Bush pokes fun at himself at dinner

[Subjugation]

going into Iraq to protect freedom and democracy is part of the US's role. Whether they (Saddam) posed a threat now or later is irrelvant in the eyes of America.

bullshit, if it was irrelevant, bush and his lackeys wouldn't have had to lie about bin laden and wmd's in order to gain enough support at home to gain approval to go to war alone.

[THE ENFORCER]

you sure about that?

Its got to do with terrorism on a whole not just Al Queda, democracy is the key to the end of terrorism in general not just Al Queda.

bullshit, if it was irrelevant, bush and his lackeys wouldn't have had to lie about bin laden and wmd's in order to gain enough support at home to gain approval to go to war alone.

First of all i dont think Bush lied i think he honestly thought with the intelligence given to him that there were WMD but the whole reason why he had to use the WMD to gain support is because people only see things in black and white (generally see war as bad) and therefore you have to prove to the public there must be immediate threat because if you say it will be a long term threat then people wont care and wont support you, i admit if i was president and knew WMD werent there (once again i dont think Bush knew that) i would try and explain why Iraq poses a long term threat and way it is crucial economically and politically (terrorism) to invade iraq however i dont think many people would support that argument because they fail to see the long run of these issues and only see the short run which i think can be devastating.

[lunch3]

Democracy is definitely the way to get rid of terrorism. And people in ME do want democracy, just there own styled one with Islamic laws and culture.

The key to having a prosperous democracy is that any country that evolves into democracy must fight for it. The reason I say this is because of many so far failed examples of democracy in South America and Africa, these countries were kindof just given their own nation and democracy after the Imperialistic age. But in many other cases, like Eastern Europe, US, France, and many others, democracy was fought for or was attained after living in a very harsher government before, like dictatorship communism in Eastern Europe. The plain reason is that you do not know the value of something until after you fight for it (when another huge entity tries to take it, ie democracy, away from you) or if you had something far worse before it to compare it too.

From said thinking I think Iraq will be a great success 5-10 years down the line if they win this fight. The Iraqi people are fighting for democracy in general. Something like 200,000 Iraqis are police officers now and almost every single Iraqi hates what terrorism stands for now. The simple fact for this is because terrorism has hit the Iraqi people more than it has our military or civilian corp in Iraq, with many of Iraqis dead are children blown up by a cowardly bomb. At this time there are Iraqi rebellions in Fallujah and Najif (doh forgot that second holy city, it starts with an "N" is all I'm sure of at present) and although I think they are fighting the wrong fight against us, these rebellions show the simple fact that Iraqis are fighting for themselves and their future. Many reasons expressed by the insurgents of this uprising for fighting the US is because the US is not providing security for them against terrorism. Whether the US fails or succeeds, I think the Iraqi people will succeed in the long term and they will fight for some type of government, probably democracy, that insures the basic rights of Iraqis.

For Afghanistan, I don't really know, didn't read the news much during that time. But the present situation seems to be that reconstruction is going slow because of the inherent bueracy attached to anything labeled as "US" and that there seems to be many warlords still in military power that Afghanistan's president is having trouble with. Think they recently wrote an Islamic based constitution. Their success in my opinion, depends on how much they are willing to fight for democracy. From some interviews I heard of in Afghanistan the people are annoyed at the US's slowness and at the aparent lack of power of their president, but they are happy that the Taliban are gone because they were very strict about Islamic law. For instance women have to stay indoors at all times and have their windows painted in black so that their beauty will not be seen by men. From the interviews it seems some would like a heavily Islamic government, but not one that is harsh or as strict as the Taliban's.

[bloodzombie]

That analogy is pretty loose. Kinda like your wife. That's right I said it. And anyway if someone stabbed my baby (if I had one) and my neighbor made a joke about it, I'd still be offended even though he wasn't the one who did the stabbing.

Was the holocaust funny, of course not. Neither is the war on Iraq. But the context is pretty important. This was a roast dinner (or so I'm told by this thread) which is basically the same as a SNL sketch. I can see how the WMD joke could be offensive if taken out of context, but I don't think it's anymore offensive than a holocaust joke in the context of southpark. The context of the joke in a roast situation was obviously to make fun of Bush personally, not of the situation in Iraq or the motives behind it, which the somber moments that followed were probably meant to emphasize. So my point was to elicit whether this was general sympathy for the feelings of others (and therefore in my opinion you should be offended by both) or just trying to take some jabs at Bush.

What if hitler had a son and you knew that he believed strongly in everything that his father did, and he was the one that made that southpark episode, or if it was hitler himself, somehow still alive and making cartoons? woudln't that make it less funny to you?

If I had a kid when i was about 4, and he was in iraq right now because our president lied to us, and i saw him joking like that, I would freak out.

[bloodzombie]

"I just proven to you that anything that happens in US is relevant to Aust!!!"

-enforcer



really? if we make a constitutional ammendment to ban gay marriage, does that affect you?

[Troll King]

I would think that people in Australia who agree with that position would use the U.S. as an example to further a similar decision there.

[THE ENFORCER]

really? if we make a constitutional ammendment to ban gay marriage, does that affect you?

I would think that people in Australia who agree with that position would use the U.S. as an example to further a similar decision there.

Troll king is right america has a significant influence socially on Aust, however Aust is still a democracy so it would still be decided by the people but our govt only concerns itself with important issues.

[Mobey]

Hey guys, its GW again. If you are interested in learning more about me, go to www.google.com type in "weapons of mass destruction" and hit im feeling lucky. Also, type in "miserable failure" and hit search, the second site that comes up is the one you are looking for

hahaha, nice! $$

[bloodzombie]

our govt only concerns itself with important issues.

I wish ours did too, let the gays get married, stop worrying about a titty on tv and come up with an exit strategy in iraq, but that's not the Bush regime's style. Our attorney general john ashcroft doesn't have time for things like a war on terror, he's more interested in keeping the porn industry from invading our homes. He's spending his time going after "porn" channels like HBO and cinnemax.

I feel safe now.

[Verthanthi]

you should. you're much to young to see a breast, covered or uncovered.