Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(London Times)   Bush Sr. says no to unilateral war on Iraq   (timesonline.co.uk) divider line 720
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

23016 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Mar 2003 at 6:39 PM (12 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



720 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2003-03-12 07:29:25 PM  
Read an article last week that said if there was an election today Bush would lose no matter who he ran against.
 
fb-
2003-03-12 07:29:27 PM  
I don't get it.. how can anybody actually still be supporting this administration?!?!

Jesus shiat farkpumper Christ.. between his father and former president publicly calling him out.. and the "unmanned aircraft capable of flying long distances and attacking the US homeland with chemical and biological weapons" that turned out to be abalsa wood hobby plane powered by weed wacker engines that can travel a few hundred yards is there ANYBODY that still supports our administration and believes a farking word they say?!?!
 
2003-03-12 07:30:01 PM  
Bashturn, my favorite part of that article you posted was this:
"Also, the vice president has nothing whatsoever to do with the Pentagon bidding process," the aide added.

Funny!
 
2003-03-12 07:30:02 PM  
"MorningBreath has a point, DrGeoffrey - given the way things are in the states now, you could simply be declared an enemy combatant and disappear...."

Oh jesus christ. If it's so bad, shouldn't you be off making explosives in the woods or something? Help give your charismatic leader more time to work on that 1,000 page ranting manifesto.. those things don't write themselves, you know.
 
2003-03-12 07:30:06 PM  
SadDad: I remember September 11,2000, as well. Nothing much happened that day.

It's only about oil because the Guardian says so? Baaaaaaaah.
 
2003-03-12 07:30:23 PM  
Fb--

Not anyone with a brain or a conscience.
 
2003-03-12 07:32:00 PM  
Flg8or:

True enough - but in the past you were pretty much guarenteed due process. Now with the patriot act in full swing a simple declaration by the AG that the person in question is an enemy combatant and due process goes straight out the window - the way things are in the states now. It would be awfully tempting for anyone to have that power, and Ashcroft does not strike me as the most scrupulous of guys.
 
2003-03-12 07:32:13 PM  
Oh no! This can't be! Who would have guessed that Daddy Bush was a flaming liberal.
 
2003-03-12 07:32:30 PM  
Bashturn: I love how no matter what your viewpoint is, anyone that disagrees is a sheep. Interesting how that works. In any event, this war is not about making profits on oil. If it were, then we would just drop sanctions and send in American oil companies straight away. I don't particularly support this war either, but an effort costing hundreds of billions of dollars is no way to make a profit. It's not about the farking oil!
 
2003-03-12 07:32:56 PM  
Flg8or: My mistake... I guess i should be a good sheep and get my news from Newsmax and Fox News...
 
2003-03-12 07:34:03 PM  
Uh Bashturn..

Incase you didn't know Haliburton is a HUGE and I mean Huge company and there by is almost guaranteed to have gov. contracts. Secondly, incase you didn't know this, Chaney is the Vice president.. which means he's not incarge. Plus the payment are for previous work.

And The War is NOT about OIL. We don't buy Iraq's oil now and don't need too and the UK actually exports oil. The only country that buys Iraq's oil is France, which is exactly why they are against the war. Amazingly war does not increase a countries output of oil.
 
2003-03-12 07:34:20 PM  
Bush is just another word for coont.
 
2003-03-12 07:34:33 PM  
Scrotar:

Can I borrow yours? You must be almost done by now.
 
2003-03-12 07:34:40 PM  
Here's some information worth knowing that you'll never get on CNN. Do you know enough to justify going to war with Iraq? Take the War on Iraq IQ Test:

1. Q: What percentage of the world's population does the U.S. have? A: 6%

2. Q: What percentage of the world's wealth does the U.S. have? A: 50%

3. Q: Which country has the largest oil reserves? A: Saudi Arabia

4. Q: Which country has the second largest oil reserves? A: Iraq

5. Q: How much is spent on military budgets a year worldwide? A: $900+ billion

6. Q: How much of this is spent by the U.S.? A: 50%

7. Q: What percent of US military spending would ensure the essentials of life to everyone in the world, according the the UN? A: 10% (that's about $40 billion, the amount of funding initially requested to fund our retaliatory attack on Afghanistan).

8. Q: How many people have died in wars since World War II? A: 86 million

9. Q: How long has Iraq had chemical and biological weapons? A: Since the early 1980's.

10. Q: Did Iraq develop these chemical and biological weapons on their own? A: No, the materials and technology were supplied by the US government, along with Britain and private corporations.

11. Q: Did the US government condemn the Iraqi use of gas warfare against Iran? A: No

12. Q: How many people did Saddam Hussein kill using gas in the Kurdish town of Halabja in 1988? A: 5,000

13. Q: How many western countries condemned this action at the time? A:None ; why?

14. Q: How many gallons of Agent Orange did America use in Vietnam? A: 17 million.

15. Q: Are there any proven links between Iraq and September 11th terrorist attack? A: No

16. Q: What is the estimated number of civilian casualties in the Gulf War? A: 35,000

17. Q: How many casualties did the Iraqi military inflict on the western forces during the Gulf War ? A: None

18. Q: How many retreating Iraqi soldiers were buried alive by U.S. tanks with ploughs mounted on the front? A: 6,000

19. Q: How many tons of depleted uranium were left in Iraq and Kuwait after the Gulf War? A: 40 tons

20. Q: What according to the UN was the increase in cancer rates in Iraq between 1991 and 1994? A: 700%

21. Q: How much of Iraq's military capacity did America claim it had destroyed in 1991? A: 80%

22. Q: Is there any proof that Iraq plans to use its weapons for anything other than deterrence and self defense? A: No

23. Q: Does Iraq present more of a threat to world peace now than 10 years ago? A: No

24. Q: How many civilian deaths has the Pentagon predicted in the event of an attack on Iraq in 2002/3? A: 10,000

25. Q: What percentage of these will be children? A: Over 50%

26. Q: How many years has the U.S. engaged in air strikes on Iraq? A: 11 years

27. Q: Was the U.S and the UK at war with Iraq between December 1998 and September 1999? A: No

28. Q: How many pounds of explosives were dropped on Iraq between December 1998 and September 1999? A: 20 million

29. Q: How many years ago was UN Resolution 661 introduced, imposing strict sanctions on Iraq's imports and exports? A: 12 years

30. Q: What was the child death rate in Iraq in 1989 (per 1,000 births)? A: 38

31. Q: What was the estimated child death rate in Iraq in 1999 (per 1,000 births)? A: 131 (that's an increase of 345%)

32. Q: How many Iraqis are estimated to have died by October 1999 as a result of UN sanctions? A: 1.5 million

33. Q: How many Iraqi children are estimated to have died due to sanctions since 1997? A: 750,000

34. Q: Did Saddam order the inspectors out of Iraq? A: No

35. Q: How many inspections were there in November and December 1998? A: 300

36. Q: How many of these inspections had problems? A: 5

37. Q: Were the weapons inspectors allowed entry to the Ba'ath Party HQ? A: Yes
 
2003-03-12 07:34:41 PM  
It's not about the farking oil!

No. It's about Freedom.

Freedom fries.
 
2003-03-12 07:34:56 PM  
Someone get that former Republican President a big steaming cup o' shut the fark up!
 
2003-03-12 07:35:12 PM  
St.Jacques
...They're terms commonly used by many politicians, academics, and journalists.

Thank you captain obvious. And I still contend that these "commonly used" terms have been more frequently used by this administration than any other.

Oh, and by the way, which of these distinguished groups do you belong to? The "regurgitate whatever my political science professor said yesterday in class" group?
 
2003-03-12 07:35:14 PM  
Hey Camel,

I reckon he didn;t actually win the last election. They just weren;t allowed to count teh rest of the votes.....
 
2003-03-12 07:35:37 PM  
Honest_Iago : thanks for the love... But Do you honestly think that we would be going to Irak If there was no oil ?
 
2003-03-12 07:37:08 PM  
Flg8or

Seriously. This guy is pitting the US against the rest of the planet, and frankly, that's just crazy....The hell with the oil, North Korea, France, Iraq or anything else. Bush is going to destroy the US at this rate. Economically and socially.

Anyone read Barbara W. Tuchmans "The March of Folly"...The Chapter on "Pursuit of Policy Contrary to Self Interest"..Remind anyone of Rehoboam?
 
2003-03-12 07:38:05 PM  
Quithex

Awesome. I'm going to print that and post it at school. Thanks.
 
2003-03-12 07:38:13 PM  
Is there anyone in America who really believes that George Bush is still not the President?


/attempt to understand this joke.
 
fb-
2003-03-12 07:38:35 PM  
Quinzy,

Actually.. 12% of the US imported oil in January was Iraqi. You'd have to read to know that though..
 
2003-03-12 07:38:49 PM  
Quithex... I nominate you as the next president.

Here's to the real axis of evil... Bush, Blair, and Sharon... keep on rockin' in the free world gentlemen.
 
2003-03-12 07:38:49 PM  
about the 'assassinate bush' crap. personally, i don't like the guy at all, but i surely don't want him dead. i think all good democrats should join the secret service just to protect him, because if something happens to shrub, we're stuck with cheney.

and cheney strikes me as one mean dude. he'd make dubya look like a puppy dog in no time. the idea of 'president cheney' chills me to the bone.
 
2003-03-12 07:39:21 PM  
Assistant_Madman - I would, but I don't have the rights to it any longer. Teach me to trust them militia types, I tells ya..
 
2003-03-12 07:39:54 PM  
WickedWanda

On the subject of Iraqi reconstruction; King Abdullah of Jordan has offered to temporarily help take care of things in Iraq after Saddam's ousted. I'm not sure about the sincerity of this offer, but it makes sense if you ask me (provided he truly has the best interest of the Iraqi people at heart). While I'm sure the majority of Iraqi citizens will welcome the change in leadership that the US-led campaign will provide, I doubt that they would be very trustful of prolonged US involvement. Another stable Arab nation who the Iraqi people are more apt to trust, like Jordan, would definitely have more credibility in the long run in terms of helping to get the Iraqi populace back on their feet.

On the subject of unilateral action; there are a multitude of nations in and outside of the UN that are backing US-led military action. Within the confines of the UN there's the UK, Spain, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Guinea, Angola, and Chile who are backing action against Saddam. Mexico is still on the fence, but leaning toward the US side. Outside the UN and in the Middle East there is support from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan, and Qatar. Turkey, like Mexico, is still on the fence but leaning towards the military option as well. There are also the Austrailians, who firmly back action against Saddam and have committed troops to the region. That's thirteen nations backing US action and two others that are still on the fence, but are leaning toward backing action. Best case scenario, that would be a total of fifteen. Still, thirteen that are for action is hardly what I'd call "unilateral".

Maybe, just maybe the ambassadors and leaders of these thirteen nations know a little more than a bunch of left-wing Farkers embroiled in an internet dick-measuring contest.

*stares in the general direction of D8vo, Fb-, Drgeoffrey, LittleCamel*

That is all.
 
2003-03-12 07:40:05 PM  
Will they just go to war already and get this over with...
 
fb-
2003-03-12 07:40:34 PM  
Here's what it boils down to.. 99% of the world know that Bush is a greedy, war mongering psychopath.

The other 1% is comprised of rah-rah, we're #1, Go Team! Americans that would still defend Bush if he was kidnapping babies in the Washington DC area, sexually mutilating them and drinking their blood to defend us from "Terrah" and "Evil Doooers."
 
2003-03-12 07:40:35 PM  
holy mackerel, batdork!!. DanielVovak in non self-promoting post shock.
 
2003-03-12 07:40:50 PM  
The only country that buys Iraq's oil is France,

ER UM no russia and alot of other countrys
 
2003-03-12 07:41:00 PM  
Also, fark SquirrelWithLargeNuts. Fark him in his stupid squirrel nest. Perhaps he needs to invest in a larger brain.
 
2003-03-12 07:42:01 PM  
Oops, sorry guys, and secret service lurkers.
I take back everything I said about wishing someone would off W. I really do. That would be a horrible misfortune and I, for one, would not stand for it. If W were to be hurt in any way, you will see me taking up arms and offering my personal brand of justice to whatever nutsack disagreed with his policy. Live free or die.
 
2003-03-12 07:42:15 PM  
Bashturn: Honestly, they have such a hard-on for Saddam I think even without oil we'd be going over there. Which isn't to say he isn't an evil bastard, cause he is.
 
2003-03-12 07:42:59 PM  
03-12-03 07:34:03 PM Quinzy
Uh Bashturn..

Incase you didn't know Haliburton is a HUGE and I mean Huge company and there by is almost guaranteed to have gov. contracts. Secondly, incase you didn't know this, Chaney is the Vice president.. which means he's not incarge. Plus the payment are for previous work.


You are not allowed to make ANY MONEY outside public donations and your salary. Getting money from a previous job should have gone into a blind trust, like the law states.

But then again, how many laws does Bush & Co. get away with and change anyway?
 
2003-03-12 07:43:21 PM  
Amen Fb-...

If only americans would travel more, perhaps they would understand a little better... and by travel, I dont mean trading shots at Senor Frogs in Cabo San Lucas
 
2003-03-12 07:45:00 PM  
Tottie

I don't study PoliSci, I am not a politician, nor am I a journalist. In fact, I study biochemistry, pretty much as far removed from politics as you can get. But I also know that when you talk about the US going to war alone vs. going to war with only Britain and Australia vs. going with the backing of the UN, eventually you're going to get tired of using long phrases like "the US going to war without UN approval" and start using the equivalent phrase "unilateral action." Of course the administration is using these phrases, because it is something the whole world is talking about at the moment, but you can't insist that they are catchphrases that the admin. has made up or somehow co-opted. They are being used a lot... that's the state of the world today.
 
2003-03-12 07:45:24 PM  
That's thirteen nations backing US action and two others that are still on the fence,

But what about the citizens of those nations? The leaders of the nations that support the US are just ass-kissing because they want to be able trade and have a good relationship with us. The majority of the world disagrees with this war.
 
2003-03-12 07:45:43 PM  
well we always knew daddy was going to end up back in the presidency somehow. who knew we would actually be wanting it.....

i'm not sure how much i believe this, it could just be something started in the press. to get gw more approval in the end. i don't think they'd be airing dirty laundry at such a serious time. but if it was planned, of course it would be in the press.

/thinking outloud.
 
2003-03-12 07:46:33 PM  
oil has little or nothing to do with this.. Perhaps it is about changing the structure of power in the middle east to pressure Iran and Saudi Arabia to stop supporting this type of terror that could spell the end of western civilizantion as we know it. I believe if Bush has to lie and use every dirty trick in the book to lay down the hammer of american justice on these farkers that will eventually down the road change the dynamic of the middleast to be more Western friendly then. DO IT. No one wants to see any more people falling out sky scrapers and smoldering ashes.. I guess what I'd really like to know is if any of the hippies have any suggestions to prevent 9/11/01 from happening again? I'd like to hear it.

peace out.
CashMoney [midget farker4life]
 
2003-03-12 07:46:53 PM  
Cronehimself
Also, fark Bush, fark Rumsfeld, fark Rice, fark Ashcroft, and Cheney... i can't farkin see you or find you but fark you too.

Ohh, if only:
[image from bartcop.com too old to be available]
Granted, it's from her younger years, but still... I'd inspect it!
 
2003-03-12 07:47:26 PM  
Nhurley:
"The majority of the world disagrees with this war. "

the majority of the world at one time believed the world was flat.
 
2003-03-12 07:47:54 PM  
03-12-03 07:40:34 PM Fb-
Here's what it boils down to.. 99% of the world know that Bush is a greedy, war mongering psychopath.

The other 1% is comprised of rah-rah, we're #1, Go Team! Americans that would still defend Bush if he was kidnapping babies in the Washington DC area, sexually mutilating them and drinking their blood to defend us from "Terrah" and "Evil Doooers."


I'd say that was one of the best trollings ever from the Master, except when you're laying down Truths like that, it can't be construed as trolling. Not at all trying to say that anyone that is pro-war/other military action is a brain-dead imbecile hick, but way too many in the pro-war camp fit that description to a T. And to be fair, the anti-war camp has its brain-damaged members too (ANSWER- way to discredit the movement right from the beginning pinkos; Babs "STFU Already" Streisand; Alec "I wish I were still nailing Kim Basinger" Baldwin; etc. Sean Penn gets honorary mention here too).
 
2003-03-12 07:48:42 PM  
well outa here guys nice flame today

/flame out
 
2003-03-12 07:48:53 PM  
H8red Hold on buddy... Chile, Angola, Guinea and Cameroon are not on the US side yet buddy...
 
2003-03-12 07:49:14 PM  
The fact is that Bush Sr. is not going to come right out and say, "I think my boy is being a dumb shiat." But what he is saying is that he thinks that Dubya is making a mistake in the way he is proceeding with Iraq. The fact is Bush has been quietly saying this for over a year. The first sign that Bush Sr. was against it was when Bush's friend and closest advisor Brent Snowcroft slammed Dubya's handling of Iraq in the Washington Post. Snowcroft has always shown himself to be very loyal to Bush Sr. So one must ask ones self, why would he come out and criticize his boy, unless he knew that Bush Sr. agreed with him?
 
fb-
2003-03-12 07:49:16 PM  
Quizny,

US doesn't buy Iraqi oil?!?! Just France?!?! What the fark are you talking about you brainless shiat fark?

http://www.forbes.com/business/newswire/2003/02/06/rtr873019.html

"NEW YORK (Reuters) - The United States consumption of Iraqi crude increased by 24 percent in January, even as the Bush administration gears up for a war it says is not about Baghdad's oil.

13% of all US oil imports"
 
2003-03-12 07:49:28 PM  
Nhurley: Even if the majority disagree with war, that doesn't mean it is the right decision. That's the difference between a gov't that does what the people want and one that does what is in their best interest. I've no further time to discuss this matter, but you should consider that thought.
 
2003-03-12 07:49:41 PM  
I guess what I'd really like to know is if any of the hippies have any suggestions to prevent 9/11/01 from happening again?

Ahhhhhhh! Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11. The terrorists used AMERICAN COMMERCIAL PLANES, not weapons of mass destruction. The hijackers were from Saudi-farking Arabia, not Iraq. There are no established links between Saddam and terrorism. I repeat, there are NO established links between Saddam and terrorism.

I guarantee you that getting rid of Saddam will not stop terrorism. I'm sick and tired of people implying that it will. If anything, it will increase Anti-American sentiment and therefore INCREASE terrorism.
 
2003-03-12 07:51:08 PM  
Fb-

The "Liberal" Media are too busy asking Celeb's what they think about the war so that they can turn around and bash them as liberal communists for having an opinion. Some conservatives in the news have gone so far as to claim that celeb's are "forcing" their opinions on us. If the media is not interested in what celeb's have to say they should probably not ask them.

After that the media runs a segment on 'What you can do to protect yourself' so that during the breaks they can run Home Depot ad's to move some more Duct Tape.

The Media is a joke, news for profit is a failure, it takes the ethics out of simply presenting what is happening.
 
Displayed 50 of 720 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report