|
|
 |
|
|
Pages: 1
Bush and Propaganda
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
Posted by: TotalRecall
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle....storyID=1979690
 Quote:
CRAWFORD, Texas/BAGHDAD (Reuters) - President Bush warned a world partying into the New Year that Iraq had the power to unleash economic chaos if given the chance to mount an attack on the United States.
Bush said on Tuesday he still hoped to resolve the standoff with Baghdad peacefully, but made a fresh pitch to drum up support at home and abroad for possible war to force Iraq to come clean over any weapons of mass destruction.
Asked by reporters about the potential cost of war against Iraq, Bush countered: "An attack from (Iraqi President) Saddam Hussein or a surrogate of Saddam Hussein would cripple our economy.
"Our economy is strong, it's resilient, we've got to continue to make it strong and resilient. This economy cannot afford to stand an attack," said Bush, holidaying at his ranch in Crawford, Texas.
|
...disgusting.
Posted by: Xtren
George Bush really doesn't want that second term does he?
He should face it, so far no nuclear weapons have been found in Iraq, and Iraq does not seems to pose any threat of attacking the United States whatsoever.
Posted by: AtariFX
He's 100% right. Our economy was kicked in the ass after 9/11. If an Iraqi brought a suitcase bomb to the US and cause more damage than the towers, our economy would be crippled. How is that disgusting?
Posted by: Gunslinger
There's a fine line that is being walked here.
There would be economic damage (so he is right), but probably not to the degree, or severity, that he claims when he's making a speech. You have to understand, that while his assertion may be legitimate, that a leader will always use something 'emotional' as a strong piece of rhetoric in an effort to drum up support.
Basically, he has a smart advisor(s) that are telling him to exagerrate a legitimate concern as a tool to gain support. It works. It always has. It always will.
Posted by: Shalome
Quote:
Originally posted by ErikC
He's 100% right. Our economy was kicked in the ass after 9/11. If an Iraqi brought a suitcase bomb to the US and cause more damage than the towers, our economy would be crippled. How is that disgusting?
|
He's 100% right... and 100% wrong at the same time.
Our economy was in the toilet BEFORE 9/11. 9/11 didn't cause the dot-com bust, Enron, WorldCom, and the unemployment resulting from exportation of jobs overseas.
Bush and co. have been counting on the old-school 1950s thinking that war is good for the economy. However, in a modern business context, war doesn't make a lasting mark economically -- it just raises a leader's popularity temporarily, and results in big gain for oil companies who profit from increased prices due to "supply line uncertainty."
If he can keep the populace in a state of fear, uncertainty, and doubt, and the military on war footing for long enough, he almost ensures himself reelection.
Statements of death and destruction made in the midst of celebration are specifically designed to cause fear and dampen any chance that the nation might be trying to "move on." "Remember, at midnight when you're toasting your friends and loved ones with champagne, a terrorist with a suitcase bomb could be lurking 'round your building waiting to blow you up! This would ruin our economy!" Uh, no, corporate practice and governmental squabbling seem to have ruined our economy already, thank you very much...
What's even more disgusting is how quickly people buy every official statement that comes out, and how quickly people forget things that actually happened... read my sig.
Posted by: Shalome
Heh.. you gotta love CNN. Special report: "This just in: Security officials nationwide breathed a sigh of relief this morning, as it seems that US New Years celebrations passed without any acts of terrorism."
Much like the rest of the damn year.
When are we going to stop viewing everything through a haze of vague, unsubstantiated threat?
Posted by: Daedleus
Quote:
Originally posted by Shalome
When are we going to stop viewing everything through a haze of vague, unsubstantiated threat?
|
That's more of a rhetorical question, but...
Maybe when we get a president who doesn't contradict himself in the same quote (and doesn't flat out lie):
Quote:
|
"Our economy is strong, it's resilient, we've got to continue to make it strong and resilient. This economy cannot afford to stand an attack," said Bush, holidaying at his ranch in Crawford, Texas.
|
If it's so strong and resilient, why fear an attack? And along the same lines, why then is the economy still in the toilet after a year? Bush was talking out of his ass when he said that.
The media is a complete waste, as it's already been stated numerous times by numerous people, and to any intelligent person, it's blatantly obvious the media is nothing more than a propoganda tool. I can't watch five minutes of it without it making my stomach turn (that is, if I watch it at all).
What really gets me is that Bush has something around a 70% approval rating. People are stupid.
Posted by: justinious
Quote:
Bush countered: "An attack from (Iraqi President) Saddam Hussein or a surrogate of Saddam Hussein would cripple our economy."
|
Attack from Iraq?!
Posted by: Xtren
Ever since George Bush became president of the United States the economy has been going downhill and by the looks of things it isn't going to get any better for a while. Iraq's attack on the United States, which is never going to occur is just another excuse for the US to issue military action against Iraq.
I agree with what Shalome said about terrorism too. No acts of terrorism have really occured in the United States since 9/11 but yet the nation anticipates an attack every time there's a major occasion, such as the New Year celebrations.
George Bush has to realize there are much larger things he should have on his mind than attacking Iraq, or terrorist attacks occuring in the United States. The situation right now in North Korea is a perfect example.
Posted by: Bored
Quote:
|
Ever since George Bush became president of the United States the economy has been going downhill and by the looks of things it isn't going to get any better for a while. Iraq's attack on the United States, which is never going to occur is just another excuse for the US to issue military action against Iraq.
|
The fact that the economy appears to be low now is only a result of the insanely high economy in the late 90s. Think about it, the economy HAD to come down from that ridiculous 30% returns on mutual fund investment of 1998 and 1999. The economy did most of its dropping in 2000, before Bush was even elected, let alone in office.
Can you forsee the future? I don't claim to, but what I know is Iraq has already attacked our allies in the past. Left alone, they are more likely to attack than not to attack. You don't turn your back on a dog that has bitten once.
Quote:
|
What really gets me is that Bush has something around a 70% approval rating. People are stupid.
|
He has a 70% approval rating because he is doing what 70% of the people want him to do. That's his job. He is elected for the people, by the people, or a group of people anyway. If 70% of the people agree with what he's doing then he should keep right on doing it. Those people recognize that this country cannot afford to go back to sleep like we were before 9/11.
Posted by: redwench
so if 70% of people think that he should kill the jews, he should do it? we elect our leaders to do 2 things: the first is to do what we want them to. the second is to use their best judgement on what should be done, since they are presumably more informed on these matters, as it is their job to be.
be that as it may, i think that any military action must be done by the warmongers. i dont care how sick or old you are, if you want us to start combat, you damn well better be on that front line.
Posted by: AtariFX
Well said bored. You are a smart man. I try so hard to stay out these types of threads. Having to read stupid comments from liberals on the President and the Govt. is funny yet frustrating b/c they just don't understand. His approval rating is 70% because .......HE'S DOING A GOOD JOB!!!
Posted by: Canis Lupus
His approval rating is 70% because he is feeding off the people's emotions from 9/11 ... by continually urging the people to "get back at the people who hurt us", the reaction you get is more due to emotion rather than coherent thought ... hence his "high" approval rating...
yeah, our president is getting back at the bad guys... let him kill all them sons of bitches... they all deserve to suffer and die for what they did to us... bomb em all, let em all die... here's an approval rating for your good work, mister president...
"Stupid comments" from liberals is mainly brought about by stupid decisions by the president... then again, to a republican, is there any liberal comment that they don't consider "stupid"? 
Posted by: redwench
ah yes, good ol conservatives. strom thurmond and his good buddy trent lott. wish everyone was like them, dont you?
Posted by: Iownyourmom
i personally beleive iraq has some hidden weopons, but i think that every nation has weopson of mass destruction still, as long as i dont get a nuke dropped on my head and my parents dont lose work, im happy, big wars cause the economy to rise which is good but war is not so good... if we ever go to war with iraq we are just gonna bomb them like crazy like we did in desert storm...
Posted by: Gunslinger
Big wars only help the economy if it creates the need for production, and subsequently the need for jobs, at home. That's why WW 2 succeeded in bringing the economy out of depression. This country went into total war production. Money was moving all over the place, and we maintained that level of production after the fact.
This war, well, it's not nearly as big an effort to prepare for war as it was then. Short of a huge global catastrophe, we wouldn't really be doing much of anything economically. Instead, we would be alienating our largest oil suppliers. That will drive up the price of the bread, and the butter of our economy. Everything needs oil. Then, you will see oil prices skyrocket. Yes, we have oil reserves, and can get it at home, blah blah blah. Doesn't matter. A war in the middle east really only stands to hurt us economically.
In fact, we don't even need to go to war for that to happen. It just needs to be a rhetorical "threat looming over the horizon." That's enough to put uncertainty into industries that rely on oil (many of them totally rely on it, all of them need it). Uncertainty is all that it takes to bring things down.
Posted by: Xtren
Therefore the United States won't be gaining much, if anything, by attacking Iraq, and George Bush knows this. Everyone knows that Iraq is among the richest countries in the world in terms of oil and a principal supplier. This just goes to show that Bush doesn't want to attack Iraq to save the economy, nor for any other reason from which the United States would benefit other than to drive Saddam Hussein out of power.
Posted by: Canis Lupus
or a personal vendetta to finish what his dad started...
Posted by: AngstMerchant
Quote:
Originally posted by Daedleus
The media is a complete waste
|
This man deserves a beer.
Posted by: AtariFX
Quote:
Originally posted by Canis Lupus
His approval rating is 70% because he is feeding off the people's emotions from 9/11
|
Prove it
There's no way that's the reason that 70% of America supports him.
Posted by: redwench
of course it is. presidents that have actually done things dont get those kind of ratings. and no, sorry, he hasnt actually done anything. he just makes a lot of noise.
|
|
|
|
|
