Bush death will be the beginning of the civil war.

[KerrTexas]

Re: Bush death will be the beginning of the civil

Hadeka;

I believe that every individual should be capable of living in peace and to enjoy the differences between the cultures, instead of developing a hatred because of those differences.

The reasons that the U.S. Government used to enter Iraq where lies and those responsible for the deceit should be held accountable. No question about that.

It doesnt change the fact that Saddam was slaughtering thousands for differences of belief, as where his sons. This too is an abuse of authority that these leaders were entrusted with.

Saddam brough this on himself. As I recall he was challenging the U.S. to come on down and take him out. Well, we did. Perhaps he shouldnt have been so bold to make the challenge.

I truly am uncomfortable arguing with you, because I dont wish for there to be any animosity between you and myself. I have a deep respect for your culture and truly wish you all would be untouched by any acts of violence.

The history of your region is fantastic and brings awe to my mind. Amazing things that are astoundingly beautiful.

So, please, dont believe all Americans wish for war. If I had my druthers, I would like to see all guns, all weapons completely destroyed. But, unfortuantely, that is pie in the sky.

However, you and I have the opportunity to make a difference. If we can respect each other and our differences, than at least two of us have started a new way of life for ourselves and our children.

 

[RainmanTime]

Re: Bush death will be the beginning of the civil

Hadeka,

This planet doesnt have a leader except the real moral rules that must be followed from all countries including USA and Israel.

Those would be the same moral rules that were blatantly ignored and abused by Saddam Hussein in his killings of people, including many Muslims. These moral laws were also broken by the Serbs in Kosovo. That was another conflict that the US stepped into in order to save Muslim lives. You cannot say that the USA hate, or wishes ill to Muslim states, given that we have fought (and yes, our men have died) to protect Muslim lives.

Im with you, the government of Saddam was an unfair system, but this was internal problems in Iraq, there are laws that must interact with these problems. USA is not the prophet of UN laws because as i said, they must be under all the laws, they must follow it.

When people are being slaughtered in ANY country, it is unacceptable and irresponsible to say "it is an internal problem, we are not right to interfere." Let me ask you this one question: If you, and so many other countries in your region agree, that Saddam was a bad, evil man, who killed innocent people.... then why did none of your Arab countries in the region act to put an end to his killing of Arabs and Muslims? Why did YOUR governments not act in a responsible way to save lives in your own countries? Can you please provide a logical answer for why so many Arab states sat by and did nothing, allowing Saddam to kill so many people?

Well, do you think that Iraqi people are more happier than before ??

Do you think that the USA army is really giving or just think to give Iraq a freedom?!

You have spoken about moral laws that we ALL must live by. And you admit that Saddam Hussein did not obey these moral laws. Since no other countries in the your region of the world was going to punish Saddam for breaking these moral laws, the US has done nothing but enforce the moral laws for not killing innocent people that you admit Saddam Hussein violated.

If no other country in this world will take responsibility for rooting out evil, and getting rid of dictators who murder innocent people, then the US is forced to take care of things whenever they look like they may threaten the US.

Why not convince your fellow Arab states to develop a "United States of Arabia" where you will all band together to ensure the laws of freedom and justice are enforced for all? Where you can determine for yourselves how to deal with killers and other security threats to your states. And that way, if a murderous, dictatorial ruler emerges in one of your states, you can handle the enforcement of international law on your own, in your own territories.

If the new Palestinian leadership steps-up to eliminated murderous terror groups who kill innocent Israelis, I am sure you will see how quickly peace will be possible with the Israelis. They want peace as badly as the Palestinians. But suicide bombers must be stopped, and put in prison for their murderous acts.

Do you not agree?
RMT

 

[trollface]

Re: Bush death will be the beginning of the civil

It cannot be pretended that the US went into Iraq for any kind of altruistic reason. There have been some good effects from the invasion, sure, but we cannot pretend that that was the reason that the country was invaded. And retro-active justification is never a good excuse.

You also cannot pretend that there haven't been adverse effects of the invasion: a massive increase in religious intolerance, the farming out of Iraq's industries to forigen contractors (and the accompanying 80% unemployment that there now is), the doubling of child malnutrition, the state of power and medicare (which are reportedly now at the levels they were in pre-war times, but it's been a long time coming and has cost many lives), the decreased stability in the region, the haven for terrorists/terrorism it has become, the added impetus it has given towards an increase in militant radical Islamism...the list goes on.

So, you cannot simply say "Saddam was a bad man, he is no longer in charge, ergo we have done a good thing", the issue is much broader. Similarly, you cannot say "because it is beleived that there will be a reasonably free election in a localised area with a small proportion of the country participating next year" that democracy has been achieved, or is a certainty for the future. You know that Saddam's lawyer has pointed out that there's nothing in the law to prevent him for running for office, and that a poll said that 45% of Iraqis would vote for him? Now, personally I don't hold much stock by that, by that's a possible side-effect of democracy, and where exactly would that leave us with regards to our retroactive justifications of getting Saddam out of power?

Now, even though the oil industry was privatised (which is illegal, BTW, but then so many things of the handling of this war have been illegal that pillaging is hardly surprising), I don't really beleive that the invasion was to do with securing the oil. I also don't think that it was "revenge" for Bush's father although I do think that both these things, like the advantages that the Iraqi people have gained, were considered a happy side-effect. No, I think that the idea was to have a stable base in the Middle East, in a strategically good geographical position from where the US could exert pressure on Syria, Iran, even Saudi Arabia. It hasn't worked out like that because the administration had absolutely no post-invasion plan, and simply assumed that taking and holding Iraq would be easy, and that they would be welcomed with open arms by one and all.

So, to sum up, you cannot say "but the people are better off" because:

A: In some areas they are much worse off, and the long-term effects may be much worse.
B: That was not the reason for going in, but may have been an incidental side-effect.

You might be able to make a good case for the logical sense of having a military power-base (and a friendly government) where Iraq is, both for US security and the security of the globe. However, the absense of a post-war strategy, let alone a good one, has meant that the situation now cannot be described in terms much more accurate than "cock-up". I think you'd still have trouble justifying it legally, too.

 

[Hadeka]

Re: Bush death will be the beginning of the civil

--RainmanTime--

huh

Well, sadly /ttiforum/images/graemlins/confused.gif i dont think that the arab countries are going to be a group together, if this is going to happen, so be sure, that it will not happen with the current arab presidents.

We all hope that this happen, but look at the arab countries now, everyeone is thinking for only his own life.
/ttiforum/images/graemlins/confused.gif

 

[Hadeka]

Re: Bush death will be the beginning of the civil

I just want to remember you about the main idea of this thread, which is my time travel experience.

I just found what can confirm and support my predictions

I really dont totally trust the bible codes, but some predictions using these codes can really happen and some didnt and will not happen.

but you can see these 2 codes that are saying that Bush will be assassinated by clicking here and here here


well, i would like to know what do u think about that ?

off course you can continue the thread as it is now --- about politics ...etc ..
but dont forget the real subject.

thank u

 

[KerrTexas]

Re: Bush death will be the beginning of the civil

It cannot be pretended that the US went into Iraq for any kind of altruistic reason. There have been some good effects from the invasion, sure, but we cannot pretend that that was the reason that the country was invaded. And retro-active justification is never a good excuse.

Uh, the U.S. isnt the only one there, I do believe England is there too. So your government is guilty as well.
I agree with you on this view. As I mentioned the reasons for going into Iraq where based on lies and deceit. This isn't appropriate for any country, unfortunatley, it seems to be the norm.

You also cannot pretend that there haven't been adverse effects of the invasion:

I agree with you on this point as well. Any 'war' has its adverse effects. Hopefully, time will smooth out these adversities.

a massive increase in religious intolerance...

At least that wasnt the case before. Wonder where all those mass graves came from?

the farming out of Iraq's industries to forigen contractors ...

Everybody wants us the U.S. and England out so bad, do you realize that most of the "industry" in the Middle East would come to a grinding halt if the U.S./England withdrew all the technicians from the entire region?

the doubling of child malnutrition

I am sure that blowing up and killing Red Cross and other aid workers didnt have any effect on that score.

the decreased stability in the region,

Overall region or Iraq? What stability are you referring too?

the added impetus it has given towards an increase in militant radical Islamism

And an opportunity for just out and out killers to murder whomever they feel like this week. Regardless of the religious heading, they would find some injustice to use for killing people.

I think that the idea was to have a stable base in the Middle East, in a strategically good geographical position from where the US could exert pressure on Syria, Iran, even Saudi Arabia. It hasn't worked out like that because the administration had absolutely no post-invasion plan, and simply assumed that taking and holding Iraq would be easy, and that they would be welcomed with open arms by one and all.

I agree with this point as well, except Iraq was easy on the removing Saddam part, holding it has become expensive in lives for Iraqis as well as U.S. Troops. The insurgents are the ones doing most of the killing, and killing anybody their bombs and bullets can target. They dont give a rats behind about the Iraqi people.

You might be able to make a good case for the logical sense of having a military power-base (and a friendly government) where Iraq is, both for US security and the security of the globe. However, the absense of a post-war strategy, let alone a good one, has meant that the situation now cannot be described in terms much more accurate than "cock-up". I think you'd still have trouble justifying it legally, too.

"They" might be able to make a good case for military presence in Iraq. Saddam made for a good scape goat. Gives the politicians the .."Yeah, but" ability in response as to the whys and wherefores. And I agree that the planning seems a little wanting. As far as the legality of the whole thing, what country ever does things legallly if they want to do it... Mr. Falkland Islands Guy?

 

[KerrTexas]

Re: Bush death will be the beginning of the civil

Trollface, it is good to know that you probably would be joining us in the FEMA attitude adjustment camps. I was hoping for Hawaii..you?

 

[trollface]

Re: Bush death will be the beginning of the civil

Uh, the U.S. isnt the only one there, I do believe England is there too. So your government is guilty as well.

Oh, trust me, I'm not making any excuses for Tony Blair. I mean, if I was to be making any nationalistic and/or xenophobic comments, they'd be along the lines of pointing out that the majority of the UK actually opposed the invasion and our government acted against its people's wishes. But I won't.

At least that wasnt the case before. Wonder where all those mass graves came from?

Not from religious intolerance. He may have worn the clothing of vareious religions to gain support from time to tame, but the reason bin Laden wanted him dead was for the secular nature of his rule. Christian Iraqis were free to wander around wearing what they wanted. Now the more extreme Moslem factions are taking over, Christian women are covering theiur faces, just to avoid being beaten in the street.

In fact, if you're talking about graves full of Kurds (which I have to assume you are), then you should know that the majority of Kurds are Moslems - Sunni to be precise. Saddam was nominally a Sunni.

Everybody wants us the U.S. and England out so bad, do you realize that most of the "industry" in the Middle East would come to a grinding halt if the U.S./England withdrew all the technicians from the entire region?

And yet there was 20% unemployment, mainly in those industries, under Saddam's rule. Now he's gone, the US has fired and replaced most of the workers, Iraq has 80% unemployment, and the industry's opoerating in the same way, except the profits go to the US and a few hand-picked friendly countrys? The sole reason for this is that Iraq lacks skilled workers, you say? Besides, that's technicians, what about the managers, and the people who decide what happens to the oil industry? Is it a coincidence that they're American and give favourable deals to Americans?

I am sure that blowing up and killing Red Cross and other aid workers didnt have any effect on that score.

Are you saying that the invasion had no effect on this?

Overall region or Iraq? What stability are you referring too?

Well, the area in general, but you could say Iraq too.

And an opportunity for just out and out killers to murder whomever they feel like this week. Regardless of the religious heading, they would find some injustice to use for killing people.

Indeed, but they've got lots and lots of new recruits now.

They dont give a rats behind about the Iraqi people.

Actually, I was talking to a friend of mine who is in charge of a platoon over there. He says that there are 4 basic types of "insurgent", and that most of them do make sure that they only target US/Iraqi troops/police.

As far as the legality of the whole thing, what country ever does things legallly if they want to do it... Mr. Falkland Islands Guy?

I agree, but what do two wrongs not make?

Trollface, it is good to know that you probably would be joining us in the FEMA attitude adjustment camps. I was hoping for Hawaii..you?

Not me, that's just for you 'merkins. Knowing our lot, we'll probably just be rounded up and clubbed to death from the back of a horse.

 

[lorval]

Re: Bush death will be the beginning of the civil

For those not in the know, at least 27 mp's, sort of like usa senators, have decided to table a motion to impeach Tony Blair priminister of England. They are backed by various celebrities who feel that Blair lied over the real reason he dragged our great country to war with Iraq.
There are also unconfirmed reports that several men have been arested in the south of england over firearms offenses, but we cannot get any police spokesman to confirm or deny these rumours.
The other disturbing factor in England is reports that the Labour party are ahead in the polls, again strange considering their actions of late. And they are finally deciding to go ahead with id cards in possibly two to three years time, a move a number of people including myself are opposed to.
Trollface and I may not see eye to eye all the time but if we had to we would stand shoulder to shoulder should we have to fight for freedom from Blairs forces..

 

[freelight]

Re: Bush death will be the beginning of the civil

hours, 1 minute ago World - AP


By ANDREW SELSKY, Associated Press Writer

BOGOTA, Colombia - Colombia's main rebel group asked followers to mount an assassination attempt against President Bush (news - web sites) during his visit to Colombia last week, Defense Minister Jorge Uribe said. There was no evidence Saturday that rebels even tried to organize such an attack.


AP Photo

Colombian Official: FARC Urged Attack on Bush
(AP Video)



Uribe told reporters late Friday that informants said the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, known as the FARC, told followers to attack Bush during his four-hour visit in the seaside city of Cartagena last Monday, where he met with Colombian President Alvaro Uribe.


The defense minister, who is no relation to the president, said security forces were on full alert during the visit. About 15,000 Colombian troops and police, along with U.S. troops and Secret Service agents provided security. There was no indication Bush's life was ever in danger.


Uribe did not say where the informants had heard about the purported order to attack Bush.


The Secret Service (news - web sites) did not comment on security details, as is its policy.


"We have full confidence in the fine work of the Secret Service and their work with security officials on the ground when the President travels," White House spokesman Jim Morrell said Saturday.


The FARC has declared U.S. troops in Colombia military targets. The troops are training local forces and providing logistics and planning assistance for military operations against the rebels.


However, the rebels never publicly declared Bush a target during his first-ever visit as president to Colombia. Bush visited Colombia after attending a summit in Chile




THIS IS WHAT I THINK. It's already begun.

 

[The_Teacher]

Re: Bush death will be the beginning of the civil

Developing Iraq as a democratic country to begin using it's oil was very important for the U.S.A.
The worlds oil supply is quickly running low. At the current rate of oil consumption, the world will run out of oil within 45 years. We've already passed the mid-point. The U.S.A. cannot deal openly with tyrants such as Saddam Hussein so he needed to go and a democratic nation developed.
You think U.S.A. oil prices are high now? Just wait and see what they're like in 2024!!!

ALSO....

Saddam put a price on Bush Sr.'s head.
Bush Jr. put a price on Saddam AND his 2 sons' heads...and finished it.
Wouldn't you do the same for your Dad? Maybe, maybe not.

Like it or not, lies and deception, whatever, "liberating" Iraq needed to be done NOW.
You have to crack a few eggs to make an omelet.
The U.S.A. prescence in Iraq will diminish in 2006 when democracy has it's hold and all will be relatively well.

As for the original topic of this post, G.W. Bush has pissed a lot of people off for various reasons and I'm sure many would like to see him gone for good. I'd say there's a very small chance that he would be assassinated during his 2nd term. He's just not that easily accessible as past presidents, and for good reason. However, the above post concerning the "Bible Code" prediction cannot be ignored. I have the "Bible Code" software and I, myself, did a code search on Saddam before the U.S.A. (and allies) liberated Iraq and I got codes from 1 matrix that predicted everything that happened to Saddam leading up to his capture, and possibly other codes concerning his upcoming trial (I need to go back and check it, it's been awhile).

So, having experienced the "Bible Code" phenomena myself, I put a little bit of trust in it.
I agree what another said, there are others pulling the strings and it's not simply all the president's doing. The way I see it, the president of the U.S.A. is merely a public relations manager for the U.S. to the world. That being said, sadly there are others in the world that don't see it that way and think that knocking off a president will change the way things are handled.

YOU have made your prediction. It is recorded here. Others have seen the same vision. The "Bible Code" says it will happen. All we can do is wait and see what happens during the 1st quarter of 2005 or the rest of President Bush's term.

Here's my prediction/vision... Bush will serve out his 2nd term as President, during that time he will have to pick a new vice president, have a health scare himself, spend more money raising the national deficit, capture Usama bin Laden, shake hands with the anti-christ, and start another war or be on the verge of starting one near the end of his presidency.

We shall see.

 

[OllyB]

Re: Bush death will be the beginning of the civil

I'll probably be shot down for this, but;

The fact is Saddam was not a threat to the US, not enough for war. I agree with rainman. US are not a world police. but a balance is needed, There was no doubt he had to be stopped.

But if only this was 'the' reason. This however was not the case.

The British intelligence, that initially pretty much set the war in motion, was an absolute joke. Britsh Intel is amoung the best if not the best in the world. You don't base a war on flawed 'evidence'. Much of this was purely opinion based. People would have known this and it would be insane to suggest that enough people were fooled by it. There was more at play here. Someone wanted the War and used the flawed intel as a somke screen, which later came out. causing at least on suicide from the man that would have publically taken the heat for it. I'm not sure to what extent the US heard about this. I know our news isn't s heavily watered as much as yours.

Weapons of mass-destruction was not a valid reason. Even the weapons inspectors were surprised at the War. This says a lot.

I would also put it to you that oil and the 'Westernisation' of Iraq were primary aims. If you link one arab state to the Western way of 'democracy'. Others will follow suit. Its the children that this will effect most. When other Arab nations see Iraq (this is hard to imagine now) on its feet (which it WILL acheive) and with strong economy due to ties with the West. They will also follow suit, not wanting to be left behind (this is not a religion thing either).

As the middle east becomes more westernised - or at least heavily linked in terms of economy and cultural influence (the next generation come into play here), then control over the 'problem area' of the middle east will not be the problem it is now. oil fears will also be over.

You can't have one world government, with the middle east as fractured as it is now.
Who will be unofficial head of this government, and have most influence? its not hard to work out. Or maybe this is me just being highly cynical....watch, and you'll see.

Like i said its not a view than many will like or agree with.

All i will say is i agree, one good thing to come out of it is the fall of Saddam. Which sooner or later had to happen.

Kind regards,
Olly

 

[Mikebo]

Re: Bush death will be the beginning of the civil

I'll probably be shot down for this, but;

I don't know why you would think that you would be harresed for your opinion, it seems to be a pretty acurate description of what has taken place. The "why's" and outcomes could be argued but over all I would have to agree with your basic assesment of the situation.

 

[TIMETRESEARCHER]

Re: Bush death will be the beginning of the civil

i am a paranormal investigator and i take interest to this expeirence so the people that are shouting hoax can get lost