President's speech

[Valigator]

> > > UNITED WE STAND....
> > >
> > > WOULDN'T IT BE GREAT TO TURN ON THE TV AND HEAR ANY U.S. PRESIDENT,
> >DEMOCRAT
> > > OR REPUBLICAN GIVE THE FOLLOWING SPEECH?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > My Fellow Americans: As you all know, the defeat of Iraq regime has
> >been
> > > completed.
> > >
> > >
> > > Since congress does not want to spend any more money on this war, our
> > > mission in Iraq is complete.
> > >
> > >
> > > This morning I gave the order for a complete removal of all American
> >forces
> > > from Iraq This action will be complete within 30 days. It is now to
> >begin
> > > the reckoning.
> > >
> > >
> > > Before me, I have two lists. One list contains the names of countries
> >which
> > > have stood by our side during the Iraq conflict. This list is short.
> >The
> > > United Kingdom , Spain , Bulgaria , Australia , and Poland are some of
> >the
> > > countries listed there.
> > >
> > >
> > > The other list contains everyone not on the first list. Most of the
> >world's
> > > nations are on that list. My press secretary will be distributing
> >copies of
> > > both lists later this evening.
> > >
> > >
> > > Let me start by saying that effective immediately, foreign aid to those
> > > nations on List 2 ceases immediately and indefinitely. The money saved
> >during the
> > > first year alone will pretty much pay for the costs of the Iraqi war.
> > >
> > >
> > > The American people are no longer going to pour money into third world
> > > Hell-holes and watch those government leaders grow fat on corruption.
> > >
> > >
> > > Need help with a famine? Wrestling with an epidemic? Call France
> > >
> > >
> > > In the future, together with Congress, I will work to redirect this
> >money
> > > toward solving the vexing social problems we still have at home. On
> >that note,
> > > a word to terrorist organizations. Screw with us and we will hunt you
> >down
> > > and eliminate you and all your friends from the face of the earth.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thirsting for a gutsy country to terrorize? Try France , or maybe
> >China
> > >
> > >
> > > I am ordering the immediate severing of diplomatic relations with
> >France ,
> > > Germany , and Russia . Thanks for all your help, comrades. We are
> >retiring
> > > from NATO as well. Bon chance, mes amis.
> > >
> > >
> > > I have instructed the Mayor of New York City to begin towing the many
> >UN
> > > diplomatic vehicles located in Manhattan with more than two unpaid
> >parking
> > > tickets to sites where those vehicles will be stripped, shredded and
> >crushed. I
> > > don't care about whatever treaty pertains to this. You creeps have tens
> >of
> > > thousands of unpaid tickets. Pay those tickets tomorrow or watch your
> >precious
> > > Benzes, Beamers and limos be turned over to some of the finest chop
> >shops in
> > > the world. I love New York
> > >
> > >
> > > A special note to our neighbors. Canada is on List 2. Since we are
> >likely to
> > > be seeing a lot more of each other, you folks might want to try not
> >pissing
> > > us off for a change.
> > >
> > >
> > > Mexico is also on List 2. President Fox and his entire corrupt
> >government
> > > really need an attitude adjustment. I will have a couple extra tank and
> > > infantry divisions sitting around. Guess where I am going to put em?
> >Yep, border
> > > security. So start doing something with your oil.
> > >
> > >
> > > Oh, by the way, the United States is abrogating the NAFTA treaty -
> >starting
> > > now.
> > >
> > >
> > > We are tired of the one-way highway. Immediately, we'll be drilling for
> >oil
> > > in Alaska - which will take care of this country's oil needs for
> >decades to
> > > come. If you're an environmentalist who opposes this decision, I refer
> >you to
> > > List 2 above: pick a country and move there. They care.
> > >
> > >
> > > It is time for America to focus on its own welfare and its own
> >citizens.
> > > Some will accuse us of isolationism. I answer them by saying, "darn
> >tootin."
> > >
> > > Nearly a century of trying to help folks live a decent life around the
> >world
> > > has only earned us the undying enmity of just about everyone on the
> >planet.
> > > It is time to eliminate hunger in America . It is time to eliminate
> > > homelessness in America . It is time to eliminate World Cup Soccer from
> >America . To
> > > the nations on List 1, a final thought Thanks guys. We owe you and we
> >won't
> > > forget. To the nations on List 2, a final thought: You might want to
> >learn to
> > > speak Arabic. God bless America . Thank you and good night. If you can
> >read
> > > this, thank a teacher. If you are reading it in English, thank a
> >soldier.
> > >
> > >
> > > (Please forward this to at least ten friends and see what happens!
> >Let's get
> > > this to every USA computer!)

[gspsonny03]

Hey Val, you don't happen to know what dubba's email address is do ya? Maybe send it to him.

[Andy L]

Honestly, I believe W is about to the point of giving that speech.

God I would love for that to happen.

[scalerman]

There are Canadian soldiers dying on a daily basis in Afghanistan because we deciced to back the US. Don't tell me that Canada is on List 2. As to Cancelling NAFTA- the sooner the better. While Canada is at it let's turn off the gas, water, and electricity to the US and see how they like freezing to death in the dark.

[L. Cooper]

If the President made a speech like that it would prove once again that many Americans have no understanding of international affairs, world history, the fundamental concepts articulated in their own constitution, or the basic principals of their professed Christianity.

The world doesn't need more threats, interference and bullying from the United States.

[Riposte1]

It is not my intent to offend our friends North of the Border but about the only things I need to know about international relations were espoused by George Washington and Theodore Roosevelt:

1. "Avoid foreign entanglements" & 2. "Speak softly and carry a big stick!"

Of course I rather like the "Scotty" dictim from Star Trek: "Diplomacy begins with a full phaser bank."

As far as I am concerned, our respone to the attacks on 911 was not nearly forceful enough, swift enough, nor broad enough. That is one of the prices we pay for a complex society in which half the decision makers do not understand violence.

It is not my intent to offend (and I have to admit I find the above letter a bit extreme on some points), but if one does not stand for something he will fall for almost anything.

Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition - we are at war, we can fight it over there or later over here - stopping is not an option! Though pausing while they kill us piecemeal is apparently one for some of our self-styled "leaders".

Riposte

[skeet]

Scalerman, Turning off the water gas and oil wouldn't put the US in the Dark. First off the grid is just that and almost impossible to "turn off" and secondly what will you do if Quebec decides to secede from Canada? They have a huge proportion of the power in Canada. Argue too much with them and you'll be in the dark.
Personally I think the US and Canada are at odds with each other over too many things as it is. We are, after all, neighbors. What makes you feel immune to the possibility of arab terrorism in Canada? I know I'll probably be jumped on for saying this but having the US in Iraq and Afghanistan(with Canada) the towel heads seem to be understanding that We(collectively in at least part) will come to where they live and search them out to kill them. Not saying they won't do something else over on this side of the pond as they are terrorists and have very little thought for others. But for the time being...they are keeping a low profile in the US and Canada...and spending their time and energies killing their own neighbors.

L Cooper, the best I can say is that people here really aren't allowed to use the basic principles of religion..of any kind. As far as having no concepts of international affairs People in the US are pretty much isolationists and always have been. We get entangled in international affairs through agreements and treaties. The few times in the past that we got involved in your government's European wars was to support GOD King and your country. So lets fight together rather than with each other. BTW the fundamental concepts of OUR constitution are usually followed pretty well but what does out constitution have to do with foreign peoples....And as for bullying and threats from a government...look first to your own. England made the US look like pikers. Really read world history yourself. I know, I know, England isn't your lord and Soveriegn any longer, you are free nation...but then...it still is .


And by the way...there will never be a speech such as mentioned ....and any thinking person knows it.. I feel you are a thinking person...so...think

[L. Cooper]

I am thinking.

I'm thinking about something my grandfather always said whenever I was being overbearing in some way: "You have to give every other human being the same freedom you demand for yourself. You have to give up every freedom you insist others can't have."

To make it more "Christian" in context; "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

It does not say "Do unto others as they do to you".

I'm thinking that the original post contains values, attitudes, and biases that contradict those simple but profoundly elegant ideas. Whether or not the speech will be made by a president, it was "made" by someone, and several here are agreeing with the principles it contains. Those principles are short sighted, selfish, arrogant and dangerous. They are not principles Christ would have agreed to, and I believe they do not support the principles of justice, personal freedom, democracy, and protection of the rights of the most powerless for which the American Constitution is so justifiably praiseworthy.

And that is what the American Constitution has to do with foreign peoples. It applies directly, of course, only to Americans, but, if it is to have the legitimacy its authors intended, it's values and principles should be the basis for the way the U.S. treats all peoples, not just its own. Unfortunately, those principles seem to have been abandoned by the people deciding American foreign policy.

The original also contains a direct threat to Canadians. Why is there any surprise that an American suggesting Canadians better stop "pissing us off" pisses us off? That's the way bullies work. They threaten to hurt you if you don't do what they want.

Nice people don't do that.

[Aim to maim]

Originally posted by Riposte1

As far as I am concerned, our respone to the attacks on 911 was not nearly forceful enough, swift enough, nor broad enough. That is one of the prices we pay for a complex society in which half the decision makers do not understand violence.

Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition - we are at war, we can fight it over there or later over here - stopping is not an option! Though pausing while they kill us piecemeal is apparently one for some of our self-styled "leaders".

Riposte

Very well said. If I might add a quote and expand on your point:

"The American military is like a finely crafted sword. To be effective, it must be wielded by a decisive, skilled and merciless hand."

We are currently offered the alternatives of "cut and run," or "stay the course (now new and improved with "surge")." I find both equally repugnant, without vision or courage and doomed to inevitable failure. What is worse, either will result in the deaths of thousands of America's finest with absolutely nothing to show for the blood so shed when all is said and done. Either course of action is nothing less than criminal.

Whatever happened to "kill the enemy and win the war"? No such sentiment has been exhibited by any U.S.president since 1945, nor do I see any prospect of it in the future... in either party.

[skeet]

LC as far as our constitution being applied to the way we deal with other people...well it just isn't the right way to do it. We should deal with other peoples the way they seem to deal with others. Everyone always says that America uses bullying tactics. Well, hell, what did the British do to anyone and everyone for 250 yrs or more. Being the big guy on the block always brings out those who use that as a way to get what THEY want. In a war(I've posted this before) the only way to win is to be nastier than the other guy...be the bully..the big nasty country. If it weren't for the allied countries(supplied by the US) being nastier than the Germans and the Japanese...the British would be speaking German now and the Australians Japanese. And there would be a lot of countries still enslaved by the Russian communists. The reason Russian communism folded was as a direct result of the US. We spent them into oblivion and at the same time nearly ourselves. Canada didn't help to pay for that. At least to the best of my knowledge. Want to pony up a whole lot of cash to help pay for a(somewhat) safer world? At least you don't have to worry about getting nuked by the Russians like ya used to. Oh, by the way! The bullies did that! If you can read this without glowing in the dark....thank the US.

And in case you are wondering I like the country to our north and her people. I used to hunt and fish up there but no longer do because of the onerous firearms laws y'all have. If ya have a gun they treat ya like a criminal..or at least they did the last time I came hunting up there. Get those stupid laws changed for goodness sake

[L. Cooper]

Well, Skeet, you're right about the spending. It was American money that did it alright. Although you have to admit, a very large part of the reason for the collapse of the Communist Party in the USSR was the unsuccessful almost decade long war they fought against the Mujihadin in Afghanistan. The Russians lost 15,000 men in that fight. The political consequences in the USSR of the anger over those deaths was the final straw. The Mujihadin were supported to a very large extent with American money and arms. Lots of both.

Now the only difficulty is that after the Mujihadin beat the crap out of the Russians, the Taliban became the direct political arm of the Mujihadin. The Taliban were in power to support Osama Bin Laden only because American interference in the Middle East had given them the clout to be the only viable successor after the Russians left. The Taliban exists largely because American money and weapons created them.

Saddam Hussein's story is an exact parallel. He got to power with American help so he would be there to keep the Iranians in check. Now look at it.

So using money and military power to "influence" the course of another country's history is not always (history says "hardly ever" I think) wise. It tends to piss off a lot of people.

The present conflict is WAY more morally complicated than WWII and no such comparisons are valid. American industrial might, a very few British pilots, and about 20,000,000 dead Russians stopped what needed to be stopped. This fight is not nearly as justifiable.

Oh yeah, and Canadians are not and have never been "part of the problem."

[skeet]

Actually LC the fall of the communists was directly related to the lack of every day items you and I take for granted. Like food and basic necessities like toilet paper and anything that worked as it was supposed to. Then the anger over all the other inequities in the basic Russian experiences in Afghanistan and in some of their own provinces(or countries under the soviet influence). Internal politics over Afghanistan had very little to do with the fall of hard line communism. But when all the best stuff in the country went to either political hacks in the politburo or the military the common people got a little pissed off. The Brandenburg gate was torn down along with the unsuccessful political experiment that Lenin and his henchmen foisted on an enslaved country. When 75-80% of your GNP is spent on the military without the market system to back it up. Well we spent them out of power. Sadly I am afraid Russia is on the verge of anarchy again. Have you ever been there? I have and have a couple of good friends that live there(one is very good looking btw). Was there before the fall and also again after. But before was definitely worse.

As far as what happened in the middle east...of course mistakes have been made. The Iraqi thing was in retailiation to Iran after the shah. The Iranians are still messed up. I am sorry you don't happen to like the US or it's policies but you did jump on this bandwagon after the posting of a tongue in cheek feeling of a few who, if you really read it....want the same thing that I said most Americans want... Isolationism. It won't work and if you can't take it as exactly what it was..a political joke...well I'm sorry but you seem to have no sense of humor.

Oh yeah, and Canadians are not and have never been "part of the problem." What is that in regards to? I don't know what part of what problem....but the French Canadians are your biggest problem... or at least it seems so.

[L. Cooper]

> > >
> > > A special note to our neighbors. Canada is on List 2. Since we are
> >likely to
> > > be seeing a lot more of each other, you folks might want to try not
> >pissing
> > > us off for a change.

We’re not "part of the problem" is used by the Black Panthers, or George W's simplification of the world as in you either support American action, or you are supporting the terrorists. Way too simple for this conflict, and it's frightening to hear threats from powerful forces.

As for the rest of our "histories of the Middle East", ultimate causes are open for debate. I actually don't dislike the U.S. but I dislike what it's doing in parts of the world. (One problem many of us have is American reluctance to understand that disagreement does not mean dislike or enmity). I admire the fundamental values that the founders of the nation envisioned. I fear those values have strayed, and the consequences are now thousands of dead people on both sides.

Rhetoric like the original post is not funny. If no one really thought that way, maybe it would be to some, but people are dying because too many with too much power actually do think like that.

Power is a grave responsibility. The U.S. has tremendous economic, cultural, and military power. Such power must be very carefully used because power always brings with it the potential to do great good, or great harm. Too many are ignoring, or are unaware of the harm being done in this situation, and of the fact that military force can never solve this kind of problem. It will only kill people. Both sides.

Why does Quebec keep coming up in this discussion? The Prime Minister of Canada has already declared Quebec to be a "Nation". We're not going to kill thousands of English or French over this. Could be some economic slaughters as a result, I suppose, but very few people will die. We tend to talk a lot.

The whole history of Quebec separatism involves a lot fewer deaths than the Oklahoma bombings. Our disagreements with our government tend to be long winded and boring. Occasionally we kidnap someone or blow up a mailbox, but that’s pretty rare. A long time ago some Metis and Cree got shot for trying to defend their rights and the government hung one of them, but we have never managed to work up a good Civil War like Americans did. I don't think you should be concerned. Worst that could happen to you is you'll get to have French directions on all your products sometime.

By the way, we ARE trying to have something done about the gun laws, but I don't expect Harper will have the balls to anger every city slicker in Toronto or Montreal by doing anything.

[skeet]

"The whole history of Quebec separatism involves a lot fewer deaths than the Oklahoma bombings. Our disagreements with our government tend to be long winded and boring."
Deaths? Oh, of course, another little shot at the US. That was just another terror attack. It surely wasn't a seperatist movement.
I certainly am not concerned with a bunch of silly nationalists(who think they are really french). And surely I don't worry about items or things printed in French. I am concerned with the splitting up of a great country. Economically and physically! Those pseudo-french in Quebec will not stop until they either run Canada completely or break it up. The only reason it seems you haven't had terrorism attached to the seperatist movement there is just because they think they are french...and are above such things. The splitting up of Canada would, of course, affect the US also. There were already some overtures from the maritime provinces concerning joining the US. I for one would welcom them.
As far as our civil war, most people really don't know what it was really fought over....especially people from other countries(although you may).


"I actually don't dislike the U.S. but I dislike what it's doing in parts of the world."
Well if you feel that way and post in a negative manner where a lot of more hard line conservative Americans are visiting..you must understand you will get arguments. And usually people anywhere usually feel if you ain't with us you are agin us

Lighten up man, It was a joke. Maybe one ya didn't like but still...a joke! I am done beating a dead horse

[scalerman]

I really am not concerned about Quebec "separating" from Canada. They have not thought all of that through. It does not work. It would take a very long time to negotiate all of the necessary aggreements, If they really thought about it they would become one of the most impoverished nations in the world overnight.

How long will it be before we all realize that the possibility of a terrorist attack is not based on where we live but on what we do (or do not) believe. Any person in the world whose belief system does not line up with theirs is susceptible to attack. You will notice that they oppose the killing of "innocent" people. The interesting thing is that they continue to kill those that we would consider innocent. It is obvious that their definition of innocent is slightly different than ours.

I need to aploogize for the "freeze to death in the dark " comment. My frustration lies with the softwood lumber (dis) agreement. I am trained as a log scaler and am now working in consrtuction in another province as a result of the issues related to softwood lumber. It looks to me like the American consumers need to get up in arms about it and demand some action. Now I am willing to admit that maybe my view is a little simplistic but this is how I see it. When you go shopping for lumber at Home Depot- or wherever, the clerk does not say to you here we have two choices- the cheaper manufactered in the US lumber or the more expensive manufactured in Canada stuff, no it is all the same price- the US consumer is being ripped off. Not only that the US lumber manufacturers want to get their hands on the money that is being held in trust from the tarriffs. Most of the lumber companies that operate in Canada are US owned anyway so I don't get it. From where I sit it looks like the only ones who are suffering from this whole thing are those who are buying the lumber while the price is artificially inflated. It is not about fair trade at all- it is about fleecing the public out of as much money as possible.