Why do you hate Bush?

[emily]

Bring me a shrubbery!!

[Axtech]

Ni!

[Ignignokt]

not sure if anyone mentioned this yet

but all you people who dislike bush for going to war with iraq

it was the best, yes i repeat best, thing he could have done.

you see the economy has been on the downslide since the end of clintons admin, which is just natural because thats how the economy works.

but guess what a war does? creates jobs, therefore, people get paid, therefore, they buy things, which in turn brings the economy up... yea they said the war was about freeing iraq, when yea it was about money and getting the oil.........but think of this..... u think the economy is bad now and gas is expensive? imagine if we HADN'T gone to war... and the economy slipped even more. and one of the largest industries in this country (see OIL COMPANIES) began to decline.... think about that end of the arguement before you shoot down Bush for the war... also, yea people died. its a part of the world. nothing big has ever happened where people haven't died. people must die for change. its the way the world works and no amount of argueing you can do will change that.

support for my claim: how the hell do you think the world got out of the great depression? oh yea, WWII.

[/end ownage]

[wanan]

Reasons why I don't like Bush:

1. He used the American peoples fears after 9/11 in order to build support for the war in Iraq.

2. He has created a culture of fear within the US (worse than it was before) with his "you're either with us or against us" rhetoric. Although things are changing now because the American people are starting to realize the intelligence used for support of attacking Iraq is garbage. At the time of the war and just before, an American citizen was not able to protest the war without being labelled as unpatriotic and anti American. It seemed Americans had freedom of speech, but only when they agreed with the majority.

3. He created a dangerous precedent by going against the UN.

4. All of his war actions are causing more anti-Americanism (and anti-West) throughout the world. He's not creating a safer world, he is creating a world where everyone hates and despises Americans.

5. He is soft on the environment. Didn't ratify Kyoto (or something like it)

6. Never answers questions the media asks him. Always is talking in circles. (gotta agree with Raine here, he always has that stupid grin on his face) While there is no evidence of this, it really seems the American media is a pawn of the government. It disgusts me to watch CNN for more than one minute.

7. He won't open the border to Canadian beef. I'm not a farmer but my close friend's father is and he is losing everything. There was one case of mad cow several months ago in Alberta (2 provinces over from me) from a cow that originally came from the States. There have been no new cases. Keeping the border closed is a petty case of Bush wanting to get Chretien back for not supporting the war or reigning in members of his cabinet that have publicly opposed Bush.

8. He is bridging the gap between religion and government. This is a major reason I don't like him.

9. He is supporting discrimination against gays and lesbians by publicly calling them "sinners".

[Narbus]

not sure if anyone mentioned this yet

but all you people who dislike bush for going to war with iraq

it was the best, yes i repeat best, thing he could have done.

you see the economy has been on the downslide since the end of clintons admin, which is just natural because thats how the economy works.

but guess what a war does? creates jobs, therefore, people get paid, therefore, they buy things, which in turn brings the economy up... yea they said the war was about freeing iraq, when yea it was about money and getting the oil.........but think of this..... u think the economy is bad now and gas is expensive? imagine if we HADN'T gone to war... and the economy slipped even more. and one of the largest industries in this country (see OIL COMPANIES) began to decline.... think about that end of the arguement before you shoot down Bush for the war... also, yea people died. its a part of the world. nothing big has ever happened where people haven't died. people must die for change. its the way the world works and no amount of argueing you can do will change that.

support for my claim: how the hell do you think the world got out of the great depression? oh yea, WWII.

[/end ownage]

First off, you are suggesting that killing people, including innocent civilians, is an acceptable method of advancing the economy. Your entire justification for the war is "it's good for the economy." That isn't change, that's a "better" economy. Not the same, and not justifiable.
Next, if the war was so great for the economy, then explain why in June the unemployment rate rose to the highest it's been in 9 years. (source)
Here. Let me tell you why. It's because war doesn't create jobs, it creates uncertainty. The heighted possibility of counter-attacks on our soil, the threat of reservists being called to duty leaving employers without key staff, the threat of increased taxes in all areas to pay for the ongoing effort, etc etc etc.

Yeah. Great "ownage."

[Ignignokt]

did u expect an overnight change?????

i never said it happened right away

learn your history kid

everytime the economy gets real bad , there's usually a war following it, this isn't opinion, its fact. and tell me one time a drastic change in the world has happened where lives have not been lost.. thats right you cant.

its the way the world works , u might as well get used to it.
im sick of hearing people complain about innocent lives being lost ya da ya da, its going to happen so get over it

[Narbus]

did u expect an overnight change?????

i never said it happened right away

learn your history kid

You're the one who suggested that we hit war and BAM, jobs and prosperity. Learn english, kid.

everytime the economy gets real bad , there's usually a war following it, this isn't opinion, its fact. and tell me one time a drastic change in the world has happened where lives have not been lost.. thats right you cant.

1. No, the Renaissance followed no war, yet did follow a period of intense economic depression. No war, but the economy got better. It's what economies do. They fluctuate.
2. The depression in the mid-80's was followed by no war, like you claim.
2. Yes, change tends to cause unrest, which leads to death. That's no reason to go around killing people hoping to act as a catalyst for change.

its the way the world works , u might as well get used to it.
im sick of hearing people complain about innocent lives being lost ya da ya da, its going to happen so get over it

There are only three possible reasons you're so cavalier about other people dying:
1. You're not the one doing the dying.
2. You're trying to be all big and cool on the internet message board.
3. You're just a moron.

I'm personally guessing "all of the above."

[gerri_cherry]

not sure if anyone mentioned this yet

but all you people who dislike bush for going to war with iraq

it was the best, yes i repeat best, thing he could have done.

you see the economy has been on the downslide since the end of clintons admin, which is just natural because thats how the economy works.

actually if you were to check it out, under the clinton admin, there was a surplus. but three months after bush came into power, the american economy slipped and went into a huge deficit. then w/ this war it created more of a deficit. and if war was such a good thing, why hasn't he found any of whom he said he would get?

and also i don't like how he's shady w/ the whole separation of church and state. it's actually quite scary. america is a democracy but he's making america into a theocracy and god knows what he'll do next.

[Ignignokt]

2. The depression in the mid-80's was followed by no war, like you claim.

well seeing as i was refering to the GREAT depression, you're obviously an uneducated idiot and are no longer allowed to post in this thread.


the mid 80s depression, lol, he thought the great depression was in the 80s.... thats so classic.

[Ignignokt]

narbus, here's what i want you to do, find the nearest jr high and fucking enroll in american history becuase you obviously never had that class did ya

[saman]

2. The depression in the mid-80's was followed by no war, like you claim.

well seeing as i was refering to the GREAT depression, you're obviously an uneducated idiot and are no longer allowed to post in this thread.


the mid 80s depression, lol, he thought the great depression was in the 80s.... thats so classic.

i don't think his reference to the depression had anything to do with your reference of the depression. there was an economic slump in the mid '80s

[Narbus]

Saman's right, you misread what I wrote, and yes I realize the great depression was in the 1930's. I assumed (mistakenly) that you knew there was an economic depression in the 1980's.

You claimed "everytime the economy gets real bad , there's usually a war following it, this isn't opinion, its fact." I provided examples to prove that you're wrong. The Renaissance, one of the most beneficial social movements in history, followed a period of economic depression, but no war. There was an economic depression in the mid 1980's, including a stock market crash worse than the one that began the Great Depression. Again, there was no war that brought us out of this depression. You are wrong.

Look, your point that "Bush going to war was great because it helps the economy" has been summarily disproven. It has clearly provided no short term benefits (in fact, the insecurity that comes with war has actually hurt the economy), and there is no proof that there will be any long term benefits, as you claim, as evidenced by the examples I provided, and I'm sure there are many more throughout the history of the world. You are wrong, and you're doing absolutely nothing to show otherwise.

[Ignignokt]

hey moron


did i say it happened always ?

no , thats why i used the word USUALLY

meaning MOST OF THE TIME

jesus christ you are dumb

and , no i didn't misread what u wrote, u were refering the 80's depression back at my quote about the great depression, dont try and cover up your stupidity now.

and yea, i never knew there was a depression in the 80s, i only fuckin lived through it, dumb fuck.

[xoNoDoubt69]

No need for name calling.

[Ignignokt]

its not my fault narbus is a fucking moron man

he's probably some dumbass 14 yr old wanna be olp fan who thinks he's cool

[Dr. Hobo]

no offense or anything but you arent acting much older than a 14 year old w/ the language and all that crap heh
if you want ppl to respect you and your opinion then dont flame them or resort to name calling

[Ignignokt]

narbus, you truly amaze me with your ignorance

first, you have no understanding of the english language.

i haven't used the word always in my posts yet you seem to think my point it that theres "always a war" after economic depression. well guess what, look at my post and there low and behold it says USUALLY, which means MOST OF THE TIME, BUT NOT ALL OF THE TIME
so the lovely examples you have pointed out are just merely what has happened the times when it wasn't war that jumped people out of depression.

oh yea, and the renaisance... actually...... there WAS a war. so yea, again, get your history straight bud.


anyhow. don't try and post to debate me if you cant even understand my original posts... like i said, go find a jr high and take a history class and learn something before you try to debate with people. while you're at it, take english because you obviously don't understand that either.

[Ignignokt]

hey if someones an idiot im gonna em an idiot

[Narbus]

Your exact quote:
"everytime the economy gets real bad , there's usually a war following it, this isn't opinion, its fact."

You are the one who used the term "its fact." You used this statement in an arguement that the war was good because it will bring about renewed economy. I gave you the benefit of the doubt and assumed that you weren't going to be backing up points with "usually," since, "well, it may be the only way to get our economy moving," is not the same as "it will get the economy moving." Since your entire stance on the war has thus far been summed up in the latter phrase, the fact that you used the former leads to a paper thin argument. You essentially argued yourself wrong, which I didn't think you'd do. Hence my accidental misinterpretation of your post.

Also, if you'll look at the inital post where you replied to when you claimed I thought the Great Depression was in the 80's, you'll see that I was replying to the same statement, that is, "everytime the economy gets real bad , there's usually a war following it." There was no war that was responsible for yanking us out of the depression of the 80's, was my point.

You are also wrong about the Renaissance. There was no war. The Bubonic Plague destoryed much of Europe's economy, and when it finally began to receed, the resultant population growth allowed for fresh faces to take over the roles of merchants and bankers, which in turn generated great economic growth. There was no war involved.

[Henrietta]

actually if you were to check it out, under the clinton admin, there was a surplus. but three months after bush came into power, the american economy slipped and went into a huge deficit. then w/ this war it created more of a deficit. and if war was such a good thing, why hasn't he found any of whom he said he would get?

I remember people predicting the slump in the economy years before Bush got into office. It would have happened not matter what, becuase, as someone above so eloquently pointed out, that is what economies do.