wouldn't want foreign soldiers to leave their country no matter what the circumstances. That doesn't prove anything.

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: key wish We have no imperialist power. Imperialist governments do not allow countries they control to have their own elections.

I daresay it's all in how you define Imperialism. Ours is a more economic and cultural imperialism - backed by a superpower military, of course. As advocates of democracy, we'd be hard pressed not to allow countries to have their own elections... as long as we can see to it they come out the way we like, and with our long history of running election campaigns, we know pretty well how to do that... especially with folks unsophisticated in how to sell candidates.. (Ooops... sorry about Hamas)

Quote by: key wish We got rid of a genocidal tyrant and left a democracy that is getting more stable by the day.

Swell... at what cost? Is the U.S. better off today than five years ago? Not by lightyears. Most would call it a pyrrhic victory at best, saving face at the least.

And besides, there's genocidal tyrants all over the globe. Where's our self-righteous vigor in Darfur? Myanmar? Zimbabwe? In North Korea, they've killed far more of their own citizens than Saddam could ever dream of, they have a clear record of shipping arms to terrorists and they actually have, right now, nuclear weapons.... everything that Boy George misled us about Iraq. Shall we pencil them in for invasion and occupation?

Oh wait, that's right... they don't have any oil.

Quote by: key wish We stayed long enough to make that happen but it is up to the iraqi's to make it flourish.

That certainly wasn't the plan, was it.

Long term military presence planned

After all, what's the point of installing a puppet regime at the strategic apex of the Gulf Oil Region without a permanent military presence to enforce our will.

.

[dixon]

Quote by: Sonart . As advocates of democracy, we'd be hard pressed not to allow countries to have their own elections... as long as we can see to it they come out the way we like, and with our long history of running election campaigns, we know pretty well how to do that... especially with folks unsophisticated in how to sell candidates.. (Ooops... sorry about Hamas)

Dont you think Maliki would be a more relevant example than hamas.

[StevenBee]

Quote by: Associated Press Al-Zeidi, [the shoe-happy reporter] is currently in custody, and may be charged with insulting a foreign leader. If found guilty, al-Zeidi could face two years or more in prison.

I would like to extend a formal congratulations to the USA for successfully exporting American-style democracy into Iraq.

[JJ58]

america and britain have given untold trillions to try to make peoples lives better in countries all over the world. to make it safer for them and they still bloody hate us. but it dont help when our boys are being killed over there and a lot of ppl from uk and usa are still trying to demean our two countries.are the yanks going to treat the soldiers like lepers when they manage to get home in one piece and not a body bag. you did it to the poor vietnam soldiers. why dont we just stop giving these countries aid. after all we give africa aid and in return they give us aids. usa has its faults but to be formed into a great country through hard work and enterprise in just over 300 yrs and with dozens of differnt nationalities and religions pulling together is just amazing after all most of these backward nations that hate us are backward by choice. whether it be by religion or just naturally lazy and corrupt

[StevenBee]

Quote by: JJ58 america and britain have given untold trillions to try to make peoples lives better in countries all over the world. to make it safer for them and they still bloody hate us.

In the words of Southpark: "The reason why we hate you is because you don't even know why we hate you."

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: dixon Dont you think Maliki would be a more relevant example than hamas.

As an example of a U.S. friendly puppet regime. Absolutely, both him and Karzai. Is he a perfect puppet? No... we had to allow for some sort of reasonably legitimate free election. Do we expect Maliki to play ball with us? Beyond all doubt.

Quote by: JJ58 are the yanks going to treat the soldiers like lepers when they manage to get home in one piece and not a body bag.

Not so far, jj... quite the opposite, Americans have a lot of respect of our returning vets, especially for doing their duty in the service of a fool.

In fact, the only disrespect has come from the Bush administration itself, both in the form of financial cuts to the VA system that helps wounded vets, and in hanging out the poor dumb Army reserve slobs from abu Ghraib to twist in the wind and do prison time, when it now turns out they were only doing what was instructed from the very top at the Pentagon.

And I think most Americans are also very grateful to the Brits in sticking by us throughout. I know I am.

Quote by: StevenBee In the words of Southpark: "The reason why we hate you is because you don't even know why we hate you."

Yup.


.

[key wish]

Quote by: StevenBee I would like to extend a formal congratulations to the USA for successfully exporting American-style democracy into Iraq.

What do you think should happen? how about I throw a fast ball shoe at your head a few times. You wouldn't do anything about it. If a cop was standing by in any country I would get arrested.

You act like it would be a good idea for people to be able to attack any dignitary at a podium because they don't like him...

or did I read sarcasm into your post that wasn't there.

[key wish]

Quote by: JJ58 america and britain have given untold trillions to try to make peoples lives better in countries all over the world. to make it safer for them and they still bloody hate us. but it dont help when our boys are being killed over there and a lot of ppl from uk and usa are still trying to demean our two countries.are the yanks going to treat the soldiers like lepers when they manage to get home in one piece and not a body bag. you did it to the poor vietnam soldiers. why dont we just stop giving these countries aid. after all we give africa aid and in return they give us aids. usa has its faults but to be formed into a great country through hard work and enterprise in just over 300 yrs and with dozens of differnt nationalities and religions pulling together is just amazing after all most of these backward nations that hate us are backward by choice. whether it be by religion or just naturally lazy and corrupt

Excellent post. Thank you for the Kudos. I for one really appreciate it. It wasn't long ago when I was telling a couple of people that Great Britain was our greatest allies. I hope that never changes.

The days of treating our american soldiers with out right contempt from the left ended in the 70's but don't let anyone fool you. It is still there.
John Kerry (some on the left wanted as president at one time) eluded to our fighting men being uneducated; saying that if you don't do well in school you end up in Iraq. He tried to back peddle but most sensible people take him for what he is. (he really says ' I honer our men and women in the military but if you can help it don't join up')

Hot Air » Blog Archive » Audio: John Kerry on America’s lazy, uneducated military; Update: McCain demands apology

all of our liberal colleges started to ban military recruiters from their campuses. It was just another example of warped leftist thinking. so the supreme court had to get involved and ruled the government could withhold funding for any school that did not give the military equal treatment. Protests erupted on campuses and they try to tell you it was because they felt the military was unfair to gays but that was never their reason before. They just hated the military and saw it in an unclear light.

I have listened to liberals try and talk people out of joining the military on one side of their mouth and then speak highly of a soldiers service on the other.

I had read part of a book by one of vietnams most prominent general's during the vietnam war. He spoke of how defeated they felt till the american protesters helped his side out. He claimed it gave them the strength to continue.

Ever wonder where the protests were when we bombed yugoslavia for 72 days? were you guys involved in that with us? I don't remember.

Love from across the pond.

[dixon]

Quote by: Sonart . As an example of a U.S. friendly puppet regime.

Oooh please. Hamas a puppet regime?..... Right.

Quote by: Sonart . Absolutely, both him and Karzai. Is he a perfect puppet? No...

Karzai was Americas guy in Afghanistan. Hes had as high as 78% approval rating from the Afghanistani people. I doubt hes ever reached such a high level of approval with your puppet masters so I dont buy it. Alawi was our guy in Iraq, not Maliki. His party won 35 seats in the election. Maliki's Iraqi Alliance party won something like 170.

Quote by: Sonart . we had to allow for some sort of reasonably legitimate free election. Do we expect Maliki to play ball with us? Beyond all doubt.

Nonsense. The Status of Forces Agreement doesnt demonstrate anyone playing ball. You dont see anything about any long term bases, let alone these 14 bases from your 4 year old article, in the current agreement.

[key wish]

Quote by: Sonart . I daresay it's all in how you define Imperialism. Ours is a more economic and cultural imperialism - backed by a superpower military, of course. As advocates of democracy, we'd be hard pressed not to allow countries to have their own elections... as long as we can see to it they come out the way we like, and with our long history of running election campaigns, we know pretty well how to do that... especially with folks unsophisticated in how to sell candidates.. (Ooops... sorry about Hamas) Swell... at what cost? Is the U.S. better off today than five years ago? Not by lightyears. Most would call it a pyrrhic victory at best, saving face at the least. And besides, there's genocidal tyrants all over the globe. Where's our self-righteous vigor in Darfur? Myanmar? Zimbabwe? In North Korea, they've killed far more of their own citizens than Saddam could ever dream of, they have a clear record of shipping arms to terrorists and they actually have, right now, nuclear weapons.... everything that Boy George misled us about Iraq. Shall we pencil them in for invasion and occupation? Oh wait, that's right... they don't have any oil. That certainly wasn't the plan, was it. Long term military presence planned After all, what's the point of installing a puppet regime at the strategic apex of the Gulf Oil Region without a permanent military presence to enforce our will. .

Do you even bother reading your own links or are you another headline browser. I stopped reading after the first few lines where it said long term bases for troops to stay for two years and that a drwa down in troops would not be expected till 2006.

We help who we help and we have to stick with things that involve our national interest in most times. And we have helped out in all the places you have mentioned except north korea.

In north korea we would have to destroy the entire country down to the last man. There is no helping them. There is nothing to work with. just because we can't put out the biggest fire (we could but we would have to kill many millions of people) doesn't mean we shouldn't put out the smaller ones.

I like how you can ignore all the actual evidence of the wmd's that Iraq must have had at some point in its history but believe in our fixing an election to get results we like with no proof in any way other than hearsay.

[StevenBee]

Quote by: key wish You act like it would be a good idea for people to be able to attack any dignitary at a podium because they don't like him...

According to the quoted AP article, the man is not being charged with attacking a dignitary - he is being charged with insulting one. Unspeakably huge difference betwix the two.

[Sweet Katie]

Bush's security was right there, too -- making sure the reporter didn't get the chance to throw a SECOND shoe at him . . . Wait a minute . . .

:-)

[Electric Hermit]

Quote by: dixon No, before the sanctions Saddam had the same weapon. All oil revenue went through Saddam.

Plain silliness. How could he have had the "weapon" before it existed?

[Electric Hermit]

Quote by: key wish We started to give up support for iraq after its war with Iran back in the eighties so I have no idea how you think america supported Iraq.

Then you haven't been paying attention.

[Electric Hermit]

Quote by: dixon You dont see anything about any long term bases...

The measure of your Beloved Leader's failure.

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: dixon Oooh please. Hamas a puppet regime?..... Right.

LOL!!! Indeed. Yet another monumental screwup by the Bush League. Push for democratic elections without ever considering who might get elected.

Quote by: dixon Karzai was Americas guy in Afghanistan. Hes had as high as 78% approval rating from the Afghanistani people.

The operative word being "had". Bush once had 80% approval among Americans too. Now the Afghan government is a massive exercise in corruption, thanks to our neglect in pursuit of Iraq.

Quote by: dixon Nonsense. The Status of Forces Agreement doesn't demonstrate anyone playing ball.

I said do we "expect" him to play ball. After 5 years of Bush League criminal incompetence, our current position in Iraq is so incredibly weak that we can't 'expect' much from anyone. Thus the Status of Forces Agreement more closely resembles Barack Obama's plan for our withdrawal from Iraq than anything Bush had planned. How 'ironical'.

Quote by: key wish I stopped reading after the first few lines where it said long term bases for troops to stay for two years and that a draw down in troops would not be expected till 2006.

Then you missed the part where it said...

"As the U.S. scales back its military presence in Saudi Arabia, Iraq provides an option for an administration eager to maintain a robust military presence in the Middle East and intent on a muscular approach to seeding democracy in the region."

Obviously their intent was to 'draw down' from the numbers required for pacifying the resistance, but to continue maintaining a permanent presence, to replace our garrison in Saudi Arabia that has been so troublesome among Islamists.

Quote by: key wish In north korea we would have to destroy the entire country down to the last man.

Oh really? Says who? You don't have sympathic populations surrounding them on three sides. You have a weary, suffering populace eager to reunite with their successful relatives to the South. Beyond the thousands of gun tubes currently pointed at Soeul, why would the preening NeoCons see it as any more difficult than a simple 'regime change' Iraq?

Quote by: key wish I like how you can ignore all the actual evidence of the wmd's that Iraq must have had at some point in its history...

To the contrary. I was well aware of Iraq's capabilities prior to Desert Storm. But I had serious doubts about afterward, given the 7 years of inspections and 12 years of sanctions. But when Powell made his case before the UN, I was pretty convinced... for about 3 days when his entire case promptly began falling apart.

And I'll remind you that there was no "Actual evidence" after Desert Storm, since Iraq had no WMD.

Quote by: key wish but believe in our fixing an election to get results we like with no proof in any way other than hearsay.

No proof? We were the occupying authority in Iraq and in charge of their provisional government, with the intention of establishing a permanent military presence to pacify the region, ala Japan, Germany and South Korea. Are you actually suggesting that we didn't vet who was and wasn't eligible to run for office?

.

[dixon]

Quote by: Sonart . I said do we "expect" him to play ball. After 5 years of Bush League criminal incompetence, our current position in Iraq is so incredibly weak that we can't 'expect' much from anyone. .

I'll step back out of your way while you slither over to some more defensable position from your previous position.

Quote by: Sonart . Do we expect Maliki to play ball with us? Beyond all doubt.

[SoylentGreen]

key wish I have listened to liberals try and talk people out of joining the military on one side of their mouth and then speak highly of a soldiers service on the other.

Then what you would have listened to was a liberal making a distinction between the many fine qualities of a soldier and the politicians who will misuse those fine qualities for their own corrupted purpose.