bush

[king of all pie]

is it just me, or is the whole of south east england waiting for that barstard bush to get killed in a freak accident

[Reddig]

Can I ask you this one thing? Could we all stop talking about how we all hate Bush and want him dead? Because lots of people just keep on repeating it all the time in half of the threads and it doesn't seem to lead anywhere. Could we? Please?

Or could we just LOGICIALLY EXPLAIN why we hate him? Otherwise these are only hate posts, and it's the cheese bin that is the place for hate posts, not "Debates".

In the future, post your hate threads in Pap or Cheesebin, regardless who they are aimed against. This weekend I plan to hate the British, the Dutch and South Africa, just so I can act like a cheesehead.

[Discus]

Its just you.
Infact the whole north, south, west, east, up, down, left, right & centre of England are waiting for that bastard Bush to get killed in a freak accident.

[squealpiggy]

I don't particularly care about acting-president Bush.

[Sloth]

Originally posted by Astir
Its just you.
Infact the whole north, south, west, east, up, down, left, right & centre of England are waiting for that bastard Bush to get killed in a freak accident. Gosh are the protestors (or how the protestors would think of themselves 'the rest of the world') really that stupid?... Or do you think that a President Cheney will make the world an oh-so magical place?

[squealpiggy]

President Gore would be a touch less likely to see things in such simple terms.

[Sloth]

thats beside the point squealpiggy... king of all pie and Astir both stated that people in the UK want to see Bush get killed... and i don't quite understand how they think that will make the world better...

everyone knows that Carl Rove and Dick Cheney are the really dark evil masters of that administration...

[squealpiggy]

Indeed. But Bush is a thick yokel and embodies everything that the majority of British people feel about the states. Seriously over here they think that Bush is typical of his country. Which is like saying that the Queen is typical of England.

[Ouroboros]

Bush being killed in England would not be good, as America would probably carpet bomb Europe or something stupid. Footage of him commiting a crime or hitting someone would be much better.

[smiley clown]

I think the Queen is a good example. *snigger*

[Ninja Duck]

Originally posted by Reddig
Can I ask you this one thing? Could we all stop talking about how we all hate Bush and want him dead? Because lots of people just keep on repeating it all the time in half of the threads and it doesn't seem to lead anywhere. Could we? Please?

Could we talk about Tony Blair instead?

[Angry_Pierre]

I love the "Everyone in Britain hates bush!!! He should die!!!" comments. They smell of poop.

Despite much talk in the media about Bush's unpopularity, a poll in the Guardian newspaper showed more British voters welcome the visit than reject it, and that 62 percent think America "a force for good, not evil, in the world".

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/031118/80/eeb5t.html if you don't believe me.
Suck on that Hippys, go to china and hug a panda.

[ZekeyLizard]

LOOK:

All Politicians lie
All modern Government is shit
The World is a bad, bad place
It will never be fixed until we humans are gone from it
The filling in a twinky does NOT taste good
Finished.
Done.
fin

[squealpiggy]

Originally posted by ZekeyLizard
LOOK:

All Politicians lie
All modern Government is shit
The World is a bad, bad place
It will never be fixed until we humans are gone from it
The filling in a twinky does NOT taste good
Finished.
Done.
fin

You'll change your mind when you are no longer an impetulant teen ;)

[Magpie]

Originally posted by Angry_Pierre
I love the "Everyone in Britain hates bush!!! He should die!!!" comments. They smell of poop.



http://uk.news.yahoo.com/031118/80/eeb5t.html if you don't believe me.
Suck on that Hippys, go to china and hug a panda.


i wouldn't use hippies as an insult when you quote the Guardian :rolleyes:

[Ogilvy]

Originally posted by ZekeyLizard
LOOK:

All Politicians lie
All modern Government is shit
The World is a bad, bad place
It will never be fixed until we humans are gone from it
The filling in a twinky does NOT taste good
Finished.
Done.
fin

What the hell are you talking about? The filling in a twinky is delicious!

[ZekeyLizard]

Hey Ogliv-whateveryernameis,

The twinky filling killed my father.
Damn you Hostess, damn you......

[gopherboy]

I've never had a twinky. I've had an oreo, but not a twinky. I want a twinky. Oh and whats this salt water taffy that americans have. That sounds discusting but i've heard it's nice.

Erm, yeah... Hilary Clinton for president!

[Explosivo]

the world is not a bad bad place its only people like you who go around saying its a bad bad place that make it a bad bad place, that fact that polititions are generally wankers doesnt help the world, but did you think Winston Churchull was a wanker or JFK is he a crappy polition there are good politions in this world its just a problem that britain and america have the worst in office at this present time, but things will change, i mean bush is not gonna get another term in office i think thats a bit obvisous the way the americans think hes a wanker.

[squealpiggy]

Winston Churchill was a total wanker. Furthermore he was a drunken wanker. He was a superb wartime leader but a drunken old wanker all the same,

[Salty Samurai]

Originally posted by Astir
Its just you.
Infact the whole north, south, west, east, up, down, left, right & centre of England are waiting for that bastard Bush to get killed in a freak accident.

let the noble astir be reminded that it is not only britan. Most of america whishes this upon the "devil in office" as well.

The noble samurai, as a whole are planning his "accident" as we speak.

we gave him a chance to repent, but like the race of redneck, he was too drunk to hear us.

[Explosivo]

ok you say churchhills bad what about JFK there have been loads of gd pollitions you just have to look back in history to find them :weebl: :weebl:

[squealpiggy]

I didn't say he was bad, I just said he was a drunken wanker. Now JFK was a drug using, womanising mafia-connected wanker, it doesn't make him a bad leader.

[gopherboy]

Originally posted by squealpiggy
I didn't say he was bad, I just said he was a drunken wanker. Now JFK was a drug using, womanising mafia-connected wanker, it doesn't make him a bad leader.

Exactly, Hitler is probably the best leader that ever lived and look what a total and utter love box he was. :D

[EDIT] "love box"? Wow I didnt realise we had censorship!

[Shave]

'me like Bush, me like anything that gives foliage to the pubic region'

a quote from Ali G InDaHouse

[Pie Diddy]

Originally posted by Shane
'me like Bush, me like anything that gives foliage to the pubic region'

Isn't it, foliage to the 'punanni area'?

[ZekeyLizard]

Originally posted by ZekeyLizard
LOOK:

All Politicians lie
All modern Government is shit
The World is a bad, bad place
It will never be fixed until we humans are gone from it
The filling in a twinky does NOT taste good
Finished.
Done.
fin


The Govt of the world has been going downhill at a hideous rate since the 40's when we decided that we neede more Govt interference due to the whole Great Depression thing.

[SemiCircle]

churchill may have been a wanker (he was male, after all), but he was also damn witty. i don't give a damn how evil he was, nor how much he screwed up whatever it was that he screwed up, (did he screw up anything?) all i care about is the fact that books of his quotes are funny to read.

i guess if my life had overlapped with his i'd have a different point of view.

anyhow, bush. he's clearly stupid. he's probably trigger happy. i'm not sure if he's a typical american, but i hope not. i wouldn't vote for him unless the other guy was suggesting war with china or some other obviously suicidal policy.

fortunately, i don't have to. not my problem. :).

[Rogue]

Bush is okay. The clintons on the other hand are manipulative treacherous scum bags who deserve death.

[Shave]

Isn't it, foliage to the 'punanni area'?

probably, i haven't seen the film for a while

[squealpiggy]

Originally posted by SemiCircle
churchill may have been a wanker (he was male, after all), but he was also damn witty. i don't give a damn how evil he was, nor how much he screwed up whatever it was that he screwed up, (did he screw up anything?) all i care about is the fact that books of his quotes are funny to read.

i guess if my life had overlapped with his i'd have a different point of view.

anyhow, bush. he's clearly stupid. he's probably trigger happy. i'm not sure if he's a typical american, but i hope not. i wouldn't vote for him unless the other guy was suggesting war with china or some other obviously suicidal policy.

fortunately, i don't have to. not my problem. :).

I never said that Churchill was evil! I said he was a drunken wanker! And yes, he was witty

Woman: You are drunk sir!
Churchill: Madame you are ugly... and in the morning I shall be sober!

[Mexican Pie]

I support the War in Iraw. 25 million people are free, and everyone is just looking at the bad things in the events. Look, of course there will be casualties on both sides for christs sake. It's just because of these "Guerillarists" that they are giving a bad name to the USA Army. They are Saddam Loyalists- Saddam is evil: he never gave 2 shits for his comrades and country.

What about September 11? The World sought out to stop terrorism, but they are getting peeved at America because they are stopping Terrorist inhabited states and freeing people.

September 11 is an unforgivable crime. I don't think there has been more deaths in that short amount of time than Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But then again, Nagasaki and Hiroshima were unforgivable, yet forgiven crimes.

People who want to wage a "Holy War" are full of crap. I personally think-nay, KNOW that Transnational Corporations are ultimately responsible for the bad financial state of some countries. But they bring money to stronger, more developed countries.

But that's how it is- there are always going to be those that are strong, and those that will struggle.

[squealpiggy]

I don't think there has been more deaths in that short amount of time than Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But then again, Nagasaki and Hiroshima were unforgivable, yet forgiven crimes.


The firebombing of Dresden caused more deaths than Nagasaki and Hiroshima combined. It's chronicled in a way by Kurt Vonnegut Jr in his novel Slaughterouse 5.

[kitchard]

I dont see the point of the protests against the war now anyway. We have gone to war and ousted Saddam but now people are saying we should leave iraq alone, thats exactly what we British did back in the 70's. Invade iraq, get bored, leave. And guess who got into power once we left a poxy weak government in our place? Answers on a post card please. It's too late to leave now unless we want another Saddam once again ruling the roost.

P.S. I aint one of those bush loving fascists, and was against the war in the first place but whats done is done

[squealpiggy]

Originally posted by kitchard
I dont see the point of the protests against the war now anyway. We have gone to war and ousted Saddam but now people are saying we should leave iraq alone, thats exactly what we British did back in the 70's. Invade iraq, get bored, leave. And guess who got into power once we left a poxy weak government in our place? Answers on a post card please. It's too late to leave now unless we want another Saddam once again ruling the roost.

P.S. I aint one of those bush loving fascists, and was against the war in the first place but whats done is done

The gulf war was the 90s. Britain did not invade in the 70s, there was a coup in 1968 by the Baath party and Saddam became president in 1979 following the previous president's death.

And just because someone supports Georgey Boy doesn't mean you should label them as a fascist...

[Explosivo]

just face it bush reguardless of what anybody said was gonna invade iraq they needed to secure the oil.

[Magpie]

Right.

ofcourse, oil.

not like it would be cheaper to buy from another source on anything like that......

no war for oil ofcourse.

[squealpiggy]

Originally posted by YYYEEEAAAHHH
just face it bush reguardless of what anybody said was gonna invade iraq they needed to secure the oil.

Don't be silly, 64 billion dollars on a war for 40 billion dollars worth of oil...

[Psycho Fox]

Originally posted by king of all pie
is it just me, or is the whole of south east england waiting for that barstard bush to get killed in a freak accident

I am!!!

[PoofBird]

Originally posted by YYYEEEAAAHHH
just face it bush reguardless of what anybody said was gonna invade iraq they needed to secure the oil.

heh, back that up with some facts and figures, if you want to debate...

[Rogue]

in the words of ann coulter:

Why not go to war just for oil? We need oil. What do Hollywood celebrities imagine fuels their private jets? How do they think their cocaine is delivered to them?"


but seriously, the war is not just about oil. People who say that are being ridiculous.....americans have access to a lot of oil in alaska already. its not like we are desperate.

besides the americans are a most clever ppl. I suspect that eventually an alternative fuel source wil lbe invented out of sheer need.

[Tart]

Depends on your opinion of the war. Some see it as liberating Iraq (me), others see it as fighting for oil.

And hydrogen is looking pretty good as a new fuel source. ;)

[squealpiggy]

Hydrogen will never be used as a fuel source. You woud get it where? From water? OK. The earth is covered with water. So how can anyone make any money out of that!?

There will never be a hydrogen engine because the companies that would fund the development of such a machine would not be able to see a return on their investment. They can already make an efficient car that runs on vegetable oil.

[Tart]

...there already IS a hydrogen engine. And a refilling station too.

I think they could make quite a bit off of fuel cell cars. Plus, cars using hydrogen make water instead of smoke. As far as we know, it's not harmful on the enviroment.

[Death]

Originally posted by Tart
Depends on your opinion of the war. Some see it as liberating Iraq (me), others see it as fighting for oil.

And hydrogen is looking pretty good as a new fuel source. ;)

if we look back the idea of liberating Iraq was slowly introduced after troops went in to lobby support. Before it was all about finding those 'weapons of mass destruction' but once the public began to realise they would never come the status quo was intent on manipulating the purpous of the war. maybe it was right to liberate iraq, I will wait and see because it looks like it is getting alot worse.

[squealpiggy]

It seems to be getting worse as a direct result of foriegn terrorists going to fight "the cause". That sort of thing makes me sick. If you're a guy who owns a shop you want to work in your shop, make a bit of money and feed your family. You don't want liberators trying to liberate you and freedom fighters fighting the liberators for your freedom. If the terrorist element packed up and went then the American and British armies would pack up and go home within a few short months. We don't want to stick a garrison in Iraq, it's too costly, we just want to get in there, do the job and get out, and with an arabic democratic government in place it would bring a little extra stability to the region. But al-qaeda, the PLO, Hammas and other groups do not want stability. They want instability and they want a jihad to happen worldwide.

[Explosivo]

right
point 1: America need to secure oil because of Saudi Aribia and the riots goin on with oil workers

Point 2: Mexican pie said that iraqis are free, in theoy that is correct, but its not. The Iraqis are now in more fear than they were when Saddam was in power, not only are there forien troops in their country there are still saddam loyalists, and because its american troops Alekieda pose a big threat as well.

Point 3:How come no one has bothered to count the numbers of Iraqis that have been killed?

[squealpiggy]

Originally posted by YYYEEEAAAHHH
right
point 1: America need to secure oil because of Saudi Aribia and the riots goin on with oil workers

Point 2: Mexican pie said that iraqis are free, in theoy that is correct, but its not. The Iraqis are now in more fear than they were when Saddam was in power, not only are there forien troops in their country there are still saddam loyalists, and because its american troops Alekieda pose a big threat as well.

Point 3:How come no one has bothered to count the numbers of Iraqis that have been killed?

1) America may want oil but they will not spend more money than the oil is worth in order to get it.

2) How do you know this? Are you an iraqi? Do you know anyone currently living in Iraq?

3) There have been approximate figures published on Amnesty International and on the BBC.

[Explosivo]

Originally posted by squealpiggy
1) America may want oil but they will not spend more money than the oil is worth in order to get it.

2) How do you know this? Are you an iraqi? Do you know anyone currently living in Iraq?

3) There have been approximate figures published on Amnesty International and on the BBC.

1) They will if bush see's fit

2) yes i know seven people actually

3) sorry i take that remark back

[squealpiggy]

Saddam Hussein has now reportedly been captured. There has been footage of people celebrating in the streets. The average Iraqi from the accounts I have read (from a number of different sources) seem to think that Saddam being gone is not a bad thing but of course have concerns about continued fighting in their country mainly by people from Saddam's political party or militants from other countries.

[Cainam]

One thing that you have to give Bush and his administration credit for: They admitted that there have not been W.M.D. found, instead of planting fake ones - which would have been fairly easy.

Besides, an estimated 65,000 people in Bagdad alone were killed by Sadam's government. Would it really have been a better idea to leave things the way they were? As for the 'War for Oil' theory, wouldn't it have simply been easier to lift the sanctions?

[psychohamster]

I am getting sick of this crap. I for one think Bush is ok, a president is just the tool of the Senate and the House and of the political party he is associated with. After 9/11, everyone was like "Oh, save us Bush, kill Osama!!" and now that we are getting up of our asses and doing some shit, the entire world as well as his own country is like "Stop it Bush, this is senseless!". Somebody had to go in and clean up the middle east, and of course it was again us, as it always is. Because we learn from our mistakes, remember the last time the world shut its eyes and looked away after WWI? Covering your eyes to the truth doesnt save the millions of lives lost in combat that was easily preventable.

[squealpiggy]

WWI marked the end of an era of warfare. It was the end of the time where to the victor went the spoils of war, the treaty of Versaille imposed unacceptable sanctions on the German people created a political climate ripe for a dictator like Hitler to take over and turn into a war machine. It wasn't a case of the world shutting it's eyes.

[psychohamster]

Yeah it was, they gave Germany the friggin treaty of versailles and then they just turned away and never looked at it again until Hitler invaded the Rhineland.

[squealpiggy]

The treaty of versailles basically demanded payment from Germany for WWI, putting Germany into recession. The ethnic Jews were exempted from tributes hence they became easy scapegoats for Hitler's political campaigns.

My god treaties are really boring to read!

http://history.acusd.edu/gen/text/versaillestreaty/vercontents.html

[psychohamster]

Yeah, they really are, esp. the post war ones.

[Kelp_Master]

ahhh this kind of talk makes me think back to the good old days in pagano class...

[Cainam]

Well, after WW2, the world was sick of fighting, and Stalin's government actually managed to kill more Jewish people than Hitler and the Nazi's. As bad as continued fighting would have been, it probably would have been better for the world to have continued across Germany and taken Russia. War sucks, but so does peace sometimes.

As far as I can see, the U.S. government has something that a government like Iraq's never did, and that is constant media attention given to every little detail. In some ways this is good, because it makes it a bit harder to hide things with everyone watching. Triumph and defeat. Look at the space race during the '60s. EVERYONE saw three Astronauts get burned to death in a horrible accident. But everyone watched as three others went to the moon.

That is the problem with the media. Someone doing a good job and everything working as everyone wants it is boring. Bad things, and disagreement gets good ratings. Bush could eat garbage, poop gold and cure cancer with a wink, but you will ALWAYS find someone who doesn't agree with him, and if you are a reporter, you find that person and put his story on the front page. Bush has a Texas accent, and can't pronounce a few words "correctly"? Well, with the right twist to the story, just show the 2 second clip where he stuttered, and INSTANT IDIOT! RATINGS SCORE! Who cares what the content of the speach was.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think Bush is the greatest thing that ever happened. I have huge problems with some of the things he has done. He is too much a puppet to big busness, and his policy on the environment is horrible. I know that the ongoing problem in Iraq is the thing that everyone centers on, but in light of the atrocities the Sadam committed, I think that the war was the right thing to do in the long run.

But, oooh, civilians and CHILDREN were killed! That is bad!

Yes, it is. But those that were killed were killed by accident, and the number of those that were killed ON PURPOSE by Sadam was much higher.