Wartime President Impeached (1 Viewer)

[jsanders]

In the first time in our nation’s history a president might face wartime impeachment proceedings.

At a time when President GW Bush's popularity is a at all time low, he faces questions in Congress about illegal wire taping of American citizens.

The next thing we’ll probably hear from capital hill is the possibility of an impeachment trial.

Surely a local police officer would be suspended pending investigation for a similar crime. What can we expect next from this above the law administration?

 

[Rich]

At a time when President GW Bush's popularity is a at all time low, he faces questions in Congress about illegal wire taping of American citizens.

But not for kidnap, incompetence, illegal detention without trial, rendition, torture, war mongering, oops silly me, that's only foreigners

 

[BarryMK]

I heard on the Beeb this morning that his popularity rating with US citzens has gone up around 8 percentage points since his broadcast. They do say ignorance is bliss....

 

[jsanders]

I heard on the Beeb this morning that his popularity rating with US citzens has gone up around 8 percentage points since his broadcast. They do say ignorance is bliss....

I think maybe because for the first time he has admitted making mistakes. And has demonstrated a willingness to compromise on some issues.

There is a possibility that this Iraqi operation could have a positive outcome.
Especially if shows a willingness to find a solution.
You have to remember, we’re there, and taking a totally pessimistic attitude won’t solve the problem.

 

[jsanders]

But not for kidnap, incompetence, illegal detention without trial, rendition, torture, war mongering, oops silly me, that's only foreigners

And your point?

 

[BarryMK]

I think maybe because for the first time he has admitted making mistakes.

Rich will be impressed.

There is a possibility that this Iraqi operation could have a positive outcome.

Like Vietnam, where things got better only after the peasants defeated an overwhelming adversary and booted them out of their country?

Especially if (he) shows a willingness to find a solution.

Monumental breakthrough that would be. We'll keep our fingers crossed.

You have to remember, we’re there, and taking a totally pessimistic attitude won’t solve the problem.

I'm only too well aware that you're there - but your soldiers (and ours) wouldn't be out there getting butchered if your great Prez had had the intelligence to learn from history. Just because you've got the money and the killing technology doesn't mean you'll win every war you start. Perhaps if GWB hadn't watched so many John Wayne movies where the all American hero always beats the baddie and only ever gets a small flesh wound in return he would have left well alone.

The bottom line is there's a lot of good people, locals and foreigners getting killed and maimed in Iraq who would not have that misfortune were it not for Bush.

 

[ColinEssex]

In the first time in our nation’s history a president might face wartime impeachment proceedings.

You've got a snowballs chance in hell of impeaching ol' Cross Eyes.

Do you honestly think Daddy Bush and all his cronies will let that happen?

When Daddy Bush has let Ol' Cross Eyes finish playing world domination - there's Jez baby Bush in the wings waiting to carry on the warmongering.
So with all the vote rigging to get him in, the world will still hang precariously thanks to the USA Government and gawd knows where you'll invade next, I just hope its not China or North Korea or Iran or somewhere serious.

Its one thing playing about in Iraq, its another to start a nuclear war.

Col

 

[FoFa]

I'm only too well aware that you're there - but your soldiers (and ours) wouldn't be out there getting butchered if your great Prez had had the intelligence to learn from history. Just because you've got the money and the killing technology doesn't mean you'll win every war you start.

Now, your soldiers being there was not really our call, might have asked, but we didn't order, so it is kind of hard to blame GWB on that.
Also it does appear the terrorist acts have been limited to mostly the middle east countries now. Yes there was London and Spain, but really from before 9/11 those are kind of small potatos comparativly speaking. Outward appearance would suggest the the global threat has been diminished, and maybe some of their resources to spread out globally on a large scale. Sorry but I am just not as negative about it, yes I hate to see the soldiers plight, but they do seem to be doing a good job over all.

 

[ColinEssex]

Sorry but I am just not as negative about it, yes I hate to see the soldiers plight, but they do seem to be doing a good job over all.

I suspect your censored [only show good things about the USA] news didn't show the poll amongst Iraqi's living in Baghdad where the majority of those questioned, said they felt safer under Saddam than the USA, and also felt more upbeat about the future under Saddam - whereas they feel now the future is uncertain and unstable under US rule.

Col

 

[FoFa]

I suspect your censored [only show good things about the USA] news didn't show the poll amongst Iraqi's living in Baghdad where the majority of those questioned, said they felt safer under Saddam than the USA, and also felt more upbeat about the future under Saddam - whereas they feel now the future is uncertain and unstable under US rule.

Col

So a whole contry is based on a few in Bagdad, I see the Kurds didn't play into it at all.

 

[jsanders]

I suspect your censored [only show good things about the USA] news didn't show the poll amongst Iraqi's living in Baghdad where the majority of those questioned, said they felt safer under Saddam than the USA, and also felt more upbeat about the future under Saddam - whereas they feel now the future is uncertain and unstable under US rule.

Col

Actually Col I did hear this on NPR, But the version YOU got was actually taken out of context, or you’re quoting it out of context. I don’t want to generalize (the way my British cohorts here do ) but is that a British trait or just you guys?


Ya’ll should listen to NPR and PRI if you want really balanced news.

 

[ColinEssex]

So a whole contry is based on a few in Bagdad, I see the Kurds didn't play into it at all.

I didn't mention the whole country I said a poll of Iraqi's living in Baghdad. Maybe the Kurds would have a different view as possibly might the Iraqi's living in Basra where the British troops are.

Actually Col I did hear this on NPR, But the version YOU got was actually taken out of context, or you’re quoting it out of context. I don’t want to generalize (the way my British cohorts here do ) but is that a British trait or just you guys?


Ya’ll should listen to NPR and PRI if you want really balanced news.

I recalled it from a newspaper article I read. I may have not recalled it correctly - perhaps you can put it in context for us.

What on earth is NPR and PRI? I've not heard of it before.

Col

 

[Kraj]

I suspect your censored [only show good things about the USA] news didn't show the poll amongst Iraqi's living in Baghdad where the majority of those questioned, said they felt safer under Saddam than the USA, and also felt more upbeat about the future under Saddam - whereas they feel now the future is uncertain and unstable under US rule.

I'm not suprised by that at all (by the way, we've all heard that poll many times, so you can give the censorship diatribe a rest); human instinct is to fear change and embrace the status quo, even if it sucks. A battered wife usually chooses to stay with her husband. Does that mean she's better off?

What on earth is NPR and PRI? I've not heard of it before.

NPR is National Public Radio, a public-access, not-for-profit (ie., not controlled by corporate interests) radio station.

And there's no way in hell impeachment proceding will be brought against Bush. The Republicans have nothing to gain by doing so and it would be political suicide for the Democrats. The only reason he's admitting mistakes is to smooth over the Republican image and pave the way for the next candidate.

 

[jsanders]

I'm not suprised by that at all (by the way, we've all heard that poll many times, so you can give the censorship diatribe a rest); human instinct is to fear change and embrace the status quo, even if it sucks. A battered wife often usually chooses to stay with her husband. Does that mean she's better off?


NPR is National Public Radio, a public-access, not-for-profit (ie., not controlled by corporate interests) radio station.

And there's no way in hell impeachment proceding will be brought against Bush. The Republicans have nothing to gain by doing so and it would be political suicide for the Democrats. The only reason he's admitting mistakes is to smooth over the Republican image and pave the way for the next candidate.

I totaly agree. But what coll headline huh?

 

[Kraj]

We can only dream, my friend... Then again, who'd replace him? Cheney? ...Whoopee!

 

[Rich]

Then again, who'd replace him? Cheney? ...

Michael Moore

 

[Vassago]

.....me!!!!!

 

[BarryMK]

It starts here - Vass for president!

 

[Kraj]

He's got my vote.

 

[Year of the Tig]

You cannot seriously compare the plight of the Iraqis to a battered wife. I have both friends and family in Iraq. One is actually a British soldier serving in Basra. Others are Kurds. Some are in Baghdad.

I can assure you that the majority of Iraqis, from news reports, polls and what these people say, they DO NOT want the US or UK troops there and that things are WORSE than before.

That is saying something knowing what a murderous, psychopath Saddam was. Win hearts and minds? Not in the real world which is Iraq.