Newsflash: America does not own the world. Pakistan is a sovereign state with its own laws.
I agree America does not own the world.
However I am not a fan of WMD proliferation for obvious reasons and I simply believe (and this is only my opinion) that the entire world (UN) or other form of governing body should demand real punishment to people that proliferate WMD.
As a side note about you raising the issue about Pakistan being a sovereign state with its own laws,, Do you dismiss this argument in regard to Iraq?
Quote:
And why are some European countries right for following public opinion and staying out of the war, but Pakistan is wrong for following its public's opinion and condemning - but not jailing - its "national hero"?
Their "national hero" proliferated WMD technology and materials to questionable parties.
Just because a person is a "national hero" does not mean they are immune to doing something against the interests of humanity at large and should be immune from punishment.
After reading the transcript I still believe it was unfortunate that the Joking about WMD was carried out for reasons that John Kerry has stated in his reply to this issue.
Following the joking with a bit of recognition of the troops is not enough to sweep the unfortunate jokes under the rug in my opinion.
However I am not a fan of WMD proliferation for obvious reasons and I simply believe (and this is only my opinion) that the entire world (UN) or other form of governing body should demand real punishment to people that proliferate WMD.
The UN has no power or right to dole out judicial rulings and/or punishments associated with the aforementioned proceedings to any citizen of any sovereign nation.
UN resolutions are not law. Let that be clear. Any agreement made in the UN can be broken by any involved party without direct retribution for the breach of contract. Sure, nations can agree to 'punish' a country through the UN (i.e. agree to economic sanctions) but in itself, the UN does not 'punish' nations or individuals. The UN cannot extridite anybody.
The closest thing that exists to handle an issue of this sort is the International Court of Justice in the Hague.
Quote:
Their "national hero" proliferated WMD technology and materials to questionable parties.
Just because a person is a "national hero" does not mean they are immune to doing something against the interests of humanity at large and should be immune from punishment.
Fellows
At the risk of repeating something I posted eariler, Musharref will not do anything to compromise his political future.
Jailing, executing, or doing anything else of the sort to a "national hero" would seriously undermine Musharref's stance with his own people.
One thing about being President is you get lots of advice. Yes, Mother. (Laughter.) Yes, Mother. (Laughter.) Mother, would you just listen to us for once. (Laughter.)
Well I don't because I just can't get over that bit where he's making fun of other people's misfortune. I was taught at quite a young age that this is never right. It's the equivalent of running away with a cripple's wheelchair and then standing back and laughing while they drag themselves along the pavement.
After reading the transcript I still believe it was unfortunate that the Joking about WMD was carried out for reasons that John Kerry has stated in his reply to this issue.
Following the joking with a bit of recognition of the troops is not enough to sweep the unfortunate jokes under the rug in my opinion.
Fellows
Well I guess Kerry needs to hire some joke writers as well.
Quote:
But Kerry himself has had trouble with pushing the humor envelope.
"Somebody told me the other day that the Secret Service has orders that if George Bush is shot, they're to shoot Quayle," Kerry joked in 1988. The Massachusetts Democrat then said, "There isn't any press here, is there?"
Gee Presidential and Vice-Presidential assasination. So funny....really.... these are the jokes folks...ba-dum...dum...dumb....
Well I don't because I just can't get over that bit where he's making fun of other people's misfortune. I was taught at quite a young age that this is never right. It's the equivalent of running away with a cripple's wheelchair and then standing back and laughing while they drag themselves along the pavement.
Errr...? What?
I was talking about the part I quoted. The part about his mother giving him constant "advice."
How on Earth does that have to do with cripples in wheelchairs???
I was talking about the part I quoted. The part about his mother giving him constant "advice."
How on Earth does that have to do with cripples in wheelchairs???
I am referring directly to the subject of this thread. A little more than an unfortunate joke me thinks. I note the failure of so many of either persuasion to address this directly. I don't blame you. Our sychophantic PM is bad enough. I'd be in denial too if he was as big an idiot as George.
Why is Musharraf in power right now? Because the US wants him there. Who are his bodyguards? US special forces. Why is Pakistan starting to go into tribal areas?
Quote:
Jailing, executing, or doing anything else of the sort to a "national hero" would seriously undermine Musharref's stance with his own people.
Not only can you not spell the name, but you say this like it is news.
Quote:
He won't touch this guy with a ten foot pole.
But not because we can't.
We won't because he's our guy running pakistan.
What Khan did will likely turn out to be the most significant factor in international relations for the next couple decades and has changed the course of world history dramatically.
Intentionally meddling in another government's decisions, that could fuel anti-US sentiment in a politically volatile and nuclear-threatened region of the world, would be even more dumb.
Newsflash: America does not own the world. Pakistan is a sovereign state with its own laws.
we meddled in iraq, it fueled anti-US sentiment for a false claim of WMD
iraq is a sovereign state with its own laws
pakistan has WMD and gave WMD to "hostile" countries...why invade one but not the other?? why invade one and not even slap the hand of the other?? that is all fellows is asking...bushie can't answer because the answer will hurt him badly...he wanted saddam, he lied to america about it and he (well not he, but soldiers he put out on the front line) went and got him...all on the american peoples dime and the american peoples psyche...but i'm sure he sleeps soundly on big fluffy pillows as 585 american mothers cry themselves to sleep each night, nightmares each night of their child being killed so young and so far from home....
"Pakistan's president pardoned the country's top nuclear scientist Thursday for leaking weapons technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea."
And you have this:
"Musharraf was unapologetic about pardoning Khan, whom he referred to as a "hero" many times in a two-hour news conference at army headquarters Thursday. "Whatever I have done, I have tried to shield him," he said."
Where are Bush and Blair on this? Funny they do not demand our "US friendly" partner Pakistan to seize Kahn's home and assets and put him in prison or worse.
Double FREAKING Standards. Bush has no integrity. The war in Iraq was not about WMD. If WMD were the concern Kahn would either be dead or in prison today not keeping his millions and his mansions in Pakistan.
Yes this pisses me off.
Fellowship
Why go after Kahn? He's just the tool in Pakistan's machine.
Even if Bush does not believe he lied to or misled the public, how can he make fun of the rationale for a war that has killed and maimed thousands? Imagine if Lyndon Johnson had joked about the trumped-up Gulf of Tonkin incident that he deceitfully used as a rationale for U.S. military action in Vietnam: "Who knew that fish had torpedoes?" Or if Ronald Reagan appeared at a correspondents event following the truck-bombing at the Marines barracks in Beirut--which killed over 200 American servicemen--and said, "Guess we forgot to put in a stop light." Or if Clinton had come out after the bombing of Serbia--during which U.S. bombs errantly destroyed the Chinese embassy and killed several people there--and said, "The problem is, those embassies--they all look alike."
On a simplistic level, the speech is very funny, I did laugh when he says he's playing poker to remember the names of world leaders.
However, as I've said in another thread, the job of presidency must at all times be a reflection of the seriousness and responsibility that the position demands. Joking about the lies of WMD and the issues that have cost the lives of tens of thousands of people is simply unacceptable and really, just plain dumb, in any circumstance. I doubt any of the parents of dead servicemen, or even the living ones under daily attack, found it funny, nor the families of 10000 dead iraqis, nor anyone with a decent sense of moral consciousness.
I 100% agree with fellowship. If i was in the US, I wouldn't want to choose between Bush or Kerry, both are equally Vile.
Why go after Hussein's cronies? They were just his tools. Why not just arrest the country?
There is no defending Bush here, it is pathetic and sad.
I still don't get this. What would you have him do?
Arresting the guy is outside his jurisdiction, isolating Pakistan is dangerous and destabilizing. Does no one remember how hard it was to get them onside in the first place? This is a country that, along with India, has elements in it prepared to launch Armaggedon over a piece of real estate.
How does anyone know that US displeasure has not been voiced through diplomatic channels? Does any thinking person really believe that Musharraf would alienate the few grassroots supprters he has, to jail someone with this guy's public support?
Is it worth having hardline elements sympathetic to Al Queda retaking the Gov't simply to say we did something? The trafficking has been stopped and can't be undone.
I understand the anti-Bush posters that are common in every AO thread. What I don't understand are those (both left and right in this thread) who would seem to be ignoring the geo-politics of the region and thinking all this is happening in a vacuum.
Why is Musharraf in power right now? Because the US wants him there. Who are his bodyguards? US special forces. Why is Pakistan starting to go into tribal areas?
Not only can you not spell the name, but you say this like it is news.
But not because we can't.
We won't because he's our guy running pakistan.
What Khan did will likely turn out to be the most significant factor in international relations for the next couple decades and has changed the course of world history dramatically.
Wow! Two pages of nonsense until giant finally hits the nail on the head. The US had known about Khan for awhile now and had been keeping track of what he was up to. Remember the NK ship intercepted in international waters with the help of the Spanish? How about Libya coming clean? And Iran? That's just what we know publicly.
And who says the US hasn't severely reprimanded Pakistan? For two years they have done practically nothing inside their borders and all of the sudden a major operation is taking place. And that's just on the surface.
The same people who fault the Administration for not acting diplomatically now faults them when they do. Go figure.
Comments
Originally posted by Frank777
Newsflash: America does not own the world. Pakistan is a sovereign state with its own laws.
I agree America does not own the world.
However I am not a fan of WMD proliferation for obvious reasons and I simply believe (and this is only my opinion) that the entire world (UN) or other form of governing body should demand real punishment to people that proliferate WMD.
As a side note about you raising the issue about Pakistan being a sovereign state with its own laws,, Do you dismiss this argument in regard to Iraq?
Quote:
And why are some European countries right for following public opinion and staying out of the war, but Pakistan is wrong for following its public's opinion and condemning - but not jailing - its "national hero"?
Their "national hero" proliferated WMD technology and materials to questionable parties.
Just because a person is a "national hero" does not mean they are immune to doing something against the interests of humanity at large and should be immune from punishment.
Fellows
Originally posted by trumptman
Perhaps you ought to read it without the spin.
Nick
After reading the transcript I still believe it was unfortunate that the Joking about WMD was carried out for reasons that John Kerry has stated in his reply to this issue.
Following the joking with a bit of recognition of the troops is not enough to sweep the unfortunate jokes under the rug in my opinion.
Fellows
Originally posted by SDW2001
Well that makes me feel all warm and fuzzy. How exactly do we stop "acting like we do"?
Eh? by not getting tangled up in world affairs that don't need to pertain to us. Converting people to democracy..et al.
Originally posted by Fellowship
However I am not a fan of WMD proliferation for obvious reasons and I simply believe (and this is only my opinion) that the entire world (UN) or other form of governing body should demand real punishment to people that proliferate WMD.
The UN has no power or right to dole out judicial rulings and/or punishments associated with the aforementioned proceedings to any citizen of any sovereign nation.
UN resolutions are not law. Let that be clear. Any agreement made in the UN can be broken by any involved party without direct retribution for the breach of contract. Sure, nations can agree to 'punish' a country through the UN (i.e. agree to economic sanctions) but in itself, the UN does not 'punish' nations or individuals. The UN cannot extridite anybody.
The closest thing that exists to handle an issue of this sort is the International Court of Justice in the Hague.
Their "national hero" proliferated WMD technology and materials to questionable parties.
Just because a person is a "national hero" does not mean they are immune to doing something against the interests of humanity at large and should be immune from punishment.
Fellows
At the risk of repeating something I posted eariler, Musharref will not do anything to compromise his political future.
Jailing, executing, or doing anything else of the sort to a "national hero" would seriously undermine Musharref's stance with his own people.
He won't touch this guy with a ten foot pole.
One thing about being President is you get lots of advice. Yes, Mother. (Laughter.) Yes, Mother. (Laughter.) Mother, would you just listen to us for once. (Laughter.)
Actually, I found this part quite funny.
It reminds me a lot of my own mother.
Originally posted by job
Actually, I found this part quite funny.
It reminds me a lot of my own mother.
Well I don't because I just can't get over that bit where he's making fun of other people's misfortune. I was taught at quite a young age that this is never right. It's the equivalent of running away with a cripple's wheelchair and then standing back and laughing while they drag themselves along the pavement.
Originally posted by Fellowship
After reading the transcript I still believe it was unfortunate that the Joking about WMD was carried out for reasons that John Kerry has stated in his reply to this issue.
Following the joking with a bit of recognition of the troops is not enough to sweep the unfortunate jokes under the rug in my opinion.
Fellows
Well I guess Kerry needs to hire some joke writers as well.
But Kerry himself has had trouble with pushing the humor envelope.
"Somebody told me the other day that the Secret Service has orders that if George Bush is shot, they're to shoot Quayle," Kerry joked in 1988. The Massachusetts Democrat then said, "There isn't any press here, is there?"
Gee Presidential and Vice-Presidential assasination. So funny....really.... these are the jokes folks...ba-dum...dum...dumb....
Nick
Originally posted by crazychester
Well I don't because I just can't get over that bit where he's making fun of other people's misfortune. I was taught at quite a young age that this is never right. It's the equivalent of running away with a cripple's wheelchair and then standing back and laughing while they drag themselves along the pavement.
Errr...? What?
I was talking about the part I quoted. The part about his mother giving him constant "advice."
How on Earth does that have to do with cripples in wheelchairs???
Originally posted by job
Errr...? What?
I was talking about the part I quoted. The part about his mother giving him constant "advice."
How on Earth does that have to do with cripples in wheelchairs???
I am referring directly to the subject of this thread. A little more than an unfortunate joke me thinks. I note the failure of so many of either persuasion to address this directly. I don't blame you. Our sychophantic PM is bad enough. I'd be in denial too if he was as big an idiot as George.
Originally posted by job
....
Why is Musharraf in power right now? Because the US wants him there. Who are his bodyguards? US special forces. Why is Pakistan starting to go into tribal areas?
Jailing, executing, or doing anything else of the sort to a "national hero" would seriously undermine Musharref's stance with his own people.
Not only can you not spell the name, but you say this like it is news.
He won't touch this guy with a ten foot pole.
But not because we can't.
We won't because he's our guy running pakistan.
What Khan did will likely turn out to be the most significant factor in international relations for the next couple decades and has changed the course of world history dramatically.
Originally posted by Frank777
Intentionally meddling in another government's decisions, that could fuel anti-US sentiment in a politically volatile and nuclear-threatened region of the world, would be even more dumb.
Newsflash: America does not own the world. Pakistan is a sovereign state with its own laws.
we meddled in iraq, it fueled anti-US sentiment for a false claim of WMD
iraq is a sovereign state with its own laws
pakistan has WMD and gave WMD to "hostile" countries...why invade one but not the other?? why invade one and not even slap the hand of the other?? that is all fellows is asking...bushie can't answer because the answer will hurt him badly...he wanted saddam, he lied to america about it and he (well not he, but soldiers he put out on the front line) went and got him...all on the american peoples dime and the american peoples psyche...but i'm sure he sleeps soundly on big fluffy pillows as 585 american mothers cry themselves to sleep each night, nightmares each night of their child being killed so young and so far from home....
g
Originally posted by Fellowship
And then you have This
Then you have:
"Pakistan's president pardoned the country's top nuclear scientist Thursday for leaking weapons technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea."
And you have this:
"Musharraf was unapologetic about pardoning Khan, whom he referred to as a "hero" many times in a two-hour news conference at army headquarters Thursday. "Whatever I have done, I have tried to shield him," he said."
Taken from This Link
Where are Bush and Blair on this? Funny they do not demand our "US friendly" partner Pakistan to seize Kahn's home and assets and put him in prison or worse.
Double FREAKING Standards. Bush has no integrity. The war in Iraq was not about WMD. If WMD were the concern Kahn would either be dead or in prison today not keeping his millions and his mansions in Pakistan.
Yes this pisses me off.
Fellowship
Why go after Kahn? He's just the tool in Pakistan's machine.
There is no defending Bush here, it is pathetic and sad.
Originally posted by Scott
Why go after Kahn? He's just the tool in Pakistan's machine.
What would you suggest?
Fellows
Originally posted by SDW2001
You know, at this point it really doesn't matter what Bush does...the Bush haters will attack him for everything. .
You know, at this point it really doesn't matter what Bush does . . . SDW will still see rosy brilliant leadership
I wouldn't get too huffy about it though . . . but then again, my son was not killed in Iraq either
Bet the other jokes and pictures were pretty funy though
Originally posted by pfflam
The jokes are in poor taste . . . they reveal a flaw in reading the situation
I wouldn't get too huffy about it though . . . but then again, my son was not killed in Iraq either
Bet the other jokes and pictures were pretty funy though
David Corn put it nicely ,
Even if Bush does not believe he lied to or misled the public, how can he make fun of the rationale for a war that has killed and maimed thousands? Imagine if Lyndon Johnson had joked about the trumped-up Gulf of Tonkin incident that he deceitfully used as a rationale for U.S. military action in Vietnam: "Who knew that fish had torpedoes?" Or if Ronald Reagan appeared at a correspondents event following the truck-bombing at the Marines barracks in Beirut--which killed over 200 American servicemen--and said, "Guess we forgot to put in a stop light." Or if Clinton had come out after the bombing of Serbia--during which U.S. bombs errantly destroyed the Chinese embassy and killed several people there--and said, "The problem is, those embassies--they all look alike."
On a simplistic level, the speech is very funny, I did laugh when he says he's playing poker to remember the names of world leaders.
However, as I've said in another thread, the job of presidency must at all times be a reflection of the seriousness and responsibility that the position demands. Joking about the lies of WMD and the issues that have cost the lives of tens of thousands of people is simply unacceptable and really, just plain dumb, in any circumstance. I doubt any of the parents of dead servicemen, or even the living ones under daily attack, found it funny, nor the families of 10000 dead iraqis, nor anyone with a decent sense of moral consciousness.
I 100% agree with fellowship. If i was in the US, I wouldn't want to choose between Bush or Kerry, both are equally Vile.
Originally posted by groverat
Why go after Hussein's cronies? They were just his tools. Why not just arrest the country?
There is no defending Bush here, it is pathetic and sad.
I still don't get this. What would you have him do?
Arresting the guy is outside his jurisdiction, isolating Pakistan is dangerous and destabilizing. Does no one remember how hard it was to get them onside in the first place? This is a country that, along with India, has elements in it prepared to launch Armaggedon over a piece of real estate.
How does anyone know that US displeasure has not been voiced through diplomatic channels? Does any thinking person really believe that Musharraf would alienate the few grassroots supprters he has, to jail someone with this guy's public support?
Is it worth having hardline elements sympathetic to Al Queda retaking the Gov't simply to say we did something? The trafficking has been stopped and can't be undone.
I understand the anti-Bush posters that are common in every AO thread. What I don't understand are those (both left and right in this thread) who would seem to be ignoring the geo-politics of the region and thinking all this is happening in a vacuum.
Originally posted by giant
Why is Musharraf in power right now? Because the US wants him there. Who are his bodyguards? US special forces. Why is Pakistan starting to go into tribal areas?
Not only can you not spell the name, but you say this like it is news.
But not because we can't.
We won't because he's our guy running pakistan.
What Khan did will likely turn out to be the most significant factor in international relations for the next couple decades and has changed the course of world history dramatically.
Wow! Two pages of nonsense until giant finally hits the nail on the head. The US had known about Khan for awhile now and had been keeping track of what he was up to. Remember the NK ship intercepted in international waters with the help of the Spanish? How about Libya coming clean? And Iran? That's just what we know publicly.
And who says the US hasn't severely reprimanded Pakistan? For two years they have done practically nothing inside their borders and all of the sudden a major operation is taking place. And that's just on the surface.
The same people who fault the Administration for not acting diplomatically now faults them when they do. Go figure.