Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Wow Bush is a hypocrite~~

  1. #1

    Wow Bush is a hypocrite~~

    According to Bu$h's doctrine of preemptive war, we should take military action against North Korea, Iran, and a dozen other nations. But has he done this? No. Instead he incompetently invades Iraq, a nation that had nothing to do with 9/11 and which posed no threat to the US, nor had any wmds.

    Now that North Korea has a nuke, Ws all about "diplomacy." Yeah, right. Who does this guy think he's fooling?

    Meanwhile, Osama bin Laden runs loose, still uncaught.

    Good going W! Keep this up and you will have ****ed up international affairs more than your worse critics thought possible.

  2. #2
    what a broken record you are

  3. #3
    bush supporters absolutely hate the truth and facts...and it clouds their moronic minds.

  4. #4
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [QUOTE=YellowSubmarine]According to Bu$h's doctrine of preemptive war, we should take military action against North Korea, Iran, and a dozen other nations. But has he done this? No. Instead he incompetently invades Iraq, a nation that had nothing to do with 9/11 and which posed no threat to the US, nor had any wmds.

    Now that North Korea has a nuke, Ws all about "diplomacy." Yeah, right. Who does this guy think he's fooling?

    Meanwhile, Osama bin Laden runs loose, still uncaught.

    Good going W! Keep this up and you will have ****ed up international affairs more than your worse critics thought possible.[/QUOTE]


    So, you'd have supported all out war with North Korea and Iran in 2002, in place of Afghanistan and Iraq? Please.

    Who's the hypocrite here? You rip on Bush for not using diplomacy and ignoring the "international community" on the one hand regarding Iraq, and yet rip him for doing precisely that with regards to North Korea and Iran. Wouldn't having one on one with any nation talks be "unilateral" and outside the auspices of the UN structure? Isn't "diplomacy" some magical force that Bush needed to use more of with regards to Iraq?

    Bman - you keep pushing for one on one talks with N Korea, not realizing that one on one talks with N Korea are precisely the reason why they have nukes now. It is not the shape of the bargaining table that is causing a problem, it is the fact that no matter what the shape, N Korea is at that table. They don't honor agreements or negotiate in good faith.

    Grow the f*ck up.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    US
    Posts
    244
    Bush is the worst president in American history, and his followers are the dumbest people on the planet,,, tell us something we dont know...

  6. #6
    [QUOTE=Renaissance10]Bush is the worst president in American history, and his followers are the dumbest people on the planet,,, tell us something we dont know...[/QUOTE]


    you have an extremely poor grasp on American history

  7. #7
    [QUOTE=bman]bush supporters absolutely hate the truth and facts...and it clouds their moronic minds.[/QUOTE]


    I didn't see any facts in that post. I saw a lot of popular belief and assumption. Not to mention the fact that Japan and China are more pissed at NK than we are.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    US
    Posts
    244
    [QUOTE=pauliec]you have an extremely poor grasp on American history[/QUOTE]

    Reagan? Bush Sr.? :huh:

  9. #9
    [QUOTE=jets5ever]So, you'd have supported all out war with North Korea and Iran in 2002, in place of Afghanistan and Iraq? Please.

    Who's the hypocrite here? You rip on Bush for not using diplomacy and ignoring the "international community" on the one hand regarding Iraq, and yet rip him for doing precisely that with regards to North Korea and Iran. Wouldn't having one on one with any nation talks be "unilateral" and outside the auspices of the UN structure? Isn't "diplomacy" some magical force that Bush needed to use more of with regards to Iraq?

    Bman - you keep pushing for one on one talks with N Korea, not realizing that one on one talks with N Korea are precisely the reason why they have nukes now. It is not the shape of the bargaining table that is causing a problem, it is the fact that no matter what the shape, N Korea is at that table. They don't honor agreements or negotiate in good faith.

    Grow the f*ck up.[/QUOTE]

    So what do you recommend Clinton should have done? You keep saying that the 1 on 1 talks is why NK has nukes now, but Bush has had 6 1/2 yrs to do something about it. He had the backing of a republican House and Senate yet, Clearly he hasent done anything. Why do you think Bush's policies toward 9/11 have failed? What should he have done differently.

    Also back in 2002 Colin Powell praised Clintons approach toward NK and wanted to use it as a platform for future foreign relations with NK. Even recently, James Baker has stated that he thinks the USA should resume one on one talks with NK......so why are they so wrong?

    One on one talks is not why they have nukes today. The first reactor was built in 1984 while Reagan was in office. The first nuclear grade plutonium was achieved under Bush seniors watch. Neither president engaged in one on one talks yet its widely believed NK had at leat 2 nukes before clinton even took over. The Agreed Framework was hardly a perfect plan but it DID keep NK from developing nukes during much of the 1990s. Yes , NK did not keep up with their end of the bargain, but neither did the USA when economic sanctions were not fully lifted and full diplomatic relations were not achieved. It was not a perfect plan, but it was a start.

    Stop tellling people to grow up. You dont have nearly enough understanding of these matters to tell anyone to grow the f*ck up.
    Last edited by kennyo7; 10-12-2006 at 06:29 PM.

  10. #10
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    [QUOTE=kennyo7]So what do you recommend Clinton should have done? You keep saying that the 1 on 1 talks is why NK has nukes now, but Bush has had 6 1/2 yrs to do something about it. He had the backing of a republican House and Senate yet, Clearly he hasent done anything. Why do you think Bush's policies toward 9/11 have failed? What should he have done differently.

    Also back in 2002 Colin Powell praised Clintons approach toward NK and wanted to use it as a platform for future foreign relations with NK. Even recently, James Baker has stated that he thinks the USA should resume one on one talks with NK......so why are they so wrong?

    One on one talks is not why they have nukes today. The first reactor was built in 1984 while Reagan was in office. The first nuclear grade plutonium was achieved under Bush seniors watch. Neither president engaged in one on one talks yet its widely believed NK had at leat 2 nukes before clinton even took over. The Agreed Framework was hardly a perfect plan but it DID keep NK from developing nukes during much of the 1990s. Yes , NK did not keep up with their end of the bargain, but neither did the USA when economic sanctions were not fully lifted and full diplomatic relations were not achieved. It was not a perfect plan, but it was a start.

    Stop tellling people to grow up. You dont have nearly enough understanding of these matters to tell anyone to grow the f*ck up.[/QUOTE]


    Wow, you are a Clinton apologist. You treat him better than Monica did. It's no longer any use to talk to you. You regurgitate talking points and don't think for yourself. If you are honestly telling me that Clinton's dealings with North Korea were in any way effective, I have no reason to listen to a word you ever say about anything. My God, you excuse everything that man has done and ALWAYS blame America. You have zero credibility. Clinton's North Korea policy has been an absolute failure.

    North Korea does not honor agreements that they sign, period, end of story. What should Bush do - talk with them ad have them sign another agreement that they'll ignore? At elast we've stopped giving them money, so that they can get their nukes faster! Clinton gave them money, money that that used to build the very arsenal with which they are trying to blackmail us with today. But you prattle on about "frameworks" and other nonsense. Please.

    Bush has done "nothing." So, you'd rather he (1) invade NK or (2) hold some one on one talks that North Korea doesn't participate in good faith in? What happens when these one on one talks eventually break down, will Bush get support from you for trying? NO, you'll blame him for their failure. You just don't get it.

    Your abject hatred of George Bush has clouded your reasoning. Clinton does not deserve 100 of the blame for this situation, merely a lot of it and sorry, his agreement was a complete and utter failure. If it weren't such a serious topic, it would be funny.

  11. #11
    OK..So Clinton's policies were a failure..He was operating with a REP. congress that didn't override anything nor suggest a different approach (on N Korea, or Al Qeada)..

    I agree..Clinton wasn't that strong on those issues..
    But Bush has been an absolute failure in regards to foreign affairs..Has he not 5EVER?
    No OBL or Al Zawahiri, an almost nuclear Iran, a nuclear N Korea, an absolute mess of a war in Iraq (which is creating MORE jihadists)..
    I mean lets call a spade a spade..

    This has been a DISASTEROUS administration.
    Last edited by bman; 10-12-2006 at 08:16 PM.

  12. #12
    [QUOTE=jets5ever]Wow, you are a Clinton apologist. You treat him better than Monica did. It's no longer any use to talk to you. You regurgitate talking points and don't think for yourself. If you are honestly telling me that Clinton's dealings with North Korea were in any way effective, I have no reason to listen to a word you ever say about anything. My God, you excuse everything that man has done and ALWAYS blame America. You have zero credibility. Clinton's North Korea policy has been an absolute failure.

    North Korea does not honor agreements that they sign, period, end of story. What should Bush do - talk with them ad have them sign another agreement that they'll ignore? At elast we've stopped giving them money, so that they can get their nukes faster! Clinton gave them money, money that that used to build the very arsenal with which they are trying to blackmail us with today. But you prattle on about "frameworks" and other nonsense. Please.

    Bush has done "nothing." So, you'd rather he (1) invade NK or (2) hold some one on one talks that North Korea doesn't participate in good faith in? What happens when these one on one talks eventually break down, will Bush get support from you for trying? NO, you'll blame him for their failure. You just don't get it.

    Your abject hatred of George Bush has clouded your reasoning. Clinton does not deserve 100 of the blame for this situation, merely a lot of it and sorry, his agreement was a complete and utter failure. If it weren't such a serious topic, it would be funny.[/QUOTE]

    WOW!!! I never knew someone can write so much and yet say so little.

    Now that your done with the name calling, spouting of tired, worn out Right Wing slogans, and little hissy fit. Whats the plan you would have recommended?

  13. #13
    hey guys ease off George Bush

    he's reshaping the middle east into democracy

    don't be a hater

    stay the course

  14. #14
    [QUOTE=bitonti]hey guys ease off George Bush

    he's reshaping the middle east into democracy

    don't be a hater

    stay the course[/QUOTE]

    [QUOTE=YellowSubmarine]Anything this guy says.[/QUOTE]

    [QUOTE=Renaissance10]Bush is the worst president in American history, and his followers are the dumbest people on the planet,,, tell us something we dont know...[/QUOTE]



    What you people don't understand is that the progress and production of this administration cannot be judged either black or white. For liberals, it's a complete, utter failure led by a truly stupid man. Anyone who disagrees with that statement must be a hardcore gun-nut who would vote for a Bush monarchy if possible.

    Politics is more than just succeed/fail. People who are quick to make broad, sweeping comments (both right and left) are simply misinformed and most likely terribly lazy. My suggestion: try reading. Books. By credible scholars, not Al Franken or Bill O'Reilly.

    In 50 years, presidential scholars will have more insight about this administration than "Bush was a failure ex-cokehead" or "Bush was the second coming of Lincoln."

    So hold tight, and stop acting like ****ing idiots.

    Goddammit.

    I'm almost happy voter turnout is always so low. At least I know the lazy, misinformed public who watches Hannity & Colmes and listens to Air America aren't ****ing up the system.
    Last edited by JetsFan2012; 10-12-2006 at 10:29 PM.

  15. #15
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ft Lauderdale by way of New York
    Posts
    13,208
    [QUOTE=pauliec]What you people don't understand is that the progress and production of this administration cannot be judged either black or white. For liberals, it's a complete, utter failure led by a truly stupid man. Anyone who disagrees with that statement must be a hardcore gun-nut who would vote for a Bush monarchy if possible.

    Politics is more than just succeed/fail. People who are quick to make broad, sweeping comments (both right and left) are simply misinformed and most likely terribly lazy. My suggestion: try reading. Books. By credible scholars, not Al Franken or Bill O'Reilly.

    In 50 years, presidential scholars will have more insight about this administration than "Bush was a failure ex-cokehead" or "Bush was the second coming of Lincoln."

    So hold tight, and stop acting like ****ing idiots.

    Goddammit.

    I'm almost happy voter turnout is always so low. At least I know the lazy, misinformed public who watches Hannity & Colmes and listens to Air America aren't ****ing up the system.[/QUOTE]

    Paulie, you're quite intelligent for such a young dude and I agree with your post.

  16. #16

  17. #17
    [QUOTE=Renaissance10]Bush is the worst president in American history, and his followers are the dumbest people on the planet,,, tell us something we dont know...[/QUOTE]

    Welcome back Jetsin2004. And go away again

  18. #18
    [QUOTE=doggin94it]Welcome back Jetsin2004. And go away again[/QUOTE]
    Ren10, bman, YellowSub...

    Jets5ever - you are having multiple arguments with a multiple-handled poster. So you know.

  19. #19
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    20,663
    [QUOTE=Renaissance10]Bush is the worst president in American history, and his followers are the dumbest people on the planet,,, tell us something we dont know...[/QUOTE]

    Your problems extend all the way down to your DNA. :yes:

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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

Follow Us