Anyone else get the sense that Bush is irrelevant?

[anticlimates]

But he has had support for his "initiatives and requests".......Are you suggesting that the likes of the United Kingdom, Australia, Italy, Japan etc are irrelevant? Or were they bribed and/or threatend? If yes, can you prove it?

Which initiatives and requests?

It would seem he's been refused much more lately than suported.

I'm afraid I'm not getting your picture because it's not drawn very well at all.

[anticlimates]

Canadians love that difference,but they are cowards by nature. What was your dittie: "stick your head in an oven"? Yep, that's a Canadian alright.

Our "dittie"? I missed that one.

Besides the fact that your "take" on Canada don't mean squat, I think you've got it backwards.

Americans are the cowards. Kill 3000 of them and they're all shitting their pants....even years later.

Is life worth living when you're always afraid?

America acts as if terrorism was invented on 9/11. They think the realatively small loss of life on 9/11 excuses all the subsequent paranoid, neurotic, and violent behaviour by their leadership.

America is now a nation of mice staring out of their holes with wide nervous eyes. The courage to even challange their bad leadership evades them.

[Stoker]

Which initiatives and requests?

It would seem he's been refused much more lately than suported.

I'm afraid I'm not getting your picture because it's not drawn very well at all.

Since you are having a problem understanding me, I'll from here on out, for your benefit, type very slow.......

WRT initiatives and requests, I'll point to Iraq and the war on terror in the cases of all the nations I mentioned.........

I'll also add, in the case of Japan, the reworking of their laws to allow the Japenese to take a more "pro-active" role on the world scene, namely the potentail of growing hostilites with China over Taiwan and North Korean nuclear prolifaration.

Besides the fact that your "take" on Canada don't mean squat, I think you've got it backwards.

Americans are the cowards. Kill 3000 of them and they're all shitting their pants....even years later.

Is life worth living when you're always afraid?

I think you are a very confused lad........how does America's responce to 9/11 disprove that Canadians are not cowards? What would the Canadian responce had of been? What was the nations mood after a handful of soldiers died in Afghanistain? I hope you respect the sights rules when you respond.........

America acts as if terrorism was invented on 9/11. They think the realatively small loss of life on 9/11 excuses all the subsequent paranoid, neurotic, and violent behaviour by their leadership.

America is now a nation of mice staring out of their holes with wide nervous eyes. The courage to even challange their bad leadership evades them.

Again, how does this disprove ft.niagara's points on Canada?

[ft.niagara]

Germany loves to criticize US President George W. Bush's Middle East policies -- just like Germany loved to criticize former President Ronald Reagan. But Reagan, when he demanded that Gorbachev remove the Berlin Wall, turned out to be right. Could history repeat itself?

Many Germans don't like President George W. Bush and like to criticize his foreign policy. But could Bush be right?

Quick quiz. He was re-elected as president of the United States despite being largely disliked in the world -- particularly in Europe. The Europeans considered him to be a war-mongerer and liked to accuse him of allowing his deep religious beliefs to become the motor behind his foreign policy. Easy right?.....

Could George W Bush Be Right?

This is from the english Der Spiegel online, please read the whole article. I think stick in the muds will always be stick in the muds. They never seem to "grow up".

What's your name? Anticlimates? Anticlimates (Stick in the Mud), glad to meet you.

[ft.niagara]

America is now a nation of mice staring out of their holes with wide nervous eyes. The courage to even challange their bad leadership evades them.

I think the referenced quote brings up an interesting dilema. While it is not a personal attack, it is an attack upon something I take personally: my country. To respond to such a dittie, I have to attack the country the poster is from in a vicious way, or the poster himself. The forum rules do not allow personal attacks, so then I guess I am supposed to viciously attack Canada and its citizens. Is this the idea?

[ft.niagara]

Kudos to Martin for staying out.  Now revenge will be exacted in the form of trade pissiness.  Oh well, we've been putting up with that for a while now.

What's this little problem with "mad cow" disease which doesn't seem to go away. How come? Can't you fix a problem, and keep it fixed? You did seem to "fix" the SARS virus problem though, thank God.

[Stoker]

I think the referenced quote brings up an interesting dilema. While it is not a personal attack, it is an attack upon something I take personally: my country. To respond to such a dittie, I have to attack the country the poster is from in a vicious way, or the poster himself. The forum rules do not allow personal attacks, so then I guess I am supposed to viciously attack Canada and its citizens. Is this the idea?

The best policy is to just not "feed the trolls"

Oh, and take notice of my quote

[moderateamericain]

America is now a nation of mice staring out of their holes with wide nervous eyes.  The courage to even challange their bad leadership evades them.

I think the referenced quote brings up an interesting dilema. While it is not a personal attack, it is an attack upon something I take personally: my country. To respond to such a dittie, I have to attack the country the poster is from in a vicious way, or the poster himself. The forum rules do not allow personal attacks, so then I guess I am supposed to viciously attack Canada and its citizens. Is this the idea?

the problem with that is, you make no point to anyone when you attack them, their culture, or their country, i appreciate your zeal however by lashing out you only feed into there generalizations that Americans are all gun toting, footballwatching, beer drinking, cowboys. (which i happen to be) however if you really wanna make a point, use your brain, think it through and find an answer that actually has a point. I know you can do it

[anticlimates]

America is now a nation of mice staring out of their holes with wide nervous eyes.  The courage to even challange their bad leadership evades them.

I think the referenced quote brings up an interesting dilema. While it is not a personal attack, it is an attack upon something I take personally: my country. To respond to such a dittie, I have to attack the country the poster is from in a vicious way, or the poster himself. The forum rules do not allow personal attacks, so then I guess I am supposed to viciously attack Canada and its citizens. Is this the idea?

I think you should report it.

And while you're at it, include the original quote by you that I was responding to:

Canadians love that difference, but they are cowards by nature.

Don't you just love catching someone with both feet in the hypocrisy jar?

[anticlimates]

Back on topic:

Iran Signs Nuclear Fuel Deal With Russia

BUSHEHR, Iran (AP) - Iran and Russia ignored U.S. objections and signed a nuclear fuel agreement Sunday that is key to bringing Tehran's first reactor online by mid-2006.

read rest here

Main Entry: rel·e·vant

Function: adjective

1 a : having significant and demonstrable bearing on the matter at hand

So tell me, how is bush relevant in this situation? He's being forced to watch on the sidelines and chew on a little bone Putin tosses him. And surprise, he's chewing on it!

[moderateamericain]

Back on topic:

Iran Signs Nuclear Fuel Deal With Russia

BUSHEHR, Iran (AP) - Iran and Russia ignored U.S. objections and signed a nuclear fuel agreement Sunday that is key to bringing Tehran's first reactor online by mid-2006.

read rest here

Main Entry: rel·e·vant

Function: adjective

1 a : having significant and demonstrable bearing on the matter at hand

So tell me, how is bush relevant in this situation? He's being forced to watch on the sidelines and chew on a little bone Putin tosses him. And surprise, he's chewing on it!

nuclear fuel in not nuclear weapons, at least last time i checked.

[Stoker]

So tell me, how is bush relevant in this situation? He's being forced to watch on the sidelines and chew on a little bone Putin tosses him. And surprise, he's chewing on it!

You can't, until the entire scenario has played itself out. IOW, we will have to wait and see what the end result is......Do you think Bush/America and Israel will allow Iran to aquire nuclear weapons?

But if you wish to speculate on what the outcome will be, I guess that it will be a US strike on all of Iran's nuclear sites, which will in effect make the transaction done by Russia and Iran irrelevant.

[ft.niagara]

Canadians love that difference, but they are cowards by nature.

Don't you just love catching someone with both feet in the hypocrisy jar?

Hypocrisy? I call you a coward, which you are, and you accuse all Americans of shitting their drawers because a measly 3000 people get killed. What a silly perspective you have on hypocracy.

Furthermore, who cares whether Canadians think Bush is irrelevant. What a silly topic. I got a better topic, Is Canada Relevant?

[ft.niagara]

the problem with that is, you make no point to anyone when you attack them, their culture, or their country, i appreciate your zeal however by lashing out you only feed into there generalizations that Americans are all gun toting, footballwatching, beer drinking, cowboys. (which i happen to be) however if you really wanna make a point, use your brain, think it through and find an answer that actually has a point. I know you can do it

Instead of lecturing others on propriety, how about you learn where the shift key is. Sometimes you bother to use it, but most of the time you don't. It is difficult to take you seriously, when you have such a problem with such a simple issue.

[anticlimates]

So tell me, how is bush relevant in this situation? He's being forced to watch on the sidelines and chew on a little bone Putin tosses him. And surprise, he's chewing on it!

You can't, until the entire scenario has played itself out. IOW, we will have to wait and see what the end result is......Do you think Bush/America and Israel will allow Iran to aquire nuclear weapons?

I can't what? It's already played out....read the news. Putin is doing what he wants, and the bone he threw chimpy was a pledge to collect up all the spent rods. It's a done deal, it's played out.

Chimp and his pals are already falling over themselves to pretend this is all A-OK. Know why? Because he's not relevant in the situation anymore and he knows it.

What, exactly, is Israel/America/et al going to do about it? Piss all, that's what. In case you haven't noticed America is stretched out militarily. There is not enough gas left to put Iran (and a coalition of Arab states which would surely jump to help them) down without major destruction on both sides.

Do you honestly think America would ignite the whole region in war just to take the bomb away from Iran? Bush bluffs and everyone knows it. Just like he'd never admit he smoked pot, he'll never admit he can't stop Iran from doing what it wants.

[anticlimates]

Back on topic:

Iran Signs Nuclear Fuel Deal With Russia

BUSHEHR, Iran (AP) - Iran and Russia ignored U.S. objections and signed a nuclear fuel agreement Sunday that is key to bringing Tehran's first reactor online by mid-2006.

read rest here

Main Entry: rel·e·vant

Function: adjective

1 a : having significant and demonstrable bearing on the matter at hand

So tell me, how is bush relevant in this situation?  He's being forced to watch on the sidelines and chew on a little bone Putin tosses him.  And surprise, he's chewing on it!

nuclear fuel in not nuclear weapons, at least last time i checked.

I'm not sure I understand your point.

My point is that this is something that Bush was STRONGLY against. Demonstrating Bushs new irrelevance, it's going ahead anyway.

Spent fuel rods are somethign that can be processed to provide the main ingredient to nukes. The bone thrown to Bush that he's happily chewing on is that part of the agreement is Iran will return the spent rods. Nice of Putin to give Bush a little face saver. He didn't have to.

Next up America will want the IAEA in there.....watch. More bluster and demands by the irrelevant Bushies. Answer from Iran will be no. Russia will back 'em up. What will CONdi and her Bush do?

Irrelevance = ineffectual.

[ft.niagara]

Did it ever occur to you that Bush is not stupid. He knows the Iranians are not good for their word. He does not want to attack Iran, but if they get the bomb, he can wash his hands and sleep tight because it is Europe's impotance, and Russian colaboration. One advantage the US does have from the nut cases in the Middle East is distance. Except for the delivery by a freighter, or through Canada perhaps, Europe is more at risk than the US. Anything is possible, but i would expect a bomb blast in Rome or Paris MORE likely than in NYC. The US can say "we had out assurances".

The Bush administration has positioned the US well. Iraq is in the heart of the middle east. The US will not be leaving there soon. Oh, and don't dismiss the possibility of an accident happening to the Iranian reactor.

[anticlimates]

Did it ever occur to you that Bush is not stupid.

Yes...before I got some real exposure to him.

No there's no doubt in my mind that he's hopelessly stupid.

[Stoker]

I can't what? It's already played out....read the news. Putin is doing what he wants, and the bone he threw chimpy was a pledge to collect up all the spent rods. It's a done deal, it's played out.

Chimp and his pals are already falling over themselves to pretend this is all A-OK. Know why? Because he's not relevant in the situation anymore and he knows it.

What makes you think it's played out? Do you think that America and Israel will not respond?

Also, can you back up your statement about the Americans being "A-OK" with the deal? Senator John McCain is already calling for the G8 to ban Russia from the next summit.

What, exactly, is Israel/America/et al going to do about it? Piss all, that's what. In case you haven't noticed America is stretched out militarily. There is not enough gas left to put Iran (and a coalition of Arab states which would surely jump to help them) down without major destruction on both sides.

Do you honestly think America would ignite the whole region in war just to take the bomb away from Iran? Bush bluffs and everyone knows it. Just like he'd never admit he smoked pot, he'll never admit he can't stop Iran from doing what it wants.

What makes you think America can do "piss all" about?

They could use their forces in Iraq and Afghanistain, to support a war, then reinforce their troops in the region with units from Germany and South Korea (Which the United States announaced already will begain to start coming back to the United States itself), added to countless Reserve formations and National Guard units. It's been the policy (I think made law) of the United States for decades to be able to fight two concurrent major wars and one minor war. I'd count the war in Iraq as major, and the war in A-stain as minor......

With that said, I doubt very much that the United States would even need to invade Iran......The Israels knocked out Saddam's reactors in the early 80s with a handful fighters.......I'm quite confident the Americans could scrape up some stealth bombers and some Green Berets to deal with Iran......

Would you think Saddam thought Bush bluffed him and that the "threats" (more like promises) of the Bush Administration don't come true?

[I miss Reagan]

Ft. Niagra,

Stoker is right. I think you are taking the bait of the trolls. This is exactly what they want, to spew their irrational vitriol and get you all fired up. Most of these anti-Bush trolling threads are easy to spot. Responding to the insanity only perpetuates the thread and encourages them. There are a couple of posters on the forum who use slander as their primary debating tool.

[anticlimates]

So, ya'll think Bush (or Israel) will attack Iran if they get the bomb. OK Fine...

What if Iran just goes ahead with what they're doing with their reactor?

The deal with Russia is done......it's done. No debate.

Let's say that they refuse to let the IAEA in (which is likely) and there's no way for anyone to confirm that all the spent rods are being returned to Russia.

What then?

Should the newly irrelevant Bush attack? Will he? Surely he won't think this "axis of evil" member can be trusted....?

[Stoker]

What if Iran just goes ahead with what they're doing with their reactor?

After GWB's statement last tuesday, I go along with what he said.......All options are on the table.

The deal with Russia is done......it's done. No debate.

Perhaps the paper deal, but the entire Iranian nuclear ordeal is far from over........

Let's say that they refuse to let the IAEA in (which is likely) and there's no way for anyone to confirm that all the spent rods are being returned to Russia.

What then?

As GWB said himself, all options are on the table.

Should the newly irrelevant Bush attack? Will he? Surely he won't think this "axis of evil" member can be trusted....?

How is GWB "newly irrelevant"? Have you refuted my claim that GWB has not followed through on any of his postions as of yet? Did I miss it? Did you miss my question of you?

Here it is:

Now again, the countries that you claim feel that GWB is irrelevant to are themselves irrelevant to United States and it's coalition. Now this begs the question, which one of these "sides" is the most relevant to the world itself? The one that achieves it's objectives, or the one that fails.

The proof is simple.......who's end game was acheived?

Now since I've answered most (if not all) of your questions, would you answer mine? I'd hate to thing all you are doing around here is trolling....

[anticlimates]

What if Iran just goes ahead with what they're doing with their reactor?

After GWB's statement last tuesday, I go along with what he said.......All options are on the table.

Wah? That's your answer? What are you, a pot-smoking truth-dodging President? I'm asking you, not chimp!

Newsflash, I don't think Iran is hanging on your every word. You can be straight with us here!

Perhaps the paper deal, but the entire Iranian nuclear ordeal is far from over........

The "ordeal"? Bushs ordeal of having to accept something he doesn't like, you mean?

Iran has struck a deal with Russia. That's a done deal. Period. The "ordeal" is indead far from over....in spite of losing relevance Bush and cast will make a lot of noise over Iran. That will be an entertaining "ordeal" indeed!

As GWB said himself, all options are on the table.

You deferred your ability to think to him again! I'm not interested in the administration one-liners. If I had a dime for every time I've heard one of those ditto-heads tell us "all options are on the table" I'd be a rich man! It means nothing. All options are NOT on the table....politically or realisticly.

Again, I remind you....Iranian agents are not trolling this site hanging on your every word. Let's step away from the administration talking points......put down the koolaid!

[Stoker]

Wah? That's your answer? What are you, a pot-smoking truth-dodging President? I'm asking you, not chimp!

Newsflash, I don't think Iran is hanging on your every word. You can be straight with us here!

And I gave you my answer, which is I beleive the same as GWB.

If you want to know my personnal prediction, I'd say after the European diplomatic efforts fail (which I'm sure they will), the United States will go to the UN seeking trade restrictions (ie embargo) on Iran. Then when the UN route is vetoed by Russia (or France or China), you will see an ultimatum given by the United States to Iran (akin to what was given to Iraq), then when the deadline passes (which it will) you will see "Shock and Awe two", which will succede in taking out the Iranian nuke sites.

After that, the next move will be decided by the Iranian government.......with their choices being:

1. Stay in power (for the time being), agreement to international inspectors, stop funding terror groups and agree to democratic reforms

-OR-

2. "Shock and Awe three", which will see the decapitation

of the Iranain government and miltary leadership. After that, the miltary can choose to stand down, and allow progressive, democratic Iranian elements to set-up a new elected government. If the military doesn't choose this option, they would be pummeled into submission by the American airforce and special forces, and perhaps limited amounts of regular, conventional forces.............

The "ordeal"? Bushs ordeal of having to accept something he doesn't like, you mean?

Iran has struck a deal with Russia. That's a done deal. Period. The "ordeal" is indead far from over....in spite of losing relevance Bush and cast will make a lot of noise over Iran. That will be an entertaining "ordeal" indeed!

By ordeal, I mean Iran developing nuclear technology.........which as I pointed out, is far from over.

You deferred your ability to think to him again! I'm not interested in the administration one-liners. If I had a dime for every time I've heard one of those ditto-heads tell us "all options are on the table" I'd be a rich man! It means nothing. All options are NOT on the table....politically or realisticly.

Again, I remind you....Iranian agents are not trolling this site hanging on your every word. Let's step away from the administration talking points......put down the koolaid!

Now since I've answered most (if not all) of your questions, would you answer mine? I'd hate to thing all you are doing around here is trolling....

Here's the first two:

Now again, the countries that you claim feel that GWB is irrelevant to are themselves irrelevant to United States and it's coalition. Now this begs the question, which one of these "sides" is the most relevant to the world itself? The one that achieves it's objectives, or the one that fails.

The proof is simple.......who's end game was acheived?

Here's a new one:

If Iran's goal is to develop and build nuclear technolgoy and the Russian's goal is to aid them in this venture, in contrasted with the American goal, which is to prevent this from happening, who in the end, do you think will achieve their goals?

Russian backed Iran or the United States?

[Black Dog]

If you want to know my personnal prediction....

Hmm. You forgot the bit where American troops will be greeted in Tehran with flowers and candy.

Realistically, if there's a strike on Iranian nuke facilities, it will be through American proxy forces in Israel. This will inevitably lead to retaliation by Iranian forces (if they're smart, they won't challenge the U.S or Israel directly, but use proxies such as Lebanese Hezbollah guerrilla forces or Iraqi Shia insurgents.)

The "Shock and Awe" scenario is more shuck and jive, as there's no way airpower or special forces alone could topple a government like Iran. If the U.S. wants regime change in Iran, they'll need to do it themselves, which would risk igniting the whole region in a conflict that would make Iraq lookk like Grenada.