Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Bush was just on T.V.saying that it was the responsibility of democratic societies to make sure that citizens of other nations in the world be allowed to experience "the freedom that dwells within their hearts".

Well if it is his responsibility to do that, I guess he'll be going to the continent of Africa in the very near future as millions of people there have been oppressed and suffered under their governments and warring factions for years.

Are we talking about "Spreading freedom across the world" or are we talking about spreading freedom to countries who's freedom will benefit the western world?

The latter. There are a number of countries which have oppressive governments that our government has traditionally accepted or even supported. Like Mexico for example, there are a ton of people fighting for democracy in Mexico, and Bush is still buddies with Fox. Spreading freedom my ass.

Indeed....!!!
Let this period of global destabilisation in the name of hypocritical BS end now..!
But sadly, having learned much of history in regards to this, I can't see this stopping.... Not when the arms industry/ and their political lapdogs has so much profit to make... Slags- each and every last one of 'em.

Hmm this so sounds like the communistic doctrine. Screw that especially Democratic Countries have no right or reason to **** ujp other countries. Doesn't anyone see that there is not that much differece beetween "Bringing "Freedom" (democratic government) to other countries (by war and revpolution" or "Help other countries to the Communistic values (which actually are freedom too) by the revolution of the proletarians". I think countries don'T have the right to intevene with other countries in any way.

For the most part I agree with you. But when we see mass genocides and the like that have occured (and are occuring) that's when I think other countries should step up to the plate, step in and say, "Sit your punk ass down and sort things out without the baby killing or we will take you out!"

I think thats why we formed the UN didn't we?

"spreading freedom" yeah right.

Yes, now if only it worked!

UN is nothing but a fake body it only works when the ones who are really in power want it to work, ex. the UN couldnt do anything to stop the invasion of iraq could it, that just goes to show.............

Sadly though the U.N has a bit a bit circumvented/ignore of late....
Seemingly reduced to a state of impotence in the face of "The last superpower in the world...."

And Tony Blair.... no What are you doing man...
You are turning this once-proud nation Brits into a nation of hated twats
in the eyes of the world....
As Bill Bailey put it... If the U.S is like the bully of the playground going around punching kids and going "Give me all your sweets", Tony Blair is like the smaller kid behind the bully who occasionally leans round, shakes his fist at the victim going-"Yeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaahhhhhhh...."



Either Blair scare of getting punched by the Bully or worse he, actually believes in the sweetgrabber's crusade.... Over here we've kind of being looking at the U.S's foreign policy for ages going... "Tut tut tut.... No wonder they are always getting in trouble with those 'non-christian' countries....." and now WE are having to following them...!!
How bloody depressing... The sooner we get Howard in over here, the better.....

i hate to say it but bush will probably be america's undoing

Well I know that the UN has problems, but it is the tool that should be the solution to these problems. I mean we all see it isn't but wouldn't it be nice if it would be??

What's the purpose of "spreading" or "bringing" democracy to an African country that really has no financial means of getting off the ground?

The only thing worst than trying to force regime change to a country is trying to force a regime change to a country that will ultimately topple due to lack of finance.

Iraq and other middle Eastern countries are rich with oil. This means 2 things. One, the US is going to get a big kick back on oil deals. Two, a robust oil industry will help fun the new government and it's actions.

And the UN si basically a joke. (especially if you are an American) They are the world authority without the power to back it up. Those guys need the power to make a decision and then put foot to ass in order to back it up.

the UN si basically a joke. (especially if you are an American) They are the world authority without the power to back it up. Those guys need the power to make a decision and then put foot to ass in order to back it up.

Yeah THATS gonna be allowed to happen by Bush and co on the Project for The New American Century programme.....

Well it shoudl be but, the US rather plays world police than help a real World Police that got the authority.
The UN has the right to and the US the power. Very Sad indeed.

I really don't see how the UN is all that much different than the US to tell you the truth.

The members of the UN (permanent members) are all countries that, throughout history, have done numerous wrongs that have completely dwarfed the wrongs done by the United States in Iraq. They are all much more powerful than the majority of the nations of the world, and they are all in this for their own slice of the pie. Germany and France protected Iraq from the US for a while because of the oil for food program (and Saddam's extra incentives). Russia is providing weapons to Iran.

Every country does things for their own best interest. It's just America chooses to resort to violence in order to get things done.

"It ain't what'cha do its the way that you do it...."

Besides in those countries the majority of people there opposed the invasion of Iraq, mainly because of the flimsy, fabricated evidence to support going in.

How about the popular concencous over in the states....?
The average Joe's opinion...?

Well that is the problem we only care for ourselves, I mean that is ok to some extend but we should do as much as we can to unify the world I think.

Here Here. By respecting it and providing help for it.... Not bombing 7 shades out of it until it conforms to our will.

Indeed.

The UN is a decent organisation to deal with certain problems but when it comes to militairy action it just doesn't fuction (the security council being one of the big mistakes)

anywayz I agree with Bardock about the rights of every independent state.

I don't think you'll find an American (aside from Napalm) who is happy to see the United States go to war in Iraq.

At the time of the war most of the country was under the impression that the intelligence gathered by our government was legitament. So support for the war was like 50/50.

After all of this, I'm pretty sure that the majority of the country is opposed to the war...but the general concencus feel we need to stay in there until the job is done.

I'd like to think that a war with Iran would bring out this generation's version of the 70's style protesting.

I don't know if that will happen. Today too many people are to jaded to think that they can make a difference. And alot of other people just don't care anymore.

Man, thats real good to hear... There may be some hope yet...
As I said before, screw Bush's goreverment, but we love you guys-
The PEOPLE of America.

I don'T like protesting I have to admit, I am rather conservative aboot that. For example Bush visited Germany today, and there were Protesters, god they piss me off, what has that to do with anything. If you want to make a difference go to politics don't go somewhere tos how that you are an idiot.

That'd be real sad if is were true.
Sure. Apathy is a real tempting drug to get into in the face of adversity and the illusion of powerlessness. But for the hopes of mankind and this big old ball we call Earth I hope we can kick the habit.

If you guys impeached Clinton, then how come no-one's attempted to do that with Bush....?

Protestors are not idiots they let the people know the validity of their own concerns about certain matters....That they are not alone hopefully inspiring hope among the populous.

(Even if "Those in charge" don't listen...)

Remember the brave sacrifice of the people of Tianomon(Sp?) square..?
It may've been a slaughter, but the world was awakened to the plight of the Chinese people there....

London saw a record turnout of people protesting against invading Iraq,
and im real proud of that, cause, even if that Knob Balir illegally involved us in this whole illegal fiasco, then its good that the people of the world know that the actions or one brownnoser do not speak for us all, if anything....

And MANY of them ARE politically active...

Tony Blair has never had such a (rightfully) hard time of it.....

BTW.. On tv just now it has just been revealed that Downing Street falsified the statement that the parliment mostly backed action the legal side of it all had been bullshit and pushed through by (Presumably)Blair's cronies....

Give him time.

I'm wondering what will happen to Bush and his office if they have to resort to the draft. I'm sure the whole country would get off their ass and protest to that. And opposition to the draft would get a lot of support.

Personally, if the US has a draft, I'm just flat out refusing to go. Arrest me, stick me in an entournment camp...whatever they want. If I'm taking up arms it will be to protect my life and defend my country.....not to pick on other countries.

Well I didn't say it isn't a strong device but I don't like it. Its something different if you are in a country that opresses youj but you have the freedom to speak in my country you could write to a newspaper, you can become part of a political party, you have many options, but for me at least the protests that go on in my country are by left wing socialists without work that just think its cool to do ( they interviewed 3-4 people of the protests today and they had no clue what they were talking aboot just "Bush is bad" great arguement dumbass) What the people in China did or also in East Germany on the other hand is admirabnle, stupid but admirable.

I agree with everything that you have just said...!

And Good man, Link I (And many others in this world) well and truly salute your ethics on this...!!

oh...and my country's allies as well.

No one's picking on the Brits and getting away with it. (unless it's us )

Hey we fought two wars with em and lost, we deserve picking on them

LOL at the tragic so-near-to-the-truthness-of-it-all

Cheers Bud.

yeah, germany is the inventor of the Olympic thought:
participating is more important than winning

Oh well, we kick as though, well in the beginning at least

Munich 5-1

and

1966 at Wembley.....

("Yeah but Sadako, the Germans aside from that always seem to whup you in important football tournaments..."

Yeah...I know.....

freedom and bush should never be put into the same sentance..

I love it when people who have no understanding of the UN dismiss it's relevance! It's so ridiculous...If you have any grasp of international diplomacy and international law, then you will never underplay the significance of the UN. It is vital.

As for Bush, it's not really a suprise that he says things like that any more...No matter where he is or what he is speaking about, he always uses the platform to turn in a few more references about Iraq and the promotion of freedom. It's what American voters see as his 'steadfastness' - other people see it as belligerence masked as political opportunism.

Of course, the US has no right to prescribe the political persuasions of any country other than it's own. That power is for the people to dictate and real international coalitions to help render.

how can people believe that? I mean yeah he is a bad president, but people make his term out to be the worst thing to happen in the worlds history. you know veitnam was much much worse for America than Iraq, maybe not globally but at home it tore the country apart. America survived Veitnam. I believe that bush will probably one day be looked up to for what he is doing. you know how history gets misconstrued. I am sure things will only get better in Iraq after getting worse. Soon after bushs term someone will come in and with time the mess will be cleaned up and the country will have some form of goverment. either that or this will be remembered in history as a grand idea to liberate a country. History always gets turned ass around like that.

One good thing out of Iraq was the voting that occured. I think that is inspiring. More than half of the country turned out to vote, while under threat of death. that is a nice example of how strong the idea of freedom can be. I also think that Bushs statement of it being peoples duty to spread freedom was just his way of making up for his previous statements of, your either with us or your against us, oh...and that other one...America doesnt need the rest of the worlds authority to take Iraq. LOL Of course he could just apologize and withdraw his terror machine out of everyones ass and let the healing of Iraq and America begin, but he is of course a christian texan.

Oh yeah, just leave them to rot - they have no oil - screw them!!

I think Link was trying to say that you first need more stability both political and economical before bringing democracy will change anything

Oh right, silly me...because in Iraq people are soooooo politically and economically stable.

no but in Iraq they have oil

and last I checked Link didn't decide the US foreign policy

Lil you're absolutely right. America should spend their time and interests in places like Africa or hell, Sri Lanka and other places deeply affected by the tsunami. America shouldn't be wasting hundreds of billions of dollars to fund a war when it gives like half a percentage of that to help tsunami victims. It's disgusting.

But, if Bush's agenda is to "spread freedom" to the world...why not start in the Middle East where there is an abundance of one of the most valuable resources in the world. Why is Saudi Arabia such a wealthy country?

If America is going to destroy the whole country and try to rebuild it and make it an "example" of the "newly spread freedom" then I'd think they would want to pick a country that could financially thrive with a relatively small investment.

Fire> What are you talking about? I have old JW on speed dial just incase he needs help with foreign policy decisions....how do you think we got in this whole mess anyhow?

...
Looks more like Bush is spreading WAR to be honest...
And who says the rest of the world wants that?

GW is full of shit. It isn't the responsabiltiy of free societies to spread their ideals. There are some countries in this world where citizens have no rights. If Bush wants to share the freedom of this society, truely share the freedom, he would open our country to all the oppressed people of the world. Now, I'm not for unchecked immigration...no one in their right minds would be. But the the theory is just as legitimate as his idea of spreading freedom. If he wanted to right wrongs, then we would be in practically every third world country on the planet. Instead, we're in a country where the ruler tried to off his daddy. A country where there's oil. And let's not confuse freedom with cheap oil. It's odd that the price of oil is back up to over fifty dollars a barrel, when we invaded a country that produces so much oil. Why? It isn't because we are really there to promote freedom. It's because this administration can't allow the price of oil to drop because it would prove that we went to war for cheap oil(especially in light of the fact that no WMD were found)

Does anyone want to hear my impression of Bush? where he says the same cliche over and over again?

It is plain to see that it is now well-known that President Bush and his 'freedom' plight is just yet another part of political rhetoric that has plagued his first term, and by the looks of things, his second term also. The Omega has correctly, and most importantly, placed and labelled out the most autocratic and repressed governments and dictatorships in this world; and the message is quite affluently clear, as all those nations are seemingly absent from Bush's "Axis of Evil"; and to which The Omega strategically pointed out the 'oil' business.

With the Middle East colonialism by the Bush Administration, also in style by the British Empire which took control over the former Ottoman Empire and created the Middle East for its own goals, and after World War II, the United States took over as the world power and usurped the British rule, people need to also look into Central Asia, where the routing of pipelines is vastly important for the oil expenditure; which explains why US aid towards Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan is rather high, and also in Turkey, where US aid is only seconded by Colombia. So while we are muddled and given such creative talk, just look what's underground, the oil, and everything makes sense.