• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Death to America, Death to Bush

H

hipsterdufus

An estimated 100,000 people came out to protest Bush's vist to India in New Delhi. Pakistan is not too happy he's coming either.

Tens of thousands of Indians waving black and white flags and chanting "Death to Bush!" rallied Wednesday in New Delhi to protest a visit by President Bush.

Surindra Singh Yadav, a senior police officer in charge of crowd control, said as many as 100,000 people, most of them Muslim, had gathered in a fairground in central New Delhi ordinarily used for political rallies.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/01/ap/world/mainD8G2KND00.shtml
 

Trajan Octavian Titus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
T

The Real McCoy

Oh man... 100,000 out of what? A billion plus? Less than .01%!

Fact is, India is one of the most pro U.S. countries in the world.
 

Synch

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 15, 2006
Messages
564
Reaction score
16
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
100,000 means nothing....
 

KidRocks

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
1,337
Reaction score
16
Location
right here
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Synch said:
100,000 means nothing....


If it were 100,000 pro-Bush demonstrators the Bush supporters would be climaxing all over themselves! :cool:
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
hipsterdufus said:
An estimated 100,000 people came out to protest Bush's vist to India in New Delhi. Pakistan is not too happy he's coming either.



http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/01/ap/world/mainD8G2KND00.shtml
WOW!...This is fascinating!...

It's good thing something like this has never happened before!...:2wave:

Anti-US Riot Erupts As Clinton Visits Greece
ATHENS, Greece (AP) - President Clinton arrived in Greece Friday while thousands of leftists protesting against his visit clashed with police in the capital.

Witnesses said hundreds of police in gas masks and anti-riot gear tried to stop protesters marching to the U.S. embassy. They fired tear gas as the leftists surged through police lines.

Clinton landed at Athens international airport after spending five days in Turkey. He will stay less than 24 hours in Greece, cutting his visit short because of the protests prompted by widespread Greek opposition to the U.S.-led bombing campaign against Yugoslavia earlier this year
.

Different year...Different President...Different War...Different Country...

Same Sh!t...:shrug:
 

Synch

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 15, 2006
Messages
564
Reaction score
16
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
KidRocks said:
If it were 100,000 pro-Bush demonstrators the Bush supporters would be climaxing all over themselves! :cool:

pro-bush supporters aren't stupid enough to demonstrate for no reason whatsoever...:mrgreen:
 

KidRocks

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
1,337
Reaction score
16
Location
right here
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Synch said:
pro-bush supporters aren't stupid enough to demonstrate for no reason whatsoever...:mrgreen:



Everyone knows that Bush supporters are to lazy appear at organized demonstrations, first of all they don't ever have enough conviction to expose their faces to the media, not when they can listen to Rush Limbaugh or mearly pick up their phones and call Rush from the safety of their homes.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
KidRocks said:
Everyone knows that Bush supporters are to lazy appear at organized demonstrations, first of all they don't ever have enough conviction to expose their faces to the media, not when they can listen to Rush Limbaugh or mearly pick up their phones and call Rush from the safety of their homes.

Yeah but 61,000,000 voted for President Bush in 2004.......You see thaey don't have to go to anti U.S. and anti Troops ralleys.........
 
T

The Real McCoy

KidRocks said:
Everyone knows that Bush supporters are to lazy appear at organized demonstrations

Evidently you've never seen a pro-life rally.


KidRocks said:
first of all they don't ever have enough conviction to expose their faces to the media

What kind of drugs are you smoking?? Fox News Channel.... ever heard of it?



KidRocks said:
not when they can listen to Rush Limbaugh or mearly pick up their phones and call Rush from the safety of their homes.

And how are Rush's callers any different (sans political views) than Al Franken's?
 

LeftyHenry

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
1,896
Reaction score
12
Location
New York City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The Real McCoy said:
Oh man... 100,000 out of what? A billion plus? Less than .01%!

Fact is, India is one of the most pro U.S. countries in the world.

ouch! 100,000 is now a pro US number? what's it like in other places?

Navy Pride said:
Yeah but 61,000,000 voted for President Bush in 2004.......You see thaey don't have to go to anti U.S. and anti Troops ralleys.........

2004 was a while ago. We're in 2006 now. And Bush's approval ratings are in between 32 and 40 depending on the source.

Lets see...India has a billion people........100,000 protested..........Not to bad........

c'mon, you never see a protest bigger than 100,000. It's just not possible to more than two times the amount of casualties in the Vietnam war.
 

Trajan Octavian Titus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
KidRocks said:
Everyone knows that Bush supporters are to lazy appear at organized demonstrations, first of all they don't ever have enough conviction to expose their faces to the media, not when they can listen to Rush Limbaugh or mearly pick up their phones and call Rush from the safety of their homes.

So sorry that unlike the left we prefer to win our battles in the arena of ideas we let our policies do the talking for us, we're called the silent majority for a reason.
 

Cassapolis

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2006
Messages
85
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
So sorry that unlike the left we prefer to win our battles in the arena of ideas we let our policies do the talking for us, we're called the silent majority for a reason.

And the right wings policies are speaking volumes. Less taxes for the rich, less books and police for the cities. Waging a war on a sovereign nation, Stripping American's of their civil rights, giving billions of dollars to their buddy's corporations, shall I go on? If i was a "conservative" I wouldn't be bragging about how your policies are winning any battles.
 

Trajan Octavian Titus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Cassapolis said:
And the right wings policies are speaking volumes. Less taxes for the rich,

That's not true we promote equal taxation for all income brackets.

less books and police for the cities.

Got any figures to back that up? Conservatives want to give vouchers to poor students to allow them to go to the same schools as the children as rich liberal elitests.

Waging a war on a sovereign nation,


A nation that continually violated the U.N. resolutions that were imposed on it after they attacked a truly innocent country to their south. And besides Saddam took power by force and maintained that power through force and intimidation of his citizenry so how can you honestly suggest that an outside power removing him through force is somehow immoral?

Stripping American's of their civil rights,

That's a lie we're tapping the phones of aliens to this country who are here with the explicit intent of murdering our citizenry, they are not naturalized citizens and non-citizens should not be granted the same rights as Americans. What you want is to give a foriegn enemy protection under the Bill of Rights which is quite possibly the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

giving billions of dollars to their buddy's corporations,

Giving money away? Hmm, that's more of a policy of the left, perhaps you would prefer keystone industries; such as, the airlines to have gone belly up?
shall I go on?

Please do, your ignorance has got me in stiches.
If i was a "conservative" I wouldn't be bragging about how your policies are winning any battles.

Why not? Our policies work yours don't. The lessons of history have proven the utter fallacy of the socialist ideology maybe that's why liberals love rewriting it so very much.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,946
Reaction score
16,562
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
hipsterdufus said:
An estimated 100,000 people came out to protest Bush's vist to India in New Delhi. Pakistan is not too happy he's coming either.



http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/01/ap/world/mainD8G2KND00.shtml


Terrorist supporters are never happy.

Look at these vermin from last year .

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/05/20/britain.protest/index.html

. "Death, death Tony Blair; death, death Tony Blair. Death, death George Bush," the protesters chanted.

"The only language we speak today is the language of jihad," said one protester
 
T

The Real McCoy

Che said:
ouch! 100,000 is now a pro US number? what's it like in other places?

What?

We had a million mom march. I guess that means we're an anti-gun country, right?

Again, the fact remains. India has a much more favorable opinion of the United States than almost any other nation in the world.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,946
Reaction score
16,562
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
The Real McCoy said:
Again, the fact remains. India has a much more favorable opinion of the United States than almost any other nation in the world.


They should have a favorable opinion of us, considering our jobs are beng outsourced to India.
 

Cassapolis

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2006
Messages
85
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
That's not true we promote equal taxation for all income brackets.[/Qoute]

http://www.ctj.org/html/gwbfinal.htm

Percisely, the tax cuts for the rich have severly crippled the economy, the more money you make the more you should subjected to pay in taxes, percentage wise. The ultra rich can afford to pay more in taxes than the middle class. It's a simple fact. The people who got the biggest benefit from the cuts were the ones who have more money in their bank accounts than 20 regular families will earn in a year.

Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Got any figures to back that up? Conservatives want to give vouchers to poor students to allow them to go to the same schools as the children as rich liberal elitests.

No, the conservatives want to pay for people to go to religious school, and where I'm from most of the "elitists" who send their children to those schools are not Liberals. I said nothing at all about college so I'm not gonna bother wasting time to look it up.


Trajan Octavian Titus said:
A nation that continually violated the U.N. resolutions that were imposed on it after they attacked a truly innocent country to their south. And besides Saddam took power by force and maintained that power through force and intimidation of his citizenry so how can you honestly suggest that an outside power removing him through force is somehow immoral?

There are hundreds of dictators in the world that took their power by force, Saddam Hussein was probably one of the weakest, and many of them are in the middle east. And where's the proof that the UN sanctions weren't being obeyed? Did they find the WMD's we invaded for in the last 20 minutes? Did they find the links to Al Qaida just now? Iraq posed exactly no threat to the United States or any other country for that matter. What exactly is so "moral" about 25,000 American casualties and hundreds of thopusands of Iraqi casualties, for no reason what so ever? It is immoral to invade a relatively peaceful country killing tens of thousands of civilians, just because you don't like them. There is no evidence that the reasons we were given as to why we had to invade Iraq was were truthful. Who do you base your "morals" on Jesus? I don't think so. Jesus said things like "turn the other cheek", and "love thy enemy" not drop your bombs and invade them blindly for no reason and in the mean time allow your intelligence agency to torture the captives. You have zero moral ground to stand on if you side with this administration.

Trajan Octavian Titus said:
That's a lie we're tapping the phones of aliens to this country who are here with the explicit intent of murdering our citizenry, they are not naturalized citizens and non-citizens should not be granted the same rights as Americans. What you want is to give a foriegn enemy protection under the Bill of Rights which is quite possibly the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

So we are not subject to random searches now, have you flown on a plane recently? People who in no way, shape, or , form resemble terrorists are being searched at random. The White House refuses to tell us who they have been wiretapping, you are just spewing more right-wing propaganda. Fact is it is in blatent violation of thr 4th Amendment to wire tap American's without a warrent.

Amendment IV - Search and seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Giving money away? Hmm, that's more of a policy of the left, perhaps you would prefer keystone industries; such as, the airlines to have gone belly up?

The Bush administration has given no less than $1 Billion worth of contracts to Halliburton since they took office,most of them no-bid. I know as a good neo-con you know what the ties are between Cheney and Halliburton.



Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Please do, your ignorance has got me in stiches.
Why not? Our policies work yours don't. The lessons of history have proven the utter fallacy of the socialist ideology maybe that's why liberals love rewriting it so very much.

OK now I ask you. Where is proof of this conservative policy working? Also, if you really want me to dig up a bunch of links for what I have posted I will but I believe that basically everything I have posted is either an opinion or a well know fact. And obviously I can't post links to my opinions, so tell me precisely what is a lie and I'll dig up the truth for you since you are obviously too blind to be able to find it for yourself.
 
Last edited:

Trajan Octavian Titus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
http://www.ctj.org/html/gwbfinal.htm

Percisely, the tax cuts for the rich have severly crippled the economy, the more money you make the more you should subjected to pay in taxes, percentage wise. The ultra rich can afford to pay more in taxes than the middle class. It's a simple fact. The people who got the biggest benefit from the cuts were the ones who have more money in their bank accounts than 20 regular families will earn in a year.

You're entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts the economy is doing just fine growth is up and unemployment is down, the only thing that got us out of the recession inherited from the Clinton administration was the tax cuts. You want to soak the rich that's not fair and that's not equal, and more than that it hurts the economy. I thought liberals were supposed to be for equality.

No, the conservatives want to pay for people to go to religious school, and where I'm from most of the "elitists" who send their children to those schools are not Liberals. I said nothing at all about college so I'm not gonna bother wasting time to look it up.

No conservatives want to allow kids to go to any school that they want religion has nothing to do with, the public education system is a joke, private schools produce better results regardless if they're Christian or not. I thought liberals were supposed to be pro-choice.


There are hundreds of dictators in the world that took their power by force, Saddam Hussein was probably one of the weakest, and many of them are in the middle east. And where's the proof that the UN sanctions weren't being obeyed?

Saddam violated every single U.N. resolution ever put to him. And in terms of genocide and human rights abuses Saddam Hussein was the worst by far.

Did they find the WMD's we invaded for in the last 20 minutes?

That's not the only reason why we went to Iraq there were 20 odd reasons listed in the Joint Resolution of Congress authorizing the use of force against Iraq:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html

Did they find the links to Al Qaida just now?

No they found those along time ago in the 9-11 Commission report: (SEE NEXT POST)


Iraq posed exactly no threat to the United States or any other country for that matter.

Yes they did, Saddam was actively harboring terrorists and training thousands of terrorists at Salmon Pak.

What exactly is so "moral" about 25,000 American casualties and hundreds of thopusands of Iraqi casualties,

You're just making up numbers now.

for no reason what so ever?

Actually bringing Democracy to Iraq is a pretty good damn reason, it's called Democratic Peace theory, Democratic nations don't attack one another.

It is immoral to invade a relatively peaceful country killing tens of thousands of civilians,

Is it moral to sit idly by while Saddam butchered millions of his own citizenry?

just because you don't like them.

Nice straw man.
There is no evidence that the reasons we were given as to why we had to invade Iraq was were truthful.

Umm yes there is, there was mountains of intelligence from just about every country in the world that Saddam had not destroyed his WMD, what's more regardless of WMD Saddam was harboring terrorists and aligning himself with Al-Qaeda.

Who do you base your "morals" on Jesus?

I'm agnostic but am still a moral absolutist unlike the moral relativists on the left.

I don't think so. Jesus said things like "turn the other cheek", and "love thy enemy" not drop your bombs and invade them blindly for no reason and in the mean time allow your intelligence agency to torture the captives. You have zero moral ground to stand on if you side with this administration.

Your entire post is one big logical fallacy.




So we are not subject to random searches now, have you flown on a plane recently?

lol, are you kidding me? After 9-11 are you honestly going to argue that rigid searching procedures for airline passengers isn't a necessity?


People who in no way, shape, or , form resemble terrorists are being searched at random.

Um the fact of the matter is that 19 men of arabic descent killed over 3,000 U.S. citizens on 9-11-01, so would you suggest that we focus on little old ladies and children as much as we do those from the same region as the 9-11 hijackers?

The White House refuses to tell us who they have been wiretapping, you are just spewing more right-wing propaganda.

Your entire post is something right out of moveon.org and I'm the one spreading propaganda? You think the whitehouse should declassify intelligence of such vital importance as the names of the people who we are tracking and monitoring? Hay while we're at it we can just give al-qaeda members a phone call and tell them all of our intelligence strategies.

Fact is it is in blatent violation of thr 4th Amendment to wire tap American's without a warrent.

To bad for you that hasn't been proven and it's not a violation of the 4th amendment during war time.
Amendment IV - Search and seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Article 2 Section 2:

Section 2. The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

September 14, 2001 Joint Resolution of Congress:

Portion from secion 1:

Whereas the president has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States.

Section 2
(a) That the president is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

The Bush administration has given no less than $1 Billion worth of contracts to Halliburton since they took office,most of them no-bid. I know as a good neo-con you know what the ties are between Cheney and Halliburton.

Umm so what Clinton gave just as many no bid contracts to Halliburton and that is hardly giving away anything they are paying for a service.

Cheney doesn't recieve dime one from Halliburton, all of the money that he gets through his stock options is given away to charity. In order to eliminate the perception of a conflict of interests he created a legally binding contract that made this donation mandatory, the terms are non-negotiable, everything he gets goes to charity.

Summary



[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]A Kerry ad implies Cheney has a financial interest in Halliburton and is profiting from the company's contracts in Iraq. [/FONT]The fact is, Cheney doesn't gain a penny from Halliburton's contracts, and almost certainly won't lose even if Halliburton goes bankrupt.
The ad claims Cheney got $2 million from Halliburton "as vice president," which is false. Actually, nearly $1.6 million of that was paid before Cheney took office. More importantly, all of it was earned before he was a candidate, when he was the company's chief executive.

http://www.factcheck.org/article261.html



OK now I ask you. Where is proof of this conservative policy working? Also, if you really want me to dig up a bunch of links for what I have posted I will but I believe that basically everything I have posted is either an opinion or a well know fact. And obviously I can't post links to my opinions, so tell me precisely what is a lie and I'll dig up the truth for you since you are obviously too blind to be able to find it for yourself.

Everything you posted is either an opinion, a distortion, or an outright slanderous lie.
 
Last edited:

Trajan Octavian Titus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
9-11 Commission Report:



Paragraph #327 on page 61 Bin Ladin was also willing to explore possibilities for cooperation with Iraq, even though Iraq’s dictator, Saddam Hussein, had never had an Islamist agenda—save for his opportunistic pose as a defender of the faithful against “Crusaders” during the Gulf War of 1991. Moreover, Bin Ladin had in fact been sponsoring anti-Saddam Islamists in Iraqi Kurdistan, and sought to attract them into his Islamic army.

Paragraph #328 on page 61To protect his own ties with Iraq,Turabi reportedly brokered an agreement that Bin Ladin would stop supporting activities against Saddam. Bin Ladin apparently honored this pledge, at least for a time, although he continued to aid a group of Islamist extremists operating in part of Iraq (Kurdistan) outside of Baghdad’s control. In the late 1990s, these extremist groups suffered major defeats by Kurdish forces. In 2001, with Bin Ladin’s help they re-formed into an organization called Ansar al Islam.There are indications that by then the Iraqi regime tolerated and may even have helped Ansar al Islam against the common Kurdish enemy.

Paragraph #329 on page 61With the Sudanese regime acting as intermediary, Bin Ladin himself met with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Khartoum in late 1994 or early 1995. Bin Ladin is said to have asked for space to establish training camps, as well as assistance in procuring weapons, but there is no evidence that Iraq responded to this request.55 As described below, the ensuing years saw additional efforts to establish connections.

Paragraph #347 on page 66
In mid-1998, the situation reversed; it was Iraq that reportedly took the ini tiative. In March 1998, after Bin Ladin’s public fatwa against the United States, two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence. In July, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with the Taliban and then with Bin Ladin. Sources reported that one, or perhaps both, of these meetings was apparently arranged through Bin Ladin’s Egyptian deputy, Zawahiri, who had ties of his own to the Iraqis. In 1998, Iraq was under intensifying U.S. pressure, which culminated in a series of large air attacks in December.

Paragraph #348 on page 66
Similar meetings between Iraqi officials and Bin Ladin or his aides may have occurred in 1999 during a period of some reported strains with the Taliban. According to the reporting, Iraqi officials offered Bin Ladin a safe haven in Iraq. Bin Ladin declined, apparently judging that his circumstances in Afghanistan remained more favorable than the Iraqi alternative. The reports describe friendly contacts and indicate some common themes in both sides’ hatred of the United States. But to date we have seen no evidence that these or the earlier contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship. Nor have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United States.

Paragraph #615 on page 128
Though intelligence gave no clear indication of what might be afoot, some intelligence reports mentioned chemical weapons, pointing toward work at a camp in southern Afghanistan called Derunta. On November 4, 1998, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York unsealed its indictment of Bin Ladin, charging him with conspiracy to attack U.S. defense installations.The indictment also charged that al Qaeda had allied itself with Sudan, Iran, and Hezbollah.The original sealed indictment had added that al Qaeda had “reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq.”109 This passage led Clarke, who for years had read intelligence reports on Iraqi-Sudanese cooperation on chemical weapons, to speculate to Berger that a large Iraqi presence at chemical facilities in Khartoum was “probably a direct result of the Iraq–Al Qida agreement.” Clarke added that VX precursor traces found near al Shifa were the “exact formula used by Iraq.”110 This language about al Qaeda’s “understanding” with Iraq had been dropped, however, when a superseding indictment was filed in November 1998.
 

Willoughby

Active member
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
411
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Death to Bush!"

but not death to america..there is a big difference

so conservatives are winning the battle of ideas then are they. ok so that is why there has been a lurch to the left in South america and there has been millions of people around the world demostrating against bush's conservative foreign policy
 
H

hipsterdufus

Trajan Octavian Titus said:
So sorry that unlike the left we prefer to win our battles in the arena of ideas we let our policies do the talking for us, we're called the silent majority for a reason.


There's some "truthiness" for ya! :naughty
 
H

hipsterdufus

The Real McCoy said:
Again, the fact remains. India has a much more favorable opinion of the United States than almost any other nation in the world.

You're right. That's why the story is interesting to me. India is the worlds largest Democracy. To have 100K protesting against us is interesting. I would expect this in Pakistan.
 

Willoughby

Active member
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
411
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
You're right. That's why the story is interesting to me. India is the worlds largest Democracy. To have 100K protesting against us is interesting. I would expect this in Pakistan.
with america's standing on the world state at the moment i think you can expect this in any country in the world
 
Top Bottom