Bush blasts into Obama

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Stoneburner

Diamond Member
May 29, 2003
3,491
0
76
Mccain will be angry. If bushy turns this into an Obama v. Bush campaign, mccain will get fuxored in his nasal cavities.

What an idiot.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,145
9
81
Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Mccain will be angry. If bushy turns this into an Obama v. Bush campaign, mccain will get fuxored in his nasal cavities.

What an idiot.
i agree. While i think what Bush said is true he should just keep his mouth shut and not draw any attention to himself. Unless he does not care or want McCain to win.

last thing McCain wants is bush's help heh
 

Foxery

Golden Member
Jan 24, 2008
1,709
0
0
A guy with his reputation and approval ratings trying to slander the Democrats is nothing but great news for Democrats! Let's hope he does more.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,251
5
0
Originally posted by: Foxery
A guy with his reputation and approval ratings trying to slander the Democrats is nothing but great news for Democrats! Let's hope he does more.
Did you bother to read what Bush actually said?

He didn't mention any one by name but was talking in general. This speech is similar to ones he has been making for years. And it is an argument that people have been making for decades as well.

Go back to Reagan and his answer when asked about the Soviet Union.
"We win, the lose"

When everyone else wanted to talk to the Soviets and accepted the Soviet Union as a permanent part of the world Reagan went against that few and created a plan to confront and challenge the Soviet Union. And look at what happened...
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Joe Lieberman hit the nail right on the head when he said ?President Bush got it exactly right today when he warned about the threat of Iran and its terrorist proxies like Hamas and Hezbollah. It is imperative that we reject the flawed and naïve thinking that denies or dismisses the words of extremists and terrorists when they shout ?Death to America? and ?Death to Israel,? and that holds that? if only we were to sit down and negotiate with these killers ? they would cease to threaten us. It is critical to our national security that our commander-in-chief is able to distinguish between America?s friends and America?s enemies, and not confuse the two.?

I'm no Bush fan but I'm definitely not a BDS guy either. But at least Bush is smart enough to realize and publically state that Iran is a real threat to ME peace...to actually believe that diplomacy will magically solved this problem is truly "flawed and naive" thinking. Diplomacy is a tool that's proven ineffective in this case...what do we do...keep banging away hoping for a different result? Dems for some reason seem to think that they're incredibly good diplomats and can be much more effective. I'm still waiting for Pelosi's and Carter's visits to pay off....yawn...still waiting.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
But at least Bush is smart enough to realize and publically state that Iran is a real threat to ME peace.
One things for certain, since Bush has been President we have been more of a threat to peace in the ME than Iran.
 

FuzzyBee

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2000
5,172
1
81
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
But at least Bush is smart enough to realize and publically state that Iran is a real threat to ME peace.
One things for certain, since Bush has been President we have been more of a threat to peace in the ME than Iran.
Why stop at Bush?
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
But at least Bush is smart enough to realize and publically state that Iran is a real threat to ME peace.
One things for certain, since Bush has been President we have been more of a threat to peace in the ME than Iran.
Right...I'm sure that the Dems will fix it all shortly when they take the White House....like Carter and Clinton did.

Edit: My bad...forgot to add Willie.

 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
But at least Bush is smart enough to realize and publically state that Iran is a real threat to ME peace.
One things for certain, since Bush has been President we have been more of a threat to peace in the ME than Iran.
Right...I'm sure that the Dems will fix it all shortly when they take the White House....like Carter did.
At least we would have a moral ground to stand on unlike now.

 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
But at least Bush is smart enough to realize and publically state that Iran is a real threat to ME peace.
One things for certain, since Bush has been President we have been more of a threat to peace in the ME than Iran.
Right...I'm sure that the Dems will fix it all shortly when they take the White House....like Carter did.
At least we would have a moral ground to stand on unlike now.
So I guess we would all feel better knowing we had the "moral high ground" the day after Iran nukes Israel or vice versa. Somehow that strikes me as very sad...I will find no comfort in that and hope you wouldn't either.

 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
But at least Bush is smart enough to realize and publically state that Iran is a real threat to ME peace.
One things for certain, since Bush has been President we have been more of a threat to peace in the ME than Iran.
Right...I'm sure that the Dems will fix it all shortly when they take the White House....like Carter did.
At least we would have a moral ground to stand on unlike now.
So I guess we would all feel better knowing we had the "moral high ground" the day after Iran nukes Israel or vice versa. Somehow that strikes me as very sad...I will find no comfort in that and hope you wouldn't either.
So you are now equating Israel with Iran. Interesting.
 

BMW540I6speed

Golden Member
Aug 26, 2005
1,055
0
0
Aren't Nazis off limits?

Remember the early comparisons of the Republican call for the Iraq War? Remember the press going wild when anyone, no matter how obscure, dared to call Bush a Nazi?

But being disrespectful only seems to work one way, as usual.

Funny that Bush makes that analogy when most of his family's fortune was made through financing Nazi corporations during Hitler's reign.

Simple-minded rhetoric from a simple-minded president..

What a truly small man occupies such a large office at this hour. January 20 can not come fast enough. Bush should crawl into his Texas Rangers sleeping bag, zip it up tight, and wait for Jan. 21.




 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
But at least Bush is smart enough to realize and publically state that Iran is a real threat to ME peace.
One things for certain, since Bush has been President we have been more of a threat to peace in the ME than Iran.
Right...I'm sure that the Dems will fix it all shortly when they take the White House....like Carter did.
At least we would have a moral ground to stand on unlike now.
So I guess we would all feel better knowing we had the "moral high ground" the day after Iran nukes Israel or vice versa. Somehow that strikes me as very sad...I will find no comfort in that and hope you wouldn't either.
So you are now equating Israel with Iran. Interesting.
Perhaps you can be more specific...what do you find so interesting?

 

yours truly

Golden Member
Aug 19, 2006
1,026
1
81
ffs hurry up george you've only got a few more months to start WWIII

poor fella, at least he tried
 

BMW540I6speed

Golden Member
Aug 26, 2005
1,055
0
0
Who would know better...about talking to and appeasing Hitler than a member of the Bush family? W's grandfather Prescott is practically the poster boy for American collaboration with the Nazis.

Prescott Bush was also alleged to have been involved in the "Business Plot", a conspiracy - according to General Smedley Butler - to overthrow the presidency of FDR, which would have also resulted in an alliance with Germany.

If the Republicans of the 1930s were allowed to have their way, Hitler would now be entering his 98 th year, well-respected as the Fuhrer of a United Europe. The Republicans of that day were opposed to stopping Hitler.

Typical nonsense from a man with no sense of reality, history or accountability.




 

Jebeelzabub

Member
Mar 7, 2008
31
0
66
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
So I guess we would all feel better knowing we had the "moral high ground" the day after Iran nukes Israel or vice versa. Somehow that strikes me as very sad...I will find no comfort in that and hope you wouldn't either.

Why in the world would Iran, providing they even had nuclear weapons, use them on Israel? This makes no sense whatsoever, especially considering that the Israeli's have advanced counterstrike capabilities that guarantee any attacker using nuclear weapons would suffer a counterattack an order of magnitude worse.

Essentially, you attack Israel, your entire country ceases to exist, and untold millions of your citizens would die. Why would Iran do this? Are you saying they're so irrational that they'd willingly sacrifice their entire country to attempt to destroy Israel?

Jebeelzabub
 

manowar821

Diamond Member
Mar 1, 2007
6,063
0
0
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Originally posted by: sportage
CNN

JERUSALEM (CNN) ? In a particularly sharp blast from halfway around the world, President Bush suggested Thursday that Sen. Barack Obama and other Democrats are in favor of "appeasement" of terrorists in the same way U.S. leaders appeased Nazis in the run-up to World War II.
This is going to be a VERY dirty election! What has Bush got to lose?
Gotta agree, for once, with Dubya on this one. His approach has been flawless. Terrorism has become a thing of the past since his great successes in the ME :thumbsup:
Bahaha, are you shitting me?
 

RightIsWrong

Diamond Member
Apr 29, 2005
5,649
0
0
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Joe Lieberman hit the nail right on the head when he said ?President Bush got it exactly right today when he warned about the threat of Iran and its terrorist proxies like Hamas and Hezbollah. It is imperative that we reject the flawed and naïve thinking that denies or dismisses the words of extremists and terrorists when they shout ?Death to America? and ?Death to Israel,? and that holds that? if only we were to sit down and negotiate with these killers ? they would cease to threaten us. It is critical to our national security that our commander-in-chief is able to distinguish between America?s friends and America?s enemies, and not confuse the two.?

I'm no Bush fan but I'm definitely not a BDS guy either. But at least Bush is smart enough to realize and publically state that Iran is a real threat to ME peace...to actually believe that diplomacy will magically solved this problem is truly "flawed and naive" thinking. Diplomacy is a tool that's proven ineffective in this case...what do we do...keep banging away hoping for a different result? Dems for some reason seem to think that they're incredibly good diplomats and can be much more effective. I'm still waiting for Pelosi's and Carter's visits to pay off....yawn...still waiting.
You have a few things that I would like to address so I will go in order of the way that you listed them.

1. Who has rejected Iran, Hamas or Hezbollah as threats and just how effective has bombing them indiscriminately been for us in winning them over?
2. Isn't NOT MAKING MORE enemies equally important as being able to distinguish between our friends and enemies?
3. Obama is smart enough to see the threat of Iran also.
U.S. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) and U.S. Representatives Barney Frank (D-MA) and Tom Lantos (D-CA) today introduced the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act of 2007, which empowers Americans to apply economic pressure on the Iranian regime by establishing a federal list of entities that invest in Iran and allowing for divestment. As Iran continues to threaten regional stability and international security by pursuing a nuclear program, rattling sabers at its neighbors ? especially Israel ? and supporting terrorist groups funded by its energy sector, this bill will enable investors and state and local governments to ensure they are not invested in companies that support Iran?s oil and gas industry.
4. Obama also said that he would not rule out surgical strikes so he is not just talking about negotiating in blind faith and has left military options open.
5. Diplomacy doesn't work overnight. And in case you are wondering how effective Carter can be, why don't you ask the Israelis how many times they have been attacked by Egypt in the last couple of decades.

To rule out diplomacy before you even begin talking or fighting is even more stupid than trying it in the first place. But Leiberman, Cheney, Bush and everyone else with a hard on to protect Israel at all costs don't want to face that reality.
 

BMW540I6speed

Golden Member
Aug 26, 2005
1,055
0
0
So Bush tells us...

1. Keep ignoring the recommendations of the Baker-Hamilton report - No surprises here

2. The voting patterns of American Jews can be manipulated by specious references to Hitler and the hollocaust - Lemme know how that works out

impressed by Obama's consistent handling of these attacks. Stay calm, stay rational, stay on message and hit back during the same news cycle.

 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Originally posted by: Jebeelzabub
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
So I guess we would all feel better knowing we had the "moral high ground" the day after Iran nukes Israel or vice versa. Somehow that strikes me as very sad...I will find no comfort in that and hope you wouldn't either.

Why in the world would Iran, providing they even had nuclear weapons, use them on Israel? This makes no sense whatsoever, especially considering that the Israeli's have advanced counterstrike capabilities that guarantee any attacker using nuclear weapons would suffer a counterattack an order of magnitude worse.

Essentially, you attack Israel, your entire country ceases to exist, and untold millions of your citizens would die. Why would Iran do this? Are you saying they're so irrational that they'd willingly sacrifice their entire country to attempt to destroy Israel?

Jebeelzabub
IMO...judging from their extremist rhetoric...yes.

 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
77,822
35,917
136
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
But at least Bush is smart enough to realize and publically state that Iran is a real threat to ME peace.
One things for certain, since Bush has been President we have been more of a threat to peace in the ME than Iran.
Right...I'm sure that the Dems will fix it all shortly when they take the White House....like Carter did.
At least we would have a moral ground to stand on unlike now.
So I guess we would all feel better knowing we had the "moral high ground" the day after Iran nukes Israel or vice versa. Somehow that strikes me as very sad...I will find no comfort in that and hope you wouldn't either.
Why would Iran nuke Israel or vice versa? This is the sort of insane talk that makes this debate so difficult to have. There is literally zero reason either one of those states would nuke the other unless national destruction was at hand. Since everyone knows this, in a lot of ways a nuclear armed middle east could make the prospect of war LESS likely.

I'm so sick of the idea people have that Iran is just some sort of insane country that can't be predicted or controlled. They are every bit as rational actors as we in the US are if not moreso. They want nukes to defend themselves, not to nuke Israel. This is obvious.
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
Well Bush is still the president. When he is gone whoever is left can appease all they want. So are politicians made because they are appeasers, or just because he called them appeasers?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
77,822
35,917
136
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: Foxery
A guy with his reputation and approval ratings trying to slander the Democrats is nothing but great news for Democrats! Let's hope he does more.
Did you bother to read what Bush actually said?

He didn't mention any one by name but was talking in general. This speech is similar to ones he has been making for years. And it is an argument that people have been making for decades as well.

Go back to Reagan and his answer when asked about the Soviet Union.
"We win, the lose"

When everyone else wanted to talk to the Soviets and accepted the Soviet Union as a permanent part of the world Reagan went against that few and created a plan to confront and challenge the Soviet Union. And look at what happened...
Are you seriously trying to say that Reagan caused the breakup of the Soviet Union? Maybe you should read up on the social and economic conditions of the Soviet Union in the 80's. Reagan being insane and ratcheting up our defense budget might have made them collapse a few years earlier, but to claim that the world had accepted the Soviet Union and somehow his policy of confrontation changed all that is ridiculous.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY