Shrubby's state of the union address...

[Crown]

...Well it seams that President Bush is finally focusing on something other than the war on Iraq. Here are some of his points;

1. The economy.
   1. He wishes to promote more investor confidence.
   2. Wishes to stop the 'double' taxing on divedends.
   3. Wishes to increase the federal budget on a par with average American pay-check increases.
2. Health care and social wealfare.
   1. Shake up the medicare system to take control away from beurocracy and back to doctors, nurses and patients.
   2. Allow a greater access to basic prescription medication to all Americans.
   3. Wants to put the brakes on the suing of medical practitioners.
3. Energy and the environment.
   1. Make America less dependant on external sources of energy, and thus less vunrable to international instability.
   2. Promote greater efficiency in energy resources, and also investigating 'greener' technologies to help the environment.
   3. Pledges a budget (a couple of billion) to develope new generation automobiles that will run on Hydrogen rather than fossil fuels.
4. Social welfare.
   1. I can't say that I listened too closely on this issue, so others might want to jump in, but I do know he said he wishes a ban on human cloning (I thought it was already in place).
   2. Tougher abortion laws.
   3. Wishes to promote better world image of America, especially by supporting a secure Israel and a democratic Palestine.
   4. Larger focus on helping countries in a crisis, for example food support.
   5. Wishes to help prevent the spread of AIDS in Africa, and wants to propose the imergency plane of AIDS relief. It's aim is to prevent seven million new AIDS cases, treat a further two million with medication, help childern who have suffered from the disease. The president asks for 15 billion dollars over five years.
5. War on terror (sigh).
   1. Remids Americans that the war is continuing and that the US has had successess against Al-Quade with key arrests.
   2. Mentions the SDI (Star Wars) program as being fielded (deployed?).
   3. Project Bio-Shield, requires 6 billion dollars of funding, it's purpose is to prepare an inoculation of the American public.
6. Rogue states.
   1. Wants to limit the flow of missile and nuclear tech.
   2. North Korea, and Iran are not very good regimes at the moment.
   3. But Iraq is worse and Suddam is really pissing him off.
   4. Lists the unacountability of Iraq's potential arsenals.
   5. Talks about Iraq's dogged persistance of pursuing nuclear capability, mainly the 'high strength' aluminium tubes (which has been shown by the UN as not being used for any suspicious nature, but since then has that gotten in the way of a good lie?)
   6. Tells Iraqi people that Suddam is the enemy not America, and the day he is removed from power will be the day of your liberation.
   7. On Feb 5th the US will conviene the UN security council to 'consult' but if Suddam does not fully disarm America will lead a coalition to disarm him through force.
   8. Pledges to the Iraqi people; food, medical supplies and freedom.

There might have been more, I tuned in a little late so please feel free to add more points that I missed. While I am happy to see that Shruby has finally realised that the people require a greater focus than just a war, I am hesitant to believe that a lot of this is not just smoke-screen window dressing to woo the voters. I mean if I had a vote, I would re-elect him on these promises because he has hit on a lot of the key issues that are close to my heart; the economy, medicare, and the environment. With security later (important sure, but later), he of course spoke about Iraq, and the embargo on the distribution of missile technology and nuclear knowledge. While nuclear knowledge is all well and good, what fucking right does America have to tell any government that they are forbidden to develope 'missile technology' (remember I am an Aerospace engineer and I love rockets )?

Hmm it looks like I spoke too soon, as he spends 20mins on the internal issues, and another 20mins on Iraq. I changed my mind.

Well? Questions, comments?

[Sea Skimmer]

Why did you feel then need to create another topic on this?

[Crown]

Because I was actually anottating the State of the union address as I was watcing it. When I started the thread, the other thread wasn't opened and when I submitted it, I realised what had happened. Anywho, at least this one actually contains (most) of his speech in nice point form for greater discussion amongst the board...

[Darth Garden Gnome]

According to your numbers, thats twenty-three billion dollars. And who knows how much SDI is gonna cost. There's probably another dozen billion dollars in all the other crap he said too.

On Feb 5th the US will conviene the UN security council to 'consult' but if Suddam does not fully disarm America will lead a coalition to disarm him through force.

Butthisladies and gentlemen, is where the shit hits the fan. Bush wants a war, and I think hes going to get it.

[The Dark]

Well, the points I disagree with on general principle are a3, d1, d2, f2 (Iran only, NK seems fairly well rogue to me, Iran seems to be becoming less anti-West), and f7.

[Crown]

While I never had any doubt about Bush's war, what I found interesting was that his speech on the economy, health care and energy actually made sense to me. I was like about time! Err Dalton should this thread be merged with the other one or something?

[Ted]

What alot seem to forget is that Bush Sr. said to the Iraqis after the Gulf War that "Now is the time to rise up against your oppressors". So they did. They got slaughtered by the Iraqis, who were ALLOWED by the yanks to brutally put down the rebellion.

Like they are gonna believe the yankees again, especially another bush.

[Darth Garden Gnome]

What alot seem to forget is that Bush Sr. said to the Iraqis after the Gulf War that "Now is the time to rise up against your oppressors". So they did. They got slaughtered by the Iraqis, who were ALLOWED by the yanks to brutally put down the rebellion.

Like they are gonna believe the yankees again, especially another bush.

And one of the main causes for the slaughter of teh Iraqi resistance is because the guy who was leading the US forces in Iraq (be damned if I can remember his name..) LET the Iraqi's use HELICOPTERS. He juts said "Yeah, its ok..." Even ones with guns and missles too. He didn't have any orders at the time, and it was a mess, but this is just common sense. Do you let the enemy fly fucking attack choppers? NO.

[Enlightenment]

What a fucking hypocritical moron. Shrubbyspeak translated into English

a2. wants to adjust the ratio of taxes paid on investment income vs real work such that people who don't work for a living--i.e. the rich--pay less taxes.

a3. How the fuck does he intend to pay for this?

b3. Is responding to siginificant lobbying from the medical business to reduce patient rights to sue for gross malpractice.

c3. Hydrogen is not a fuel source. It is an energy transport medium. Hydrogen cannot be harvested on earth; it must be created either by reforming hydrocarbons (read: oil) or cracking water (expensive and still needs energy, either from oil or nuclear power.)

d2. Wants to take control of other peoples' reproductive equipment.

d3. Supporting Israel is incompatible with improving the world image of the Unites States.

d4. Providing food support causes dependency. Immediate needs can be met with short-term food aid but the real problems are economic and in large part caused by pervasive abuses comitted by US-based businesses. See the United Fruit Company and ARAMCO.

d5. Shrubby is a fucking useless hypocrite on AIDS. The US vetoed a WTO agreement to make in-patent AIDS drugs available to the third world at prices it can afford. If Shrubby wants to fix the US' image in the rest of the world then the US must stop engaging in this kind of morally bankrupt behavior.

e1. Interning American citizens and foreigners without charge or trial is certainly making a big dent in the terrorism problem.... Why hasn't the Saudi problem been taken care of yet?

e2. Corporate welfare for the military industrial complex. No strategic value against terrorism.

e3. Corporate welfare for US biotech.

f. No mention of Israel as a rogue state and the only state left which continues to engage in military expansionism.

f8. Freedom like what's been going on in Afghanistan lately, where the Islamic nuts banned cable TV? Freedom like what the Chileans experienced after the CIA put Pinochet in power?

As I said, he's a fucking useless hypocrite.

[Crown]

f8. Freedom like what's been going on in Afghanistan lately, where the Islamic nuts banned cable TV? Freedom like what the Argentines experienced after the CIA put Pinochet in power?

Err that was Chile, and don't I look like an easy to woo voter now? Doh!

Oh and Enlightenment, pesimist much!

[Enlightenment]

Butthisladies and gentlemen, is where the shit hits the fan. Bush wants a war, and I think hes going to get it.[/quote]

Agreed. It's too late to back down now. Shrubby is going to launch his 400 million dollar opening day fireworks display as soon as the Pentagon gets enough ships and troops into the region. All this talk about talk is just to keep the media busy while the 100,000 troops and 3 CVBGs that are working their way into the area to take up their positions.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

A) The economy.
I - He wishes to promote more investor confidence.
How does he plan to do this? By tightening the regulations, reducing the odds of another Enron or WorldCom? Or by huge corporate tax cuts?
II - Wishes to stop the 'double' taxing on divedends.
Apparently the answer to part one of this section. But why do it? It's money that mostly never sees the light of day again?
III - Wishes to increase the federal budget on a par with average American pay-check increases.
Well, doesn't the federal budget increase as pay increases? I mean, the more you make, the more that gets taken out in taxes. Moron.

B - Health care and social wealfare.
I - Shake up the medicare system to take control away from beurocracy and back to doctors, nurses and patients.
The less overhead, the better.
II - Allow a greater access to basic prescription medication to all Americans.
We're probably overmedicated as a culture as it is. This isn't as good as it might initially look.
III - Wants to put the brakes on the suing of medical practitioners.
I actually agree with this. Malpractice insurance is driving people out of the medical business.

C - Energy and the environment.
I - Make America less dependant on external sources of energy, and thus less vunrable to international instability.
*coughcoughWe're gonna drill in the ol' ANWR!coughcough*
II - Promote greater efficiency in energy resources, and also investigating 'greener' technologies to help the environment.
It'd be believable if it weren't for the fact the whole lot of you are in the back pocket of the American petrol industry. Moron.
III - Pledges a budget (a couple of billion) to develope new generation automobiles that will run on Hydrogen rather than fossil fuels.
Oh, this just means that we'll be running on petrol vehicles out till about the end of time. You need to phase a change like that in gradually! Think hybrids first. But nooo, you can't. The Japanese made idiots out of you by beating you to it. Moron.

D - Social welfare.
I - He wishes a ban on human cloning (I thought it was already in place).
There are very good uses that cloning can eventually be put to that you won't support because it's interfering with God's work. Moron.
II - Tougher abortion laws.
I know your nickname is Shrub, but you don't have a uterus. It's the woman's goddamned body, it should be the woman's goddamned choice. Moron.
III - Wishes to promote better world image of America, especially by supporting a secure Israel and a democratic Palestine.
Nice pipe dream. One of these days . . .
IV - Larger focus on helping countries in a crisis, for example food support.
Wishes to help prevent the spread of AIDS in Africa, and wants to propose the imergency plane of AIDS relief. It's aim is to prevent seven million new AIDS cases, treat a further two million with medication, help childern who have suffered from the disease. The president asks for 15 billion dollars over five years.
Many presidents have thrown many billions of dollars at the AIDS problem. Yet, many of these presidents have come and gone, and AIDS has just gotten worse. AIDS is a problem that will only go away if Africa undergoes rapid modernization and reformation. Better focus on building infrastructure.

E - War on terror
I - Remids Americans that the war is continuing and that the US has had successess against Al-Quade with key arrests.
Yes, my fellow Americans, this whole thing isn't a boondoggle! Nevermind that we haven't gotten Bin Laden and we've scattered them like dust on the wind. Moron. Then again, there's only so many ways we can deal with terrorists.
II - Mentions the SDI (Star Wars) program as being fielded (deployed?).
'We will mount a giant "laser" on the moon.'
'Lemme guess, you're gonna call it the "Death Star"?'
Well, then again, the jobs for me are all in the defense industry, so I can't knock this one too much.
III - Project Bio-Shield, requires 6 billion dollars of funding, it's purpose is to prepare an inoculation of the American public.
Boondoggle. Playing on the fears of the typical American sheep, thus ensuring your victory in '04. Moron.

F - Rogue states.
I - Wants to limit the flow of missile and nuclear tech.
Good boy.
II - North Korea, and Iran are not very good regimes at the moment.
But Iraq is worse and Saddam is really pissing him off.
And this year's picks for the Axis of Evil are . . .
III - Lists the unacountability of Iraq's potential arsenals.
And thus, the lack of evidence is all the evidence we need to move.
IV - Talks about Iraq's dogged persistance of pursuing nuclear capability.
Where's the evidence? It's common knowledge the US can take pictures of people's license plates with sattelites. Show us some fucking pictures! Moron.
V - Tells Iraqi people that Suddam is the enemy not America, and the day he is removed from power will be the day of your liberation.
This is true enough. Saddam's reign would be a psychotic dictatorship on NationStates. He probably does refer to his subjects as "My little playthings."
VI - On Feb 5th the US will conviene the UN security council to 'consult' but if Suddam does not fully disarm America will lead a coalition to disarm him through force.
"We're gonna have us a war and there ain't shit you can do about it."
VII - Pledges to the Iraqi people; food, medical supplies and freedom.
Anything to take their minds off the fact that we're about to blow the whole lot of 'em to bits.

[Crown]

That was a very in-depth reply (yay!) but I happen to disagree with the limit of missile tech (since he isn't stating that he wants to stop selling manufactured missiles, just wants to stop people from developing their own), and as I said I am biased, I am an aerospace engineer student...

[Sea Skimmer]

What alot seem to forget is that Bush Sr. said to the Iraqis after the Gulf War that "Now is the time to rise up against your oppressors". So they did. They got slaughtered by the Iraqis, who were ALLOWED by the yanks to brutally put down the rebellion.

Like they are gonna believe the yankees again, especially another bush.

And one of the main causes for the slaughter of teh Iraqi resistance is because the guy who was leading the US forces in Iraq (be damned if I can remember his name..) LET the Iraqi's use HELICOPTERS. He juts said "Yeah, its ok..." Even ones with guns and missles too. He didn't have any orders at the time, and it was a mess, but this is just common sense. Do you let the enemy fly fucking attack choppers? NO.

They would have won with or without them. As for allowing it to happen, there where forces from quite a few other nations that could have intervened if they wanted too, none did. Ever consider criticizing say Saudi Arabia, the UK or France for what happened? They all had fighters available, they all had troops. No of course not, can't let anything get in the way of your little rant.

The US and the Coalition where there to free Kuwait, not change the government in Iraq. World opinion was very much against it, that's why the tanks turned east in Desert Saber.

Now your arguing [1] The US should have overthrown Saddam [2] The US should not overthrow Saddam. Make up your fucking mind.

[Crown]

They would have won with or without them. As for allowing it to happen, there where forces from quite a few other nations that could have intervened if they wanted too, none did. Ever consider criticizing say Saudi Arabia, the UK or France for what happened? They all had fighters available, they all had troops. No of course not, can't let anything get in the way of your little rant.

The US and the Coalition where there to free Kuwait, not change the government in Iraq. World opinion was very much against it, that's why the tanks turned east in Desert Saber.

Now your arguing [1] The US should have overthrown Saddam [2] The US should not overthrow Saddam. Make up your fucking mind.

Err, I believe the point of contention is this; did any other Head of State of the governments involved 'urge the Iraqi people to rise up against Suddam'? If so then critisise them away, if not...

[Darth Garden Gnome]

They would have won with or without them. As for allowing it to happen, there where forces from quite a few other nations that could have intervened if they wanted too, none did. Ever consider criticizing say Saudi Arabia, the UK or France for what happened? They all had fighters available, they all had troops. No of course not, can't let anything get in the way of your little rant.

Excuse me then, was ANYBODY, America included, smart enough to see that choppers for the Iraqis would've easily put down any resistance? As for winning anyways, maybe they would, that's not what I'm ranting about anyways.

The US and the Coalition where there to free Kuwait, not change the government in Iraq. World opinion was very much against it, that's why the tanks turned east in Desert Saber.

I'm only bitching about this singular point. Bush wants the people ot rise up and resist Iraq. Then (whoever) turns around and allows them to use choppers? Doesn't that strike you in the least bit dumb?

Now your arguing [1] The US should have overthrown Saddam [2] The US should not overthrow Saddam. Make up your fucking mind.

I don't know where you pulled this from. But I firmly believed the idea of ending the ground war after 100 hours, escpecially when they had the Republican Guard's balls in a vice (they were trapped someplace, can't for the life of me remmber where) was not the right choice. We could've finsished them off right there. Instead 70% (I think) of the Republican Guard gets away.

[IRG CommandoJoe]

General Swartzkoff (retired now) was interviewed and he said that he allowed the Iraquis to fly transport choppers to move around officials and whatever other bullshit they fed him. He was reluctant to allow them to do so, but I think he honestly did not think they would dare pull a stunt like that immediately after getting their asses handed to them.

[Beowulf]

Now you see, even though hydrogen is an energy transport medium, it's still able to be of use. You see, with less point source for pollution, the better able we are able to conduct emission controls on the remaining sources. So if it's a choice between 4400 cars and a 500 MW power plant, the power plant is better, because of increased efficiencys due to the larger scale.

That is why hydrogen fuelled cars are good.

[IRG CommandoJoe]

A) The economy.
I - He wishes to promote more investor confidence.
How does he plan to do this? By tightening the regulations, reducing the odds of another Enron or WorldCom? Or by huge corporate tax cuts?
II - Wishes to stop the 'double' taxing on divedends.
Apparently the answer to part one of this section. But why do it? It's money that mostly never sees the light of day again?
Investments? That money sees the light of day when you retire. Plus it encourages people to invest, which helps businesses.
III - Wishes to increase the federal budget on a par with average American pay-check increases.
Well, doesn't the federal budget increase as pay increases? I mean, the more you make, the more that gets taken out in taxes. Moron.
Agreed...
B - Health care and social wealfare.
I - Shake up the medicare system to take control away from beurocracy and back to doctors, nurses and patients.
The less overhead, the better.
II - Allow a greater access to basic prescription medication to all Americans.
We're probably overmedicated as a culture as it is. This isn't as good as it might initially look.
Agreed...he should have attacked those stupid medical commercials that make medicine seem like it's such a harmless, common product that can be taken on a daily basis. "Take Zymatrex and all of your problems will disappear!" (Shot of woman walking through field of flowers on a picnic with her family.) "Common side effects include constant nausea, mental instability, inflammation of the genitals, rashes in uncommon places, violent spasms, excessive amounts of excretion, uncontrollable emotional outbursts..."
III - Wants to put the brakes on the suing of medical practitioners.
I actually agree with this. Malpractice insurance is driving people out of the medical business.
Agreed.
C - Energy and the environment.
I - Make America less dependant on external sources of energy, and thus less vunrable to international instability.
*coughcoughWe're gonna drill in the ol' ANWR!coughcough*
WTF who cares? We've already drilled it, why not continue?
II - Promote greater efficiency in energy resources, and also investigating 'greener' technologies to help the environment.
It'd be believable if it weren't for the fact the whole lot of you are in the back pocket of the American petrol industry. Moron.
What makes you think the oil industry won't switch over to producing new means of energy? They can't hold on to old technology when the rest of the world advances, so they have no choice but to switch over or die out.
III - Pledges a budget (a couple of billion) to develope new generation automobiles that will run on Hydrogen rather than fossil fuels.
Oh, this just means that we'll be running on petrol vehicles out till about the end of time. You need to phase a change like that in gradually! Think hybrids first. But nooo, you can't. The Japanese made idiots out of you by beating you to it. Moron.
$1.2 billion is NOTHING for R&D. That IS a gradual step. Intel spent $5 billion just for the R&D a computer chip. This is an entirely new technology and $1.2 billion isn't going to cut it.
D - Social welfare.
I - He wishes a ban on human cloning (I thought it was already in place).
There are very good uses that cloning can eventually be put to that you won't support because it's interfering with God's work. Moron.
What good uses? Creating a clone army?
II - Tougher abortion laws.
I know your nickname is Shrub, but you don't have a uterus. It's the woman's goddamned body, it should be the woman's goddamned choice. Moron.
Tougher laws on "partial abortion," I think the term was. Meaning tougher laws on killing almost fully-grown babies. Do you think that's moral? I sure as hell don't.
III - Wishes to promote better world image of America, especially by supporting a secure Israel and a democratic Palestine.
Nice pipe dream. One of these days . . .
Agreed.
IV - Larger focus on helping countries in a crisis, for example food support.
Wishes to help prevent the spread of AIDS in Africa, and wants to propose the imergency plane of AIDS relief. It's aim is to prevent seven million new AIDS cases, treat a further two million with medication, help childern who have suffered from the disease. The president asks for 15 billion dollars over five years.
Many presidents have thrown many billions of dollars at the AIDS problem. Yet, many of these presidents have come and gone, and AIDS has just gotten worse. AIDS is a problem that will only go away if Africa undergoes rapid modernization and reformation. Better focus on building infrastructure.
So better just to ignore it and let Africa solve its own problems when 30 million of its population are sentenced to death? At least he's making an effort to save 7 million people from getting infected.
E - War on terror
I - Remids Americans that the war is continuing and that the US has had successess against Al-Quade with key arrests.
Yes, my fellow Americans, this whole thing isn't a boondoggle! Nevermind that we haven't gotten Bin Laden and we've scattered them like dust on the wind. Moron. Then again, there's only so many ways we can deal with terrorists.
What's wrong with pointing out all of the plots we've foiled all over the world? And do you really expect anyone in their right mind to say that we've fucked up? Yeah, that's really going to boost the public opinion and the morale of the country.
II - Mentions the SDI (Star Wars) program as being fielded (deployed?).
'We will mount a giant "laser" on the moon.'
'Lemme guess, you're gonna call it the "Death Star"?'
Well, then again, the jobs for me are all in the defense industry, so I can't knock this one too much.

III - Project Bio-Shield, requires 6 billion dollars of funding, it's purpose is to prepare an inoculation of the American public.
Boondoggle. Playing on the fears of the typical American sheep, thus ensuring your victory in '04. Moron.
...I don't know about you but I'd rather have some preparation than no preparation.
F - Rogue states.
I - Wants to limit the flow of missile and nuclear tech.
Good boy.
Agreed.
II - North Korea, and Iran are not very good regimes at the moment.
But Iraq is worse and Saddam is really pissing him off.
And this year's picks for the Axis of Evil are . . .
I say clean all of those shitholes out. As long as we do it right, why not do it? If Iraq is handled well and Bush demonstrates that he truly will do good for Iraq, he will have my support for future military actions.
III - Lists the unacountability of Iraq's potential arsenals.
And thus, the lack of evidence is all the evidence we need to move.
Especially since it once existed and it is UNACCOUNTED FOR.
IV - Talks about Iraq's dogged persistance of pursuing nuclear capability.
Where's the evidence? It's common knowledge the US can take pictures of people's license plates with sattelites. Show us some fucking pictures! Moron.
I'm not a man in black, I can't answer that. I'd like to see hard evidence too.
V - Tells Iraqi people that Suddam is the enemy not America, and the day he is removed from power will be the day of your liberation.
This is true enough. Saddam's reign would be a psychotic dictatorship on NationStates. He probably does refer to his subjects as "My little playthings."
He's a sick fucking asshole. Make his ass grass.
VI - On Feb 5th the US will conviene the UN security council to 'consult' but if Suddam does not fully disarm America will lead a coalition to disarm him through force.
"We're gonna have us a war and there ain't shit you can do about it."
(Cue "Ride of the Valkeries.")
VII - Pledges to the Iraqi people; food, medical supplies and freedom.
Anything to take their minds off the fact that we're about to blow the whole lot of 'em to bits.
This was addressed in another thread. We are using precision bombing, not massive firebombing like we did in WWII. We have many nasty weapons we could use to achieve that, such as napalm, tactical nukes, 2,000 lb bombs, cluster bombs, etc. But are we using that massive firepower to deliberately kill civilians? No. Here's the thread, BTW: http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... alm#283148

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

A) The economy.
I - He wishes to promote more investor confidence.
How does he plan to do this? By tightening the regulations, reducing the odds of another Enron or WorldCom? Or by huge corporate tax cuts?
II - Wishes to stop the 'double' taxing on divedends.
Apparently the answer to part one of this section. But why do it? It's money that mostly never sees the light of day again?
Investments? That money sees the light of day when you retire. Plus it encourages people to invest, which helps businesses.

Still, it's an awful long wait for most people. It's a nice thing if you're planning ahead, but the US economy needs help now.

III - Pledges a budget (a couple of billion) to develope new generation automobiles that will run on Hydrogen rather than fossil fuels.
Oh, this just means that we'll be running on petrol vehicles out till about the end of time. You need to phase a change like that in gradually! Think hybrids first. But nooo, you can't. The Japanese made idiots out of you by beating you to it. Moron.
$1.2 billion is NOTHING for R&D. That IS a gradual step. Intel spent $5 billion just for the R&D a computer chip. This is an entirely new technology and $1.2 billion isn't going to cut it.

So essential, what Bush said is that "we plan to do nothing with any impact." Just a bit of money towards R&D while hoping the private sector continues to take up the slack. Which I'll admit they have, but then we have the whole problem of what comes first, demand for fuel-cell cars, or the infrastructure to fuel them? Until then, since no mention has been made towards any intermediate steps, we will all still be driving petrol-powered vehicles well into the future.

D - Social welfare.
I - He wishes a ban on human cloning (I thought it was already in place).
There are very good uses that cloning can eventually be put to that you won't support because it's interfering with God's work. Moron.
What good uses? Creating a clone army? :lol:

Organ replacement comes to mind. Why worry about rejection when you can grow a new organ that happens to be a perfect match for the recipient?

IV - Larger focus on helping countries in a crisis, for example food support.
Wishes to help prevent the spread of AIDS in Africa, and wants to propose the imergency plane of AIDS relief. It's aim is to prevent seven million new AIDS cases, treat a further two million with medication, help childern who have suffered from the disease. The president asks for 15 billion dollars over five years.
Many presidents have thrown many billions of dollars at the AIDS problem. Yet, many of these presidents have come and gone, and AIDS has just gotten worse. AIDS is a problem that will only go away if Africa undergoes rapid modernization and reformation. Better focus on building infrastructure.
So better just to ignore it and let Africa solve its own problems when 30 million of its population are sentenced to death? At least he's making an effort to save 7 million people from getting infected.

You can't just focus on the AIDS epidemic. It's only a symptom of the abject poverty and poor quality of life in Africa. Yes, it's all well-and-good to throw money at AIDS, but unless you address the underlying problems, then it's just throwing good money after bad.

III - Project Bio-Shield, requires 6 billion dollars of funding, it's purpose is to prepare an inoculation of the American public.
Boondoggle. Playing on the fears of the typical American sheep, thus ensuring your victory in '04. Moron.
...I don't know about you but I'd rather have some preparation than no preparation.

But you don't need a humongous immunization program. There are simply not that many people at risk. I would understand emergency stocks that could be delivered to those who are most at-risk, but the entire country? I don't see many international terrorists who would be interested in giving some redneck hick up in the Ozarks smallpox.

II - North Korea, and Iran are not very good regimes at the moment.
But Iraq is worse and Saddam is really pissing him off.
And this year's picks for the Axis of Evil are . . .
I say clean all of those shitholes out. As long as we do it right, why not do it? If Iraq is handled well and Bush demonstrates that he truly will do good for Iraq, he will have my support for future military actions.

The problem is, can we count on Bush to truly do Iraq any good? Our track record has been dismal in cases like these. We go in, we take out the psychotic dictator, then we more-or-less leave the country in question to deal with the consequences. If we take out Saddam, we have to be willing to stay in it well after the actual shooting stops.

VII - Pledges to the Iraqi people; food, medical supplies and freedom.
Anything to take their minds off the fact that we're about to blow the whole lot of 'em to bits.
This was addressed in another thread. We are using precision bombing, not massive firebombing like we did in WWII. We have many nasty weapons we could use to achieve that, such as napalm, tactical nukes, 2,000 lb bombs, cluster bombs, etc. But are we using that massive firepower to deliberately kill civilians? No. Here's the thread, BTW: http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... alm#283148

We may not be aiming for civilians. In fact, we'll probably end up blowing up a few of our allies thanks to our "sophisticated" weapons. But civilians are going to die, that's war. There's no way around it. Maybe Saddam will take his billions and go retire quietly to an island off the coast of Africa. Then again, maybe Natalie Portman will show up outside my door and demand that I have anal sex with her, on the same day I win the lottery. The only way Saddam will leave power is feet-first. And it's not gonna be pretty. But, I admit, it has to be done.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

What a fucking hypocritical moron. Shrubbyspeak translated into English

a2. wants to adjust the ratio of taxes paid on investment income vs real work such that people who don't work for a living--i.e. the rich--pay less taxes.

All work is real work. I can't believe you of all people would say this! You seem at times to have some basic comprehension of reality; but here you go off with insanities like this. The vast majority of rich people expend a great deal of energy working very hard for their wealth. They deserve to keep the exact same amount of money as everyone else.

Morally, we should be implementing a Flat Tax in the USA. Economically, indeed, we should an inverse proportional income tax!

a3. How the fuck does he intend to pay for this?

Lowering taxes will increase government revenue. That's simple economics.

b3. Is responding to siginificant lobbying from the medical business to reduce patient rights to sue for gross malpractice.

No, not reducing patient rights to sue for gross malpractice -- The reported $250,000 limit will just be for PAIN AND SUFFERING, not total. You can still get more money than that for actual injuries; but your "emotional trauma" will be declared only worth a maximum of $250,000.

c3. Hydrogen is not a fuel source. It is an energy transport medium. Hydrogen cannot be harvested on earth; it must be created either by reforming hydrocarbons (read: oil) or cracking water (expensive and still needs energy, either from oil or nuclear power.)

Then we'll use nuclear power. What's wrong with that? We need breeder reactors and we need an efficient use of a truly safe and clean energy source, which has been held for too long by greenie lunatics.

d2. Wants to take control of other peoples' reproductive equipment.

No, he wants to ban partial-birth abortion, which is a despicable method of murdering children already partially born. I'm sorry, but even though I'm pro-choice, I simply cannot support the kind of fanatical attitude that would allow partial-birth abortions for anything except saving the life of the mother, and even then, only if it was her choice (Perhaps she'd rather choose to have the doctors try and save her child).

Life, or sentience, definitely does not begin at conception, but it probably begins somewhere around the fifth or sixth month of pregnancy, and allowing abortions in the third trimester and partial-birth abortions, for reasons of economic hardship or convenience, would be wholly unacceptable to a society with any kind of morality, no matter the basis.

d3. Supporting Israel is incompatible with improving the world image of the Unites States.

That's your opinion.

d4. Providing food support causes dependency. Immediate needs can be met with short-term food aid but the real problems are economic and in large part caused by pervasive abuses comitted by US-based businesses. See the United Fruit Company and ARAMCO.

Yes, food support causes dependency, but the real problems are economic and in a large part caused by pervasive government corruption and large-scale disorganization and incompetency in the governments of the nations in questions, which are incapable of handling the modern world (the governments, not the people in them), and are half-formed ruins of colonial structures. Simply put, the colonial powers didn't stay long enough to finish the job and that's the result.

d5. Shrubby is a fucking useless hypocrite on AIDS. The US vetoed a WTO agreement to make in-patent AIDS drugs available to the third world at prices it can afford. If Shrubby wants to fix the US' image in the rest of the world then the US must stop engaging in this kind of morally bankrupt behavior.

He did that so the drug companies would still have an economic reason to continue research into even better AIDS drugs. No revenues from the current ones, no reason for more research.

Would you really have liked for research on a cure for AIDS to have essentially halted dead?

Who's the hypocrite here?

e1. Interning American citizens and foreigners without charge or trial is certainly making a big dent in the terrorism problem.... Why hasn't the Saudi problem been taken care of yet?

They're being held as enemy combatants, in a War. As for the KSA, again, this is a War, and it shall be dealt with in due time. I think the charge that Iraq is being invaded just for oil has been largely disproved at any rate.

f. No mention of Israel as a rogue state and the only state left which continues to engage in military expansionism.

Only State left that continues military expansionism? Ha! Do I have to list them all? I love the sweeping generalizations.

Also, Israel is hardly a rogue State; the U.N declarations it is in "violation" of are in fact of a non-compulsory nature, whilst those Iraq is in violation of are of a compulsory nature.

f8. Freedom like what's been going on in Afghanistan lately, where the Islamic nuts banned cable TV? Freedom like what the Chileans experienced after the CIA put Pinochet in power?

Afghanistan is turning into a democratic State, and you cannot expect instant and total western democracy there overnight! One should instead expect the process to be gradual. As long as the rule of Law prevails, they will eventually become a western democracy, but it will TAKE TIME! You apparently have such little idea of how the real world works that you - curious since you've charged those of us who claim democracy is possible in Iraq - think that instant Democracy is possible in Afghanistan. Well, no, it isn't, and even in Iraq it won't be fully comparable to our's, and Iraq is a State with far more advanced foundations than those of Afghanistan.

As I said, he's a fucking useless hypocrite.

You're a fucking useless hypocrite.

[IRG CommandoJoe]

Still, it's an awful long wait for most people. It's a nice thing if you're planning ahead, but the US economy needs help now.

I think long-term investing is the only form of investing worth....investing...in. You get my point. Anything else is bullshit.

So essential, what Bush said is that "we plan to do nothing with any impact." Just a bit of money towards R&D while hoping the private sector continues to take up the slack. Which I'll admit they have, but then we have the whole problem of what comes first, demand for fuel-cell cars, or the infrastructure to fuel them? Until then, since no mention has been made towards any intermediate steps, we will all still be driving petrol-powered vehicles well into the future.

So you're saying that he should have put more money into it, but not put too much money into it? Before you said that you have to take gradual steps and then you said that because we aren't taking big steps we're still going to be driving regular cars.

Organ replacement comes to mind. Why worry about rejection when you can grow a new organ that happens to be a perfect match for the recipient?

To tell you the truth, I thought he meant human cloning as in whole humans. Not just organs. If he meant that cloning human organs is also banned, I agree that's stupid. But there is no point in cloning whole humans. I think that's just stupid and could create a whole mess of unecessary problems regarding clones.

You can't just focus on the AIDS epidemic. It's only a symptom of the abject poverty and poor quality of life in Africa. Yes, it's all well-and-good to throw money at AIDS, but unless you address the underlying problems, then it's just throwing good money after bad.

But until that happens, throwing money at AIDS is the best we can do. Maybe after we're done toppling regimes we can better focus our attention to Africa. I think Africa is the biggest problem of all and that it would require the most amount of work to solve. IMO, it might take decades before the situation in Africa would get any better than what it is. And relieving 7 million people of HIV is a good start.

But you don't need a humongous immunization program. There are simply not that many people at risk. I would understand emergency stocks that could be delivered to those who are most at-risk, but the entire country? I don't see many international terrorists who would be interested in giving some redneck hick up in the Ozarks smallpox.

Yes, but it could spread relatively easily. I read in another thread that on the East Coast alone 30 million people would die without immunization. It would keep spreading and many more would die. And your average dumbshit rednecks don't rank too high on the personal hygiene scale, so...

The problem is, can we count on Bush to truly do Iraq any good? Our track record has been dismal in cases like these. We go in, we take out the psychotic dictator, then we more-or-less leave the country in question to deal with the consequences. If we take out Saddam, we have to be willing to stay in it well after the actual shooting stops.

That's what we have to find out now. I think he won't fuck it up because not only elections but because even if he won't get elected again, I think he'd want to at least end his political career on a good note. And he just may actually want to do some good , believe it or not.

We may not be aiming for civilians. In fact, we'll probably end up blowing up a few of our allies thanks to our "sophisticated" weapons.

What allies?

But civilians are going to die, that's war. There's no way around it.

That's the point. No matter how accurate our weapons are, civilians are going to die. So why make it an issue?

Maybe Saddam will take his billions and go retire quietly to an island off the coast of Africa.

And hopefully get his new palace bombed like Quadafi.

Then again, maybe Natalie Portman will show up outside my door and demand that I have anal sex with her, on the same day I win the lottery.

Maybe you should talk to Wong about that...

The only way Saddam will leave power is feet-first. And it's not gonna be pretty. But, I admit, it has to be done.

Good. We agree.

[HemlockGrey]

I notice America's dwindling civil rights didn't touch his mind at all.

[Spanky The Dolphin]

Hmm, lat time I checked, I wasn't missing any civil rights.

(Post 3300.)

[Durandal]

I notice America's dwindling civil rights didn't touch his mind at all.

That's because, according to him, we never had those rights in the first place.