I Am Not Un-American, Just Tired

[jjw1965]

I do not hate President Bush, I'm just pointing out the tyrannical things that this administration is up to, and that includes the previous administration as well, they are two sides of the same coin, both run by the same gangsters. they may have some different views but that's just reteric, they both have had the same goal and thats to push toward the new world order.

 

[jjw1965]

I'll ask another question then if it is ok. If it isn't I'm sure I'll hear about it

How has Bush affected Canada and Canadian people? Have Canadians suffered under his watch? What about the previous administrations who also experienced terrorism against U.S. properties around the world and did little to combat it, other than a couple of lobbed missiles at Kaddafi and to remove Hussein from Kuwait (a coalition which included Canada).

I can't believe that any administration whether it be the U.S. or a European nation, or the Australians for example have such an influence on what happens to Canada and Canadians to raise such a set of comments.

I am aware of how people feel about the Iraq invasion but how has it affected any of the people here to get so exercised over the topic?

If we we were discussing matters of trade and economics I could understand some of the decisions which have affected Canada negatively, but if the American people are paying for the Iraq situation, how can this bother Canadian people who can sit back and view it from afar?

Please read the thread on The Coming American Union

 

[Ocean Breeze]

However, the claim Bush squandered the sympathy for the US after 9/11 is nonsense.

hope this is not a serious remark......as it is so blatantly wrong, it cries out in distress. Bush had not only the "sympathy" of the world........he had the world's support post 9-11, If ever in recent history there was a brief moment of unity and collective support for not only the US but for each other. Then the bushman brought up Iraq......following an agenda he had in mind since before 9-11 , and this collective unity - as new and fragile as it was.......dissapated almost immediately. He (if he had been SMART ) could have utilized this "unity" in so many positive , collaborative ways to not only counter terrorism, but move towards a more peaceful world. Instead , he chose an invasion that has fostered even more terrorism./and anger at the US. It is this anger that builds on itself that creates "hatred"Anyone who can't see that has some serious blinders on. Heck, if he had handled it EFFECTIVELY , collectively........I doubt any of this discussion would be taking place. He had the audacity to use 9-11 to foster/promote his own agenda. ---and this is another tragedy of it all. A tragic event could have been used for so much positive..........and yet it has been used for so much negative.

Not sure anyone "hates" bush . He is too pitiful a man/leader to bother 'hating'. But he bears watching, and watching closely.

 

[I think not]

However, the claim Bush squandered the sympathy for the US after 9/11 is nonsense.

hope this is not a serious remark......as it is so blatantly wrong, it cries out in distress. Bush had not only the "sympathy" of the world........he had the world's support post 9-11, If ever in recent history there was a brief moment of unity and collective support for not only the US but for each other. Then the bushman brought up Iraq......following an agenda he had in mind since before 9-11 , and this collective unity - as new and fragile as it was.......dissapated almost immediately. He (if he had been SMART ) could have utilized this "unity" in so many positive , collaborative ways to not only counter terrorism, but move towards a more peaceful world. Instead , he chose an invasion that has fostered even more terrorism./and anger at the US. It is this anger that builds on itself that creates "hatred"Anyone who can't see that has some serious blinders on. Heck, if he had handled it EFFECTIVELY , collectively........I doubt any of this discussion would be taking place. He had the audacity to use 9-11 to foster/promote his own agenda. ---and this is another tragedy of it all.

Try and stop selective editing, I know you're good at it, but you spin the entire comment. Although you touched upon it slightly here:

"If ever in recent history there was a brief moment of unity and collective support for not only the US but for each other."

 

[Ocean Breeze]

However, the claim Bush squandered the sympathy for the US after 9/11 is nonsense. The sympathy was but a blip, hatred however is chronic.

don't think so. Hatred is not "chronic" . It can become persistant when it is continually fostered. People get angry when they are persistantly ill treated........and that turns to rage....and then "hatred". Hatred does not erupt overnight.

Maybe instead of analysing what makes "terrorists tick".......it might be an idea to analyse what the US does that fosters such anger world wide and the fact that it is the author of its own misfortune. "anti " americanism is not a new phenomana. but it has been given a massive transfusion/infusion since the bush regime took office........particularly when he started to beat the drums for war. another moment of unity (world wide) was the anti Iraq war protests .........and bush just dismissed, ignored this massive world opionion. In his arrogance he 'knew better" than any one else on this planet. The biproduct of his actions might just have unified most of the world against the US. A full 180 degree spin from the opportunity he had to what he created. (IMHO)

 

[I think not]

don't think so. Hatred is not "chronic"

Oh, but it is I'm afraid.

It can become persistant when it is continually fostered. People get angry when they are persistantly ill treated........and that turns to rage....and then "hatred". Hatred does not erupt overnight.

Hatred has been around since 1776 towards the US, if you think otherwise, I suggest you do some research on the topic.

Maybe instead of analysing what makes "terrorists tick".......it might be an idea to analyse what the US does that fosters such anger world wide and the fact that it is the author of its own misfortune. "anti " americanism is not a new phenomana. but it has been given a massive transfusion/infusion since the bush regime took office........particularly when he started to beat the drums for war. another moment of unity (world wide) was the anti Iraq war protests .........and bush just dismissed, ignored this massive world opionion. In his arrogance he 'knew better" than any one else on this planet. The biproduct of his actions might just have unified most of the world against the US. A full 180 degree spin from the opportunity he had to what he created. (IMHO)

There is no doubt Bush had an impact, but rest assured the fire was being fueled long long ago.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

There is no doubt Bush had an impact, but rest assured the fire was being fueled long long ago

agree.

 

[gopher]

what makes "terrorists tick".......


Bush terrorism is fueled by his rapacious lust for war profits. As I mentioned previously: take all profit out of his treasonous war upon Iraq and it will be ended over night.

 

[jjw1965]

I Agree!

 

[Curiosity]

Again - how does this affect the Canadian citizen?

 

[mrmom2]

Oh lets see maybe were a target for terrorim now because of whats been done south of our border.The US seems to be telling our police what to do now .The CFR wants to get rid of the border s between Canada and Mexico .Shall I go on :?

 

[I think not]

Well you can always call the Chinese to guard your borders like no1important suggested once

 

[zenfisher]

Again - how does this affect the Canadian citizen?

War affects all citizens on this planet. Whether your home is on the front ..or a few thousand miles away. With war comes uncertainty. Will it escalate to include other countries? Will the burning oil fields affect global air quality. How much of the radioactivity from the "bunker " busters will float into the jet stream? What antiquities will be destroyed? How will it increase the anxiety between the muslim and western world? What is the potential for terrorist threats on Canadian soil because we are perceived as being the same? What kind of chemicals and pollutants are being dumped into the gulf ? As we are all citizens of the world...any war affects us. We are not fighting with rocks and sticks anymore.

Then of course the more philosophical questions arise...How can we consider ourselves to be a "civilized" society, when we cannot reach understanding over anything that leads to violence? How could we not be able to talk our neighbour out of a fool's folly?

 

[mrmom2]

Well put Zen I was thinking along the same lines but the words just don't come out of my head that well :lol:

 

[zenfisher]

Aw shucks...T'weren't nuthin"

 

[moghrabi]

Bulldog, I love your avatar but I think you look better in the one down here when you click it.

http://img77.imageshack.us/img77/3982/av820ux.gif

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Re: I Am Not Un-American, Just an ANGRY AMERICAN

The Angry American
By DOUG THOMPSON
Jul 29, 2005, 07:39
Email this article
Printer friendly page

You hear a lot of words used to describe the mood of America today: Wary, apprehensive, nervous, pessimistic, cautious, etc. Another word says it best: Angry.
Americans are angry: Conservative Americans, Liberal Americans, Democrats, Republicans, loony left-wingers, rabid right-wingers. Young, old, male, female, heterosexual, homosexual: They all have one thing in common – they’re pissed.

Any reasonable person can’t help but get angry when they look at what’s happening to them. You need a second mortgage to buy a tank of gas, Americans die in a war that polls say a majority of us do not support, we don’t have confidence in our leaders and every piece of legislation that comes out of Congress seems to create more problems than it solves.

Road rage incidents increase daily across the country and police report serious injuries or death occur far too often from the anger that spills out of such encounters. A popular baseball player will sit out 20 games and pay a hefty fine for getting into a fight with fans. Brawls break out at sporting events.

The Vice President of the United States tells a Senator to “fuck off.” A senior administration official tries to get even with a critic of the President by leaking the name of his wife – a CIA operative – to the media.

Polls say most Americans believe the President lied to gain approval for the war in Iraq and also believe the majority of members of Congress are corrupt and don’t serve their constituents. They don’t believe what they read in newspapers or see on the evening news. Most say they turn to the Internet for news, which is ironic since the ‘Net is the source for most incorrect news, biased coverage and urban legends.

Congress gridlocks over the simplest pieces of legislation, special interest groups flood the airwaves with angry advocacy ads that are mostly lies or twist the facts to make a non-existent case. Political rhetoric is all-to-often filled with hate and partisan bile.

Most couples with young children worry that they won’t have enough money to send their children to college, which may well be true, and that Social Security will be bankrupt long before they retire, which is even more likely to be true.

Americans today don’t feel good about their country, about their leaders or about their future.

Our leaders have failed us because they have forgotten that their first duty is to serve the country, not their party or their personal political agendas. Too many Americans have forgotten that as well, choosing to blindly support a specific political party or philosophical agenda without thinking of the effect such support might have on their country, their way of life or their future.

Both sides hypocritically condemn actions of their opponents while condoning the same actions by members of their own party or philosophical group. Both sides strike out angrily when criticized but then don’t hesitate to level the same hyperbole towards the other side when it suits their purposes.

Yes, we’re angry, but the anger will only get worse as long as partisanship controls our lives, drives our decisions and defines our government. We cannot, and will not, control our anger until we stop thinking confrontationally as Democrats or Republicans, conservatives or liberals, right or left and start working together as Americans.

Angry people always look for someone to blame for the anger. Democrats blame Republicans. Republicans blame Democrats. Independents blame both. But, in a democratic republic, the ultimate responsibility falls on the people. In the end, the only people who can change things are you, me and the rest of the angry masses.

First, we all have to accept the blame for what’s happened to this country. Then we have to work together to resolve our anger and get to the more important job of fixing what’s wrong.

Don’t get mad. Don’t get even. Instead, let’s get together and get results.

would this capture the essence of the "mood" in the US today??

 

[zenfisher]

He forgot frustrated. He forgot to mention to get out and vote.1/3 of eligible voters not voting at a time of war is absurd.

 

[Curiosity]

Amen. I like you. You have some good old-fashioned, logical, good-natured, fine-fettle common sense.
Bull Dog

Bull Dog - thank you - I seem to have jumped into the deep end here, but I am trying to suss out what people are upset about.

There were numerous comments about "snubs" diplomatically especially since the 9/11 tragedy. That is fact and Canadians were disturbed rightly so at this new man giving them what they perceived to be rudeness. But Canadians have been complaining about the U.S. government long before 9/11, Bush, or the snubs!

The message Zenfisher wrote about war affecting the environment was valid, however there have been many wars fought before the Iraqi invasion and Canada remained unaffected environmentally. If one is to include humanitarian reasons - Canada has always suffered great losses in the modern wars but that can't be pegged in with damage to the environment. It is a separate and important issue.

That Canadians find themselves watching the decisions made by the contiguous nation to the south has not affected our country in any serious way has it? I know some Canadians are in the U.S. military, but that is an individual choice.

Also it was Canada's decision to send people to Afghanistan right? If Canadians are upset and up in arms about that fact - then we have something of substance to be angry about. But how does the American invasion of Iraq, along with the small number of supporting nations, affect Canadians in any way?

Ocean Breeze quotes The Angry American - which doesn't speak for Canadians (or does it?). If we substitute the word American and put in Canadian - would that fit? And why?

I know Canadians are angry, but I am trying to focus on what exactly. Documented back even before the 1972 Olympic massacre people have been slain by terrorists all over the world - right up until the recent London bombings. Many of the incidents were directed during that period of time towards American facilites, but how has that created such animosity towards Bush personally and the U.S.?

If one retraces the administrations and calls down the presidents for the terrorism in our world, then one would have to name Carter, Reagan, Bush Senior, Clinton and Bush Junior. They were all in the executive suite during terrorist attacks, hostage-taking, massacres against other nations. Why now is Bush singularly responsible.

Canada has taken part alongside of the U.S. in many retaliations against the work of terrorists....I can only conclude people are pinning this directly on Bush when there have been many administrations during the modern terrorist attacks, and I wonder why Canadians have chosen him to be the sacrificial boar?

It is as if people are scrambling around trying to find a really good reason.... and they keep coming up with American things instead of Canadian things.

There is a real and perhaps detrimental anger going on between the two great democracies who have co-existed in peace since their tumultuous births, and do you know how many countries (even some countries who have animus towards this great relationship) would like to see an economic divide between the two? Yes to the point of a shutting down of all diplomatic ties.
This cannot be good for Canada or the U.S.

If you think the Iraq invasion is detrimental economically to Canada, then take it a step farther and consider what severing trade relations with the U.S. at this time (without proper preparation for alternatives) would do to the country.

This is something I want people to focus on - I know it is fun to write on forums about how goofy and unlikeable Bush is - but think seriously of the consequences of where your animosity is
taking the country. Be selfish at least in care for the future of Canada and its citizens.

As people of logic, fair play, reliability and honesty - this unfocused anger doesn't seem to fit in with the Canadian psyche.

I have used up at least two weeks' of posting space! Whew..

 

[I think not]

I'm sure the moderators won't charge you for the space you used up Wednesday :wink:

I found your comments to be pretty well balanced, however Bush has irritated (putting it mildly), a great many people, within and outside the US. He appears to be a pro at it.

He has a policy of antagonism against everything, International court, the environment, trade relations etc...You can't ultimately blame Canadians or anyone else for that matter when they point the finger at Bush. Now if they exaggerate a bit, that's a different matter, but nobody should be a "yes man" because Bush has the backup of the strongest military in the world.

Friends should do alot more than say yes, they should say no when they think it is appropriate to do so (And I am not referring to France or Germany). Here in lies the issue, Bush has an arrogance about him that doesn't "permit" others to think they are right and he is wrong. I think this is what actually causes most of the animosity, coupled with the fact he is driven by extremist ideology.