If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
George W. Bush - the REAL truth....
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Reading in The Guardian on Saturday about how Bush has effectively appointed two seriously demented, evil, fascist fuck&rs* [a charming, but accurate description - ED] to his senate, I wonder how many people, like me, see the US presidential senate as rather worryingly representing a far right perspective?
* Bush recently appointed 2 people whose names I forget (ask if you really want me to search for them!) 1 is *alegedly* an ex head KKK member, the other is the head lobbyist for the "more guns in schools" campaign (I ask you.... what sort of campaign is that....? According to their own rhetoric, it is supposed to promote more safety!)
Your opinions please.....
HAPPY 2001 !
Alan London
0
Comments
I'm not sure that having them in power will make much difference - so much of the US governmental structure is administration and support for corporate business and market forces that a lot of the time it's not the visible people driving what happens anyway - the same powerful people, corporations etc. are still going and probably even firmer in control. They might be bad for society in many ways, but you won't see many changes from what's happening at the moment because it's how they like it. Big swings to the right wouldn't help them IMO, but we'll see.
The failure of these ppl to impose a right wing agenda of any kind over the next few years really would be indicative of a failure of the American 'democratic' system, wouldn't it lol. Of course they'll put it all down to the "checks and balances" of their two houses, supreme court etc.
This year alone (in election year) has signed more death warrants than any other state in history of the death penalty in the united states.
Doesn't this worry you all ?, as this is the man who has his finger on the button that could potentially destroy the world. how long would he consider his actions before he did them. he has been quoted allegedly he takes each appeal against the death penalty before he signes the execution warrant 2 minutes. How can a life be justified in 2 minutes ?.
Just something I read a while ago in hospital that freaked me out. just thought it was an apt moment to point it out.
Luka
The river is wide and oh so deep. I've been walking around in tears, No answers arethere to get. Cause between this world and eternity there is a face I hope to see
personally i think that the wrong guy is president,
like you said:
and this is quite a worrying thing i suppose in a way, because if he only take two minutes to look at the appeals well how long would he take about deciding whether to blow a whole country up??
I just hope tony blair dont ever piss him off or sleep with his wife or something cos we'll all be gonners, lol.
Hmmm i hope he never reads this either cos my house could be in ashes minutes later, lol.
The individuals are ok but when they get together they drive me insane. Jerry Springer anybody? Why is it the women on that can only say "yeah....whatEVA"?
Anyway, enough of that topic. They should have chosen Gore because unlike Bush, Gore has has some experience of running a country and not some poncy little state.
Does the world really need a leader who's not afraid of going to war? all I can say is don't forget an unecessary war called Vietnam (not that I'm saying war and conflict is ever necessary).
The river is wide and oh so deep. I've been walking around in tears, No answers arethere to get. Cause between this world and eternity there is a face I hope to see
In some cases war is necessary and inevitable, take WWII for instance or the Gulf War. Without these wars Europe would be a Facist power. However I did once read that Hitler never wanted war with Great Britain, he wanted us as allies as he respected us (nice to know). If we didnt have a Gulf war then Saddam would be pointing his Nukes at us right now. Other so called "wars" i.e. Serbia or Sierra Leone are for the protection of innocent people.
However chances are Bush will probably decide (like his good ol daddie) to invade Iraq again, bringing us in to it. Brill.
Join the Army and travel the world, meet new and exciting people and kill them.
Do you mean that sarcasticly or what??
Yeah obviously some wars maybe needed but maybe if all the presidents and shit were decent guys who didnt want fucked up things and do fucked up things we wouldnt have wars anyway cos theyd compromise with each other better,
yeah yeah yeah i know its not all down to the presidents but you know what i mean,
and i for one think it is a bad thing if he would be quick to go to war because if hes pissed off about something and really its something daft but hes having a bad mood swing and decides to have a war well who ever hes having a war with might fight back all the more to prove thier point and then other countries get involved,
we should be thinking about makin the world a peaceful place, not going to war with each other, i for one dread the fact of england getting bombed or having a war with another country cos itd be absolute shit.
WW2...interesting topic.
By September 1 1939 war was inevitable, yes. At any time before that, was was avoidable. As for Europe being a fascist power...well, is only speculation but in my view, I think he would have crippled France pretty much for good, and then kept a close eye on it, but not forever. however, where he wanted his lebensraum (in Poland, USSR etc) that would be fascist and not a red power.
But is only speculation. Is true that Germany and GB signed a non-agression pact, but Hitler was not a true statesmen in the sense that he believed that these "agreements" were just scraps of paper, only valid until they were no longer useful to his cause. He was a very smart politician, whatever else he may have been.
I've not lost my mind it's inserted elsewhere - hence the limp.
You've vastly oversimplified both these issues and given them as reasons why war is necessary. Well I'm sorry but as often, that's pretty stupid.
The Gulf War had very little to do with the aggressive and dangerous behaviour of Iraq in general. It was - however it is portrayed now - due to the invasion of Kuwait. Nato etc. only responded because the Nato countries rely on the oil from Kuwait and so didn't want to have Saddam controlling it. It was only then that the public started noticing the Kurds, the oppression suffered by Iraqis etc, and only then that Saddam Hussain's arsenal was cracked down upon. When he was fighting with Iran, it was Britain in particular, and other western countries, who supplied Saddam with equipment and even advice and training, and created the threat. In other words, a war wasn't originally necessary to stop Saddam. Sensible, anti-war international politics was. It is highly questionable whether he was (and possibly is) any more dangerous than a lot of other dictatorial regimes in the world.
Serbia and the Balkans is a difficult issue stretching back hundreds of years, so I won't address it here (though it has been used to make lots of political capital etc.). The problems in Sierra Leone however have actually been made worse by the actions, or lack of actions and complicity of many western countries, and many international businesses (e.g. in the diamond trade I think it is). Plus the problems in Africa trail back to problems created by the European superpowers once involved there. Again these problems could have been solved (or not caused) by more sensible, non-war international politics.
So using these situations as simple justifications for the necessity of war is a bit dumb. In the end war is only necessary because of other fuck ups, normally by European countries in the past. It may be necessary now, but if we do things right now, war should not be necessary in the future.
And Dubya is very worrying in that respect.
If I'm not mistaken, that 'poncy little state 'is bigger than the UK!
[This message has been edited by throbbing_python_of_love (edited 16-03-2001).]