RIP President George Bush

Northalives

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 12, 2005
5,396
4,103
Australia
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
PORT ADELAIDE
What about Saddam Hussein killing millions of Kurds, Kuwaitis and many of his own people. But that is okay by you.

The Iraq War, no matter what the reason, ended up with the capture and killing of both Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden, and that is only a good thing.

You condemn a President elected by the people, meaning that if you bag the President, you, by extension, bag those who vote for him (remember that next time, when you vote for someone, that their failure is partly your fault for backing the wrong horse). Yet you don't condemn someone NOT elected by his people (or elected by gunpoint) who commits genocide on his people, and invades other countries and kills their people.

Where is your condemnation of Saddam Hussein or Osama Bin Laden? Did you wish them to go to hell as well?
You love your Murdoch type press don't you?

Saddam Hussein killed millions of Kurds, Kuwaitis, Iranians with American weapons, using American "advisers" and with the tacit approval of the USA Government. He just outlived his usefulness and George Senior and his capitalist mates decided to get rid of him when they were ready, so, they instigated the first Gulf war, starved and stopped medicines to the innocent Iraqi's until Uncle Sam was good and proper ready to take Saddam out and claim Iraq.

As for Bin Laden, he was the sworn enemy of Saddam Hussein! It is because people such as yourself take the Murdoch type "mainstream" media seriously and don't bother to check, that Howard, Blair and George Junior invaded Iraq using the excuse of WMD AND Bin Laden which by undertaking even the most rudimentary research, would have revealed that there were no WMD's and Bin Laden did not receive ANY assistance from Hussein. Every man and his dog with half a brain knew that Bin Laden was hanging out in Pakistan so here's a question for you? Why didn't George junior and his dick head mates invade Pakistan? Do you reckon it may have anything to do with Pakistan having nukes or that it used to buy the bulk of it's weapons from the US?

What you read and hear in the "mainstream" press isn't to be taken all that seriously because there are many, many different factors in play but for papers like the Daily Dog Turd and the Australian as well as Sky news, the easiest way to win an argument is to paint everyone as either the "good guys" or the "bad guys" and that way, those who are gullible just fall into line.

George Senior, George Junior, Clinton, Obama, Carter etc. they are all beholden to the Military establishment and big money, some more than others but nevertheless, they've all had their balls being gripped tightly by the weapons manufactures and big business: that's the real "American Way", not some bullshit fairy tales spun by Rupert and the boys and American Presidents are NEVER elected by a majority of people. How can they be when 50% or so don't vote? We are a democracy, they are a joke!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Thrawn

Hall of Famer
Jul 21, 2001
32,346
23,727
Melbourne, Australia.
AFL Club
Carlton
What about Saddam Hussein killing millions of Kurds, Kuwaitis and many of his own people. But that is okay by you.

The Iraq War, no matter what the reason, ended up with the capture and killing of both Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden, and that is only a good thing.

You condemn a President elected by the people, meaning that if you bag the President, you, by extension, bag those who vote for him (remember that next time, when you vote for someone, that their failure is partly your fault for backing the wrong horse). Yet you don't condemn someone NOT elected by his people (or elected by gunpoint) who commits genocide on his people, and invades other countries and kills their people.

Where is your condemnation of Saddam Hussein or Osama Bin Laden? Did you wish them to go to hell as well?
Fallacy of relative privation.

HW Bush was a warcriminal:

I can hardly blame the people who vote for him, most of the US voting population are clueless about the people they are voting for. Especially in an era where the internet and social media didn't exist. Pointing out the whitewashing of war crimes does not mean I like or support people like Saddam, Osama, Hitler, etc. Go troll somewhere else.
 

its free real estate

fyfe > dangerfield
Jul 30, 2018
8,275
10,144
AFL Club
Fremantle
Fallacy of relative privation.

HW Bush was a warcriminal:

I can hardly blame the people who vote for him, most of the US voting population are clueless about the people they are voting for. Especially in an era where the internet and social media didn't exist. Pointing out the whitewashing of war crimes does not mean I like or support people like Saddam, Osama, Hitler, etc. Go troll somewhere else.
Everyone is a war criminal according to Chomsky.
 

Thegibbsgamble

I beg to meg
Oct 28, 2017
4,737
2,730
AFL Club
Adelaide
You love your Murdoch type press don't you?

Saddam Hussein killed millions of Kurds, Kuwaitis, Iranians with American weapons, using American "advisers" and with the tacit approval of the USA Government. He just outlived his usefulness and George Senior and his capitalist mates decided to get rid of him when they were ready, so, they instigated the first Gulf war, starved and stopped medicines to the innocent Iraqi's until Uncle Sam was good and proper ready to take Saddam out and claim Iraq.

As for Bin Laden, he was the sworn enemy of Saddam Hussein! It is because people such as yourself take the Murdoch type "mainstream" media seriously and don't bother to check, that Howard, Blair and George Junior invaded Iraq using the excuse of WMD AND Bin Laden which by undertaking even the most rudimentary research, would have revealed that there were no WMD's and Bin Laden did not receive ANY assistance from Hussein. Every man and his dog with half a brain knew that Bin Laden was hanging out in Pakistan so here's a question for you? Why didn't George junior and his dick head mates invade Pakistan? Do you reckon it may have anything to do with Pakistan having nukes or that it used to buy the bulk of it's weapons from the US?

What you read and hear in the "mainstream" press isn't to be taken all that seriously because there are many, many different factors in play but for papers like the Daily Dog Turd and the Australian as well as Sky news, the easiest way to win an argument is to paint everyone as either the "good guys" or the "bad guys" and that way, those who are gullible just fall into line.

George Senior, George Junior, Clinton, Obama, Carter etc. they are all beholden to the Military establishment and big money, some more than others but nevertheless, they've all had their balls being gripped tightly by the weapons manufactures and big business: that's the real "American Way", not some bullshit fairy tales spun by Rupert and the boys and American Presidents are NEVER elected by a majority of people. How can they be when 50% or so don't vote? We are a democracy, they are a joke!
Kuwait profited greatly from the Iran Iraq war. They paid for the weapons saddam bought from America. Kuwait was and is a dictatorship set up by the establishment to deny oil to Persians. They've done some brutal things.

It was a general who ordered the chemical weapons strike on the kurds and he was dealt with internally for what he did. Western press don't want you to know that

The general who was a relief chief had family cop it in a Kurdish uprising and struck out. He just lost more family for his crime. The weapons he used supplied by Bush and rumsfield. Rums field needed somewhere the weapons could be tested so to make more money and also deal incase someone used them against Americans.

They were hoping to be used against the Iranian replican guard who the Americans also armed. They were a get out of gaol free card if that elite Iranian until broke the stalemate in the Iran Iraq war
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

smokingjacket

Premiership Player
Mar 30, 2014
3,527
3,611
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Liverpool
Fallacy of relative privation.

HW Bush was a warcriminal:

I can hardly blame the people who vote for him, most of the US voting population are clueless about the people they are voting for. Especially in an era where the internet and social media didn't exist. Pointing out the whitewashing of war crimes does not mean I like or support people like Saddam, Osama, Hitler, etc. Go troll somewhere else.
Chomsky's argument on Iraq is incredibly weak and disappointing. Attacking infrastructure constitutes biological warfare? What a joke. Even the diplomatic solution was ridiculous the Iraqi's were in a position of strength and would have used their military position to leverage favourable terms in any deal. Not to mention the Iraqi Army had rolled into Kuwait committing a war of aggression, the same crime Chomsky goes off his head about as being the highest crime under the Nuremberg precedents.
 

Northalives

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 12, 2005
5,396
4,103
Australia
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
PORT ADELAIDE
Kuwait profited greatly from the Iran Iraq war. They paid for the weapons saddam bought from America. Kuwait was and is a dictatorship set up by the establishment to deny oil to Persians. They've done some brutal things.

It was a general who ordered the chemical weapons strike on the kurds and he was dealt with internally for what he did. Western press don't want you to know that

The general who was a relief chief had family cop it in a Kurdish uprising and struck out. He just lost more family for his crime. The weapons he used supplied by Bush and rumsfield. Rums field needed somewhere the weapons could be tested so to make more money and also deal incase someone used them against Americans.

They were hoping to be used against the Iranian replican guard who the Americans also armed. They were a get out of gaol free card if that elite Iranian until broke the stalemate in the Iran Iraq war
One of the saddest and most criminal things that has happened due to "social media" is that news and the reporting of news can be swamped very quickly and very effectively by those who want a different story told and it causes people to not be sure of what is actually happening and therefore, they really don't care.
 

Nuggs Bunny

Premium Platinum
Oct 12, 2015
4,636
6,870
live at the Greek
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys
One of the saddest and most criminal things that has happened due to "social media" is that news and the reporting of news can be swamped very quickly and very effectively by those who want a different story told and it causes people to not be sure of what is actually happening and therefore, they really don't care.
Really? Aside from the rise in morons with blogs and gullible idiots believing them, I would have thought social media has made it harder for certain narratives to be published by certain channels given how easy it is for contradicting evidence to be posted.

The fact people don't really care is a real problem though. Anti-intellectualism in the 80's and 90's gave way to a generation who want to be interested but also just want to be right. Lots of people spanning a wide range of beliefs don't want their world view challenged anymore.
 

Catters 070911

Club Legend
Oct 13, 2017
2,115
1,981
AFL Club
Geelong
You love your Murdoch type press don't you?

Saddam Hussein killed millions of Kurds, Kuwaitis, Iranians with American weapons, using American "advisers" and with the tacit approval of the USA Government. He just outlived his usefulness and George Senior and his capitalist mates decided to get rid of him when they were ready, so, they instigated the first Gulf war, starved and stopped medicines to the innocent Iraqi's until Uncle Sam was good and proper ready to take Saddam out and claim Iraq.

As for Bin Laden, he was the sworn enemy of Saddam Hussein! It is because people such as yourself take the Murdoch type "mainstream" media seriously and don't bother to check, that Howard, Blair and George Junior invaded Iraq using the excuse of WMD AND Bin Laden which by undertaking even the most rudimentary research, would have revealed that there were no WMD's and Bin Laden did not receive ANY assistance from Hussein. Every man and his dog with half a brain knew that Bin Laden was hanging out in Pakistan so here's a question for you? Why didn't George junior and his dick head mates invade Pakistan? Do you reckon it may have anything to do with Pakistan having nukes or that it used to buy the bulk of it's weapons from the US?

What you read and hear in the "mainstream" press isn't to be taken all that seriously because there are many, many different factors in play but for papers like the Daily Dog Turd and the Australian as well as Sky news, the easiest way to win an argument is to paint everyone as either the "good guys" or the "bad guys" and that way, those who are gullible just fall into line.

George Senior, George Junior, Clinton, Obama, Carter etc. they are all beholden to the Military establishment and big money, some more than others but nevertheless, they've all had their balls being gripped tightly by the weapons manufactures and big business: that's the real "American Way", not some bullshit fairy tales spun by Rupert and the boys and American Presidents are NEVER elected by a majority of people. How can they be when 50% or so don't vote? We are a democracy, they are a joke!


You sound like you listen to the Leftist media and CNN for all your news.

I bet you are an Age reader and watch the ABC as well.

So, you believe that Hussein was just a puppet, and had no say in killing all those people?

How do you know that there were NO WMD? Because critics of the Iraq War said so?

I bet if Bill Clinton had invaded Iraq, he wouldn't have copped half the flak because the Leftie media loved him.

I know it is cool to bag conservatives, and to dismiss any sins of the Left. I bet you bought what Daniel Andrews was selling as well, hook, line and sinker.

Lefty media would love gullible people like you.
 

Catters 070911

Club Legend
Oct 13, 2017
2,115
1,981
AFL Club
Geelong
Bill will be treated with the respect he deserves

Hopefully he will be remembered as an adulterer who used his position to force an intern to suck him off, or else, and had as many affairs as Trump is accused of having.

But, no, the US Leftie media will talk about him like serial adulterer and possible murderer, JFK, who was put up on a pedestal, despite sending untrained men into a war that the US eventually lost.
 

Catters 070911

Club Legend
Oct 13, 2017
2,115
1,981
AFL Club
Geelong
Fallacy of relative privation.

HW Bush was a warcriminal:

I can hardly blame the people who vote for him, most of the US voting population are clueless about the people they are voting for. Especially in an era where the internet and social media didn't exist. Pointing out the whitewashing of war crimes does not mean I like or support people like Saddam, Osama, Hitler, etc. Go troll somewhere else.

Bush was never charged with war crimes, whereas Saddam Hussein was.

But I suppose you think you are right, and everyone else is wrong.
 

Catters 070911

Club Legend
Oct 13, 2017
2,115
1,981
AFL Club
Geelong
Have seen this do the rounds on the net countless times, and no-one ever seems to want to be the one to suggest that it's a very naked PR stunt likely put together by Bush's spin team and speech writers.

Also a very low bar that people are impressed by a bunch of amiable platitudes. Were they expecting him to write "Suck my nads Billy boy I should've absolutely flogged you" or something?

I honestly think stuff like this is why people gravitate towards what Trump presents himself as. The very disingenuous, borderline incestuous, boys club atmosphere that stuff like this letter represents is what makes people want to let a fox into the henhouse.

How do you know that it isn't sincere?

Is it because it is written by a Republican president to a Democrat one?

I bet if Clinton wrote the message, you would applaud him.
 

Catters 070911

Club Legend
Oct 13, 2017
2,115
1,981
AFL Club
Geelong
Hate to state the obvious, but the title of the thread is President George Bush. Please stay on topic.

So you think no-one is allowed to tell others to keep their nasty comments to themselves at this time?

No matter what you think of Bush, it is not the time to say the nasty comments. Either say something nice or not at all, or post your thoughts at another time.

How would you like people bagging you after you died?

The comments here just show the types of narcassistic, insensitive, sociopathic turds who post on Bigfooty, and make nasty comments about someone who passed.
 

Catters 070911

Club Legend
Oct 13, 2017
2,115
1,981
AFL Club
Geelong
Entertainment value ?

Why don't you take some control, and pull some of these guys into line, Chief?

Surely making insensitive comments about someone who died shouldn't be allowed.

But then, look who I am speaking to. I mean I have read your comments to Christians and other types you disagree with, and you embody everything that is wrong with BigFooty. I shouldn't expect you to pull other bullies into line. That would make you a hypocrite.
 

Top Bottom