jeffc_76 wrote:While many think Bush may go to far at times to protect this country from terrorism, I don't think he has done enough. Too often, our policy is overly concerned with how our actions will be perceived abroad instead of simply doing what is necessary to get the job done.
While I don't discuss politics on the boards, I have to show my support for that statement since I completely agree.
What about all of the countries/people that hate the US? If the actions the US took to get that kind of reaction were calculated as to not offend anyone or worrying about what others think I would hate to see the consequence of actions taken in any other manner.
Back to the original question of giving up rights.....I would submit that in many cases we already have given them up. Many in this country give up their rights for peace and security and think nothing of it.
losing of rights is a slow incremental objective of many politicians. They figure if they can make you feel safe and secure you will vote for them not thinking that those right infringements may effect them one day.
Some day you may wake up to a police state and not even realize how and when it happened.
jeffc_76 wrote:While many think Bush may go to far at times to protect this country from terrorism, I don't think he has done enough. Too often, our policy is overly concerned with how our actions will be perceived abroad instead of simply doing what is necessary to get the job done.
While I don't discuss politics on the boards, I have to show my support for that statement since I completely agree.
What about all of the countries/people that hate the US? If the actions the US took to get that kind of reaction were calculated as to not offend anyone or worrying about what others think I would hate to see the consequence of actions taken in any other manner.
As far as Afghanistan is concerned, it would be old news by now and wouldn't be an issue other than other countries and terrorist groups would know not to mess with us.
Instead, Bush played politician and the situation is continuing instead of being over and done with.
Anyway, back to my typical stance when politics arises:
Politics=
Yes doctor, I am sick. Sick of those who are spineless. Sick of those who feel self-entitled. Sick of those who are hypocrites. Yes doctor, an army is forming. Yes doctor, there will be a war. Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
jeffc_76 wrote:While many think Bush may go to far at times to protect this country from terrorism, I don't think he has done enough. Too often, our policy is overly concerned with how our actions will be perceived abroad instead of simply doing what is necessary to get the job done.
While I don't discuss politics on the boards, I have to show my support for that statement since I completely agree.
What about all of the countries/people that hate the US? If the actions the US took to get that kind of reaction were calculated as to not offend anyone or worrying about what others think I would hate to see the consequence of actions taken in any other manner.
As far as Afghanistan is concerned, it would be old news by now and wouldn't be an issue other than other countries and terrorist groups would know not to mess with us.
Instead, Bush played politician and the situation is continuing instead of being over and done with.
Anyway, back to my typical stance when politics arises:
Politics=
Sorry to drag you into all that. I was thinking mainly of those in Europe and even here in America who were/are protesting the war, Bush's foreign policy, etc.
SaintsOfTheDiamond wrote:Sorry to drag you into all that. I was thinking mainly of those in Europe and even here in America who were/are protesting the war, Bush's foreign policy, etc.
No problem.
I just tend to not get involved in politics talk because it gets so heated. I do read what's written and occasionally comment, but that's about it.
Yes doctor, I am sick. Sick of those who are spineless. Sick of those who feel self-entitled. Sick of those who are hypocrites. Yes doctor, an army is forming. Yes doctor, there will be a war. Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
SaintsOfTheDiamond wrote:Sorry to drag you into all that. I was thinking mainly of those in Europe and even here in America who were/are protesting the war, Bush's foreign policy, etc.
European countries have their own agendas. Its a kick to see Iraq's published import partners list from 2002. It pretty much reads as a whos who of opposition against the war in Iraq: Jordan 11%, France 8.8%, China 8.4%, Germany 7.6%, Russia 7.3%, Australia 7.2%, Vietnam 6.6%, Italy 6.4%, Japan 5.6% (2002)
Other than Australia, well, no real suprises for those people who thought other countries might be looking out for their own interests.
People in America have a right to protest and peaceful demonstration, but there always will be opposition to those in power and the choices they make. Most Americans dont agree with people who rally against Bush and the war. Sometimes it seems as the protesters are the majority because they are the voices heard most often on mass media - but the truth is they wouldnt call it the silent majority if they werent both silent and the majority.
Well, to be fair, it was Spiro Agnew who named the "silent majority." And I don't think that he's someone that can realistically be called an oasis of impartiality (or morality).
As for how other countries view us, here's some handy numbers I found. Sorry I can't put it in a better format, but I'm not a computer expert. The first number is the percentage of people in that country that had a favorable view of the US in 1999/2000. The second is those that have a favorable view of the US now. The third number is the percentage of the "unfavorable" respondents who say that the problem is "mostly Bush."
EUROPE
Absolutely Adequate wrote:Well, to be fair, it was Spiro Agnew who named the "silent majority." And I don't think that he's someone that can realistically be called an oasis of impartiality (or morality).
As for how other countries view us, here's some handy numbers I found. Sorry I can't put it in a better format, but I'm not a computer expert. The first number is the percentage of people in that country that had a favorable view of the US in 1999/2000. The second is those that have a favorable view of the US now. The third number is the percentage of the "unfavorable" respondents who say that the problem is "mostly Bush."
As an American who is concerned specifically about America and my freedoms - why should I care what other people think in other countries - especially socialist countries?
Since there is a concerted effort in many of these societies to shape opinion toward socialist thought, and since Bush represents a party and people who are anti-socialist, should I be suprised?
You should care about what other countries think because their actions have consequences on us. It's really pretty simple.
Let me ask you to play along with an exercise. Describe your perfect country's political direction. Tell me, if you had your way, which school of political thought you most ascribe to. We'll call your country cornbreadland or something like that. You can have your country be capitalist or communist, pro-war or anti-war, free-market or government regulated. Anything you want. The only catch is that I get to decide who you are when you are born.
Cornbread Maxwell wrote:As an American who is concerned specifically about America and my freedoms - why should I care what other people think in other countries
The US has tried isolationism before and it has failed miserably with disasterous results.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by SaintsOfTheDiamond » Wed May 19, 2004 2:01 pm 
