how do you feel about the usa president George Bush -1 reply

Please wait...

Zab

BROtastic

50 XP

30th March 2003

0 Uploads

8,186 Posts

0 Threads

#31 16 years ago

AzH, that map is somewhat true. My dad works for Chevron in global security, and well he's an expert on that kind of stuff. Chevron owns the rights in Iraq, well, a lot of 'em. Chevron is in the Caspian and has many oil related activities going on there. In Kazakhstan, where they pretty much are the lone oil company there. Chevron is also in Russia, and many other places around the world. That map is interesting, I wouldn't even go near saying it's totally false, because it's somewhat true.




Mr. Matt Advanced Member

#BanRadioActiveLobster

357,144 XP

17th June 2002

7 Uploads

33,704 Posts

781 Threads

#32 16 years ago
nOeWould be awesome if this were true. Actually we haven't paid our bill for quite some time. (A few hundred million last time I checked.)

Really? I didn't know that. Do you know why? Political reasons, budget problems, tradtional greed? How long is quite some time, if you know?




L337-Fu

Are you trained in L337-Fu?

50 XP

17th January 2004

0 Uploads

421 Posts

0 Threads

#33 16 years ago

it is true Al-Qaeda is a terrorist network stretching to many palces across the middle east, but to say that an HQ does not exist is simply absurdity. some would paint an image of bombs flying across Afghanistan demolishing peaceful cities, but nothing could be further from the truth. The only areas in Afghanistan targeted for air-strikes were known Al-Qaeda terrorist training and base camps. Al-Qaeda exists today solely because it was centered in Afghanistan and was able to work hand in hand with the Taliban. They offered them refuge in Afghanistan where they could openly train and harbor terrorist, Afghanistan was the very nerve center of the entire Al-Qaeda network. What HQ? What resources? Osama bin Laden himself ran Al-Qaeda out of Afghanistan, their terrorists were trained and sent to other parts of the middle east from Afghanistan and to deny the fact that that country was indeed the central core of the entire operation is simply beyond me, Im sorry. "[Bush] never offered any proof saying it's a "secret"." I don't know what to make of that other then you're saying that you dont think Osama was behind it because George Bush never showed you any proof. The proof of Osama bin Laden's guilt behind the WTC attacks are evident enough that releasing such evidence would in no way jeapordize the forming of a military strategy. Did Bush need proof? Of course he needed proof. Without it Osama bin Laden would not even be suspect if not for proof. Yet, something tells me could argue for hours and hours regarding Bush's need for proof to do anything and neither of us would change our mindsets. You are simply under the impression that George Bush is a liar, I am simply under the impression that he is not and nothing your or I say will change either of our minds. Would it make sense for Osama bin Laden to be in Saudi Arabia? No, of course not! Why would it, just because he was born there? One of the sole purposes that Al-Qaeda was formed by Osama bin Laden and his cronies in the first place was to combat Saudi Arabia, he hates (assuming hes still alive) Saudi Arabia and has for years for their cooperation with the United States. This is common knowledge. He was/is wanted in Saudi Arabia just like he was in any other country. It makes absolutely no sense that he would be in Saudi Arabia, all intelligence (not just from America but from numerous other countries) pointed to Afghanistan, all the facts pointed to Afghanistan. As for the Taliban, your right, we didn't think the Taliban were so evil in the past, because the fact was they weren't. Or rather, they were, but what went on in their own country never went beyond that. Up until 1989 there was no evidence of the Taliban constructing terrorist bases on their very own sole. Al-Qaeda was created and then it went beyond from having a cruel leadership to literally acting as a base of operations for an organization that would cause the deaths of thousands worldwide. Because we make mistakes in the past means we should refrain from rectifying them in the future? What, for the sake of being consistent? To say we aren't hypocrites? No! You look at your wrongdoings in the past and you fix them with your actions in the future, you don't just continue to do what you know is wrong because it had happened in the past. You know what I really think, John Kerry drives a car that uses oil and so do all his servants, thus they must be connected to big oil companies and thats the real reason behind our presence in the middle east.

[edit]thread edited by Vikki[/edit]




Dave to the Nave

You dig?

50 XP

8th August 2003

0 Uploads

663 Posts

0 Threads

#34 16 years ago
AegenemmnoNother than takin away americans rights, making a huge deficient, and startin a war that has damaged ties with the world, well, other than that. hes A-OK with me........................................

:agreed

I heard on the news the other day that there is an icrease in the number of Al-Qaeda opperatives in Iraq after the war than before hand; so we had the grounds for war, just after the war was "over"............ :confused: Doesn't make much sense to me...........




AegenemmnoN Advanced Member

The cream of the crop

228,590 XP

20th August 2003

0 Uploads

21,534 Posts

0 Threads

#35 16 years ago

the thing that REALLY bothers me is his deficeit crap.... we are already almost 7 trillion in the hole with the national debt, all we need is a war and his worthless spending.




sgillispie

I want to be like the Admins

50 XP

31st January 2004

0 Uploads

377 Posts

0 Threads

#36 16 years ago
AegenemmnoNthe thing that REALLY bothers me is his deficeit crap.... we are already almost 7 trillion in the hole with the national debt, all we need is a war and his worthless spending.

yes interest rates at wells fargo are bellow 1 percent. i have 120.000 in the bank 4 years ago i was getting 7 thousand a year from it now i dont even make one thousand. and i have more than there than before




Mihail Advanced Member

President of Novistrana

50 XP

19th January 2003

0 Uploads

15,509 Posts

0 Threads

#37 16 years ago

It's getting to the point where stalin is starting to look better then Bush




Napalm

Alumni @ Miskatonic University

50 XP

30th January 2004

0 Uploads

1,318 Posts

0 Threads

#38 16 years ago
MihailIt's getting to the point where stalin is starting to look better then Bush

Stalin took everyone who disagreed with him and put them in Siberia to work in labor camps. He ordered the death of many Russians who had even the slightest bit of white in them (white as in not red, red are the bolshiviks). Stalin was a totalitarian wanna-be communist who wanted power and was a tyrant. I compare Mao, Hitler, Stalin, and Robespierre. Bush does not fit in that group. With Stalin, you cant speak your mind, but in America, i can say what i want when i want as long as it is not a meaningful threat.

[edit]thread edited by Vikki[/edit]




Mihail Advanced Member

President of Novistrana

50 XP

19th January 2003

0 Uploads

15,509 Posts

0 Threads

#39 16 years ago
napalmStalin took everyone who disagreed with him and put them in Siberia to work in labor camps. He ordered the death of many Russians who had even the slightest bit of white in them (white as in not red, red are the bolshiviks). Stalin was a totalitarian wanna-be communist who wanted power and was a tyrant. I compare Mao, Hitler, Stalin, and Robespierre. Bush does not fit in that group. With Stalin, you cant speak your mind, but in America, i can say what i want when i want as long as it is not a meaningful threat.

wow really? I mean can you tell me more about russian history because I seem to be out of the loop, I seem to have missed that part of my history, and O yeah stalin was not even russian if anything he was a invader, and you know what??? no one here likes stalin. stalin came out after his death thats why he was not put on display like lenin. now if you consider that bush most likely has killed about half a million arabs in his strike for oil I would not call him a "good guy",when was the last time you heard of a iraqi mother holding her dead child that was killed in american bombarment of a city and telling the american soldiers thank you for her freedom? and as for not being able to "speak my mind"

[edit]thread edited by Vikki[/edit]




Napalm

Alumni @ Miskatonic University

50 XP

30th January 2004

0 Uploads

1,318 Posts

0 Threads

#40 16 years ago
wow really? I mean can you tell me more about russian history because I seem to be out of the loop, I seem to have missed that part of my history, and O yeah stalin was not even russian if anything he was a invader, and you know what??? no one here likes stalin. stalin came out after his death thats why he was not put on display like lenin. now if you consider that bush most likely has killed about half a million arabs in his strike for oil I would not call him a "good guy",when was the last time you heard of a iraqi mother holding her dead child that was killed in american bombarment of a city and telling the american soldiers thank you for her freedom?

I think you fail to reconize my signature and avatar.

Half a million arabs huh, well i would like to see the facts about that. I doube even 100,000 arabs have been wounded.

Oil? Sure oil is big, the US needs it, but Saddam is bad and evil, and was percieved to be a threat. In my opinion it was a bad desicion, but was it made? Yes, and there is reasoning behind it, oil was a major part, but you dont send a large amount of troops to get oil if you dont even see the benifits of oil after 6 months.

BTW: I didnt know you were russian, sorry if i was incorrect.

[edit]thread edited by Vikki[/edit]