?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

GW Bush talkin' some shit.

From some article I just read on CNN:
Appearing with British Prime Minister Tony Blair at the NATO summit in Turkey, President Bush said Monday that the insurgents were taking hostages because "They can't whip our militaries."

"What they can do is get on your TV screens and stand in front of your TV cameras and cut someone's head off in order to get us to cringe and retreat. That's their strongest weapon," he said


That's fucking sweet, dude. Keep struttin' around and shaking off gruesome murder after gruesome murder. We'll see how ridiculous "their strongest weapon" is when they get a hold of one of YOUR daughters and cut her head off.

Comments

( 8 comments — Leave a comment )
queencity
Jun. 28th, 2004 05:10 pm (UTC)
hey, i was just saying yesterday that someone should kill one of his daughters and then he'd know how it feels. then my friend pointed out that it would only fan his flames, which is true. did you see fahrenheit 9/11 yet? it's G.O.O.D.
vespa59
Jun. 28th, 2004 05:33 pm (UTC)
If I say "no", and then you say "What the hell? Have you been in the wilderness since it was released??", then I can say "Yes. Yes I have."

We left on Friday right after work to go camping and just got back last night and were hella exhausted. I'd like to try to see it tonight, but I have to pack because I leave tomorrow for a week of travel. Arrrrrgh!

I might try to see it anyway.
vespaden
Jun. 28th, 2004 05:24 pm (UTC)
Well yeah, that's their "strongest weapon." Ummm, that and, a couple'a thousand roadside bombs, a few million AK-47's, some mortars, grenades... oh yeah, and a whole country of people who have a loved one who died because we invaded (ooops, uh "liberated") their country.

Yup, the sound of freedom... let it ring.
rillifane
Jun. 28th, 2004 10:44 pm (UTC)
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

Do you seriously believe that the President does not comprehend that the death of any individual is horrible for his family?

Are you suggesting that a willingess to continue on to his goal in the face of the killing of a soldier is some sort of proof that he is an asshole. If that's so then Abraham Lincoln was the biggest asshole president ever and Woodrow Wilson and FDR aren't far behind.

At the beginning of our bombing campaign against Nazi Germany we were taking 10% casualties with every mission. FDR ordered the bombing to continue despite the appalling loss of life. He made radio speeches talking about the need to continue despite the loses.

I take it that you would have said "We'll see how you react when they shoot up one of YOUR sons."

If not then why not?

Should Lincoln have surrended to the South? why not?

Should Wilson have refused to send Americans to die by the thousands in World War One. why not?

Should FDR have been voted out of office for failing to quit fighting the Nazis and the Japanese despite the horrible suffering caused to hundreds of thousands of American families? Do you think he must have been a callous bastard? A moron? Why not?

vespa59
Jun. 29th, 2004 08:45 am (UTC)
You're trying too hard.

Of course I believe that Bush realizes that the loss of someone is hard on their family. All I was saying is what everyone already knows: Our "President" chooses to conduct himself publicly like a wild-hair-up-his-ass redneck, at the expense of diplomacy and tact. People start getting their heads cut off, you don't stand up and start yelling, "IS THAT ALL YOU GOT? FUCKING PUSSIES!!"

rillifane
Jun. 29th, 2004 10:10 am (UTC)
Wrong. That is EXACTLY what you do.

The entire point of the actions that the terrorists are taking is to dishearten and demoralize their enemy. To the extent they suceed they are encouraged to continue, enhance their prestige, and win new recruits.

There is no "diplomatic" reply to terrorists that is appropriate other than open, defiant contempt coupled with an expression of grim resolve to kill them all (and action to effect that resolve).
(Anonymous)
Jun. 29th, 2004 11:05 am (UTC)
Do you think you'd be able to explain that to Paul Johnson's wife or mother, or Patrick Berg's mother, Keith Maupin's mother...maybe Daniel Pearl's new baby son, who, unfortunately, will never know what a gifted individual his father was? Do you think you could look them all in the eye and say "it's ok, we got those bastards right where we want them now, sorry your kid had to die in the process..." and live with yourself? I doubt it. I understand the point you're trying to make, though, but butchering innocent people on camera and then posting that on the internet or burning their bodies and dragging them thru the streets is an awful lot of blood to have on your hands at one time.
rillifane
Jun. 29th, 2004 11:17 am (UTC)
Could FDR look into the face of the four hundred thousand mothers who had their sons killed and say "we beat the Japs and Germans..too bad your kid had to die in the process"?

War is awful bloody business. People die.

Either the war is worth fighting or it is not.

Argue, if you will, that it not worth fighting but spare me this type of response that is proof positive that either you are playing shoddy partisan games or are a witless moron without the slightest grasp of reality.
( 8 comments — Leave a comment )