What a wimpy president

[Raubvogel]

Yeah no toejam....Al Gore comes off as a real tough guy. Hell he doesn't even wear the pants in his family. You think Ashcroft is a threat to freedom of speech? I'm sure Tipper wouldn't ever want to restrict our rights at all

[Gunthr]

Weazel, it still isn't too late for you to give up your WMD (words of mangled deduction) and get on board with the winning team.

Few media events are as misunderstood and abused as the Presidential press conference. They are controlled by the people who call them. Their purpose is to get out information that they want to get out. They are always spin - to promote the hosts viewpoint.

Bush simply refused  to answer some of those questions.  I don't have any problem with that. All Presidents do that at most press conferences. Some of the questions you say were unanswered are questions of semantics, and others I believe were answered, but you have taken all of them out of context, so it isn't clear.

We already know Bush isn't the best orator, or the best at press conferences. I think he used the press conference to say what he wanted to say, i.e. the diplomacy is almost over. I know you got his message, even if you hate the guy.

[Animal]

Originally posted by Rude
Of course, now you can tell me all about being born and raised in Texas becaused you visited once?

Funniest crap posted this week.
Drop the crack pipe and get some fresh air.

[Wanker]

Now that shoe is on the other foot, and now maybe you'll understand why I felt the same way you do when Clinton was giving nuclear technology to China while getting BJ's in the Oral office.

Rip, the issue is whether or not Bush is an effective leader. If you want to ignore current issues and live in the past, I'd be glad to sit down with you and a pitcher of our favorite beer at the con sometime. But for now, could you at least try to stay on topic?

Funked, Raub....you may have a point. But then again it's all speculation on your part when it comes to Gore. But we now have living proof about how ineffective Bush is right now as a president. We need a president that can get on the phone and get our allies and the United Nation members on board with us. He hasn't accomplished that, and instead has succeeded in getting us isolated within the United Nations.  

We are in a big mess right now with the Iraq and North Korea situation. While I think Bush is correct in ignoring the North Korean's shenanigans for the moment, it is important that he accomplish the difficult task of uniting the United Nations on the Iraqi situation.

We of course could handle Iraq on our own, militarily speaking. That's not the issue. The important issue is,  that we need to convince the rest of the UN that Saddam is a menace to the free world, and must go....one way or the other. And Bush is not getting the job done in that regard.

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by banana

We of course could handle Iraq on our own, militarily speaking. That's not the issue. The important issue is,  that we need to convince the rest of the UN that Saddam is a menace to the free world, and must go....one way or the other. And Bush is not getting the job done in that regard.

Excuse me? 40 countries say YES< take him out...and 3 say no? I'd say that IS getting the job done, considering that the 3 nations that say no have vested (but dormant due to restricitions) contracts with Iraq.  The lefties are correct about one thing, this war IS about oil (For France, Germany and Russia!)

[Wanker]

Rip, the fact that the only three countries who vote no are major players in the UN make this a slightly more difficult issue than if they were, say....Lichtenstein, Ghana and Guatamala. Don't you think?

[Ripsnort]

Not when its about having dormant contracts with Iraq for businesses once sanctions are lifted...nope, its about greed, for them!

Not unexpected, as I have stated many times, since the 60's the world has become more "ME, ME ME, I got mine, screw you!"

Incidently, here's a list of the other countries you failed to mention, and THEIR support, at least THEY can see the threat:

BTW, THIS WAR IS NOT UNILATERAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


-----------------------------------------------------
ALBANIA: Approved U.S. use of airspace, land and territorial waters.


___


AUSTRALIA: Ordered 2,000 troops to the Persian Gulf and hints it's ready to join a U.S.-led attack even without U.N. backing.


___


BAHRAIN: Sent a frigate and troops under Gulf Cooperation Council mission to defend Kuwait. Allowing use of bases for U.S. troop buildup.


___


BELGIUM: Allowed movement of troops and supplies from U.S. bases in Germany through Belgium en route to Gulf.


___


BRITAIN: 42,000 troops already in the Gulf, including a quarter of the army, a third of the air force and largest naval deployment since 1982 Falklands War.


___


BULGARIA: Approved U.S. use of military airport and 150-member Bulgarian non-combat unit. Stationing of up to 18 coalition aircraft and 400 U.S. troops, and use of airspace.


___


CANADA: Sent military planners to join U.S. counterparts at their command post in Qatar. A destroyer and two frigates sent to the region could protect U.S. ships. Help also may include special forces.


___


CHINA: No promises.





___

CROATIA: Will allow refueling stops by U.S. transport aircraft.

___

CZECH REPUBLIC: Sent unit specialized in dealing with aftermath of chemical, nuclear and biological attacks to Kuwait.

___

DENMARK: Offered 70 elite Jaegerkorps soldiers and the Saelen submarine if military action gets U.N. backing.

___

EGYPT: Promised to keep Suez Canal open to U.S. and allied warships en route to Gulf.

___

GERMANY: Ruled out participating in any war but pledges unhindered use of its airspace and U.S. and British bases. About 60 German soldiers are currently in Kuwait as part of the U.N. border monitoring force, operating specialized vehicles for detecting chemical or germ warfare; parliament has barred them from entering Iraq. Also helping to protect Turkey with AWACS and Patriot anti-missile rockets.

___

GREECE: U.S. naval base in Crete serves U.S. Sixth Fleet and supports Navy and Air Force intelligence-gathering planes. Any other assistance conditional on U.N. backing.

___

HUNGARY: The United States allowed to use a Hungarian air base to train Iraqi opposition figures for non-combat support roles and postwar administration. NATO (news - web sites) can use the country's roads, railways and airspace to carry military support for Turkey's defense. Willing to consider opening airspace to U.S. military flights. Has ruled out contributing troops.

___

INDIA: Ruled out joining any military action without U.N. backing. No facilities for U.S. forces.

___

ITALY: Offered use of bases, ports and airspace. No plans to send troops.

___

JORDAN: Several hundred U.S. troops are stationed in Jordan near the Iraqi border manning anti-missile batteries in case Iraq fires missiles at Israel.

___

KUWAIT: More than 70,000 U.S. troops training in the Kuwaiti desert in preparation for a possible invasion of Iraq.

___

LITHUANIA: Authorized use of airspace.

___

NETHERLANDS: 360 Dutch troops to operate three Patriot missile defense systems in Turkey; allowing movement of troops and supplies from U.S. bases in Germany through the Netherlands en route to Gulf.

___

NORWAY: Offered to send 10,000 chemical warfare suits to Turkey.

___

OMAN: Sent one battalion under Gulf Cooperation Council mission to defend Kuwait.

___

POLAND: A few dozen Grom elite commando troops and a transport ship in Gulf area, already under U.S. command as part of Afghanistan (news - web sites) operation, could be enlisted.

___

PORTUGAL: Granted U.S. permission to use Lajes Field air base in the Azores Islands, a traditional mid-Atlantic refueling stop.

___

QATAR: U.S. Central Command mobile headquarters at Camp As Sayliyah. Al Udeid air base opened for in-flight refueling squadron, F15 fighter wing and maintenance hangars.

___

ROMANIA: 278 non-combat nuclear, biological and chemical decontamination specialists, military police troops and demining units. Will make available Black Sea air and naval bases.

___

SAUDI ARABIA: Pentagon (news - web sites) says it has assurances the United States could launch air support missions from Saudi bases, though Saudi officials say decision not yet made. Won't participate in any direct military action.

___

SLOVAKIA: Deployed 69-member anti-chemical warfare unit to Kuwait. Has approved U.S. flyovers and offered use of its bases.

___

SPAIN: U.S. will be able to use the Rota naval base and Moron air base in southern Spain. Co-sponsoring new U.N. resolution with U.S. and Britain, but no military commitment yet.

___

TURKEY: Cabinet approved plans to allow 62,000 U.S. combat troops, 255 warplanes and 65 helicopters to use Turkish bases for possible northern front against Iraq, in exchange for multibillion-dollar aid package. Needs parliamentary approval.

___

UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: 4,000 troops backed by Apache attack helicopters, Leclerc tanks, BMP3 amphibious armored vehicles, a missile boat and a frigate to defend Kuwait in case of war on Iraq.

[Wanker]

You know, I can't get over at how little the French learn over the years. You'd think that after Munich in 1938 they would've learned their lesson about appeasement.

At the risk of opening up a *HUGE* can of worms....remember it was the French who could've spared us WW2 if they had stomped all over Germany when Hilter re-armed the de-militarized rhineland in 1936.

I feel sorry for the French, actually. Being a serious student of WWI, I can understand how much they suffered and how that affected their national psyche. The French haven't been the same since the Prussians kicked their butt in 1870!

[Dowding]

You answered your own question banana. The British and French people of the 30s remembered WW1 all too clearly. The death toll was about 4 million for hust the French and British I believe. I think after living through that, you'd be a little anti-war. Not to mention the fact that many people felt some guilt for the Treaty of Versailles - by breaking it, Hitler was seen to be 'making good' on a bad deal. Especially when it came to Hitler's claim of reuniting the German people. The Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia was primarily an ethnic German population.

With hindsight, they shouldn't have given Hitler an inch. But that's hindsight.

BTW, I think drawing parallels between Hitler and Saddam is really grasping at straws - completely different worlds, completely different circumstances.

[Frogm4n]

comparing hitler to saddam is all propaganda crap. there are alot worse dictators out in the world funding terrorism, they just dont have oil or they are our buddys(the saudis')

[Yeager]

You guys are all pretty cool.  Even animal has some redeeming qualities.

[SlapShot]

"I'm not tryin to argue the point that Saddam needs to leave....every1 pretty much agrees to that."

Of course they do, but it takes the US to call him and any of these wackos onto "the carpet" and then the "friends" start to line up behind us. Why didn't Canada lead the charge on Saddam. You sound so well informed, you should have taken the lead yourselves.

Reminds me of the film that I saw where Charles DeGaulle so proudly paraded thru Paris the day after the US and Britain liberated it. Like he had something to do with it.

"what others see is that you where there in '91(ya didn't finish the job)....you had 11 years to do it....but you waited till after 9/11.....they where a threat before 9/11....so stop usin 9/11 as an excuse please...Saddams always been a threat"

I am sure that "Stormin' Norman" wanted to march straight in Bagdad, just like Patton wanted to march right into Moscow, but the bleeding heart, politically correct countries (wussy countries) said "Oh, that would be horrible. That just wouldn't look right". You have the balls to say "ya didn't finish the job". Where were all the big-balled Canandians so eager to march into Bagdad ? Maybe if YOU went first, then we might have backed YOU up ... yeah right.

"I mostly agree with  turdboy though....he's right....but the context for which this war came from leaves a bad taste in my mouth....."

Who cares what the context is ... this madman has to go and go quickly. I could care less if the context was he spit on the sidewalk. Any excuse would suffice as far as I am conerned.

Oh, and thanks to your neighbor to the south, you probably will never have to taste mustard gas or any other biological/chemical agent that might replace that taste that you currently have in your mouth.

"Canada is already sendin what few ships an soldiers we have.....your friends are there....we might not agree on the PRESENTATION but we do agree that we never EVER leave friends standin alone....support is on the way "

How come you have so few ships and soldiers ?

If you are a true representation of the Canadian view on this issue, you can take your few ships and soldiers and send them back to Canada. We don't need you. I sleep easier at night knowing that our neighbor to the north will never leave us standin' alone. Laughable to say the least. I am sure that you sleep tight every night knowing that no one in the world dare attack Canada for fear of stirring up the US hornet nest. How convienent for you. Is that why you have so few ships and soldiers, cause Big Brother down south provides all the deterents and firepower needed to keep us both safe.

YOU say you are our "friends", yet YOUR words above send a very different message.

[krazyhorse]

to those  not from the USA  ,do not forget that the former President is the one that screwed the pooch on Iraq, and for that matter with Osama Bin Laden, he was just a tad to busy trying ta find that dress. It always amazes me how many not from the USA critisize our systems and ways but try so hard to duplicate it, when it does go your countries way you shout out we want the USA to intervene, then when we have a need, yall turn your backs and say screw you, hmmm tells me a toejamload about your backstabbing characters,  we want all our troops home now! screw Iraq   my feelings, i'm personally tired of out troops being the UN's private police department.

[sling322]

Originally posted by banana
What we need in these times is a strong leader, like Tony Blair.  

You mean the same Tony Blair who is pulling out on supporting the US in Iraq due to opposition pressure in Parliament?

[Toad]

Hey, quit knocking Canada. They're pouring 1.1% of their GDP into defense spending which is more than Trinidad & Tobago.. oh, wait, it's not. Well, more than Paraguay anyway..... oh, wait, it's not. Still more than Madagascar at least...... oh, wait, it's not.

Hmmmm. Wait a minute........  OK, that's more than Mozambique by .1%!

So ease off, already. Give 'em a break. They're doing what they can with what they have, which according to CBC is:

Canada's land forces are by far the most strapped, down 20 per cent from the number of troops required. The division's ceiling for regular forces was reduced from 35,800 to 20,900 and its reserve is down from 24,000 to 20,000. The Defence Department also cut the air force personnel nearly in half over the past decade, previously employing 23,000, now down to 13,500. As a result, troops have felt strained and have less opportunity for skills development, according to the recent report. Naval forces are also understaffed at 13,000