Jump to content

How do we stop Bush?


Jablea

Recommended Posts

  • Members

JamesF, the "us vs. they" argument is way flawed and way overused but sadly, it works. Yes, there are distinct differences between Eastern and Western culture that some people from both sides like to focus in on and blow out of proportion so they can have a reason to hate on each other. But people are just simply not that easy to classify. You can't just lump any person into one or the other. That's why Bush's entire "You're for us or against us" tirade just makes me want to scream "Stupid idiot!" everytime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Look at the news today:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6266707.stm

Over 100 people were killed just in one day, 75 killed from a bombing at the University in Baghdad. There's no possible way that all those people were terrorists. In fact, the caption on the BBC's website says that most of those killed were women just walking home from class.

Students trying to get a decent education and make better lives for themselves do not deserve to get killed like this.

But obviously Bush doesn't have to give a damn about this. He's never had to give a damn about anybody before in his life. To him, all these senseless murders are just part of the fight to "end" terrorism in Iraq. Yet why did we get involved in this mess in the first place? Because terrorists killed innocent people in our country. For the approximately 3,000 people who died on 9/11, though, 10+ times many people had to die in the fight against terrorism. Does anyone think this makes sense? Fighting fire with fire never works. The condition of Iraq right now is an utter tragedy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

First of all, it is not our call to get into other people's problems and Saddam's crimes against humanity are not enough to go to war over...in that case, start a war with India or North Korea or Iran which do the same things to their people and to be honest with you what Hussein did to the Iraqis is what we are doing: gassing, killing, raping, you name it man it is happening. So how have we made the situation better? Hussein was not a threat to us in the days and months preceding the invasion on 3/19/03 and still never was and the real threat of OBL is still out there but Bush even claimed at one point he didn't care to find him and didn't pay much attention to him. What a blowhort

This war is about oil and how much Bush can profit off of it when he has the troops guarding the oil fields and yes he has made plenty of money off of Iraq that is a given. I wish I had the source to copy and paste it here but most people already know this anyways.

I may not be in the meetings with leaders but thankfully not all of them are warmongers like Bush and some of them actually prefer to get solutions through diplomacy and not by attacking others...and if you see footage on the eve of the 3/19/03 invasion it sure looks like the Iraqis were living peacefully. Now this is not true all the time due to Hussein's crimes but again I say his crimes are not enough to go to war over and we are now more vulnerable to an attack than the days before 9/11. That is not something that a lot of people take lightly and it is all thanks to Bush in starting a war over lies and manipulation. So his solution is to send more troops there? We need to start withdrawing and one can only hope that the Democrat Congress passes a bill making it mandatory for the president to begin withdrawing forces from Iraq and let them govern on their own.

When you say terrorists are preventing peace and what not....well we are not going about this in a peaceful way and terrorism has risen since the war started so that will keep us further from days of peace and harmony.

No we should not let dictators kill and terrorists attack but we are doing those same exact things in Iraq....attacking and killing. And again Iraq was not a threat to us right before the war started so let someone else resolve the problem with the dictator and we tend to our own affairs. We must learn to stop policing the world and getting involved in other people's problems. Someday the dictatorship will end and someone with a peace approach comes forward and governs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Annie was not brought in as an antagonist for Reva. Reva wasn’t even on the canvas when Annie first appeared in late 1994. 
    • The speculation……….very entertaining. 
    • I had forgotten that several Days stars came out strong against Melissa. Good for them!
    • That would have made sense. Did all these characters get dropped when DePriest left or had they already been dropped?
    • The other issue with Missy: in June 2020, she "liked" some social media posts by Candace Owens -- things Candace said that were against Black Lives Matter.  That is described here https://tvline.com/news/melissa-reeves-racism-days-of-our-lives-instagram-controversy-2894568/ I don't know if that was ever resolved.
    • She appeared onscreen not long after Rose Livingston and Sara Montaigne, and we found out that Sara was Rose's estranged daughter. I wonder whether Peggy might have been part of that family group -- or else they were just juggling a few different potential mysteries so that they could develop whatever seemed to be getting the best response from the audience. They didn't do anything much with Rose and Sara really either. Maybe Rose would have become more prominent if Rachel and Mac had split up over Mitch, or if Sara had really flourished. In some ways I can picture Cheryl being affected by MJ's prostitution similarly to how Josie was distressed by finding out about Sharlene. But I can also see that Josie as a Frame being involved with Matthew would have different stakes for Rachel and Sharlene than Cheryl being involved with Scott. I do think the solution for Cheryl would have had to be a badder boy than Scott -- either a real bad boy who would do her wrong, or the kind of bad boy (not Chad!!!) who is essentially misunderstood and other people just don't understand. Cheryl would also have been better off with some friends her own age. Matthew and Josie benefited a bit from having other teenagers to interact with.
    • Sally Spencer was a decent actress, but the writing destroyed the "M.J." that Kathleen Layman had built. Layman had a quiet strength about her, and she and Osburn really felt like sisters. Spencer's character should have been either an unmentioned sister, or maybe Jake's that grew up close to Kathleen, M.J. and the rest, but was away for a few years before joining the force. Kristen Marie was o.k., but I always got a mousier vibe from her. Being pigeon-holed with Scott for most of the run hurt things for her, as well.  The Loves were also underserved between Rhonda Lewin and Philece Sampler. Philece would have been better as Nicole. Thank goodness Anne Heche  showed up for the next round of auditions. Christopher Holder was mediocre as Peter, but given a shot, I think Marcus Smythe could have stuck around for a while.  I would have had Peggy Lazarus be a Frame -- possibly an ex-wife for Vince with an agenda. Smythe and Hollen had  a fun chemistry that could have kept the two around.. Bringing recasts for  Cheryl and Ben back mixing it up with other Frames. Corys, Lawrences at the time might have kept all the families stronger. 
    • shoot...he said in that Locher room with Krista. I think he met her before that---she was doing Broadway and they had mutual friends or an agent maybe?
    • Yes. And I assume he met Mary Ellen Stuart at GL.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy