Keira Forums - View Single Post - Bush: Hate Him or Love Him (split from UK terror thread)
View Single Post
Old 14-08-2006, 08:29 AM   Attended an OMGWTFKKWBBQ! KKWiki Contributer Senior Registered Member #32
Sponsored Cunt
Hazzle's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 5,168
Warning this post is a fucking essay:

Yeah as a world super power we have a pretty good economy compared to other countries but have you checked out the exchange rates lately?
Yes. But do you realise the causes of that have little to do with Bush? People will blame Bush's tax cuts and the war for the increased deficit but in fact the trade deficit is caused largely by the fact more Americans need to buy more American-made products instead of buying cheap alternatives from abroad. Hence the tax cuts, designed to fuel the domestic economy.

Hello? Your fuel prices are high but you have to recognize the difference in the way our countries are built. London is close together, has an underground, and taxis running throughout. In my country there are very few cities like that. Where I live everything is spread out and we use cars to get every place we need to go. Think about how cost effective it would be to add a subway to a city that spread apart? Thus we use alot of fuel.
Understood but your fuel prices are still a quarter of ours. Perhaps if you could build cars that didn't guzzle petrol, your fuel crisis wouldn't be so bad. You can blame the geography all you want, but US cars are just as bad at fuel consumption anywhere in the world. Ironic, given you lot invented the damn thing.

The US is a market economy, the more we need the more we get. The more there is the cheaper it is.
So? I presume you mean the more fuel you use, the more you get, the more you get, the cheaper it is? Explaining the difference in price? So what? You may buy more, but as you so eloquently pointed out, in a market economy that means it costs you less. So where's the concern about fuel prices? Your price per gallon as a %age of GDP is lower than ours, I'd venture a guess.

Now another flaw I see is this...where do you think Bush gets the money for his war? where do you think he got the money to pay for the clean up of NYC? From our TAXES. He lowered the taxes the wealthy people have to pay significantly not that of the middle or lower classes of our country.
No, he gets it by increasing borrowing. This myth that taxation is paying for the war is just that, a myth. Equally, how the does one lower the taxes of the wealthy alone? Wealthy people get the most out of the tax system as they can afford to hire good tax lawyers and accountants to take advantage of loopholes. But lowering tax is lowering tax, and it's a lovely cop-out used by left wingers whenever a tax cut happens that it favours the wealthy. Bollocks. The wealthiest are usually getting the best out of the tax system anyway, it's the poorest that aren't, and who benefit from a cut. The whole rationale behind the cuts was to give people more money to spend, thereby fuelling the economy, it makes no sense for the cuts to favour the wealthy.

Excuse me but last time I checked Al Qaeda does not make up 100% of the Iraqi population so why wage war on the soil of a country who does not want us there? If waging a war like that isn't unnecessary I don't know what is. It's unnecessary to everyone involved just because we were attacked doesn't make it any less unnecessary. Enough people died win the towers fell, we don't need more to die over there. Freeing Iraq from the clutches of Saddam? Yay good plan but not when our president has enough problems to deal with in his OWN COUNTRY. Last time I checked Osama Bin Ladden was the one who decided it would be fun to knock down our towers. So what business do we have in Iraq? We're pulling regiments from Afghanistan but...(I'm really not sure about this one) isn't that a plausible place for him to be? Didn't we get news that he was there?
1) Iraqis don't want us there? Odd that, since the US approval rating in Iraq has shot up and the Iraqi president has thanked the US for freeing the country. Numerous soldiers have given accounts of being thanked in the streets. Iraqi blogs (you should look some up) tell the story of a country pleased to be rid of Saddam. Not saying EVERY Iraqi wants the coalition there, but enough seem to, based on the many many facts available. So that's a media myth if ever there was one.

2) Your understanding of the "we were attacked" scenario is flawed. It was the first attack on US soil since Pearl Harbor. The reason you were attacked at Pearl Harbor was because of the US isolation policy and your failure to engage the world. 9/11 was caused by the same inaction. You're utterly failing to grasp the significance here. The towers falling was symbolic; America needed to stop thinking the world's problems didn't affect her, and Iraq was a festering problem that America had ignored as it didn't need to worry anymore (Kuwaiti oil was getting through fine). It was time to engage, and Bush did that. It's easy saying "enough people died when the towers fell" but until you understand WHY they fell, geopolitically, you can't understand why the war is necessary. Without it, another 9/11 was begging to happen.

3) Noone but the media connected Al Queda with Iraq. Bush never used that as an argument for the war. The most telling reason was that the man was a dictator. A little understanding of geopolitics is necessary here. The Middle East is FULL of dictators. It's easy to say that Saddam wasn't the only dictator, or even the worst, but Mugabe (for example) is hardly the biggest problem in Africa. Removing Kim Jong-il would have less of a geopolitical effect on the region because China (increasingly liberal thanks to capitalism, America's secret weapon in the War on Terror) and Japan are the power players in Asia. The geopolitical rammifications of a democratic Iraq could potentially mean an end to the Palestinian conflict (though I don't hold out any hope). Democracy has a habit of spreading like a rash. Even Iran has liberalised a lot recently, since the Iraqi invasion. I wonder why...

4) The "he has enough problems in his own country" mentality is what got you attacked in the first place. Burying your head in the sand and pretending the rest of the world doesn't exist does you no favours.

5) OBL was in Afghanistan, originally, but there's nothing to suggest he's still there. Even if he is, the withdrawal of US troops doesn't make a difference as the US regiments are being replaced by Nato troops. Heaven forbid Bush try and get more US troops back home to be with their families...
Hazzle is offline   Reply With Quote