Last night's speak was not good. It was not even close to the speach he gave back after the attacks.<hr></blockquote>
And it should not be, this was a State of the Union Adress. He was supposed to go to Congress and let them know where the union stands, not really supposed to be a message like the speach after the attacks...
[quote]The country has been back to work and life as normal for months now, and he's saying "I know it's hard, but we have to get back to normal". What the heck was he talking about? In fact, a large part of his speech seemed devoted to making the American public nervous again.<hr></blockquote>
Umm, I don't know aobut you but life is hardly back to normal. Major corperations are going bankrupt one after another, other major companies are laying off and have laid off 10's of thousands of people. Hardly back to normal.
[quote]The speech needed to be more focussed on the economy and domestic issues rather than the 'War'. While I agree that it did need some attention, it most certainly did not require 80% of the speech.<hr></blockquote>
Being that we are in a war the State of the Union should address this issue and did. And I feel that he addressed it for a proper amount of time as we are not going to be done with this war for a long time and it will part of the state of our union for years to come.
[quote]Now back on the subject. Iraq is getting to be a problem, so maybe it's time to remind Saddam that he needs to play by the rules of our 1991 agreement, and if he doesn't, there will be action taken against him.<hr></blockquote>
Been done, and all we get from the guy is the middle finger. Time for action, words are not working.
[quote]Iran is a little bit hazier. They haven't really done any thing specifically to target us in a hostile way like Bin Laden did. Maybe getting their help in exterminating the Al Qaeda network in their country, but I can't see us doing an all out attack on them like we did in Afghanistan.<hr></blockquote>
I have nothing to say on this. I neither agree nor disagree due to a lack of research.
[quote]North Korea seems foolish to attack. First of all, the people there are all starving except for those in the military. The military of North Korea is dedicated to protecting itself from South Korea, not on attacking the United States. Attacking North Korea would also make another country very upset- a country we are trying to be friendly with at the moment. That country is China. Making them upset might only cause the same problems we saw in the Korean War and in Vietnam. Do we really want to repeat those mistakes?<hr></blockquote>
North Korea is a huge problem, and China is even worse. North Korea would attack the US if they had teh manpower and the wherewithal to do it. If they get Ballistic Missiles and other weapons of mass destruction I do not think they would hesitate to point them at the US and threaten us with them. China is the same way. They are bent on becoming the worlds most powerful nation, and the US is seen as standing in the way of that. There will be something that comes out of this, and it will likely not be good.
[quote]Maybe it's just me, but I'm tired of the 'war on terrorism', and I'm sure that a lot of other Americans are too. In a few more months, the ongoing 'war' may become more of a police action rather than any thing else; something more like the war on drugs, but to a higher level. We don't need our entire military devoted 24/7 to hunting down a group which is now nothing more than a pack of criminals.<hr></blockquote>
My, you have a short attention span. Already tired of the war on terrorism, and we are on what I would consider the winning team so far. What would you suggest we do? wait for the Empire State Building to be destroyed so we can go looking for the bad guys again? maybe they could fly a Jumbo jet into a nuclear power plant or the Grand Coulee Dam. Would that get your interest back? I am overstating a bit, but I don't feel that my safety and the safety of the US is something to play games about. Right now our course of action seems appropriate. And I will not tire of it.
[quote]So you'd sit back and allow North Korea to nuke South Korea? Some ally you are.<hr></blockquote>
If we aren't the aggressor, it's an entirely different situation. But the prospect of another Korean War (okay, so techincally the war never ended), is scary to me.
If we aren't the aggressor, it's an entirely different situation. But the prospect of another Korean War (okay, so techincally the war never ended), is scary to me.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well considering the "quagmire" of another "Vietnam" in Afghanistan that all the liberal pundit where hoping and praying for didn't happen at all it seems that freeing N Korea is very do able. In fact it would be easier. Then the people would be free.
"The worst is over. We're on the road to recovery," said Bill Cheney, chief economist at John Hancock Financial Services.
With all the lying, greedy analysts and economists who thought Enron were the best buy all the way when they went belly up...sorry, I don't trust any of them. Corporate strokers.
Also...
"The small gain in GDP -- a number that will be revised twice more by the government in coming months -- means the economy avoided the standard definition of a recession, two or more straight quarters of declining economic activity.
On the other hand, economists at the National Bureau of Economic Research, who use data such as employment and personal income to define a recession, said last year that a recession began in March, and Wednesday's GDP data does not change that opinion.
"That does not effect us in any way," an NBER spokeswoman said. "[The economists] stick to their guns about their choice."
Good luck finding a job.
Funny, within the past 4 hours I just got two freelance offers. Nothing perminent...but it'll pay the rent. Still think there is a loooong road for many of us. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
I was comparing pre 89 Poland and Iran after the Islamic revolution as I wrote. Under the Shah (I have avoided to say it so far but I hope everyone know who put him in power) the people were very opressed...</strong><hr></blockquote>
They still are.
[quote]<strong>The opposition was emerging around Islam, so Islam was and still is part of the liberation of Iran in the mind of people...</strong><hr></blockquote>
The opposition in Poland was centered around Solidarity and their religion.
[quote]<strong>Its a set-up or Its a conspiracy... Do you really believe that yourself?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't think those weren't the two choices I presented. Khatami is said to be a "moderate". I don't know what he is. If he is a moderate, then I need some explanation why Iran exports arms to Palestinians, harbors part of what's left of Al Qaeda and continues it's support of Hezbollah. You have some theories?
The only thing that scared me from last nights speech was when Bush explained all the Al Quaeda plans they found. Maps of US cities, transportation systems, etc. But, yeah, we're being too hard of the freedom (freedom to terrorize) fighters of this world.
<strong>The only thing that scared me from last nights speech was when Bush explained all the Al Quaeda plans they found. Maps of US cities, transportation systems, etc. But, yeah, we're being too hard of the freedom (freedom to terrorize) fighters of this world. </strong><hr></blockquote>
[shrillbushhatingliberal]You're wrong you're wrong. Bush is the real threat. Can't you see he's straight from the Taliban wing of the Republican party. His oposition to abortion is the exact same thing as the Taliban forcing women to wear burkas in public. His economic terrorism of the working class people in this country is the real threat. Not the terrorist groups that want to kill Americans by the 10,000s. Which the US asked for anyway because they are the Great Satan.[/shrillbushhatingliberal]
The country has been back to work and life as normal for months now, and he's saying "I know it's hard, but we have to get back to normal". What the heck was he talking about? In fact, a large part of his speech seemed devoted to making the American public nervous again.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
uh... that's exactly the point. he wants us to be nervous because we should be.
don't just let time pass by and pretend everything is great and forgotton. did you even listen or were you too busy preparing your rant?
Have I said anything else? No. But there still is a difference being 1) opressed and then 2) being opressed, exploided and for most parts denied access to medicare and education and without any right to vote. If I was a woman I would actually rather live now in Iran than in the pre revolution. At least now I would have the right to vote, have the opportunity to get an education and get elected.
Me: [quote]The opposition was emerging around Islam, so Islam was and still is part of the liberation of Iran in the mind of people... <hr></blockquote>
You: [quote]The opposition in Poland was centered around Solidarity and their religion.<hr></blockquote>
I am STILL comparing the situation in pre 89 Poland and Iran after the Islamic revolution (I say so just above the part you quote FGS) and arguing that religion play a different role in present Iran than in then (pre 89) Poland. Their population was/is both opressed but while religion gave room for opposition in Poland it can´t do the same in Iran now because that card was played in the revolution.
[quote]I don't think those weren't the two choices I presented. Khatami is said to be a "moderate". I don't know what he is. If he is a moderate, then I need some explanation why Iran exports arms to Palestinians, harbors part of what's left of Al Qaeda and continues it's support of Hezbollah. You have some theories? <hr></blockquote>
Is Iran now the same as Khatami? Did I say that? Iran is in a transition periode that could last very long still. As I see it we have three options: 1) Do an Afghanistan on them. 2) Call them, sorry: the state, "evil" 3) Try to support the process already taking place. The difference between Afghanistan is that noone would support US in attacking Iran, the population is well educated, well informed, isn´t starving and is still pissed at the US goverment. We have to convince them we are not the imperalists pigs we were back 10 to 40 years ago. In the light of this the only sound thing to do is option three.
And just two comments more:
1) Please give me any proff of Iran protecting Quada members.
2) If any Al Qaeda soldiers came to Denmark we had to protect them for US. We cannot hand them over to any coutry where they risk death sentence.
And STILL noone have explained Bush double standards regarding Musharraf.
When was the last time a US president told the world what we stand for? I'm glad Bush reminded the world last night.
Some may not know but Jihad TV (aka al jezeera) carried it live. I'm sure they munged the translation. Bush says, "We will end terrorism" Jihad TV translates, "Our Jewish controllers tell us to kill the Muslims".
<strong>When was the last time a US president told the world what we stand for? I'm glad Bush reminded the world last night.
Some may not know but Jihad TV (aka al jezeera) carried it live. I'm sure they munged the translation. Bush says, "We will end terrorism" Jihad TV translates, "Our Jewish controllers tell us to kill the Muslims".</strong><hr></blockquote>
when do you start to use arguments in discussions Scott?
Here is a real one on media and and middle east: On the day when 50 Israelic soldiers of the reserve sent a letter to the Minister of defence stating they would not fight against Palestinians because it is against what they believe the state stands for I couldn´t find anything on it on CNN.com. Not even in the middle east part of the web side. It was a huge history in Israel and in Europe:
when do you start to use arguments in discussions Scott?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
My responce is "**** you"
[quote]Originally posted by Anders:
<strong>Here is a real one on media and and middle east: On the day when 50 Israelic soldiers of the reserve sent a letter to the Minister of defence stating they would not fight against Palestinians because it is against what they believe the state stands for I couldn´t find anything on it on CNN.com. Not even in the middle east part of the web side. It was a huge history in Israel and in Europe:
My responce is "**** you" </strong><hr></blockquote>
Well guess you just lost then
[quote]Originally posted by Scott H.:
<strong>
I'm sure Europe made a huge story out of it. Anything to hate Jews over there.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If "we" hated Jews why would we air an history where Jews were doing something right, eh? Wouldn´t it be better to keep the stereotypical picture of all "Jews hating the Palestinians down there" And BTW: Do Israelis also hate the Jews?
I am STILL comparing the situation in pre 89 Poland and Iran after the Islamic revolution (I say so just above the part you quote FGS) and arguing that religion play a different role in present Iran than in then (pre 89) Poland. Their population was/is both opressed but while religion gave room for opposition in Poland it can´t do the same in Iran now because that card was played in the revolution.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah, yeah but so freaking what? I pointed out in a previous post that the psuedo-religion of Communism once played the same role in Poland that Islam does now. The Communists oppressed and gave no room for opposition. Islam can't play the same role in Iran that the Catholic church played in Poland but some other "ism" can.
[quote]<strong>Is Iran now the same as Khatami? Did I say that?</strong><hr></blockquote>
You wrote is a previous post
[quote]He clearly say "States". That include Khatami. <hr></blockquote>
Probably more comprehensible in your native tongue but I wasn't addressing that quote anyway. In the very next sentence you found it worrisome that Bush didn't acknowledge that Khatami was president and elected. As president I assume Khatami in some way speaks for Iran. Yes?
[quote]<strong>The difference between Afghanistan is... the population... is still pissed at the US goverment. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Some are. A lot probably aren't.
[quote]<strong>We have to convince them we are not the imperalists pigs we were back 10 to 40 years ago. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, we were just anti-communist pigs.
[quote]<strong> If any Al Qaeda soldiers came to Denmark we had to protect them for US. We cannot hand them over to any coutry where they risk death sentence.</strong><hr></blockquote>
And being an opponent of the death penalty I'd support you but I also know better than to expect anything more from Denmark than that.
[quote]<strong>And STILL noone have explained Bush double standards regarding Musharraf.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Support for Musharef is a better option than a radical Islamic state in Islamabad which is clearly what Washington wishes to avoid at all costs. Is the Musharef option a perfect solution? No. But it was under democratic government that Pakistan hatched the idea of a Taliban regime in Kabul.
For those too lazy to look for it and for those who have not Read or Heard it. Here is the State of the Union Adress in it's entirety:
[quote]The Associated Press
Tuesday, January 29, 2002; 10:03 PM
Text of President Bush's State of the Union address, as provided by the White House:
BUSH: Mr. Speaker, Vice President Cheney, members of Congress, distinguished guests and fellow citizens:
As we gather tonight, our nation is at war, our economy is in recession, and the civilized world faces unprecedented dangers. Yet the state of our union has never been stronger.
We last met in an hour of shock and suffering. In four short months, our nation has comforted the victims; begun to rebuild New York and the Pentagon; rallied a great coalition; captured, arrested and rid the world of thousands of terrorists; destroyed Afghanistan's terrorist training camps; saved a people from starvation; and freed a country from brutal oppression.
The American flag flies again over our embassy in Kabul. Terrorists who once occupied Afghanistan now occupy cells at Guantanamo Bay. And terrorist leaders who urged followers to sacrifice their lives are running for their own.
America and Afghanistan are now allies against terror. We will be partners in rebuilding that country, and this evening we welcome the distinguished interim leader of a liberated Afghanistan: Chairman Hamid Karzai.
The last time we met in this chamber, the mothers and daughters of Afghanistan were captives in their own homes, forbidden from working or going to school. Today women are free, and are part of Afghanistan's new government, and we welcome the new Minister of Women's Affairs, Dr. Sima Samar.
Our progress is a tribute to the spirit of the Afghan people, to the resolve of our coalition and to the might of the United States military. When I called our troops into action, I did so with complete confidence in their courage and skill. And tonight, thanks to them, we are winning the war against terror. The men and women of our armed forces have delivered a message now clear to every enemy of the United States: Even 7,000 miles away, across oceans and continents, on mountaintops and in caves, you will not escape the justice of this nation.
For many Americans, these four months have brought sorrow and pain that will never completely go away. Every day a retired firefighter returns to Ground Zero, to feel closer to his two sons who died there. At a memorial in New York, a little boy left his football with a note for his lost father: "Dear Daddy, Please take this to Heaven. I don't want to play football until I can play with you again someday." Last month, at the grave of her husband, Micheal, a CIA officer and Marine who died in Mazar-e-Sharif, Shannon Spann, said these words of farewell: "Semper fi, my love." Shannon is with us tonight.
Shannon, I assure you and all who have lost a loved one that our cause is just, and our country will never forget the debt we owe Micheal and all who gave their lives for freedom.
Our cause is just, and it continues. Our discoveries in Afghanistan confirmed our worst fears and show us the true scope of the task ahead. We have seen the depth of our enemies' hatred in videos where they laugh about the loss of innocent life. And the depth of their hatred is equaled by the madness of the destruction they design. We have found diagrams of American nuclear power plants and public water facilities, detailed instructions for making chemical weapons, surveillance maps of American cities and thorough descriptions of landmarks in America and throughout the world.
What we have found in Afghanistan confirms that ? far from ending there ? our war against terror is only beginning. Most of the 19 men who hijacked planes on Sept. 11 were trained in Afghanistan's camps, and so were tens of thousands of others. Thousands of dangerous killers, schooled in the methods of murder, often supported by outlaw regimes, are now spread throughout the world like ticking time bombs set to go off without warning.
Thanks to the work of our law enforcement officials and coalition partners, hundreds of terrorists have been arrested, yet tens of thousands of trained terrorists are still at large. These enemies view the entire world as a battlefield, and we must pursue them wherever they are. So long as training camps operate, so long as nations harbor terrorists, freedom is at risk and America and our allies must not, and will not, allow it.
Our nation will continue to be steadfast, and patient, and persistent in the pursuit of two great objectives. First, we will shut down terrorist camps, disrupt terrorist plans, and bring terrorists to justice. Second, we must prevent the terrorists and regimes who seek chemical, biological or nuclear weapons from threatening the United States and the world.
Our military has put the terror training camps of Afghanistan out of business, yet camps still exist in at least a dozen countries. A terrorist underworld ? including groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Jaish-i-Mohammed ? operates in remote jungles and deserts and hides in the centers of large cities.
While the most visible military action is in Afghanistan, America is acting elsewhere. We now have troops in the Philippines helping to train that country's armed forces to go after terrorist cells that have executed an American and still hold hostages. Our soldiers, working with the Bosnian government, seized terrorists who were plotting to bomb our embassy. Our Navy is patrolling the coast of Africa to block the shipment of weapons and the establishment of terrorist camps in Somalia.
My hope is that all nations will heed our call and eliminate the terrorist parasites who threaten their countries and our own. Many nations are acting forcefully. Pakistan is now cracking down on terror, and I admire the leadership of President Musharraf. But some governments will be timid in the face of terror. And make no mistake: If they do not act, America will.
Our second goal is to prevent regimes that sponsor terror from threatening America or our friends and allies with weapons of mass destruction.
Some of these regimes have been pretty quiet since Sept. 11. But we know their true nature. North Korea is a regime arming with missiles and weapons of mass destruction, while starving its citizens.
Iran aggressively pursues these weapons and exports terror, while an unelected few repress the Iranian people's hope for freedom.
Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror. The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax and nerve gas and nuclear weapons for over a decade. This is a regime that has already used poison gas to murder thousands of its own citizens, leaving the bodies of mothers huddled over their dead children. This is a regime that agreed to international inspections, then kicked out the inspectors. This is a regime that has something to hide from the civilized world.
States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic.
We will work closely with our coalition to deny terrorists and their state sponsors the materials, technology and expertise to make and deliver weapons of mass destruction. We will develop and deploy effective missile defenses to protect America and our allies from sudden attack. And all nations should know: America will do what is necessary to ensure our nation's security.
We will be deliberate, yet time is not on our side. I will not wait on events while dangers gather. I will not stand by as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons.
Our war on terror is well begun, but it is only begun. This campaign may not be finished on our watch, yet it must be and it will be waged on our watch.
We cannot stop short. If we stopped now, leaving terror camps intact and terror states unchecked, our sense of security would be false and temporary. History has called America and our allies to action, and it is both our responsibility and our privilege to fight freedom's fight.
Our first priority must always be the security of our nation, and that will be reflected in the budget I send to Congress. My budget supports three great goals for America: We will win this war, we will protect our homeland, and we will revive our economy.
Sept. 11 brought out the best in America and the best in this Congress, and I join the American people in applauding your unity and resolve. Now Americans deserve to have this same spirit directed toward addressing problems here at home. I am a proud member of my party, yet as we act to win the war, protect our people and create jobs in America, we must act first and foremost not as Republicans, not as Democrats, but as Americans.
It costs a lot to fight this war. We have spent more than a billion dollars a month, over 30 million dollars a day, and we must be prepared for future operations. Afghanistan proved that expensive precision weapons defeat the enemy and spare innocent lives, and we need more of them. We need to replace aging aircraft and make our military more agile to put our troops anywhere in the world quickly and safely. Our men and women in uniform deserve the best weapons, the best equipment and the best training, and they also deserve another pay raise. My budget includes the largest increase in defense spending in two decades, because while the price of freedom and security is high, it is never too high: whatever it costs to defend our country, we will pay it.
The next priority of my budget is to do everything possible to protect our citizens and strengthen our nation against the ongoing threat of another attack. Time and distance from the events of Sept. 11 will not make us safer unless we act on its lessons. America is no longer protected by vast oceans. We are protected from attack only by vigorous action abroad and increased vigilance at home.
My budget nearly doubles funding for a sustained strategy of homeland security, focused on four key areas: bioterrorism, emergency response, airport and border security and improved intelligence. We will develop vaccines to fight anthrax and other deadly diseases. We will increase funding to help states and communities train and equip our heroic police and firefighters. We will improve intelligence collection and sharing, expand patrols at our borders, strengthen the security of air travel and use technology to track the arrivals and departures of visitors to the United States.
Homeland security will make America not only stronger, but in many ways better. Knowledge gained from bioterrorism research will improve public health; stronger police and fire departments will mean safer neighborhoods; stricter border enforcement will help combat illegal drugs.
And as government works to better secure our homeland, America will continue to depend on the eyes and ears of alert citizens. A few days before Christmas an airline flight attendant spotted a passenger lighting a match. The crew and passengers quickly subdued the man, who had been trained by al- Qaida and was armed with explosives. The people on that airplane were alert, and as a result, likely saved nearly 200 lives. And tonight we welcome and thank flight attendants Hermis Moutardier and Christina Jones.
Once we have funded our national security and our homeland security, the final great priority of my budget is economic security for the American people. To achieve these great national objectives ? to win the war, protect the homeland and revitalize our economy ? our budget will run a deficit that will be small and short-term so long as Congress restrains spending and acts in a fiscally responsible way. We have clear priorities and we must act at home with the same purpose and resolve we have shown overseas: We will prevail in the war, and we will defeat this recession.
Americans who have lost their jobs need our help, and I support extending unemployment benefits and direct assistance for health care coverage. Yet American workers want more than unemployment checks, they want a steady paycheck. When America works, America prospers; so my economic security plan can be summed up in one word: jobs.
Good jobs begin with good schools, and here we've made a fine start. Republicans and Democrats worked together to achieve historic education reform so no child in America will be left behind. I was proud to work with members of both parties ? Chairman John Boehner and Congressman George Miller, Sen. Judd Gregg ? and I was so proud of our work I even had nice things to say about my friend Ted Kennedy. The folks at the Crawford coffee shop couldn't quite believe it, but our work on this bill shows what is possible if we set aside posturing and focus on results.
There is more to do. We need to prepare our children to read and succeed in school with improved Head Start and early childhood development programs. We must upgrade our teacher colleges and teacher training and launch a major recruiting drive with a great goal for America: a quality teacher in every classroom.
Good jobs also depend on reliable and affordable energy. This Congress must act to encourage conservation, promote technology, build infrastructure, and it must act to increase energy production at home so America is less dependent on foreign oil.
Good jobs depend on expanded trade. Selling into new markets creates new jobs, so I ask Congress to finally approve Trade Promotion Authority. On these two key issues ? trade and energy ? the House of Representatives has acted to create jobs, and I urge the Senate to pass this legislation.
Good jobs depend on sound tax policy. Last year, some in this hall thought my tax relief plan was too small, and some thought it was too big. But when those checks arrived in the mail most Americans thought tax relief was just about right. Congress listened to the people and responded by reducing tax rates, doubling the child credit and ending the death tax. For the sake of long- term growth and to help Americans plan for the future, let's make these tax cuts permanent.
The way out of this recession, the way to create jobs, is to grow the economy by encouraging investment in factories and equipment, and by speeding up tax relief so people have more money to spend. For the sake of American workers, let's pass a stimulus package.
Good jobs must be the aim of welfare reform. As we reauthorize these important reforms, we must always remember the goal is to reduce dependency on government and offer every American the dignity of a job.
Americans know economic security can vanish in an instant without health security. I ask Congress to join me this year to enact a Patients' Bill of Rights, to give uninsured workers credits to help buy health coverage, to approve an historic increase in spending for veterans' health, and to give seniors a sound and modern Medicare system that includes coverage for prescription drugs.
A good job should lead to security in retirement. I ask Congress to enact new safeguards for 401(k) and pension plans, because employees who have worked hard and saved all their lives should not have to risk losing everything if their company fails. Through stricter accounting standards and tougher disclosure requirements, corporate America must be made more accountable to employees and shareholders and held to the highest standards of conduct.
Retirement security also depends upon keeping the commitments of Social Security, and we will. We must make Social Security financially stable and allow personal retirement accounts for younger workers who choose them.
Members, you and I will work together in the months ahead on other issues: productive farm policy, a cleaner environment, broader home ownership, especially among minorities, and ways to encourage the good work of charities and faith-based groups. I ask you to join me on these important domestic issues in the same spirit of cooperation we have applied to our war against terrorism.
During these last few months, I have been humbled and privileged to see the true character of this country in a time of testing. Our enemies believed America was weak and materialistic, that we would splinter in fear and selfishness. They were as wrong as they are evil.
The American people have responded magnificently, with courage and compassion, strength and resolve. As I have met the heroes, hugged the families, and looked into the tired faces of rescuers, I have stood in awe of the American people.
And I hope you will join me in expressing thanks to one American for the strength, and calm, and comfort she brings to our nation in crisis: our first lady, Laura Bush.
None of us would ever wish the evil that was done on Sept. 11, yet after America was attacked it was as if our entire country looked into a mirror and saw our better selves. We were reminded that we are citizens, with obligations to each other, to our country and to history. We began to think less of the goods we can accumulate, and more about the good we can do.
For too long our culture has said, "If it feels good, do it." Now America is embracing a new ethic and a new creed: "Let's roll." In the sacrifice of soldiers, the fierce brotherhood of firefighters and the bravery and generosity of ordinary citizens, we have glimpsed what a new culture of responsibility could look like. We want to be a nation that serves goals larger than self. We have been offered a unique opportunity and we must not let this moment pass.
My call tonight is for every American to commit at least two years ? 4,000 hours over the rest of your lifetime ? to the service of your neighbors and your nation.
Many are already serving, and I thank you. If you aren't sure how to help, I've got a good place to start. To sustain and extend the best that has emerged in America, I invite you to join the new USA Freedom Corps. The Freedom Corps will focus on three areas of need: responding in case of crisis at home, rebuilding our communities and extending American compassion throughout the world.
One purpose of the USA Freedom Corps will be homeland security. America needs retired doctors and nurses who can be mobilized in major emergencies, volunteers to help police and fire departments, transportation and utility workers well-trained in spotting danger.
Our country also needs citizens working to rebuild our communities. We need mentors to love children, especially children whose parents are in prison, and we need more talented teachers in troubled schools. USA Freedom Corps will expand and improve the good efforts of AmeriCorps and Senior Corps to recruit more than 200,000 new volunteers.
And America needs citizens to extend the compassion of our country to every part of the world. So we will renew the promise of the Peace Corps, double its volunteers over the next five years, and ask it to join a new effort to encourage development, and education and opportunity in the Islamic world.
This time of adversity offers a unique moment of opportunity ? a moment we must seize to change our culture. Through the gathering momentum of millions of acts of service and decency and kindness, I know: We can overcome evil with greater good.
And we have a great opportunity during this time of war to lead the world toward the values that will bring lasting peace. All fathers and mothers, in all societies, want their children to be educated and live free from poverty and violence. No people on Earth yearn to be oppressed, or aspire to servitude or eagerly await the midnight knock of the secret police.
If anyone doubts this, let them look to Afghanistan, where the Islamic "street" greeted the fall of tyranny with song and celebration. Let the skeptics look to Islam's own rich history, with its centuries of learning and tolerance and progress.
America will lead by defending liberty and justice, because they are right and true and unchanging for all people everywhere. No nation owns these aspirations, and no nation is exempt from them. We have no intention of imposing our culture, but America will always stand firm for the nonnegotiable demands of human dignity: the rule of law, limits on the power of the state, respect for women, private property, free speech, equal justice and religious tolerance.
America will take the side of brave men and women who advocate these values around the world, including the Islamic world, because we have a greater objective than eliminating threats and containing resentment. We seek a just and peaceful world beyond the war on terror.
In this moment of opportunity, a common danger is erasing old rivalries. America is working with Russia, China and India in ways we never have before to achieve peace and prosperity. In every region, free markets and free trade and free societies are proving their power to lift lives. Together with friends and allies from Europe to Asia, from Africa to Latin America, we will demonstrate that the forces of terror cannot stop the momentum of freedom.
The last time I spoke here, I expressed the hope that life would return to normal. In some ways, it has. In others, it never will. Those of us who have lived through these challenging times have been changed by them.
We've come to know truths that we will never question: Evil is real, and it must be opposed. Beyond all differences of race or creed we are one country, mourning together and facing danger together. Deep in the American character there is honor, and it is stronger than cynicism. Many have discovered again that even in tragedy ? especially in tragedy ? God is near.
In a single instant we realized that this will be a decisive decade in the history of liberty, that we have been called to a unique role in human events. Rarely has the world faced a choice more clear or consequential.
Our enemies send other people's children on missions of suicide and murder. They embrace tyranny and death as a cause and a creed. We stand for a different choice, made long ago, on the day of our founding. We affirm it again today. We choose freedom and the dignity of every life.
Steadfast in our purpose, we now press on. We have known freedom's price; we have shown freedom's power, and in this great conflict, my fellow Americans, we will see freedom's victory.
Thank you, and may God bless the United States of America. <hr></blockquote>
<strong>For those too lazy to look for it and for those who have not Read or Heard it. Here is the State of the Union Adress in it's entirety:
</strong><hr></blockquote>
If an individual is too lazy to look for the speech, what makes you think they are going to read it just because it happens to be in front of them? Don't you think a link would have been more appropriate? Now those of us following the thread are going to have to repeatedly scroll through the entire speech.
I read it today in the newspaper. He listed Iran as one of the three "evil" countries.
It is so stupid for a political figure to start slinging this word "evil" around. Its just too easy and too easily can it create a climate of rhetoric that will lead to ugly unthought reactionary politics. It would at least be usefull if he went so far as to try and define what the term "evil" means: does he mean something like they are all possessed by the dark substantive forces of Evil the very substance of negativity of Satan? is he calling Iran part of "The Great Satan"?, or does he mean that humanity has a self-destructive element in its nature that sometimes prevails and is currently dominant in such places etc..
Either way it is simply too charged of a word, and simply negates any subtlety and nuance to the real inhabitants of very large countries.
Its the kind of bald faced propagandizing that is used to "mobilize the masses" by creating a faceless evil scapegoat
I am STILL comparing the situation in pre 89 Poland and Iran after the Islamic revolution (I say so just above the part you quote FGS) and arguing that religion play a different role in present Iran than in then (pre 89) Poland. Their population was/is both opressed but while religion gave room for opposition in Poland it can´t do the same in Iran now because that card was played in the revolution.
Yeah, yeah but so freaking what? I pointed out in a previous post that the psuedo-religion of Communism once played the same role in Poland that Islam does now. The Communists oppressed and gave no room for opposition. Islam can't play the same role in Iran that the Catholic church played in Poland but some other "ism" can.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well I have to disagree. The overwhelming majority of Iranians are Muslims. The overwhelming majority in Poland was NOT Communists. That (and the other factors I mentioned) makes the Poland situation then very differently than Irans now and that was my original argument
Probably more comprehensible in your native tongue but I wasn't addressing that quote anyway. In the very next sentence you found it worrisome that Bush didn't acknowledge that Khatami was president and elected. As president I assume Khatami in some way speaks for Iran. Yes?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Khatamis Presidency and cabinet is a PART of the state, not the same as it. So the state of Iran isn´t only those few opressing the people (meaning the priests) but also an elected president (and his cabinet). Why only tell half of the story and not aid those who is the only key to change?
And being an oponent of the death penalty I'd support you but I also know better than to expect anything more from Denmark than that.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
How much do you know about danish politics?
We have brought up the possibility of an international war tribunal under UN many times over the past five to ten years for things like this so we are prepared for a solution. But US is against it for some reason
Support for Musharef is a better option than a radical Islamic state in Islamabad which is clearly what Washington wishes to avoid at all costs. Is the Musharef option a perfect solution? No. But it was under democratic government that Pakistan hatched the idea of a Taliban regime in Kabul.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Was it an radical Islamic state before Musharef? No. But I can understand if US foreing policy is guided by what serves US best no matter if that means that some countries can´t have democracy because US don´t want that but its quite funny when Bush right after that part of the speech talk about the the poor Iranian people whose non-elected leaders opress them. Who wrote this speech? He must have been aware on the clash between those two parts.
Comments
Last night's speak was not good. It was not even close to the speach he gave back after the attacks.<hr></blockquote>
And it should not be, this was a State of the Union Adress. He was supposed to go to Congress and let them know where the union stands, not really supposed to be a message like the speach after the attacks...
[quote]The country has been back to work and life as normal for months now, and he's saying "I know it's hard, but we have to get back to normal". What the heck was he talking about? In fact, a large part of his speech seemed devoted to making the American public nervous again.<hr></blockquote>
Umm, I don't know aobut you but life is hardly back to normal. Major corperations are going bankrupt one after another, other major companies are laying off and have laid off 10's of thousands of people. Hardly back to normal.
[quote]The speech needed to be more focussed on the economy and domestic issues rather than the 'War'. While I agree that it did need some attention, it most certainly did not require 80% of the speech.<hr></blockquote>
Being that we are in a war the State of the Union should address this issue and did. And I feel that he addressed it for a proper amount of time as we are not going to be done with this war for a long time and it will part of the state of our union for years to come.
[quote]Now back on the subject. Iraq is getting to be a problem, so maybe it's time to remind Saddam that he needs to play by the rules of our 1991 agreement, and if he doesn't, there will be action taken against him.<hr></blockquote>
Been done, and all we get from the guy is the middle finger. Time for action, words are not working.
[quote]Iran is a little bit hazier. They haven't really done any thing specifically to target us in a hostile way like Bin Laden did. Maybe getting their help in exterminating the Al Qaeda network in their country, but I can't see us doing an all out attack on them like we did in Afghanistan.<hr></blockquote>
I have nothing to say on this. I neither agree nor disagree due to a lack of research.
[quote]North Korea seems foolish to attack. First of all, the people there are all starving except for those in the military. The military of North Korea is dedicated to protecting itself from South Korea, not on attacking the United States. Attacking North Korea would also make another country very upset- a country we are trying to be friendly with at the moment. That country is China. Making them upset might only cause the same problems we saw in the Korean War and in Vietnam. Do we really want to repeat those mistakes?<hr></blockquote>
North Korea is a huge problem, and China is even worse. North Korea would attack the US if they had teh manpower and the wherewithal to do it. If they get Ballistic Missiles and other weapons of mass destruction I do not think they would hesitate to point them at the US and threaten us with them. China is the same way. They are bent on becoming the worlds most powerful nation, and the US is seen as standing in the way of that. There will be something that comes out of this, and it will likely not be good.
[quote]Maybe it's just me, but I'm tired of the 'war on terrorism', and I'm sure that a lot of other Americans are too. In a few more months, the ongoing 'war' may become more of a police action rather than any thing else; something more like the war on drugs, but to a higher level. We don't need our entire military devoted 24/7 to hunting down a group which is now nothing more than a pack of criminals.<hr></blockquote>
My, you have a short attention span. Already tired of the war on terrorism, and we are on what I would consider the winning team so far. What would you suggest we do? wait for the Empire State Building to be destroyed so we can go looking for the bad guys again? maybe they could fly a Jumbo jet into a nuclear power plant or the Grand Coulee Dam. Would that get your interest back? I am overstating a bit, but I don't feel that my safety and the safety of the US is something to play games about. Right now our course of action seems appropriate. And I will not tire of it.
If we aren't the aggressor, it's an entirely different situation. But the prospect of another Korean War (okay, so techincally the war never ended), is scary to me.
<strong>
If we aren't the aggressor, it's an entirely different situation. But the prospect of another Korean War (okay, so techincally the war never ended), is scary to me.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well considering the "quagmire" of another "Vietnam" in Afghanistan that all the liberal pundit where hoping and praying for didn't happen at all it seems that freeing N Korea is very do able. In fact it would be easier. Then the people would be free.
Just gotta keep China out of it. Hummm?
<a href="http://money.cnn.com/2002/01/30/economy/economy/"; target="_blank">http://money.cnn.com/2002/01/30/economy/economy/</a>;
The economy grew last quarter. Very good news.
"The worst is over. We're on the road to recovery," said Bill Cheney, chief economist at John Hancock Financial Services.
With all the lying, greedy analysts and economists who thought Enron were the best buy all the way when they went belly up...sorry, I don't trust any of them. Corporate strokers.
Also...
"The small gain in GDP -- a number that will be revised twice more by the government in coming months -- means the economy avoided the standard definition of a recession, two or more straight quarters of declining economic activity.
On the other hand, economists at the National Bureau of Economic Research, who use data such as employment and personal income to define a recession, said last year that a recession began in March, and Wednesday's GDP data does not change that opinion.
"That does not effect us in any way," an NBER spokeswoman said. "[The economists] stick to their guns about their choice."
Good luck finding a job.
Funny, within the past 4 hours I just got two freelance offers. Nothing perminent...but it'll pay the rent. Still think there is a loooong road for many of us. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
<strong>
I was comparing pre 89 Poland and Iran after the Islamic revolution as I wrote. Under the Shah (I have avoided to say it so far but I hope everyone know who put him in power) the people were very opressed...</strong><hr></blockquote>
They still are.
[quote]<strong>The opposition was emerging around Islam, so Islam was and still is part of the liberation of Iran in the mind of people...</strong><hr></blockquote>
The opposition in Poland was centered around Solidarity and their religion.
[quote]<strong>Its a set-up or Its a conspiracy... Do you really believe that yourself?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't think those weren't the two choices I presented. Khatami is said to be a "moderate". I don't know what he is. If he is a moderate, then I need some explanation why Iran exports arms to Palestinians, harbors part of what's left of Al Qaeda and continues it's support of Hezbollah. You have some theories?
<strong>The only thing that scared me from last nights speech was when Bush explained all the Al Quaeda plans they found. Maps of US cities, transportation systems, etc. But, yeah, we're being too hard of the freedom (freedom to terrorize) fighters of this world.
[shrillbushhatingliberal]You're wrong you're wrong. Bush is the real threat. Can't you see he's straight from the Taliban wing of the Republican party. His oposition to abortion is the exact same thing as the Taliban forcing women to wear burkas in public. His economic terrorism of the working class people in this country is the real threat. Not the terrorist groups that want to kill Americans by the 10,000s. Which the US asked for anyway because they are the Great Satan.[/shrillbushhatingliberal]
<strong>
The country has been back to work and life as normal for months now, and he's saying "I know it's hard, but we have to get back to normal". What the heck was he talking about? In fact, a large part of his speech seemed devoted to making the American public nervous again.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
uh... that's exactly the point. he wants us to be nervous because we should be.
don't just let time pass by and pretend everything is great and forgotton. did you even listen or were you too busy preparing your rant?
Have I said anything else? No. But there still is a difference being 1) opressed and then 2) being opressed, exploided and for most parts denied access to medicare and education and without any right to vote. If I was a woman I would actually rather live now in Iran than in the pre revolution. At least now I would have the right to vote, have the opportunity to get an education and get elected.
Me: [quote]The opposition was emerging around Islam, so Islam was and still is part of the liberation of Iran in the mind of people... <hr></blockquote>
You: [quote]The opposition in Poland was centered around Solidarity and their religion.<hr></blockquote>
I am STILL comparing the situation in pre 89 Poland and Iran after the Islamic revolution (I say so just above the part you quote FGS) and arguing that religion play a different role in present Iran than in then (pre 89) Poland. Their population was/is both opressed but while religion gave room for opposition in Poland it can´t do the same in Iran now because that card was played in the revolution.
[quote]I don't think those weren't the two choices I presented. Khatami is said to be a "moderate". I don't know what he is. If he is a moderate, then I need some explanation why Iran exports arms to Palestinians, harbors part of what's left of Al Qaeda and continues it's support of Hezbollah. You have some theories? <hr></blockquote>
Is Iran now the same as Khatami? Did I say that? Iran is in a transition periode that could last very long still. As I see it we have three options: 1) Do an Afghanistan on them. 2) Call them, sorry: the state, "evil" 3) Try to support the process already taking place. The difference between Afghanistan is that noone would support US in attacking Iran, the population is well educated, well informed, isn´t starving and is still pissed at the US goverment. We have to convince them we are not the imperalists pigs we were back 10 to 40 years ago. In the light of this the only sound thing to do is option three.
And just two comments more:
1) Please give me any proff of Iran protecting Quada members.
2) If any Al Qaeda soldiers came to Denmark we had to protect them for US. We cannot hand them over to any coutry where they risk death sentence.
And STILL noone have explained Bush double standards regarding Musharraf.
[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: Anders ]</p>
Some may not know but Jihad TV (aka al jezeera) carried it live. I'm sure they munged the translation. Bush says, "We will end terrorism" Jihad TV translates, "Our Jewish controllers tell us to kill the Muslims".
<strong>When was the last time a US president told the world what we stand for? I'm glad Bush reminded the world last night.
Some may not know but Jihad TV (aka al jezeera) carried it live. I'm sure they munged the translation. Bush says, "We will end terrorism" Jihad TV translates, "Our Jewish controllers tell us to kill the Muslims".</strong><hr></blockquote>
when do you start to use arguments in discussions Scott?
Here is a real one on media and and middle east: On the day when 50 Israelic soldiers of the reserve sent a letter to the Minister of defence stating they would not fight against Palestinians because it is against what they believe the state stands for I couldn´t find anything on it on CNN.com. Not even in the middle east part of the web side. It was a huge history in Israel and in Europe:
<a href="http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,23-2002047812,00.html"; target="_blank">Click here</a>
<strong>
when do you start to use arguments in discussions Scott?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
My responce is "**** you"
[quote]Originally posted by Anders:
<strong>Here is a real one on media and and middle east: On the day when 50 Israelic soldiers of the reserve sent a letter to the Minister of defence stating they would not fight against Palestinians because it is against what they believe the state stands for I couldn´t find anything on it on CNN.com. Not even in the middle east part of the web side. It was a huge history in Israel and in Europe:
<a href="http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,23-2002047812,00.html"; target="_blank">Click here</a></strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm sure Europe made a huge story out of it. Anything to hate Jews over there.
<strong>
My responce is "**** you" </strong><hr></blockquote>
Well guess you just lost then
[quote]Originally posted by Scott H.:
<strong>
I'm sure Europe made a huge story out of it. Anything to hate Jews over there.</strong><hr></blockquote>
If "we" hated Jews why would we air an history where Jews were doing something right, eh? Wouldn´t it be better to keep the stereotypical picture of all "Jews hating the Palestinians down there"
[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: Anders ]</p>
<strong>
I am STILL comparing the situation in pre 89 Poland and Iran after the Islamic revolution (I say so just above the part you quote FGS) and arguing that religion play a different role in present Iran than in then (pre 89) Poland. Their population was/is both opressed but while religion gave room for opposition in Poland it can´t do the same in Iran now because that card was played in the revolution.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah, yeah but so freaking what? I pointed out in a previous post that the psuedo-religion of Communism once played the same role in Poland that Islam does now. The Communists oppressed and gave no room for opposition. Islam can't play the same role in Iran that the Catholic church played in Poland but some other "ism" can.
[quote]<strong>Is Iran now the same as Khatami? Did I say that?</strong><hr></blockquote>
You wrote is a previous post
[quote]He clearly say "States". That include Khatami. <hr></blockquote>
Probably more comprehensible in your native tongue but I wasn't addressing that quote anyway. In the very next sentence you found it worrisome that Bush didn't acknowledge that Khatami was president and elected. As president I assume Khatami in some way speaks for Iran. Yes?
[quote]<strong>The difference between Afghanistan is... the population... is still pissed at the US goverment. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Some are. A lot probably aren't.
[quote]<strong>We have to convince them we are not the imperalists pigs we were back 10 to 40 years ago. </strong><hr></blockquote>
[quote]<strong> If any Al Qaeda soldiers came to Denmark we had to protect them for US. We cannot hand them over to any coutry where they risk death sentence.</strong><hr></blockquote>
And being an opponent of the death penalty I'd support you but I also know better than to expect anything more from Denmark than that.
[quote]<strong>And STILL noone have explained Bush double standards regarding Musharraf.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Support for Musharef is a better option than a radical Islamic state in Islamabad which is clearly what Washington wishes to avoid at all costs. Is the Musharef option a perfect solution? No. But it was under democratic government that Pakistan hatched the idea of a Taliban regime in Kabul.
[quote]The Associated Press
Tuesday, January 29, 2002; 10:03 PM
Text of President Bush's State of the Union address, as provided by the White House:
BUSH: Mr. Speaker, Vice President Cheney, members of Congress, distinguished guests and fellow citizens:
As we gather tonight, our nation is at war, our economy is in recession, and the civilized world faces unprecedented dangers. Yet the state of our union has never been stronger.
We last met in an hour of shock and suffering. In four short months, our nation has comforted the victims; begun to rebuild New York and the Pentagon; rallied a great coalition; captured, arrested and rid the world of thousands of terrorists; destroyed Afghanistan's terrorist training camps; saved a people from starvation; and freed a country from brutal oppression.
The American flag flies again over our embassy in Kabul. Terrorists who once occupied Afghanistan now occupy cells at Guantanamo Bay. And terrorist leaders who urged followers to sacrifice their lives are running for their own.
America and Afghanistan are now allies against terror. We will be partners in rebuilding that country, and this evening we welcome the distinguished interim leader of a liberated Afghanistan: Chairman Hamid Karzai.
The last time we met in this chamber, the mothers and daughters of Afghanistan were captives in their own homes, forbidden from working or going to school. Today women are free, and are part of Afghanistan's new government, and we welcome the new Minister of Women's Affairs, Dr. Sima Samar.
Our progress is a tribute to the spirit of the Afghan people, to the resolve of our coalition and to the might of the United States military. When I called our troops into action, I did so with complete confidence in their courage and skill. And tonight, thanks to them, we are winning the war against terror. The men and women of our armed forces have delivered a message now clear to every enemy of the United States: Even 7,000 miles away, across oceans and continents, on mountaintops and in caves, you will not escape the justice of this nation.
For many Americans, these four months have brought sorrow and pain that will never completely go away. Every day a retired firefighter returns to Ground Zero, to feel closer to his two sons who died there. At a memorial in New York, a little boy left his football with a note for his lost father: "Dear Daddy, Please take this to Heaven. I don't want to play football until I can play with you again someday." Last month, at the grave of her husband, Micheal, a CIA officer and Marine who died in Mazar-e-Sharif, Shannon Spann, said these words of farewell: "Semper fi, my love." Shannon is with us tonight.
Shannon, I assure you and all who have lost a loved one that our cause is just, and our country will never forget the debt we owe Micheal and all who gave their lives for freedom.
Our cause is just, and it continues. Our discoveries in Afghanistan confirmed our worst fears and show us the true scope of the task ahead. We have seen the depth of our enemies' hatred in videos where they laugh about the loss of innocent life. And the depth of their hatred is equaled by the madness of the destruction they design. We have found diagrams of American nuclear power plants and public water facilities, detailed instructions for making chemical weapons, surveillance maps of American cities and thorough descriptions of landmarks in America and throughout the world.
What we have found in Afghanistan confirms that ? far from ending there ? our war against terror is only beginning. Most of the 19 men who hijacked planes on Sept. 11 were trained in Afghanistan's camps, and so were tens of thousands of others. Thousands of dangerous killers, schooled in the methods of murder, often supported by outlaw regimes, are now spread throughout the world like ticking time bombs set to go off without warning.
Thanks to the work of our law enforcement officials and coalition partners, hundreds of terrorists have been arrested, yet tens of thousands of trained terrorists are still at large. These enemies view the entire world as a battlefield, and we must pursue them wherever they are. So long as training camps operate, so long as nations harbor terrorists, freedom is at risk and America and our allies must not, and will not, allow it.
Our nation will continue to be steadfast, and patient, and persistent in the pursuit of two great objectives. First, we will shut down terrorist camps, disrupt terrorist plans, and bring terrorists to justice. Second, we must prevent the terrorists and regimes who seek chemical, biological or nuclear weapons from threatening the United States and the world.
Our military has put the terror training camps of Afghanistan out of business, yet camps still exist in at least a dozen countries. A terrorist underworld ? including groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Jaish-i-Mohammed ? operates in remote jungles and deserts and hides in the centers of large cities.
While the most visible military action is in Afghanistan, America is acting elsewhere. We now have troops in the Philippines helping to train that country's armed forces to go after terrorist cells that have executed an American and still hold hostages. Our soldiers, working with the Bosnian government, seized terrorists who were plotting to bomb our embassy. Our Navy is patrolling the coast of Africa to block the shipment of weapons and the establishment of terrorist camps in Somalia.
My hope is that all nations will heed our call and eliminate the terrorist parasites who threaten their countries and our own. Many nations are acting forcefully. Pakistan is now cracking down on terror, and I admire the leadership of President Musharraf. But some governments will be timid in the face of terror. And make no mistake: If they do not act, America will.
Our second goal is to prevent regimes that sponsor terror from threatening America or our friends and allies with weapons of mass destruction.
Some of these regimes have been pretty quiet since Sept. 11. But we know their true nature. North Korea is a regime arming with missiles and weapons of mass destruction, while starving its citizens.
Iran aggressively pursues these weapons and exports terror, while an unelected few repress the Iranian people's hope for freedom.
Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror. The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax and nerve gas and nuclear weapons for over a decade. This is a regime that has already used poison gas to murder thousands of its own citizens, leaving the bodies of mothers huddled over their dead children. This is a regime that agreed to international inspections, then kicked out the inspectors. This is a regime that has something to hide from the civilized world.
States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic.
We will work closely with our coalition to deny terrorists and their state sponsors the materials, technology and expertise to make and deliver weapons of mass destruction. We will develop and deploy effective missile defenses to protect America and our allies from sudden attack. And all nations should know: America will do what is necessary to ensure our nation's security.
We will be deliberate, yet time is not on our side. I will not wait on events while dangers gather. I will not stand by as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons.
Our war on terror is well begun, but it is only begun. This campaign may not be finished on our watch, yet it must be and it will be waged on our watch.
We cannot stop short. If we stopped now, leaving terror camps intact and terror states unchecked, our sense of security would be false and temporary. History has called America and our allies to action, and it is both our responsibility and our privilege to fight freedom's fight.
Our first priority must always be the security of our nation, and that will be reflected in the budget I send to Congress. My budget supports three great goals for America: We will win this war, we will protect our homeland, and we will revive our economy.
Sept. 11 brought out the best in America and the best in this Congress, and I join the American people in applauding your unity and resolve. Now Americans deserve to have this same spirit directed toward addressing problems here at home. I am a proud member of my party, yet as we act to win the war, protect our people and create jobs in America, we must act first and foremost not as Republicans, not as Democrats, but as Americans.
It costs a lot to fight this war. We have spent more than a billion dollars a month, over 30 million dollars a day, and we must be prepared for future operations. Afghanistan proved that expensive precision weapons defeat the enemy and spare innocent lives, and we need more of them. We need to replace aging aircraft and make our military more agile to put our troops anywhere in the world quickly and safely. Our men and women in uniform deserve the best weapons, the best equipment and the best training, and they also deserve another pay raise. My budget includes the largest increase in defense spending in two decades, because while the price of freedom and security is high, it is never too high: whatever it costs to defend our country, we will pay it.
The next priority of my budget is to do everything possible to protect our citizens and strengthen our nation against the ongoing threat of another attack. Time and distance from the events of Sept. 11 will not make us safer unless we act on its lessons. America is no longer protected by vast oceans. We are protected from attack only by vigorous action abroad and increased vigilance at home.
My budget nearly doubles funding for a sustained strategy of homeland security, focused on four key areas: bioterrorism, emergency response, airport and border security and improved intelligence. We will develop vaccines to fight anthrax and other deadly diseases. We will increase funding to help states and communities train and equip our heroic police and firefighters. We will improve intelligence collection and sharing, expand patrols at our borders, strengthen the security of air travel and use technology to track the arrivals and departures of visitors to the United States.
Homeland security will make America not only stronger, but in many ways better. Knowledge gained from bioterrorism research will improve public health; stronger police and fire departments will mean safer neighborhoods; stricter border enforcement will help combat illegal drugs.
And as government works to better secure our homeland, America will continue to depend on the eyes and ears of alert citizens. A few days before Christmas an airline flight attendant spotted a passenger lighting a match. The crew and passengers quickly subdued the man, who had been trained by al- Qaida and was armed with explosives. The people on that airplane were alert, and as a result, likely saved nearly 200 lives. And tonight we welcome and thank flight attendants Hermis Moutardier and Christina Jones.
Once we have funded our national security and our homeland security, the final great priority of my budget is economic security for the American people. To achieve these great national objectives ? to win the war, protect the homeland and revitalize our economy ? our budget will run a deficit that will be small and short-term so long as Congress restrains spending and acts in a fiscally responsible way. We have clear priorities and we must act at home with the same purpose and resolve we have shown overseas: We will prevail in the war, and we will defeat this recession.
Americans who have lost their jobs need our help, and I support extending unemployment benefits and direct assistance for health care coverage. Yet American workers want more than unemployment checks, they want a steady paycheck. When America works, America prospers; so my economic security plan can be summed up in one word: jobs.
Good jobs begin with good schools, and here we've made a fine start. Republicans and Democrats worked together to achieve historic education reform so no child in America will be left behind. I was proud to work with members of both parties ? Chairman John Boehner and Congressman George Miller, Sen. Judd Gregg ? and I was so proud of our work I even had nice things to say about my friend Ted Kennedy. The folks at the Crawford coffee shop couldn't quite believe it, but our work on this bill shows what is possible if we set aside posturing and focus on results.
There is more to do. We need to prepare our children to read and succeed in school with improved Head Start and early childhood development programs. We must upgrade our teacher colleges and teacher training and launch a major recruiting drive with a great goal for America: a quality teacher in every classroom.
Good jobs also depend on reliable and affordable energy. This Congress must act to encourage conservation, promote technology, build infrastructure, and it must act to increase energy production at home so America is less dependent on foreign oil.
Good jobs depend on expanded trade. Selling into new markets creates new jobs, so I ask Congress to finally approve Trade Promotion Authority. On these two key issues ? trade and energy ? the House of Representatives has acted to create jobs, and I urge the Senate to pass this legislation.
Good jobs depend on sound tax policy. Last year, some in this hall thought my tax relief plan was too small, and some thought it was too big. But when those checks arrived in the mail most Americans thought tax relief was just about right. Congress listened to the people and responded by reducing tax rates, doubling the child credit and ending the death tax. For the sake of long- term growth and to help Americans plan for the future, let's make these tax cuts permanent.
The way out of this recession, the way to create jobs, is to grow the economy by encouraging investment in factories and equipment, and by speeding up tax relief so people have more money to spend. For the sake of American workers, let's pass a stimulus package.
Good jobs must be the aim of welfare reform. As we reauthorize these important reforms, we must always remember the goal is to reduce dependency on government and offer every American the dignity of a job.
Americans know economic security can vanish in an instant without health security. I ask Congress to join me this year to enact a Patients' Bill of Rights, to give uninsured workers credits to help buy health coverage, to approve an historic increase in spending for veterans' health, and to give seniors a sound and modern Medicare system that includes coverage for prescription drugs.
A good job should lead to security in retirement. I ask Congress to enact new safeguards for 401(k) and pension plans, because employees who have worked hard and saved all their lives should not have to risk losing everything if their company fails. Through stricter accounting standards and tougher disclosure requirements, corporate America must be made more accountable to employees and shareholders and held to the highest standards of conduct.
Retirement security also depends upon keeping the commitments of Social Security, and we will. We must make Social Security financially stable and allow personal retirement accounts for younger workers who choose them.
Members, you and I will work together in the months ahead on other issues: productive farm policy, a cleaner environment, broader home ownership, especially among minorities, and ways to encourage the good work of charities and faith-based groups. I ask you to join me on these important domestic issues in the same spirit of cooperation we have applied to our war against terrorism.
During these last few months, I have been humbled and privileged to see the true character of this country in a time of testing. Our enemies believed America was weak and materialistic, that we would splinter in fear and selfishness. They were as wrong as they are evil.
The American people have responded magnificently, with courage and compassion, strength and resolve. As I have met the heroes, hugged the families, and looked into the tired faces of rescuers, I have stood in awe of the American people.
And I hope you will join me in expressing thanks to one American for the strength, and calm, and comfort she brings to our nation in crisis: our first lady, Laura Bush.
None of us would ever wish the evil that was done on Sept. 11, yet after America was attacked it was as if our entire country looked into a mirror and saw our better selves. We were reminded that we are citizens, with obligations to each other, to our country and to history. We began to think less of the goods we can accumulate, and more about the good we can do.
For too long our culture has said, "If it feels good, do it." Now America is embracing a new ethic and a new creed: "Let's roll." In the sacrifice of soldiers, the fierce brotherhood of firefighters and the bravery and generosity of ordinary citizens, we have glimpsed what a new culture of responsibility could look like. We want to be a nation that serves goals larger than self. We have been offered a unique opportunity and we must not let this moment pass.
My call tonight is for every American to commit at least two years ? 4,000 hours over the rest of your lifetime ? to the service of your neighbors and your nation.
Many are already serving, and I thank you. If you aren't sure how to help, I've got a good place to start. To sustain and extend the best that has emerged in America, I invite you to join the new USA Freedom Corps. The Freedom Corps will focus on three areas of need: responding in case of crisis at home, rebuilding our communities and extending American compassion throughout the world.
One purpose of the USA Freedom Corps will be homeland security. America needs retired doctors and nurses who can be mobilized in major emergencies, volunteers to help police and fire departments, transportation and utility workers well-trained in spotting danger.
Our country also needs citizens working to rebuild our communities. We need mentors to love children, especially children whose parents are in prison, and we need more talented teachers in troubled schools. USA Freedom Corps will expand and improve the good efforts of AmeriCorps and Senior Corps to recruit more than 200,000 new volunteers.
And America needs citizens to extend the compassion of our country to every part of the world. So we will renew the promise of the Peace Corps, double its volunteers over the next five years, and ask it to join a new effort to encourage development, and education and opportunity in the Islamic world.
This time of adversity offers a unique moment of opportunity ? a moment we must seize to change our culture. Through the gathering momentum of millions of acts of service and decency and kindness, I know: We can overcome evil with greater good.
And we have a great opportunity during this time of war to lead the world toward the values that will bring lasting peace. All fathers and mothers, in all societies, want their children to be educated and live free from poverty and violence. No people on Earth yearn to be oppressed, or aspire to servitude or eagerly await the midnight knock of the secret police.
If anyone doubts this, let them look to Afghanistan, where the Islamic "street" greeted the fall of tyranny with song and celebration. Let the skeptics look to Islam's own rich history, with its centuries of learning and tolerance and progress.
America will lead by defending liberty and justice, because they are right and true and unchanging for all people everywhere. No nation owns these aspirations, and no nation is exempt from them. We have no intention of imposing our culture, but America will always stand firm for the nonnegotiable demands of human dignity: the rule of law, limits on the power of the state, respect for women, private property, free speech, equal justice and religious tolerance.
America will take the side of brave men and women who advocate these values around the world, including the Islamic world, because we have a greater objective than eliminating threats and containing resentment. We seek a just and peaceful world beyond the war on terror.
In this moment of opportunity, a common danger is erasing old rivalries. America is working with Russia, China and India in ways we never have before to achieve peace and prosperity. In every region, free markets and free trade and free societies are proving their power to lift lives. Together with friends and allies from Europe to Asia, from Africa to Latin America, we will demonstrate that the forces of terror cannot stop the momentum of freedom.
The last time I spoke here, I expressed the hope that life would return to normal. In some ways, it has. In others, it never will. Those of us who have lived through these challenging times have been changed by them.
We've come to know truths that we will never question: Evil is real, and it must be opposed. Beyond all differences of race or creed we are one country, mourning together and facing danger together. Deep in the American character there is honor, and it is stronger than cynicism. Many have discovered again that even in tragedy ? especially in tragedy ? God is near.
In a single instant we realized that this will be a decisive decade in the history of liberty, that we have been called to a unique role in human events. Rarely has the world faced a choice more clear or consequential.
Our enemies send other people's children on missions of suicide and murder. They embrace tyranny and death as a cause and a creed. We stand for a different choice, made long ago, on the day of our founding. We affirm it again today. We choose freedom and the dignity of every life.
Steadfast in our purpose, we now press on. We have known freedom's price; we have shown freedom's power, and in this great conflict, my fellow Americans, we will see freedom's victory.
Thank you, and may God bless the United States of America. <hr></blockquote>
<strong>
My responce is "**** you"</strong><hr></blockquote>
What's a "responce" and when is Scott H. going to respond to these horrible accusations?
<strong>For those too lazy to look for it and for those who have not Read or Heard it. Here is the State of the Union Adress in it's entirety:
</strong><hr></blockquote>
If an individual is too lazy to look for the speech, what makes you think they are going to read it just because it happens to be in front of them? Don't you think a link would have been more appropriate? Now those of us following the thread are going to have to repeatedly scroll through the entire speech.
It is so stupid for a political figure to start slinging this word "evil" around. Its just too easy and too easily can it create a climate of rhetoric that will lead to ugly unthought reactionary politics. It would at least be usefull if he went so far as to try and define what the term "evil" means: does he mean something like they are all possessed by the dark substantive forces of Evil the very substance of negativity of Satan? is he calling Iran part of "The Great Satan"?, or does he mean that humanity has a self-destructive element in its nature that sometimes prevails and is currently dominant in such places etc..
Either way it is simply too charged of a word, and simply negates any subtlety and nuance to the real inhabitants of very large countries.
Its the kind of bald faced propagandizing that is used to "mobilize the masses" by creating a faceless evil scapegoat
. . . .hmmm? who else has done that in history?
<strong>quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Anders:
I am STILL comparing the situation in pre 89 Poland and Iran after the Islamic revolution (I say so just above the part you quote FGS) and arguing that religion play a different role in present Iran than in then (pre 89) Poland. Their population was/is both opressed but while religion gave room for opposition in Poland it can´t do the same in Iran now because that card was played in the revolution.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, yeah but so freaking what? I pointed out in a previous post that the psuedo-religion of Communism once played the same role in Poland that Islam does now. The Communists oppressed and gave no room for opposition. Islam can't play the same role in Iran that the Catholic church played in Poland but some other "ism" can.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well I have to disagree. The overwhelming majority of Iranians are Muslims. The overwhelming majority in Poland was NOT Communists. That (and the other factors I mentioned) makes the Poland situation then very differently than Irans now and that was my original argument
[quote]Originally posted by roger_ramjet:
<strong>quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Anders:
Is Iran now the same as Khatami? Did I say that?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You wrote is a previous post
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
He clearly say "States". That include Khatami.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably more comprehensible in your native tongue but I wasn't addressing that quote anyway. In the very next sentence you found it worrisome that Bush didn't acknowledge that Khatami was president and elected. As president I assume Khatami in some way speaks for Iran. Yes?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Khatamis Presidency and cabinet is a PART of the state, not the same as it. So the state of Iran isn´t only those few opressing the people (meaning the priests) but also an elected president (and his cabinet). Why only tell half of the story and not aid those who is the only key to change?
[quote]Originally posted by roger_ramjet:
<strong>quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Anders:
The difference between Afghanistan is... the population... is still pissed at the US goverment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some are. A lot probably aren't.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Perhaps not on the american people but on the state? Bet on it.
[quote]Originally posted by roger_ramjet:
<strong>quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Anders:
If any Al Qaeda soldiers came to Denmark we had to protect them for US. We cannot hand them over to any coutry where they risk death sentence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And being an oponent of the death penalty I'd support you but I also know better than to expect anything more from Denmark than that.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
How much do you know about danish politics?
We have brought up the possibility of an international war tribunal under UN many times over the past five to ten years for things like this so we are prepared for a solution. But US is against it for some reason
[quote]Originally posted by roger_ramjet:
<strong>quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Anders:
And STILL noone have explained Bush double standards regarding Musharraf.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Support for Musharef is a better option than a radical Islamic state in Islamabad which is clearly what Washington wishes to avoid at all costs. Is the Musharef option a perfect solution? No. But it was under democratic government that Pakistan hatched the idea of a Taliban regime in Kabul.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Was it an radical Islamic state before Musharef? No. But I can understand if US foreing policy is guided by what serves US best no matter if that means that some countries can´t have democracy because US don´t want that but its quite funny when Bush right after that part of the speech talk about the the poor Iranian people whose non-elected leaders opress them. Who wrote this speech? He must have been aware on the clash between those two parts.
[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: Anders ]</p>
It is so stupid for a political figure to start slinging this word "evil" around. Its just too easy
and too easily can it create a climate of rhetoric that will lead to ugly unthought reactionary
politics. It would at least be usefull if he went so far as to try and define what the term "evil"
means: does he mean something like they are all possessed by the dark substantive forces
of Evil the very substance of negativity of Satan? is he calling Iran part of "The Great Satan"?,
or does he mean that humanity has a self-destructive element in its nature that sometimes
prevails and is currently dominant in such places etc..
Either way it is simply too charged of a word, and simply negates any subtlety and nuance to
the real inhabitants of very large countries.
Its the kind of bald faced propagandizing that is used to "mobilize the masses" by creating a
faceless evil scapegoat
. . . .hmmm? who else has done that in history?
But I would also add, that the speach was not all that horrible.
But the phrase "homeland" is awfull
and the idea of the league is so close to "the young pioneers" of the soviets, or the Nazi Youth . . .and other stuff....oops gotta go work...bye