top bar
QuickTopic free message boards logo
Skip to Messages

TOPIC:

Bush

(not accepting new messages)
10
Deleted by topic administrator 10-06-2005 11:43 AM
9
Pouncer
12-08-2003
10:57 AM ET (US)
So, Bush sucks. Stipulated.

Who among the credible replacement candidates do you like better?

Policy-wise I suspect Lieberman is the best of the bunch and there is a certain anticipatory glow about the mental image of Arafat, et al, having to negotiate with "The Jew". But I'm not at all sure such negotiations would progress to peace.

Sharpton is the most effective public speaker. For what little that's worth.

I like Tony Blair but he can't be president -- even were he to immigrate to the U.S. Ditto, say, Lech Walesa etc.

Then there are the various incarations of Howard Dean. Pick one...
8
Mark Atwood
12-03-2003
07:31 PM ET (US)
... and a willingness to negotiate with the moderates ...

There is no common ground, nothing to negotiate, between "moderates" of The Religion of "Peace" and the West.
7
Grandma Satan
11-23-2003
10:20 AM ET (US)
I think Bush's ability for self delusion stems from his religous convictions. He truly believes that there are two sides to the universe: Good(God) and Evil(Satan). If the entire complex universe is binary, then why not the entire complex socio-political situations of the US?

As far as moving into or out of a country, I'm thinking about England or Ireland; the US is declining- though I'm not sure how quickly- and until it realizes, or corrects, this I don't wanna be here.
6
Jamais CascioPerson was signed in when posted
11-22-2003
05:29 PM ET (US)
Some of us here are that scared about the direction of US politics, too. I'm startled at how many people I know are talking about where to go outside of the US if things start to go even more badly. I'm particularly startled that I'm one of them.
5
Charlie StrossPerson was signed in when posted
11-21-2003
03:06 PM ET (US)
Kirk D: root causes of terrorism? Some of the social pressure giving rise to it is endogenous, but a hell of a lot of it is emergent from the past 85 years of western diplomacy in the Middle East. Which inherited it from the Ottoman Empire. Propping up dictators like Saddam didn't help, and propping up the House of Saud today doesn't help either. Neither does supporting Israel regardless of what outrages the Sharon government commits. Putting some money into funding schools and hospitals would be a good idea -- so far it's the Wahabbites who've had a monopoly of that kind of hearts and minds campaign in the islamic world. But it's a bit late to expect an overnight turnaround. The first message is "first do no harm", and it's pretty clear that the occupation of Iraq has been a disaster in that respect.

Polish Jews in Germany are an interesting topic. I'm really alarmed about the direction John Ashcroft is driving civil rights in the US, and various other things -- Diebold corporation's voting machines, for example, proof against audit (but not election rigging) and being pushed by a company whose CEO promised to help deliver key swing states to Bush in the next election (as a major Republican donor). There's a lot of very smelly stuff coming out of the current US administration, and I am not kidding -- if I had emigrated to the USA in the 90's by now I am certain I'd be looking to get the hell out.

(My father was due to go spend September 1939 living with cousins in the old country. He came down with a summer flu in August, and by the time he was better war had broken out. The relatives in question disappeared into Auschwitz-Birkenau. When I use that particular analogy I am using it with very specific intent, not as a cheap shot. I really am that scared about the direction US politics is developing in.)
4
Kirk D.
11-21-2003
11:46 AM ET (US)
I'm sorry, Charlie. I just couldn't stay away.

First off, I would like to extend a heartfelt congratulations on the success of your protest. To hold a gathering with that many people and to have it remain peaceful despite the high state of emotions is a testament to freedom of speech and lawful protests everywhere.

I notice in your blog that you say we should be attacking the root causes of terrorism, not just the symptoms. I am interested in seeing what some of your suggestions would be to the UK and US governments for such a tact.

As to Harvard and the GC, that University might be the last place in the US to do anything to help Bush. The President is a Yale man.

Lastly, I admitted that my reference to Jim Crow laws was over-the-top so could you please do the same about your mention of Polish Jews in Germany. We Americans can be arrogant, self-righteous, and pretty damn shallow but that comment seemed a bit much.
3
Susan
11-20-2003
07:27 PM ET (US)
I saw Geoffrey Robertson QC speak at the Imperial War Museum in London on Tuesday.

He said that Harvard University is currently rewriting the Geneva Convention in secret - presumably to get round the little "problem" of Guantanamo.

He was absolutely scathing about the US proposed special military commissions to try suspected terrorists there - no rules of evidence, all staffers from the US DoD incl the jury made up of DoD lawyers (!), no appeal, only a review by Donald Rumsfeld, and can impose the death penalty. The American Bar Association apparently not happy to say the least.

I also vaguely remember that he said because of a recent ruling over a Belgian attempt to get someone (?Charles Taylor?) indicted at the ICC, it's been decided it's not applicable to serving heads of state. What Blair's position will be when he leaves office is anyone's guess, especially as last night Richard Perle publicly admitted that the attack on Iraq hadn't complied with intl law (because of course intl law is simply wrong, according to the Dickster).

The US of course is not subject to the ICC, but could be liable under GC, which is why they're trying to rewrite it I imagine.

Robertson also referred to Pinochet as having been kept under "mansion arrest" for 18 months in Virginia Water, and tonight at the protest in London one speaker congratulated the antiwar movement for having kept Bush under "palace arrest" this week, so many events (incl Powell's award ceremony at Univ London) have had to be cancelled.
Edited 11-20-2003 07:29 PM
2
Charlie StrossPerson was signed in when posted
11-20-2003
05:51 PM ET (US)
I believe that by convention visiting heads of state have diplomatic immunity. (Indeed, most countries provide limited immunity for parliamentarians against things like extradition while in office.)

Of course, once Dubya leaves office (either through not being reelected or through term limits expiring) all bets are off ... but one suspects the "honour among thieves" principle will prevail once more and keep him from being held accountable by uppity foreigners. After all, look at the tremendous shit-storm that was raised when they detained Pinochet -- and while I'm no fan of Bush, I'd have to admit that he hasn't yet called out the air force to bomb his opposition, imposed a twenty year military dictatorship, and tortured and disappeared the DLC and their families.
1
David Bell
11-20-2003
03:16 PM ET (US)
A bit late to pull it off, but if Gitmo and Camp X-Ray are a breach of the Geneva Convention, and thus a war crime, couldn't a court in Britain issue a warrant for the arrest of Dubya?

Is that the real reason they wanted diplomatic immunity?