The Republicans now have full control...

PH01

US Politics - Republicans gain full control of Congress

Republicans have taken control of both houses of Congress in the US. This will boost Dubja's authority to wage war in Iraq, spend more on security and destablise the US economy.

If you thought the last two years were bad wait until you see the next two.
Or am I wrong?
Could this total republican government bring forth a new era of peace and prosperity?

Hobbes

Originally posted by PH01
Or am I wrong?

Well from what I gather it basically gives Bush the ability to sign into law whatever he likes.

If the last year is anything to go by, it will be loads of laws that help all his big business friends get away with murder.

DiscoStu

not to mention let bush get away with murder.

his new policy is if you dont have enough evidence just blow them up.

http://www.iht.com/articles/76077.htm

Cork

At least - he is taking action. If a rogue country had a nuclear bomb - what would you do?
I think we live in a Western Country. We owe alot to the US.
Without US foriegn direct investment - our country would be in pretty bad shape.

I think Mr Bush got a mandate - It is called democracy. Not many countrys have it.

Oh yes - Saddam got 100% of the vote.

Typedef

At least - he is taking action. If a rogue country had a nuclear bomb - what would you do?

What you mean like some despotic maniac, who has access to the world's most powerful military force and is hell bent on annexing oil stocks to further his own and his family's power within his State?
You mean like the sort of 'rouge state' who would actually use Nuclear weapons?

Why, I'd call him, Mr President and let him land his warplanes in my neutral country... that's what.

DiscoStu

Originally posted by Cork
We owe alot to the US.
Without US foriegn direct investment - our country would be in pretty bad shape.

Are we lemmings who blinly follow the leader off a cliff when we know we are going to die? Jerry Springer of all people, the spokesperson of white trash/george bush voters put it as simply as possible a few days ago. "Saddam has to go but doing this will create another generation who hate America"

Iraq does not have nuclear weapons, simple as that. more than likley he does have some reserves of chemical and biological weapons. he has no links with al-queda. he has not threatned any of his neighbours in the last 10 years. his ballistic missile program at the moment would struggle to reach israel. during the first gulf war bush senior told him in no uncertain terms any use of bioloical or chemical weapons would mean a nice smoking radioactive crater where bagdad once was. weaponsinspectors were thrown out in 98 due to the fact its was totally over run by mi5 and cia spies(look up operation teacup). the us actions with the 12000 page weapons programs documentation is just another example of it. the us now have every single piece of intelligence they would ever need to go in and bomb the fup out of them.

dubyas war on iraq is nothing more than a ploy to get his oil buddies hands on iraqi oil and keep the american public in a frenzy of hate to someone. ww2 had the japanese on the west coast and internment, then came mccarthy and the commuinists and now they need a new devil figure. with bin laden missing presumed dead who better than saddam.

Typedef

Well exactly DiscoStu, nothing unites a nation like common adversity. The bonus for Bush is that he is identified as the leader of this great campaign and thus can align himself right in the centre of this great national heave.

Right now in the US, it is considered 'unpatriotic' to criticise George Bush. That means even the American Democrats have to be seen to be fully behind George Bush. Really when you think about it, you have to admire the efficienty of the annexation of power the Republicans have managed to achieve in the US, especially after the Clinton era.

From American chat rooms I've been on, the years of economic prosperity and growth under Clinton seem to never have happened, the economic collapse that has happened under the Republicans has been blamed on 'Clinton' (boggle) and it is the opinon of most Americans I have spoken to that the nation is in the grips of a 'national crisis' that only a firm hand such as Bush's can assuage.

Sometimes I can even find solace living in this quasi-colonial bananna Republic.

DiscoStu

Originally posted by Cork
Oh yes - Saddam got 100% of the vote.

Bush didnt even get 50%

hallelujajordan

Originally posted by Cork
At least - he is taking action. If a rogue country had a nuclear bomb - what would you do?

There is no evidence that Iraq has any nuclear capability. However there is plenty of evidence of such capabilities in real rogue countries such as North Korea, but dubya's not interested . . . why? cos they got no oil man !

Without US foriegn direct investment - our country would be in pretty bad shape.

So it's all about money then? ? ? Do we not have standards of our own?? Should we allow / support Mr Bush to do anything he wants so long as he keeps the cash flowing ? ? Nice principle that . . . I wonder if Saddam has any money that he would like to invest in Ireland . . We could sell our morality to the highest bidder !!

I think Mr Bush got a mandate - It is called democracy. Not many countrys have it.

No questions about the american election then ?? No questions about the Florida result ? ? Doesn't matter that less than 50% of the American public voted for Mr Bush. . . . Democracy maybe, but a special kind of democracy.

I think we live in a Western Country.

I can confirm for you Cork, that we do indeed live in a Western Country !

gandalf

Cork I think you should read "Stupid White Men" by Michael Moore in that he clearly shows that Bush stole the US election with help from his relatives and daddys cronies, democracy my ass.

As regards rogue countries with Nuclear Weapons what about Isreal & Pakistan. Oh wait they are US friendly therefore its a different rule for them.

Cork at best your naive at worst, well I'm not going to even write what you are as I will be breaking the charter of this board.

I personally believe you are deliberately trolling threads on this board. If you think I am being unfair then please PM me.

Gandalf.

Turnip

Originally posted by gandalf
Cork I think you should read "Stupid White Men" by Michael Moore in that he clearly shows that Bush stole the US election with help from his relatives and daddys cronies, democracy my ass.

Michael Moore is an unfunny hypocritical buffoon and that book is full of absurdities and plain old lies. There's an interesting review of it here: How Dumb Is the Left?

Typedef

Wow, there is a book that isn't filled full of logic based on conclusion if I've ever heard of one.

How about the title: How long is a piece of string?

It works for me.

Rolo Tomasi

I agree "Stupid white men" is definately not funny and a lot of the chapters make for painful reading. His rambling style can get get confusing as he jumps from topic to another and back again. But in its defence the chapter on how Bush "stole" the election does make for fascinating reading, how did he get away with it? Now there's a real possibility he'll win the 2004 election legitimately.

Typedef

Well Kudos to him then.

Rolo Tomasi

Whether you like/dislike, respect/disrespect what America stands for or the power it wields, I think the world is better place with Democrats in power. Under Clinton we saw power sharing in N. Ireland and progress was being made in the Middle east.
As soon as Bush came to power he distanced himself from various peace initiatives while at the same time stated his intension to attack Iraq.

Typedef

Oh I agree.

Take the culling of the South Korean sunshine policy towards North/South rapprochament (and unification) under the Bush administration.

The cynic in me says that America would rather have an enemy to fight in North Korea then a united and trouble free Korea.

It was the Bush administration who dubbed North Korea as a 'rouge nation' and angered the South Korean President, who was attempting to build a bridge to the North.

On that front, it will take another Democrat President in the White House before the world sees moves towards North/South unificatin again.

Make no mistake on North Korea. It is in the grips of near famine and South Korea was reaching out to the North, but as soon as George Bush started with his hard line stance to the North, relations between the North and the South cooled immeasurably and rather sadly.

Lets face it, the reason the Bush Administration wants to keep North Korea isolated and 'rouge' is becuase it suits the US to have 'yet another' enemy to fight, yet another reason to spend billions of dollars on the latest military hardware and yet more reasons to have hard line unilateralist foreign policy stances.

In this respect the adage is true.
"Power corrupts, Absolute power corrupts absolutely".

dahamsta

If a rogue country had a nuclear bomb

One does. One that's defining international policy unilaterally, supporting war criminals with weapons and cash, and treading all over the civil and human rights of it's own citizens. It's called the United States of America.

adam

lbgilchrist

Just a few comments:

If you only blame Bush and the Republican Senate and House (or even the conservative dominated Supreme Court) for our arrogant foreign policies, you're really letting the USA off too easy. I've come to realize that I and all my liberal Democrat friends are simply out of step with this country. As political clout has shifted to the suburbs, a mean, selfish streak has been revealed in the American people themselves. Why do so many Americans keep electing Republicans who are so transparently corrupt? No one holds a gun to their head ... it because they really think it's in their interest to do. As long as they have their corner of suburban heaven, their SUVs and a promise to cut taxes, the president can go off and nuke Iceland for all they care. Pretending like this is some devious, secret conspiracy just lets us off the hook.

Sure people drive around with flags stuck on their car antennas and fall all over themselves ready to surrender their civil rights in the name of "FIGHTING TERRORISM" but no one's son is going to be drafted, no one's tee time is going to be delayed. It's really far worse than you think.

Obviously I'm an American and the funny thing about us though (and I include myself in this) as much as we dislike some things over here, most of us really like each other ... that may be both our strength and our weakness.

On Michael Moore: I too have been amused by Mr. Moore and his books and movies. But you have to realize he serve the same role for liberals, that the cartoon Dilbert serves for cubicle monkeys. He gives them a feeling that somebody is "finally standing up and sticking it to the man!" Yeah! and then they can get back to working and consuming like good patriots. Everything he talks about is probably true ... it's a big country with lots of people. But Michael Moore is an entertainer who serves to difuse anger not incite it. He builds no organizations, he changes nothing.

By the way ... I'm new around here. Pleased to meet you all. I'm always interested in the different perspective people bring to a discussion and that's what I hope to find here and maybe get to know some interesting folks. My occupation is web editor and I've been a writer (mostly corporate hack work) for ten + years. I live in Minneapolis (seven hours west and north of Chicago). I can still remember trying to explain where I was from to this waiter in an Italian resturant in Rotterdam. He had no idea where Minneapolis was but when I told him it was near Chicago, his eyes lit up and he pointed his fingers and made the machinegun sound. That's us alright! And you got to love us ... no I mean it you really do have to love us.

gandalf

Welcome to boards lbgilchrist.

Yes some of that book by MM is a rant but the chapter on the Florida "election" was very good and informative. The section covering people with criminal records being excluded from voting really opened my eyes (especially the poor sods whose names sounded like people who had criminal records )

As for electing corrupt policos WELCOME TO IRELAND HOME OF THE CORRUPT :rolleyes:

Gandalf

Typedef

IRELAND HOME OF THE CORRUPT

Speak for yourself...
*haha

Cork

WELCOME TO IRELAND HOME OF THE CORRUPT

So everybody is currupt. When did all honesty leave our land?

Yet - I am sure that the great & the good are entitled to make such sweeping statements.

It is only for the US foreign policy that Europe is free & we are not going around speaking German.

But eaten bread is soon forgotten.

Why don't people go on about scandals out in Germany or France.

Some far eastern countries blame the US for everything. They can live in their palaces but everything can be blamed on the US.

Some raving pinko socialists are anti american anyway.

I think other people hit our at the US for other reasons.

Then they are others who voice genuine concern.

WELCOME TO IRELAND HOME OF THE CORRUPT

I think we should start a list of Irelands Great & good.

bonkey

Originally posted by Cork
It is only for the US foreign policy that Europe is free & we are not going around speaking German.

But eaten bread is soon forgotten.

Yes, you're right. And its only British foreign policy that had us suppressed in thrall for centuries, and here we are today with them as one of our largest business partners and generally we get on great with them.

Guess even rotten bread is soon forgotten too.

What was your point?

Why don't people go on about scandals out in Germany or France.

a) They dont speak the same language - its not as interesting when everything is translated and voiced-over.

b) They're not as important as Ireland, the UK or the USA to our local culture.

c) There are more Irish in the english-speaking nations than in the non-english speaking nations. Culturally, these are the nations we have been closer to in the past century or so because of the massive emigration that underwent there

d) Germans are boring and have no sense of humour, and French are...well...garlic-eating sissies who let the Germans walk all over them in the last war.

Three of those four are intelligent answers. I'm sure even you can figure out which ones, Cork.

What was your point again?

Some far eastern countries blame the US for everything. They can live in their palaces but everything can be blamed on the US.

Some raving pinko socialists are anti american anyway.

I think other people hit our at the US for other reasons.

Then they are others who voice genuine concern.

OUTSTANDING.

What you're saying is that some people complain about America cause they dont like America, and other people complain about America because they have genuine concerns.

I take it all back Cork. I had you misjudged. That was the most brilliant piece of deductive logic imaginable. Just when I thought that you either had no clue, or were deliberately posting drivel for some bizarre entertainment fetish you have, you prove me wrong and come up with this gem of reasoning.

Truly stunning. I'm gobsmacked.

And yes, I'm being sarcastic.

I think we should start a list of Irelands Great & good.

Well sod off to Humanities or somewhere like that and try it there. Its not a Politics topic, and its not relevant to this thread.

Bet you cant get them to accept Charlie on the list either.

jc

Cork

The point that I was making that criticism of the US maybe reasoned such as Jimmy Carter but It may be motivated by a number of other factors such as a hatred of America or a pinko left post communist type of attitude.

Some countries cannot take responsibility to their own economic mess, so the decide to blame the US. These countries invest in palaces and armies at the expense of infrastructure. They whip anti Americanisms up in their countries to divert attention away from this.

pickarooney

And some other countries can't take the blame for their own economic mess and decide to blame "the Arabs", whipping up anti-Islamic fervour to divert attention away from their own governmental failures.

Cork

whipping up anti-Islamic fervour

Who was it that attacked the twin towers on September 11?
Who was it that invaded Kuwait?

Do you expect the US to do nothing?

I think international terrorisim has got to be defeated. How do you think it should be defeated?

I know that the US is casting the net widely - but terrorisim organisations do not respect national borders.

DiscoStu

Who was it that attacked the twin towers on September 11?

Why was the world trade centre destoryed would be a better question.
Could it be the exploitionist policies of succesive american administrations, the support for brutal despots and theocracies, hypocritical morals standards and support for israeli expansionisim?

After 9/11 the United States had the oportunity to look at itself and try understand why the majority of the Muslim world hates them so much and what would actually drive them to do such acts. Did they do that?

Now we have "Bombs for Peace" and everything that Muslims have claimed the US was doing for years being played out for the whole world to see.

Cork

Why was the world trade centre destoryed would be a better question.

It was a terrorist Act.

After 9/11 the United States had the oportunity to look at itself and try understand why the majority of the Muslim world hates them so much and what would actually drive them to do such acts. Did they do that?

No - They are night to target countries that support such terrorist acts.

Now we have "Bombs for Peace" and everything that Muslims have claimed the US was doing for years being played out for the whole world to see.

I think that the US is right to stand up to terrorists. I think that a "torchy Feely" attidude while admirable does nothing to bring terrorists to justice or make the western world safer from barbaric acts.

DiscoStu

I think that a "torchy Feely" attidude while admirable does nothing to bring terrorists to justice or make the western world safer from barbaric acts.

Does blowing up people homes instill a feeling "democratic spirit" in the people who now dont have a roof over their head or would it fill them with anger and hate?

"If we practice and eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, soon the whole world
will be blind and toothless." - Mahatma Ghandi

America being the "democratic", "peaceful" and "progressive" country it advertises itself as should be the one who takes the step back and practises restraint. has demolishing homes in jenine and ramallah(sp?) stopped any suicide bombings in israel? did 30 years of bombings and shootings in northern ireland get people anywhere? did the tamil tigers in sri lanka get their peace deal throu killing the opposition leaders? has banning the political wing of ETA helped the situation in the basque region of spain?

The only way to stop terrorisim is through negotiations or removing the root cause of the terrorisim itself. every terorist killed becomes a martyr and 2 more spring up to replace the dead one.

---

Why was the world trade centre destoryed would be a better question.

---

It was a terrorist Act.

how does that address my point on US foreign policy?

bonkey

Originally posted by Cork
It was a terrorist Act.

God Cork....please please PLEASE start engaging your brain before posting here. Its gone from funny to embarrassing.

Youre not answering the question of why. You're not even addressing it. You really should be a politician - but here's a tip. They use those tactics in interviews where the interviewer isnt going to fight back. That aint gonna happen here, and you'll opnly make yourself look stupider.

Did these people just wake up one day, sit bolt-upright in bed and say "oh gosh - I've just realised I'm a terrorist - what now? Oh - I know - I'll magically find all the other people who've made the same discovery, and then we'll go and hijack a plane and go fly it into the WTC?

No, I didnt think so. So why dont you read the question next time. If you're not going to answer it, then quit posting contentless soundbite drivel.

You can try stomping these people out, but history teaches us that this is rarely successful. Attacking the root cause is whats needed, which includes figuring out why these people did what they did.

Did it ever occur to you, for example, that despite all this crap about the entire western world being threatened, or that any of us could be next, that only the US has been specifically targetted by groups working outside their own borders?

No - They are night to target countries that support such terrorist acts.

Saddam and bin Laden (and Al Qaeda by extension) are so far apart in terms of idealogy that it is laughable to link them together. As far as I know, no-one has shown any sort of links between Saddam and international terrorism, unless you count his "payments to martyrs" in Palestine....but even then I dont see the US actually being concerned about these suicide bombers, so its a bit cynical to even suggest that this is the reason Saddam must go.

Invading Kuwait was also not an act of terrorism, it was an act of war.

You appear to be sitting squarely amongst the blinkered camp who havent stopped to question any of the US propaganda. I suppose you were ok with the Russians killing so many of their civilians by using a potentially lethal gas against those rebels and not bothering to have the antidote on hand for anyone (civilian or rebel) who survived. I mean - Dubya said it was fine because it was an action taken in the war on terror - so you're probably a-ok with that.

I find it funny. Governments can gas terrorists and its ok if civilians get killed along the way. If terrorists plan to poison/gas a government institution, or target politicians, police, army, or anything like that....its an act of terrorism.

Think about that for a second. A missile attack on the US Cole was an act of terrorism, but a gas attack on some rebels resulting in significant civilian loss of life was a legitimate act of defence.

This is your war on terrorism Cork. This is its nobility, and what your blind acceptance of "we must stamp them out" gives us. I hope you're proud of that.

jc

Cork

Attacking the root cause is whats needed

I agree with you Bonkey.

Saddam and bin Laden (and Al Qaeda by extension) are so far apart in terms of idealogy that it is laughable to link them together.

But Bin Laden has stated that the sactions on iraq is a factor & both of these 2 think the situation regarding the Palastinians is a factor. There is even mention of funding going to the families of Palastinian suicide bombers.

I agree that the lot of these counties needs improvement - but Bin Ladden & Saddam have not been treating their own people very well.

Before blaming the United States - they should look in the mirror.

DeVore

Why was the world trade centre destoryed would be a better question.
Could it be the exploitionist policies of succesive american administrations, the support for brutal despots and theocracies, hypocritical morals standards and support for israeli expansionisim?

Sorry to jump into your ongoing thread but this struck me as an odd thing to say....

If the US congress and House of Reps had been surruptiously feeding heroin to all arab children and simultaneously sexually abusing them... would that justify 9/11 ?

The people in those towers werent soldiers, werent spies, werent involved. Did they deserve to die even if their country leaders were evil fvcks?

I know the point you are getting at DiscoStu and its probably right, those are probably the reasons the twin towers were attacked. Doesnt justify it one iota.

DeV.