Good to see lessons have been learnt..

Now I can't say I am particularly in favour of Obama over Clinton, yes its good to see a person of colour really up in the mix and I'm surprised he even got to this stage..yada yada, but politicians are so full of their own ambition and so self serving that I can never believe in anything they do 'for the people'.

But comments like these? God help us if she was to get in the White House. Even if these are comments designed to play up to potential voters, then whatever happened to the disillusionment of the American public in regards to going to war again?

Are these rash words by a desperate woman searching for votes, or words speaking for the current mentality of the American people?

they are only talking this way about Iran because some may think they are weak and short sighted when it comes to their appeasement proposals on Iraq

Obama has said some pretty naive things in the past (incl. that he would take military action inside Pakistan if needed, with or without Pakistani government consent) and hence he's comparitively toned it down on Iran.

Hmm i am going to base my electoral campaign on my ability to blow the shit of of stuff.....

How very American

In an ideal world, I'd be President, but life's not ideal.

I despise Clinton and Mccain and if they were to take the presidency, then well...I'd migrate to Mars.

Obama, hmm not too sure about him, but because he shares my skin colour, he has my vote... :coffee:

How very informed CK :rolleyes:

meh, we all like to protect our own interests, just a shame he isn't a Muslim.

:coffee:

Ps, I'm just joking, I don't think like that. If it was up to me then none of these twats would be running for Presidency.

McCain for me

Why?

Sounded the most convincing on Raw this week

Hilary v Obama

I see Jens isn't replying :whistle:

Nah, this was better:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=KWHDxSphoB0&feature=related

to be fair there are few world leaders and policies most of us would want maintained

be it Britain or Saudis or any other nation

he's still annoyed at gp in semi retirement ;)







(was joking about gp)

This is what I'm trying to fish for.

I had the impression that the American people were totally against Iraq and America going into anyone else's country in the near future.

Ok, they are saying it to show some strength etc, but they also have their many researchers out in the field getting the feedback from their voters. So they have a clear idea of what their supporters want and need to hear.

So, by showing this strength of words, is this just a reflection of what the people want to hear? They wouldn't just go gun-ho and blab their personal feelings because as we know, political, hell ANY interview nowadays, is carefully planned and constructed to project the best image possible.

Definately.

Funny how the amount of money spent just to ELECT a democratic leader... which is millions when there are millionms of dying people around the world..

I want Obama to win, sick in tired of hearing Clintons and Bushes in the white house since i was born. I despise America for what they do with regards to their foreign policies etc, and how they got away with invading a country and using a rubbish excuse. If there so ocncerned with dictatorship and weapons of mass destruction why havent they gone to Zimbabwe ? Hypocrits and i was gobsmacked with how the Americans still re elected Bush.

how many wmd do the international community believe mugabe has? how many resolutions have been passed against zimbabwe? have they had sanctions and resolutions going back 12 years on wmd? :unsure:

zimbabwe, darfur, burma..... nothing will be done about any of these dictatorships precisely because of the chirac lead appeasement response to challenging Iraq.

I didn't think Monica was standing - thought it was Hilary. ;)

Monica was never 'standing' though was she?

;)

Well, I can't imagine Hilary kneeling. ;)

It was just Oral.

You have absolutely no grasp whatsoever on the issues behind Iraq and Zimbabwe if you honestly think that.

:goodpost:

He has a Blairite vision of the word.

do you honestly think people would agree to send troops in to darfur or zimbabwe to stop a genocide?

darfur has seen an on going genocide for several years and the international community couldn't care less or do much less action

nor does the international community care or do anything about what zimbabwe has turned in to.

and yes - wmd was the basis the iraq war was fought on based on evidence at the time and resolutions spanning 12 years

Bullshit


You said that the reason there was no action in Zimbabwe or Darfur was because of Chirac's opposition when that's utter shit. There's no advantage to gain there so there was no action from the Western powers.

As for Iraq, there were no weapons so fighting the war on that basis means that it is indefensible.

fact is I can't see the international community being bothered to do anything about any conflict or despicable regime for a long time

just look at the Nato "alliance" and Afghanistan where some fight and others restrict their troops to getting a sun tan

because of the international negative response to the Iraq war and the Chirac lead appeasement (instead of management) approach we have a continuation of this that will no longer see a toothed international allied response to such regimes

and you can swear all you like mate, Iraq was fought over wmd based on evidence at the time which dozens (incl. france, russia and germany) believed and many countries (not just us and the US) went to war over.

you can talk about oil until you are blue in the face and talk about blair being a poodle etc.

Are you seriously blaming western apathy on one nation opposing a war?

As for Iraq... there were no weapons and the evidence was non exist and/or fraudulent. It's a pointless war. End of.

If there was no oil in Iraq then Bush would not have invaded. Period. The WMD thing was manufactured and Blair was one of those who manipulated things to deceive parliament.

The basic reason for the war was so that the Americans could get the oil flowing because that is everything to them.

The US supplied Sadam Hussein for decades knowing full well what kind of person he was. There is no way the Americans can claim to have given a toss about the people of Iraq.

Blair and Bush also bang on about getting democracy to them while they ignore it in their own countries and when the Palestinians hold a democratic election as they wanted, when the result is not the way they want, they refuse to recognise it.

Blair and Bush were and are full of shit.

:goodpost:

And on the Palestinian election point, I don't like Hamas but the response was pathetic from Britain and America

hitler and bush were elected, no one says democracy is perfect, especially when the people seem drawn by whatever reason (be it economic, religious or because they think they are free from corruption) to the party no matter what they do

as for oil - like I say, talk about it all you like

as for wmd - like I say fight the argument based on evidence at the time and what the whole international community thought at the time not on what has been shown to be the case afterwards

I am against the war based on what we know now but there was legal justification (and 12 years+ of resolutions) to back up the war based on evidence to hand at the time.

Indeed. Hamas say they refuse to recognise Israel. OK, they might well think that. Time to talk to them and see what it would take to get them to accept a compromise. How about suggesting getting rid of ALL of the settlements, helping them get an economy and country under way in Gaza, the West Bank and part of Jerusalem in return for recognising Israel's right to exist. You never know, even if it does not work straight away, maybe they'll come to the negotiating table and perhaps some of the killing might stop.

And as for the shit about 'not negotiating with terrorists' that cuts both ways. Plenty of senior people in the Israeli government, including at least one prime minister are on the British wanted list for acts of terrorism before the foundation of the state of Israel. We also negotiated with the IRA. Sometimes you just have to cut the crap and get on with it.

I am fighting the argument based on the evidence at the time. The evidence at the time showed no sign of wmd. However, Bush and Blair manipulated the evidence to deceive everyone that there were wmd. The only new things coming to light now are not that the evidence of wmd was an innocent mistake at the time, but that Blair and Bush and their cronies fixed it to look that way.

Not surprisingly, the other countries now give less credence to what the UK and US want to do.

Indeed. Seeing Powell lying through his teeth at the UN was an embarassement for Western democracy.

I was also against the war from the start. In fact I was one of the people marching in London a few years ago

Democracy is an embarrassment full stop.

Anyway, so are these words of 'strength' from Hilary about Iran just posturing, or a reflection of the American people's will?

Up until then, I had a lot of respect for Colin Powell and thought he would make a great president. However, that performance was, as you say, embarrassing. I just wish he'd refused and resigned - I'd hoped he would have had more principle. Ah well.

If the US had overthrown Sadam Hussein and had a proper plan in place for immediately dealing with the aftermath, they might have earned more respect. However, they just went in and dismantled the police force without replacing it so that there was no basic civil control. Sure, there would be some corrupt and dubious people there who would need dealing with at a later stage but at least there would have been a basic structure in place to avoid some of the anarchy that followed. It is not as if there are no precedents for doing that. After the Japanese surrender, we instructed the Japanese soldiers to maintain order until they could be relieved at a later date. This helped keep things under control.

Still at least the oil facilites were protected so that was OK. ;)

Yeah, they didn't plan it well. I think that's because they thought they would be welcomed as liberators with open arms whereas in Japan it was a nation that they had just fought in a world war against and knew the Japanese people would treat them with resentment, particularly as it was fought under the principles of total war.

Also I wouldn't be surprised if Bush Jr also wanted to finish the job started by Bush Sr. Not a direct reason but I wouldn't be surprised if it factored in his thoughts

Actually Colin Power was against the war.. Bush forced Power with that speech.
Thats why Bush fired him.. lol

That's probably the most interesting thing I've read on this site (and there has been some good stuff, so it's up there), care to expand?

This would be the fabricated "evidence" Colin Powell presented to the UN?