State of the Union address

Hmmm..wonder what hes gonna say? I've never seen so much number twisting and smoke and mirriors as our State of the Union Address. Its a paradox. Its worthless because of the way they twist the numbers and 'display' for the cameras, but it has to be a requirement. I get so sick of watching the presidents party give him standing ovations for deceptive descriptions of how peachy everything is. Its become a joke...
 
Boring, prolonged advancement of previously released information. Just like all State of the Union speechs. It'll be intersting to see if Powell's speechs to the UN are made public, or better yet, carried live.

I think he made a case for war with saddam, unfortunately, it isn't new so I doubt he has many converts. Sounds like Feb 9 may be the day.
 
We're gonna cure aids in Africa.:laugh:
Might as well fix the hunger problem there while we're at it.:p

I liked the speech over all, but he pulled that shit out of his ass.
(uh, no sick pun intended there.)
 
Squiggy said:
I thought I heard February 5th, Gonz.
Click to expand...

You did. That's the day Powell gives the Security Council more info & asks for a vote. Since wars begin on Sundays, it'll be the 9th, possibly the 16th if Dubya is feeling generous. I did hear him say we're going to war. It was in politico-speak but it was clear as day.
 
Yeah ...and he already lined up iran for the next hit...Probably won't give anyone the time to think about it and move right in when we're done with iraq...Thats really stupid posing that threat right before we hit Irans 'neighbor'. Hes trying to piss them off and hopes they'll flinch...
 
There was some chest thumping and some vague pleasantries then a weak attempt at stirring up some support for Iraq without any new info.

But he did say "America believes in you" which made me feel all giddy.
 
HeXp£Øi± said:
What new info could you possibly need?
Click to expand...


I think a little hard evidence that Iraq does indeed still have weapons of mass destruction would kill that little bit of doubt I still have that we should attack.
 
I think we'll get more of that info when Powell addresses the U.N. In the meantime (and stating the obvious) releasing that information would simply prompt Iraq to move those materials when they discovered through the media that we knew their locations. In my opinion the fact that we have evidence that Iraq had these materials/weapons all the way up into the late 90's is enough. That is, since they can't prove they destroyed them. But why can't they prove it? Because there were no witnesses. I'd love to hear from anyone who actually believes Iraq destroyed any weapons whatsoever freely of their own will and with no witnesses.
 
The majority of U.S. citizens are against war with Iraq without UN support. Some new info or hard evidence that would get the UN support would be nice.

We'll see what happens with Powell though.
 
Well, if Iraq HAD wmds, in particular nukes, do you think we'd be going to war like this? There is no new evidence, because there IS no evidence. He may be working on it, and indeed it seems reasonable to assume that he is, but I don't think we would be going about it this way if we thought he actually had them and intended to use them. Because he WOULD use them, on our troops, and on Israel! We are trying to take him out BEFORE he gets them, thats what they aren't saying, and thats why there is no evidence. I guess either way you can make an argument for it, but still... I guess is sound more justified this way.

But anyway, it seems like there is no way out of it now.

btw, I guess I'm not against it so much anymore, I'm more indifferent. There is a case even without evidence, it just doesn't seem 'fair' if there is such a thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top