Recreation Well, there goes the planet...

I can't say that estimate surprises me. Kerry isn't really a jewel of a man himself - he's not overly charismatic, he's just kind of... there. But yeah, I think a lot of the pro-Kerry people (myself included) were just trying to cut their losses by voting for him instead of Bush. The sad fact is that no other party really has a chance of winning - it's either the Republicans or the Democrats, and the only choice you really need to make is which candidate you think is the lesser of two evils. XD

 

Obviously, the US couldn't have done nothing after 9/11. It would project an image of weakness. But I wasn't referring to war in general. I meant the war in Iraq. Where did that come from? Why did Bush declare war on Iraq? All he did was stir up a hornet's nest of trouble when he went in there.

Anyway, this is something that should have been discussed 3 years ago, not now.

I can see the United States falling apart, dividing between who believes in Bush, and who doesn't. I can see a nation heading for disaster, even civil war, splitting apart because of one man's foolish war, a war that needn't have happened. A war that shouldn't have happened. I see dark days indeed for the inhabitants of the USA, and the world.

Unfortunately, the case is similar in Canada. We're given a choice between many people, but, only a few of them stand a chance of winning, so, your choice is, in essence, limited to one or two. The Liberals are, unfortunately, in power once again, because everybody would rather stick with the devil they know. Nobody wants to take a chance, to see if another party could be 'better.' And the only party that can really stand against the Liberals is the Conservatives, since the NDP has since been relegated to small party status, and the Bloc, of course, is limited to just Quebec. So, we really have no choice in our government. The only party with enough support to be government is the Liberal party, and they don't even have the support of the majority anymore.

It seems the electoral systems of both Canada and the United States are in serious need of reform.

But, for the sake of the few Bush supporters, I will direct your attention to a post made by a friend of mine, who happens to be in the US Navy. Although it wasn't a thread intended to go into that topic, it went there anyway.

Wertitis' post.

 

see, a lot of the things Bush is being blamed for like 9/11 could have happened to any predisent. and it would have happened to any president too. He just happend to be the one elected that term. but the way he handled it I'm not so sure about. I don't think we have the right to fix other peoples problems if they don't even want us there. and about the whole "well if they thought they could attack us without being attacked back" well thats on us. we attacted their towers and killed their people before they attacked us. they were only getting revenge for what we did. I'm not saying what they did was right but neither was our actions, and right now Bush isn't helping matters much. and this is off topic somewhat, but it was proven that the twin towers, the way they fell was because there were bombs placed inside of them before the attack even happened. ever noticed how the antenna stayed sraight the whole time? and the way the towers fell, it was suspocious from the start. so whats going on? is Bush telling us everything? seems not

*I am NOT saying that all I typed here is true, I heard this so if its not really right...well guess we will never really know. these are also MY opinions on the situation, and you don't have to agree with them ~thanks for understanding*

 

To be honest, I don't see how he failed(KerrY) when half of MORE THAN HALF of america voted for Bush. And seeing what all he is for, I haven't a clue why he got voted back in(besides being brainwashed that all is well). But then I know why b/c even some people I talk to says he needs to fix what he messed up or that he is soo wonderful and he kicks those guys's ass well (how intelligent) I don't think that is going to work out that way, if anything worse and we are all going to die. Then some think he is soo wonderful mr man and that he does wonders for america..... gheyness. he is soo right and bla bla now those for bush .. fine but jebus wake up and smell the roses. When **** hits the fan, you won't find me here. I refuse to kill innocents or get killed for no reason at all. He is just wrong. :/ The nation is a disaster never really unified at all. Tis all the same probs.. Rich/poor.. colour, sex gender and list goes on.
IMO I don't think Kerry could have done worse, who knows maybe he would have helped fix things. But we will never know. *shrug* people have been told and they refuse to believe and still want to be left in the dark. They will get what they voted for.. disaster.

 

That's true. What's interesting, though, is how the Bush administration and its supporters used 9/11 to deflect attention and criticism. There was a book that was meant to be published about how Bush effectively stole the 2000 election, and guess what? It was shoved under the carpet because "you can't cast doubt on the president during such a crisis."

The whole terrorism thing has been the foundation of Bush's power since his first term began, and has made any other policy points secondary, which I find very unfortunate.

It depends. When "other people's problems" are creating a direct threat to a third party, then yes, something needs to be done. But the US presence in Iraq is probably creating more animosity than than anything. Not to mention the racism that was sparked in the US, although of course we can't blame that directly on Bush, heh.

Of course he isn't. He has the interests of his friends and his supporters in mind just as much as anything, and it's to their benefit to keep all eyes on the "war on terror." Now, there's only so much that can be made public in a crisis, and the government DOES have to try and minimize confusion and panic - but there is a line between omitting things that would cause more problems during a difficult time, and actually outright lying to protect personal or special group interests. I have my suspicions about which side of that line Bush is on.

 

Wasn't that Micheal Moore's book? When he was about to release the book 9/11 happened and he wasn't allowed to release it unless he changed a lot of what was written in it. But there was eventually a lot of support to have it released (it's been a while since i read it so i can't remember how the story goes exactly). Anyway, it was released and it did tell how Bush stole the election by elimnating the votes of people that had commited a crime (no natter how small, and even people who hadn't commited a crime had their vote canceled), black people's votes where not counted either, espesally in Florida (of all places ). In fact the book told of how Gore actually did win when the votes where recounted, and that Bush got the High Court to stop the recount.
What i'd like to kow is, did the same thing happen again this time round?

 

Take a look at how you phrased things earlier. You said "war was not necessary". Not "the Iraq war was unnecessary" or anything specific. Under the phrasing you had, you had decided the Afghanistan war was unnecessary as well. As far as I am concerned if someone does something to you that falls under an act of war, you fight back, not turn the other cheek.

No. Only the most rabidly fanatical leftists (for those curious I'm a centrist) claim he did steal it somehow; plenty of left-wingers don't feel he did.

 

hmmm... so what would happen in the next 4 years? Probably Bush is gonna start a new war, probably against canada because their air is cleaner and the grass is greener . After the defeat of canada, Bush will try to restore canadian economy by "buying" the clean air and green grass at a "reasonable price". This campaign would be called "The war for clean air". And the Bush will be heroically re elected again, this time as a king.

Ok, jokes aside. I think that the rest of the world can only guess what the american president is gonna come up with next. But i hope that he wouldnt start a new war :sad: . I still cannot understand why a war started. On the other hand freeing Iraq from Saddam Husein is a good thing, but who could think that a "war on terror" would go for so long? I think that Bush have failed Iraq and i really hoped that Kerry would win and end the war. When i heard that Bush won i was very dissappointed...

 

Of course, knowing Bush, he'll probably pass a law making him president for life. :shudder:

I'm sorry, I should have been clearer on that. I did mean that the Iraq war was not necessary, but I forgot to clarify.

Although, war itself is evil, and should not be. I will fight if it becomes necessary to protect those I care about, but aside from that, I'm a pacifist. I just can't see why people need to kill each other the way they do. Can't they see how horrible it is to lose loved ones to a war? Can't they resolve their problems without bloodshed? Without violence? Without death?

I don't think Bush stole the vote. He did get elected legitimately, even though he didn't have the support of the majority. The reason for this is the crappy american electoral college system. His support was greatest in the states with high numbers of electoral college votes, and Gore, though he had more support overall, was more spread out through the nation. You can clearly see who the better president would have been. (I'm a moderate leftist, myself)

 

Are we talking 04 or 00 here? Because in 04 Bush won the electoral AND the popular vote...

 

Obviously Shinryu is talking about 2000. Just follow the quotes.

Speaking about quotes, shouldn't this be one?

Unfortunately, this is true. It's human nature. And it' has been part of the US exterior moves since the beginning of the nation.

So Bush, who got the both majorities, is the better president now?

 

Not just human nature. It's been documented that both chimps and dolphins - both animals of recognized higher intelligence - are "unnecessarily" violent. That is, they will sometimes make planned attacks on members of other same-species groups, or on other species, for no reason that scientists can determine but the thrill of doing it. I can't cite an exact source (because I saw this stuff on National Geographic and, frankly, at 4am I don't feel like hunting for statistics XD), but it just goes to show that with increased capacity for abstract thought and emotion comes greater capacity for outright hatred, malice, and cruelty. War is in our genes.

Anyway, back on topic...

As to a couple of points made, no, I don't think Bush stole this more recent election. There are easily enough people in America who would support him, for whatever reason - and that doesn't make me a very happy camper. -_- I guess I'm just hopelessly leftist (although I would like to think that I'm at least not radical or extremist).

As for war, I don't think it's evil. To be evil requires a form of consciousness. Only sentient beings can be evil. War is just a by-product of a lot of the things that define us as humans - greed, passion, hatred. Wars can be necessary. It's just that they have a nasty habit of being fought for reasons that are not purely logical and necessary, and they often hit hardest the people who are the least equipped to cope.

 

Right. I figured that, in context, it would be obvious which year I'm talking about.

Yeah, I know, I didn't think it was necessary to bring it up as one in this thread. Seeing as this topic has very little to do with Saber Marionette J.

Of course not! He was the more popular, not the better. But Gore still would have been better than Bush, and so would Kerry. Unfortunately, it seems the United States would prefer a warmongering, idiotic president to one with some level of intelligence. :baffled:

 

It's relative you know, americans' most trusted move right now is to fight terrorism, that's why they elected Bush, the 'best' in this case. But their fight is terrorism too for the rest of the world, that's what Bush and most americans can't understand. It will be much difficult to get out of this vicious circle, each band just contributes to get it worse.

Anyway, returning to the topic, Bush's economic politics, give too much to desire. Will increase the deficit? What about employment? I don't think it's going to get at least better. Kerry seemed to had better strategies and more focused with latinamerica, but unfortunately we already know it's not going to happen for, at least, four more years.