G Strings : now banned in Virginia USA



limerickman said:
Is there any real difference ?

Virginia - West Virginia :

Just look at the posts from our esteemed Virginian : he uses foul language and sexual expletives too.
I'd say West Virgina and Virginia are the same.
some a' you's people in europe seem to have an outright disdain for the U.S.A. :confused: Our winning the Revolution, American Hegemony, & generalized world dominance in all things. All of these things set aside, do you have a resentment against us which is insurmountable :confused: I beleive that there is a strong possibility thast no matter what we do, you guys will find fault. You had your turn, e.g-"sun never sets on the british Empire" now its our turn. If King George had used a little more sensibility/tact, your lot would be in much better shape, In fact, Britain would be ruling the world-"calling the shots" so to speak. I don't think you gent's can get over the fact that America had a choice to make, in the late 1700's, & they made it. Incidentally, Virginia is home to the second oldest College in the U.S.: http://www.wm.edu/about/index.php
 
Undoubtedly there are people in Europe (and, for that matter, many other places) who are envious of the USA for its many sucesses and its status as a world leader in many fields. When you say "some a' you's people in europe seem to have an outright disdain for the U.S.A." I suspect you are talking about, e.g. MountainPro, Limerickman, FredC, Carrera et al. I can't speak for them but I suspect that, like me, they are not unconditionally anti-USA, they just recognise that your government and media have a record of acting in a selfish, uncooperative manner. No offence meant, but the American media is probably the closest thing to outright propaganda of any media service in the developed world. It is also true that Bush and his cronies stole an election in 2000, invaded Iraq at enormous cost (both to your economy and in terms of lost lives for America, Britain and especially Iraq), and have done serious damage to your economy while seeing that their rich supporters were well taken care of. While the stereotype of Americans all driving around at 2mph in gas-guzzling hummers is over the top, it is true that America is one of the most (if not the most) wasteful and least environmentally friendly nations on the planet, and the fact that you recently went to war to secure more oil to continue that lifestyle doesn't do anything for your image!

Now you also say that "there is a strong possibility thast no matter what we do, you guys will find fault". I would bet large money that if the US stops wrecking the environment, stops invading places without a damn good reason, repeals both patriot acts, impeaches Bush, diverts some of the hundreds of billions it spends on exercises in paranoia like "star wars" to helping out people with no food, water, electricity etc. and makes Israel play fair, all this would be universally congratulated and the detractors on this forum would join in the praise.
 
davidmc said:
some a' you's people in europe seem to have an outright disdain for the U.S.A. :confused: Our winning the Revolution, American Hegemony, & generalized world dominance in all things. All of these things set aside, do you have a resentment against us which is insurmountable :confused: I beleive that there is a strong possibility thast no matter what we do, you guys will find fault. You had your turn, e.g-"sun never sets on the british Empire" now its our turn. If King George had used a little more sensibility/tact, your lot would be in much better shape, In fact, Britain would be ruling the world-"calling the shots" so to speak. I don't think you gent's can get over the fact that America had a choice to make, in the late 1700's, & they made it. Incidentally, Virginia is home to the second oldest College in the U.S.: http://www.wm.edu/about/index.php

I try to see the good and bad side of the USA.
The USA has got good points.
Unfortunately, since 2000, the good points are slowly being eroded by the bad points.

I hope the average Joe Bloggs hasn't changed from the people I knew pre-2000 but, as time goes by, I cannot be certain of that.

I have a lot of contacts in your country - through extended family, business contacts, and friends who live there, and I notice that there has been a very subtle change in these people attitudes, since 2000.

This change is most noticeable when discussing national issues.
But it extends to changes when discussing personal issues.

My sister in law for example - she'd be a reasonably logical person, well educated, American born person from New England.
I always considered her pretty open minded.
She was telling my wife, two weeks ago, that she fully agreed with the creationist push that has been set in train in your country.
This is only one example, out of many, where previously open minded and well informed friends/relatives/acquaintances, have knowingly decided to do a 180
degree volte face.

It's their perogative, of course, to do.
But this example, along with many other examples of growing fundamentalism
in your country, makes me wonder just how many good points remain.













Europe has it's good points too.
 
I'm not myself anti U.S.A. at all. I sometimes get profoundly irritated by the direction the U.S. is taking, which I happen to disagree with. My impression is the U.S. was far better off under the Democrats (especially with respect to the economy).
However, it seems that in some ways the fall of the USSR has caused major problems for America since it doesn't seem to be able to handle the concept of a unipolar world (and not the old bipolar world).
What I mean is, if Krushchev had still been around today, I doubt the U.S. would have invaded Iraq or be planning to invade Iran. Fear of all out war with the USSR essentially acted as a system of checks and balances in the past and prevented U.S. policy going haywire or becoming too radical. The fall of the USSR also provided a boost to Islamic terrorism (with the added danger soviet missiles could fall into the hands of such terrorists).
All in all, the positive side of the U.S. still outweighs the negative seeing how they helped to prevent a communist Europe e.t.c. There are plenty of good things you can say about American history and achievements, sports, arts, media, movies e.t.c. Even the French will admit this.
I'm just hoping we see a new administration with less testosterone and more strategic thinking. But, nope, I'm not what you might call anti U.S., just critical of the Bush Administration and the neos as I guess John Lennon would have been.



mjw_byrne said:
Undoubtedly there are people in Europe (and, for that matter, many other places) who are envious of the USA for its many sucesses and its status as a world leader in many fields. When you say "some a' you's people in europe seem to have an outright disdain for the U.S.A." I suspect you are talking about, e.g. MountainPro, Limerickman, FredC, Carrera et al. I can't speak for them but I suspect that, like me, they are not unconditionally anti-USA, they just recognise that your government and media have a record of acting in a selfish, uncooperative manner. No offence meant, but the American media is probably the closest thing to outright propaganda of any media service in the developed world. It is also true that Bush and his cronies stole an election in 2000, invaded Iraq at enormous cost (both to your economy and in terms of lost lives for America, Britain and especially Iraq), and have done serious damage to your economy while seeing that their rich supporters were well taken care of. While the stereotype of Americans all driving around at 2mph in gas-guzzling hummers is over the top, it is true that America is one of the most (if not the most) wasteful and least environmentally friendly nations on the planet, and the fact that you recently went to war to secure more oil to continue that lifestyle doesn't do anything for your image!

Now you also say that "there is a strong possibility thast no matter what we do, you guys will find fault". I would bet large money that if the US stops wrecking the environment, stops invading places without a damn good reason, repeals both patriot acts, impeaches Bush, diverts some of the hundreds of billions it spends on exercises in paranoia like "star wars" to helping out people with no food, water, electricity etc. and makes Israel play fair, all this would be universally congratulated and the detractors on this forum would join in the praise.
 
Carrera said:
I'm not myself anti U.S.A. at all. I sometimes get profoundly irritated by the direction the U.S. is taking, which I happen to disagree with. My impression is the U.S. was far better off under the Democrats (especially with respect to the economy).
However, it seems that in some ways the fall of the USSR has caused major problems for America since it doesn't seem to be able to handle the concept of a unipolar world (and not the old bipolar world).
What I mean is, if Krushchev had still been around today, I doubt the U.S. would have invaded Iraq or be planning to invade Iran. Fear of all out war with the USSR essentially acted as a system of checks and balances in the past and prevented U.S. policy going haywire or becoming too radical. The fall of the USSR also provided a boost to Islamic terrorism (with the added danger soviet missiles could fall into the hands of such terrorists).
All in all, the positive side of the U.S. still outweighs the negative seeing how they helped to prevent a communist Europe e.t.c. There are plenty of good things you can say about American history and achievements, sports, arts, media, movies e.t.c. Even the French will admit this.
I'm just hoping we see a new administration with less testosterone and more strategic thinking. But, nope, I'm not what you might call anti U.S., just critical of the Bush Administration and the neos as I guess John Lennon would have been.

I have to say I cannot remember relations between Europe and the USA being as bad as they are now.

I was studying back in 1984 when Reagan visited here - to explore his Irish roots, for that years US elections.
Reagan claimed ancestry in Tipperary.
I well recall widespread protest marches throughout this country before and during his visit here.

At the time there was widespread unhappiness at US activities in Central America (El Salvador, Nicaragua).
There were widespread demonstrations here in respect of that visit.
In Britain, there was widepsread unhappiness at US nuclear policy (Greenham Common).
Even given this unhappiness, there wasn't a split between Europe and the USA.

However today, the USA is openly ridiculed.
The level of resentment toward US foreign policy is palpable.
The re-election of Bush re-enforces the (correct) perception that the US citizens support his imperialist approach.
Unfortunately, we cannot vote in the USA.

But economically, I believe the rest of the world can register their protest,
economically.
This is being done as we speak.

The RoW is slowly strangling the US economy.
All the econmic indicators say so - despite the lies published by others here about how great things are, economically in the USA.
This is a protest at Bush's presidency and his foreign policy and his re-election.
 
mjw_byrne said:
Undoubtedly there are people in Europe (and, for that matter, many other places) who are envious of the USA for its many sucesses and its status as a world leader in many fields. When you say "some a' you's people in europe seem to have an outright disdain for the U.S.A." I suspect you are talking about, e.g. MountainPro, Limerickman, FredC, Carrera et al. I can't speak for them but I suspect that, like me, they are not unconditionally anti-USA, they just recognise that your government and media have a record of acting in a selfish, uncooperative manner. No offence meant, but the American media is probably the closest thing to outright propaganda of any media service in the developed world. It is also true that Bush and his cronies stole an election in 2000, invaded Iraq at enormous cost (both to your economy and in terms of lost lives for America, Britain and especially Iraq), and have done serious damage to your economy while seeing that their rich supporters were well taken care of. While the stereotype of Americans all driving around at 2mph in gas-guzzling hummers is over the top, it is true that America is one of the most (if not the most) wasteful and least environmentally friendly nations on the planet, and the fact that you recently went to war to secure more oil to continue that lifestyle doesn't do anything for your image!

Now you also say that "there is a strong possibility thast no matter what we do, you guys will find fault". I would bet large money that if the US stops wrecking the environment, stops invading places without a damn good reason, repeals both patriot acts, impeaches Bush, diverts some of the hundreds of billions it spends on exercises in paranoia like "star wars" to helping out people with no food, water, electricity etc. and makes Israel play fair, all this would be universally congratulated and the detractors on this forum would join in the praise.
Well done Byrne,
That just about encapsulates the whole issue. They seem to have a prediliction for pissing into the wind.
The richest nation on Earth? Can't even get a social security net strung up, welfare, medicare systems, who cares? They should, all 350m of them arseholes that vote for the media ******** stuffed dowm their throats.
 
mjw_byrne said:
Undoubtedly there are people in Europe (and, for that matter, many other places) who are envious of the USA for its many sucesses and its status as a world leader in many fields. When you say "some a' you's people in europe seem to have an outright disdain for the U.S.A." I suspect you are talking about, e.g. MountainPro, Limerickman, FredC, Carrera et al. I can't speak for them but I suspect that, like me, they are not unconditionally anti-USA, they just recognise that your government and media have a record of acting in a selfish, uncooperative manner. No offense meant, but the American media is probably the closest thing to outright propaganda of any media service in the developed world. It is also true that Bush and his cronies stole an election in 2000, invaded Iraq at enormous cost (both to your economy and in terms of lost lives for America, Britain and especially Iraq), and have done serious damage to your economy while seeing that their rich supporters were well taken care of. While the stereotype of Americans all driving around at 2mph in gas-guzzling hummers is over the top, it is true that America is one of the most (if not the most) wasteful and least environmentally friendly nations on the planet, and the fact that you recently went to war to secure more oil to continue that lifestyle doesn't do anything for your image!

Now you also say that "there is a strong possibility thast no matter what we do, you guys will find fault". I would bet large money that if the US stops wrecking the environment, stops invading places without a damn good reason, repeals both patriot acts, impeaches Bush, diverts some of the hundreds of billions it spends on exercises in paranoia like "star wars" to helping out people with no food, water, electricity etc. and makes Israel play fair, all this would be universally congratulated and the detractors on this forum would join in the praise.
You make a strong argument, but most, if not all of the points you mentioned are directly attributable to Bush Inc. & his 51% ("brown shirt brigade") I didn't vote for the clown (guy) nor did 1/2 of the population of this country. I suspect there's more to it than that. It would be tantamount to identifying 10 people & because you don't care too much for 6 of them to condemn or slander them all. 49% is nothing to scoff at. I'm a proud 49%'er as I've posted many times before & there are many more in this country who have the same opinion that I do. Bashing the entire U.S.A. is not productive. We are doing all we can do to bring this administration to justice- freedom of information act filings, subpoena's, & requests for independent counsel's. Look at Bush Inc.'d cabinet. Damn near all of 'em "jumped ship" when his 1st term was over. I suspect that they wanted to get out before they had to answer to a higher authority. I equate the current "conspicuous consumption", reminiscent of Rome before its downfall, as a transitional phase. Hell, even neocon's are buying hybrid cars because they know that relying on monarchical/dictatorial/totalitarian regimes for our life blood is too risky to sustain. I suspect we will be disparaged for that too. What many fail to recognize, int the middle east, is that "time is of the essence. The longer we let those "guys" keep their countries in the stone age, the more costly its going to be to drag them into the present, at some point in time. All the while, their people suffer. I wasn't for the prefabricated invasion but, I was for an invasion nonetheless for various reasons. The U.N. seems, to me, to be becoming less & less relevant as we have seen due to their recalcitrance to act in no small measure due to the tainted, "Oil for Food Program". Would anyone deny that the middle east could not live as if it were in a "cocoon", indefinitely? Sooner or later they would have to join the rest of the world in living in the present. What w/ globalized trade the way it is, they would be slowly but surely lagging behind in standard of living not to mention education & wealth . I live by the maxim "pay now or pay later". Paying now [e.g.-invasion] is more often than not, cheaper in the long run. My only beef is inadequate plans for winning the peace. There, I've said my piece.
 
davidmc said:
You make a strong argument, but most, if not all of the points you mentioned are directly attributable to Bush Inc. & his 51% ("brown shirt brigade") I did'nt vote for the clown (guy) nor did 1/2 of the population of this country. I suspect there's more to it than that. It would be tantamount to identifying 10 people & because you don't care too much for 6 of them to condemn or slander them all. 49% is nothing to scoff at. I'm a proud 49%'er as I've posted many times before & there are many more in this country who have the same opinion that I do. Bashing the entire U.S.A. is not productive. We are doing all we can do to bring this administration to justice- freedom of information act filings, supbeona's, & requests for independent counsel's. Look at Bush Inc.'d cabinet. Damn near all of 'em "jumped ship" when his 1st term was over. I suspect that they wanted to get out before they had to answer to a higher authority. I equate the current "conspicious consumption", reminiscent of Rome before its downfall, as a transitional phase. Hell, even neocon's are buying hybrid cars because they know that relying on monarchical/dictatorial/totalitarian regimes for our life blood is too risky to sustain. I suspect we will be disparaged for that too.
As far I am concerned both the different camps can go and howl at the moon, but we, over here can do nothing about it. All that we can see is USA daily losing it's credibility in the world. I believe that the Kyoto agreement starts this week. Heloooow George. China's already in.
Oh by the way America has never had an Empire.
 
FredC said:
As far I am concerned both the different camps can go and howl at the moon, but we, over here can do nothing about it. All that we can see is USA daily losing it's credibility in the world. I believe that the Kyoto agreement starts this week. Heloooow George. China's already in.
Oh by the way America has never had an Empire.
The U.S. is the sole "superpower" at this time. Also, the predominance of the English language in international discourse is due, in no small part, to America. You guy's adopt the euro, in England, yet :confused: Until you do, you won't have a united front to oppose the U.S.A
 
davidmc said:
The U.S. is the sole "superpower" at this time. Also, the predominance of the English language in international discourse is due, in no small part, to America. You guy's adopt the euro, in England, yet :confused: Until you do, you won't have a united front to oppose the U.S.A
I don't disagree with the superpower aspect at all, but power should be used with aforethought.
As to the widespread use of the English language throughout the world this can only be attributed to the British Empire.
Yes, I'm a bit a bit miffed about not joining in with the Euro, but the £ is doing rather better than the dollar, as is the Euro.
United front, we ain't playing with dollars anymore, all gone.
 
FredC said:
I don't disagree with the superpower aspect at all, but power should be used with aforethought.
As to the widespread use of the English language throughout the world this can only be attributed to the British Empire.
Yes, I'm a bit a bit miffed about not joining in with the Euro, but the £ is doing rather better than the dollar, as is the Euro.
United front, we ain't playing with dollars anymore, all gone.
We ( The U.S) are preserving the old English measurement system. We haven't even adopted the metric system (fully) yet. Isn't that ironic :confused: I suspect that is why your country is slow to do away w/ the pound/pence, no? The E.U.'s economic clout is immense but is lessened by not having England/U.K. participate.
 
davidmc said:
The U.S. is the sole "superpower" at this time. Also, the predominance of the English language in international discourse is due, in no small part, to America. You guy's adopt the euro, in England, yet :confused: Until you do, you won't have a united front to oppose the U.S.A
Are you now claiming that you invented English as a language. Didn't all the indigenous American speakers get murdered?
 
davidmc said:
We ( The U.S) are preserving the old English measurement system. We haven't even adopted the metric system (fully) yet. Isn't that ironic :confused: I suspect that is why your country is slow to do away w/ the pound/pence, no? The E.U.'s economic clout is immense but is lessened by not having England/U.K. participate.
We're in the same boat as you regarding weights and measures. All our road signs are still in miles. Petrol (gas) is sold in litres, it's all a hotch potch and has been for years.
I think that the reputation of the pound sterling as a trusted currency is the reason for not changing as we have a great money market here in London. I wouldn't mind if we changed to the Euro, but then again I trust the City to point the way.
 
I think the crux of the problem is quite simple.
The U.S. invaded Iraq when many Americans believed Iraq had been behind the 9/11 attacks. Then, later on, we discovered there were no WMD after all and we then saw photos of Iraqi prisoners being hooded, abused and interrogated. This wasn't simply a case of anger being vented against Iraqi prisoners but it was essentially sadism - abuse for the fun of it.
Faced with this information, U.S. voters then went out and re-elected George W Bush. So, then we move from anti-Bush sentiment in Europe to all out anti-Americanism. The fact is now the Americans themselves had said to Bush, "O.K., this is the direction we should be heading in, this is O.K. with us!".
Now the U.K. has a similar choice. They're now talking about re-electing New Labour when New Labour should be castigated for encouraging Bush to invade Iraq - lying about the 45 minute missile threat. If U.K. voters re-elect Blair, there will also be anti-British sentiment in Europe - and another drubbing at the Eurovision song contest.
If the U.S. choose a theocratic Christian government and endorse it via election, sure there will be much anti-American sentiment in Europe and it will get ever worse.





limerickman said:
I have to say I cannot remember relations between Europe and the USA being as bad as they are now.

I was studying back in 1984 when Reagan visited here - to explore his Irish roots, for that years US elections.
Reagan claimed ancestry in Tipperary.
I well recall widespread protest marches throughout this country before and during his visit here.

At the time there was widespread unhappiness at US activities in Central America (El Salvador, Nicaragua).
There were widespread demonstrations here in respect of that visit.
In Britain, there was widepsread unhappiness at US nuclear policy (Greenham Common).
Even given this unhappiness, there wasn't a split between Europe and the USA.

However today, the USA is openly ridiculed.
The level of resentment toward US foreign policy is palpable.
The re-election of Bush re-enforces the (correct) perception that the US citizens support his imperialist approach.
Unfortunately, we cannot vote in the USA.

But economically, I believe the rest of the world can register their protest,
economically.
This is being done as we speak.

The RoW is slowly strangling the US economy.
All the econmic indicators say so - despite the lies published by others here about how great things are, economically in the USA.
This is a protest at Bush's presidency and his foreign policy and his re-election.
 
Carrera said:
I think the crux of the problem is quite simple.
The U.S. invaded Iraq when many Americans believed Iraq had been behind the 9/11 attacks. Then, later on, we discovered there were no WMD after all and we then saw photos of Iraqi prisoners being hooded, abused and interrogated. This wasn't simply a case of anger being vented against Iraqi prisoners but it was essentially sadism - abuse for the fun of it.
Faced with this information, U.S. voters then went out and re-elected George W Bush. So, then we move from anti-Bush sentiment in Europe to all out anti-Americanism. The fact is now the Americans themselves had said to Bush, "O.K., this is the direction we should be heading in, this is O.K. with us!".
Now the U.K. has a similar choice. They're now talking about re-electing New Labour when New Labour should be castigated for encouraging Bush to invade Iraq - lying about the 45 minute missile threat. If U.K. voters re-elect Blair, there will also be anti-British sentiment in Europe - and another drubbing at the Eurovision song contest.
If the U.S. choose a theocratic Christian government and endorse it via election, sure there will be much anti-American sentiment in Europe and it will get ever worse.

Unfortunately I don't think it's quite that simple...firstly remember that, as davidmc points out, the election was very close - there are very many Americans who didn't want Bush back, so blanket anti-Americanism, while perhaps understandable, isn't really fair to those who voted for Kerry. Secondly, the American media is hugely jingoistic and biased, so Americans in general don't have as easy a time as we do making informed decisions. As regards the situation with Labour in the UK, there isn't really a viable opposition, with the Tories falling and Lib Dem on the rise (no, I don't consider Kilroy viable opposition either!) And while I agree that Blair was wrong over Iraq, I think it's clear that overall he isn't as irresponsible and stupid a man as Bush. The pound is holding its own, for example, unlike the dollar. Besides, although he got away with Iraq, I think it cost Blair a lot more stress and uncertainty than it did Bush - I would like to think this means Blair isn't likely to repeat such a mistake. If only the same were true of his Texan buddy.
 
Carrera said:
I think the crux of the problem is quite simple.
The U.S. invaded Iraq when many Americans believed Iraq had been behind the 9/11 attacks. Then, later on, we discovered there were no WMD after all and we then saw photos of Iraqi prisoners being hooded, abused and interrogated. This wasn't simply a case of anger being vented against Iraqi prisoners but it was essentially sadism - abuse for the fun of it.
Faced with this information, U.S. voters then went out and re-elected George W Bush. So, then we move from anti-Bush sentiment in Europe to all out anti-Americanism. The fact is now the Americans themselves had said to Bush, "O.K., this is the direction we should be heading in, this is O.K. with us!".
Now the U.K. has a similar choice. They're now talking about re-electing New Labour when New Labour should be castigated for encouraging Bush to invade Iraq - lying about the 45 minute missile threat. If U.K. voters re-elect Blair, there will also be anti-British sentiment in Europe - and another drubbing at the Eurovision song contest.
If the U.S. choose a theocratic Christian government and endorse it via election, sure there will be much anti-American sentiment in Europe and it will get ever worse.

The premise for the invasion of Iraq was a lie - and it was shown to be a lie in the run up to the 2nd November 2004 US Presidential elections.
Bush's incompetence of running his economy was known prior to the 2nd November 2004.
Given all this information - the Merkians still re-elected him.

Those of us outside the US have therefore got a quandry - is the 2/11/2004 result an affirmation of Bush's policies ?
I believe that the Merkins approved Bush's actions, including his invasion of Iraq : which of course is their progative, despite the 49% who didn't vote for him.

The RoW realise that the decision to re-elect Bush, was taken in the full knowledge that the US electorates decision was made AFTER he (Bush) was shown to have lied (about Iraq) and to have mismanaged his economy.
In other words, the US population knew he was a liar, who got it wrong - but still elected him and thus endorsed his lies.

What you are seeing in the financial and economic markets, now - and which will continue until 2008 - is the RoW's disapproval of the re-election of Bush and his corrupt policies.
The US economy and US dollar thread details the travails of an economy that is going down the swanny.

You saw the lukewarm reception when the token, Rice, came to Europe last week.
Schroder told her that Germany and the EU will go their own way and Chirac
did not even bother to meet her publicly.
The previous week, Chriac was happy to meet with Bliar publicly.

The Yanks are on bended knees pleading with China to revalue their currency and to buy more dollars to us as their (China's) Central Bank Reserve.
The Chinese told the Yanks to ******** - that they weren't prepared to bail out their diminishing currency.

Let them perish on their own decision to support imperialism.
 
Carrera said:
I think the crux of the problem is quite simple.
The U.S. invaded Iraq when many Americans believed Iraq had been behind the 9/11 attacks. Then, later on, we discovered there were no WMD after all and we then saw photos of Iraqi prisoners being hooded, abused and interrogated. This wasn't simply a case of anger being vented against Iraqi prisoners but it was essentially sadism - abuse for the fun of it.
Faced with this information, U.S. voters then went out and re-elected George W Bush. So, then we move from anti-Bush sentiment in Europe to all out anti-Americanism. The fact is now the Americans themselves had said to Bush, "O.K., this is the direction we should be heading in, this is O.K. with us!".
Now the U.K. has a similar choice. They're now talking about re-electing New Labour when New Labour should be castigated for encouraging Bush to invade Iraq - lying about the 45 minute missile threat. If U.K. voters re-elect Blair, there will also be anti-British sentiment in Europe - and another drubbing at the Eurovision song contest.
If the U.S. choose a theocratic Christian government and endorse it via election, sure there will be much anti-American sentiment in Europe and it will get ever worse.
Have you read the title of this thread?
Surely you should have opened with the word 'crutch' and not 'crux'.
Well at least Blair can blame Bush and not vice versa, I think it was a con-trick.
If the US can elect a theocratic government, why does he oppose other countries from doing the same? Sorry i've lost it............................
Big day in the Pub was it?
 
FredC said:
Are you now claiming that you invented English as a language. Didn't all the indigenous American speakers get murdered?
Good one :rolleyes: On another note, I heard on the weekly "Prime Ministers Questions" that Blair said that our alliance is inviolable eternal. What do you have to say about that Smarty pants :D
 
Carrera said:
I think the crux of the problem is quite simple.
The U.S. invaded Iraq when many Americans believed Iraq had been behind the 9/11 attacks. Then, later on, we discovered there were no WMD after all and we then saw photos of Iraqi prisoners being hooded, abused and interrogated. This wasn't simply a case of anger being vented against Iraqi prisoners but it was essentially sadism - abuse for the fun of it.
Faced with this information, U.S. voters then went out and re-elected George W Bush. So, then we move from anti-Bush sentiment in Europe to all out anti-Americanism. The fact is now the Americans themselves had said to Bush, "O.K., this is the direction we should be heading in, this is O.K. with us!".
Now the U.K. has a similar choice. They're now talking about re-electing New Labour when New Labour should be castigated for encouraging Bush to invade Iraq - lying about the 45 minute missile threat. If U.K. voters re-elect Blair, there will also be anti-British sentiment in Europe - and another drubbing at the Eurovision song contest.
If the U.S. choose a theocratic Christian government and endorse it via election, sure there will be much anti-American sentiment in Europe and it will get ever worse.
HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO REPEAT THIS WELL KNOWN FACT: 49% OF ALL AMERICAN VOTERS DID NOT VOTE FOR BUSH. How hard is that to understand :confused: Everyone knows the Bush admin fabricated/doctored weak info inre: Iraq. Why do you think that his margin of victory in 2004 was so thin? The only people who voted for him were conservatives (who base their ideology on one of your historical figures-Burke[?]) Thanks alot fellows :rolleyes: They had a little help from the holy-rollers & hillbillies
 
FredC said:
Have you read the title of this thread?
Surely you should have opened with the word 'crutch' and not 'crux'.
Well at least Blair can blame Bush and not vice versa, I think it was a con-trick.
If the US can elect a theocratic government, why does he oppose other countries from doing the same? Sorry i've lost it............................
Big day in the Pub was it?
You fail to mention the "yellow-cake" incident supplied by you fellows. Was Britain complicit or did Bush Inc. embellish a weak lead :confused: I'm still waiting for someone in Bush's cabinet to be jailed w/ extreme prejudice for crimes against the state [treason]- (outing a cia officer) :mad:
 

Similar threads