Leader of the Year?

[Dari]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: Dari
Whoever nominates Chirac, who is known more as a criminal in his country and a perpetual nuisance on the international stage, has no ground to stand on. The man is known more for getting in the way of our missions than for anything productive. Hell, 15,000 of his own citizenry dies and he doesn't get reprimanded, mainly because he has "stood up" to the U.S.. If anything, he'll be remembered as another post-war de Gaulle, a man who tried to stop the US "hegemony" by trying to buy all of our gold reserves. What an idiot. lol.

Oh, if you guys can come up to anyone other than a known crook or a man whose only mission in life is to be anti-american, I'll welcome your nominations.

EDIT: With the visceral hatred of Bush in liberal circles, and with the Democratic candidates calling him the "enemy" in their electoral debates, I find it hard that his opponents will maintain composure or think straight when he wins in 2004. Either there will be a mass exodus out of the country or an influx of new patients into mental asylums.

It's not our fault, Dari. Bush said either you're with us or you're against us. Therefore I guess everyone who doesn't agree with him is the "enemy." I have no other choice but to join forces with the enemy. If only this cruel world wasn't so black or white

If you want to join the ranks of our enemies, that is your choice.

BTW, Lula, Putin and Schroeder were against the war, but they have still managed to not annoy us as much as the french. THose are true leaders. The french are just an annoyance.

 

[hagbard]

Dari, Foreign Affairs is part of the neocon propaganda machine, what do you expect?

 

[kage69]

Chirac for Leader of the Year?? :Q



HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

 

[flavio]

Originally posted by: Dari

Oh, if you guys can come up to anyone other than a known crook or a man whose only mission in life is to be anti-american, I'll welcome your nominations.

I thought Bush was already nominated?

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: flavio

Originally posted by: Dari

Oh, if you guys can come up to anyone other than a known crook or a man whose only mission in life is to be anti-american, I'll welcome your nominations.

I thought Bush was already nominated?

He doesn't fir the anti-American part though. Slight problem, but can be cured by saying anti-Islam.

In which case, I go for Ariel Sharon.

 

[flavio]

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: flavio

Originally posted by: Dari

Oh, if you guys can come up to anyone other than a known crook or a man whose only mission in life is to be anti-american, I'll welcome your nominations.

I thought Bush was already nominated?

He doesn't fir the anti-American part though. Slight problem, but can be cured by saying anti-Islam.

In which case, I go for Ariel Sharon.

Bush has done more damage to America than any foreign enemy could dream of. He's about as anti-American as they come.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: flavio

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: flavio

Originally posted by: Dari

Oh, if you guys can come up to anyone other than a known crook or a man whose only mission in life is to be anti-american, I'll welcome your nominations.

I thought Bush was already nominated?

He doesn't fir the anti-American part though. Slight problem, but can be cured by saying anti-Islam.

In which case, I go for Ariel Sharon.

Bush has done more damage to America than any foreign enemy could dream of. He's about as anti-American as they come.

Bush starts a war with false claims thereby ruining any credibility that existed in the office of the President. He did exactly what Saddam did in 91, that is invade another country without substantive provocation (getting pissed is not a credible reason for a war). He sticks us in a desert so we are forced to now nation built at an ever increasing cost that he said he would never do. That any amount of money or lives will make us any better off then when the Brits tried it last century is doubtful.

The economy is adrift with one plan, tax cuts. Nothing else. Well, he does want to roll back environmental progress.



He appoints Ashcroft who wants to be able to arrest citizens with need to demonstrate cause for as long as he likes (that in itself would have been unthinkable even during the Cold War) and stays silent on his actions.

The administration NOW says that the evidence they got from intel was good because it DIDNT say Saddam got rid of WMDs, not that they were there. It seemed "reasonable" to start a war based on non information which is a far cry from saying he HAD them at the time.


Bush? Americas worst nightmare. I never thought I would long for the Clinton days, but Bush did it for me.

 

[Mean MrMustard]

I nominate Dari, NEOCON Commander!

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: flavio

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: flavio

Originally posted by: Dari

Oh, if you guys can come up to anyone other than a known crook or a man whose only mission in life is to be anti-american, I'll welcome your nominations.

I thought Bush was already nominated?

He doesn't fir the anti-American part though. Slight problem, but can be cured by saying anti-Islam.

In which case, I go for Ariel Sharon.

Bush has done more damage to America than any foreign enemy could dream of. He's about as anti-American as they come.

But you have to remember America is Israel's b!tch, so really, Sharon is responsible
Thus he gets my vote.

 

[Insane3D]

Originally posted by: ELP
I nominate Dari, NEOCON Commander!

I'll second that. Will it be decided by a fight to the death between XZeroII and Dari?:Q

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: flavio

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: flavio

Originally posted by: Dari

Oh, if you guys can come up to anyone other than a known crook or a man whose only mission in life is to be anti-american, I'll welcome your nominations.

I thought Bush was already nominated?

He doesn't fir the anti-American part though. Slight problem, but can be cured by saying anti-Islam.

In which case, I go for Ariel Sharon.

Bush has done more damage to America than any foreign enemy could dream of. He's about as anti-American as they come.

Amen. Historians will use Bush-lite as an example of Presidential malfeasance for centuries.

 

[phillyTIM]

I vote for France & Germany's leaders, as the result of this war--no WMDs--were what they told Bush and stuck to their guns from the beginning.

It takes a lot of guts to stand up to the United States, even if it is a childish little weasel boy who is brandishing the huge gun.

And we should applaud France & Germany for this respect. They told us there was no justification for Bush's invasion, and they have been proven to be correct.

 

[phillyTIM]

Further, I think Dari should be Bush Jr's running mate, for all the propoganda she/he spews for his bush-love.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: phillyTIM
Further, I think Dari should be Bush Jr's running mate, for all the propoganda she/he spews for his bush-love.

She/he? Hermaphrodite? Trannie?! :Q

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: phillyTIM
I vote for France & Germany's leaders, as the result of this war--no WMDs--were what they told Bush and stuck to their guns from the beginning.

It takes a lot of guts to stand up to the United States, even if it is a childish little weasel boy who is brandishing the huge gun.

And we should applaud France & Germany for this respect. They told us there was no justification for Bush's invasion, and they have been proven to be correct.

France and Germany's position was for the US to give the UN more time. Apparently 12 years wasn't long enough. Now, you're saying that they insisted Iraq was WMD-free. When did that come about?

BTW, if you have anyone credible to nominate, I'd welcome the person's name.

 

[Martin]

I nominate the King of Swaziland. This courageous, outstanding man has done the right thing by ignoring the pleas of his people and spening an extraordinary amount of money on a personal jet and not on fighting AIDS.

You go King Mswati III!!!!

 

[kaizersose]

Originally posted by: phillyTIM
I vote for France & Germany's leaders, as the result of this war--no WMDs--were what they told Bush and stuck to their guns from the beginning...

why would you nominate them? what have they lead their people to that is admirable?

 

[oLLie]

Originally posted by: lozina

...defied the masses and chosen the right path

Apparently you are a facist. See most people like "democracies" where the people are the power, not some maniacal goon sitting in a throne. In a "democracy" people should be properly represented by the individuals who hold positions in the government. So let's review: government where people vote for actions = democracy, government where person holding power does what he wants, ignoring his people = facism.

LEt's not forget Dari's infamous List

Hey I know it felt really smart for you to say that, but I don't think you can show me a point since the war began that the anti-war crowd in this country was the majority (actually a point where the Iraq-war opponents were even a plurality). Just because a certain group kicks, screams, cries, whines, and protests the most doesn't make them the plurality. So I fail to see how your "point" about democracies supports your opinions of the Bush administration.

 

[dpm]

Originally posted by: oLLie

Originally posted by: lozina

...defied the masses and chosen the right path

Apparently you are a facist. See most people like "democracies" where the people are the power, not some maniacal goon sitting in a throne. In a "democracy" people should be properly represented by the individuals who hold positions in the government. So let's review: government where people vote for actions = democracy, government where person holding power does what he wants, ignoring his people = facism. LEt's not forget Dari's infamous List

Hey I know it felt really smart for you to say that, but I don't think you can show me a point since the war began that the anti-war crowd in this country was the majority (actually a point where the Iraq-war opponents were even a plurality). Just because a certain group kicks, screams, cries, whines, and protests the most doesn't make them the plurality. So I fail to see how your "point" about democracies supports your opinions of the Bush administration.

Hey, I know it felt smart for you to say that, but I don't think you can read. Lozina was talking quite clearly talking about Brazil, hence the post he quoted. So I fail to see how your "point" about the anti-war crowd has anything to do with the post you were replying to.

Dari - I'm not sure how many leaders are going to fit your definition. While I agree with you that Chirac is never going to be leader of the year (I've followed French politics for a while, and he's anything but Mr Clean) I think your reasoning is pretty flawed - he's a bad leader because he's "anti-american"? I don't know if you've noticed, but hes *not* american. He's french, and was elected to lead the french. So if he looks after the French, he's a good leader... It doesn't really matter how he treats America in this regard.

Perhaps your question should really be Leader of the Year who is pro-US. Or perhaps Pro-Bush.

 

[flavio]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: phillyTIM
I vote for France & Germany's leaders, as the result of this war--no WMDs--were what they told Bush and stuck to their guns from the beginning.

It takes a lot of guts to stand up to the United States, even if it is a childish little weasel boy who is brandishing the huge gun.

And we should applaud France & Germany for this respect. They told us there was no justification for Bush's invasion, and they have been proven to be correct.

France and Germany's position was for the US to give the UN more time. Apparently 12 years wasn't long enough. Now, you're saying that they insisted Iraq was WMD-free. When did that come about?

BTW, if you have anyone credible to nominate, I'd welcome the person's name.

Were you under the impression that the inspector's had been there for 12 years for some reason. Maybe you should do a little reading on the subject.

So when are you going to nominate someone credible?

 

[oLLie]

Originally posted by: dpm

Originally posted by: oLLie

Originally posted by: lozina

...defied the masses and chosen the right path

Apparently you are a facist. See most people like "democracies" where the people are the power, not some maniacal goon sitting in a throne. In a "democracy" people should be properly represented by the individuals who hold positions in the government. So let's review: government where people vote for actions = democracy, government where person holding power does what he wants, ignoring his people = facism. LEt's not forget Dari's infamous List

Hey I know it felt really smart for you to say that, but I don't think you can show me a point since the war began that the anti-war crowd in this country was the majority (actually a point where the Iraq-war opponents were even a plurality). Just because a certain group kicks, screams, cries, whines, and protests the most doesn't make them the plurality. So I fail to see how your "point" about democracies supports your opinions of the Bush administration.

Hey, I know it felt smart for you to say that, but I don't think you can read. Lozina was talking quite clearly talking about Brazil, hence the post he quoted. So I fail to see how your "point" about the anti-war crowd has anything to do with the post you were replying to.

#1. Where in lozina's post does he "quite clearly" talk about Brazil? He has a very short reference to part of Dari's original post, and I think it is quite clear that Dari was talking about all three countries' (USA, UK, Brazil) leaders.

#2. Even if lozina's post explicitly talked about Brazil, which it doesn't, or even if the part of Dari's post that lozina quoted had explicitly talked about Brazil, which it doesn't, your argument is still pointless. If either of these scenarios were the case, instead of quoting lozina, I would have quoted Thegonagle and you'd still be wrong.

#3. It's a good thing you disproved the assertion I made in my original post (middle bolded/quoted post)... wait a second, you didn't :Q!

Hey, I know you felt smart/witty with your reply,
but I guess you're the one that can't read. Try again.