Bush's 60 minutes interview

[it5five]

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/60minutes/main3415.shtml

This man is completely arrogant and out of control.

He needs to be removed from office, in any way possible.

[MACDRIVE]

I don't see him as arrogant, but rather hell bent on doing what he believes is right to protect the American people.

My gut feeling tells me that there have been numerous attempts made by terroists to detonate nuclear devices inside the U.S. And if it weren't for Bush being so head strong, we'd already been blown up 4 or 5 times over by now.

[it5five]

My gut feeling tells me there hasn't been any attempts to detonate any devices in the US, since the terrorists already won.

He isn't protecting the American people at all. He is making the world far more unsafe for Americans abroad.

[zimv20]

My gut feeling tells me that there have been numerous attempts made by terroists to detonate nuclear devices inside the U.S. And if it weren't for Bush being so head strong, we'd already been blown up 4 or 5 times over by now.
bit of a nuke obsession you've got there.

[MACDRIVE]

The people of the MidEast have already hated Americans far before G.W. took office. I think they would have eventually hated us just as much as they do now with or without G.W.

[seabass069]

Bush knows that if he loses the war, then there is the potential that he could be tried for war crimes. He is doing everything he can to prevent that.

[MACDRIVE]

bit of a nuke obsession you've got there.

I just think we should get them before they get us.

[it5five]

Except they won't get us, since they don't have nukes.

[MACDRIVE]

Except they won't get us, since they don't have nukes.

They're working on it, and fast.

[it5five]

No, they're not.

And if they are, it's only because we are invading countries and playing world police.

[pseudobrit]

They're working on it, and fast.

You don't know the first thing about nuclear weapon design and manufacture.

[MACDRIVE]

You don't know the first thing about nuclear weapon design and manufacture.

It's not something I spend countless hours researching no.

[pseudobrit]

It's not something I spend countless hours researching no.

Then you have absolutely no authority to claim that terrorists are working on nulcear weapons at any speed.

I don't know how to nicely point out the fact that you're talking out of your ass.

[MACDRIVE]

pseudobrit -- If you want to go on living in your protective bubble, rather than face reality, that's your business. ;)

[it5five]

pseudobrit -- If you want to go on living in your protective bubble, rather than face reality, that's your business. ;)

Ha! You're one to talk. ;)

[aquajet]

pseudobrit -- If you want to go on living in your protective bubble, rather than face reality, that's your business. ;)

Huh?

[mrkramer]

The people of the MidEast have already hated Americans far before G.W. took office. I think they would have eventually hated us just as much as they do now with or without G.W.

Yes they did hate us but they have already won when the Patriot Act was signed and our freedoms started to be taken away. I don't think that there have been any more attempts, because if there had been Bush would have used the fact that they were stopped to help support his wiretapping.

[MACDRIVE]

I agree that Bush has made alot of mistakes; in large part because of Cheney. But I think there's alot of information that he feels we shouldn't know; either because it would scare us to death, or because he doesn't want the terrorists to know what he knows. The info we get from the media is just a drop in the bucket compared to what's really going on out there.

[Black&Tan]

I had to turn the interview off within the first 2 minutes. I was ready to go ballistic when the interviewer asked Bush if he felt he owed the Iraqis an apology, and he said "no." I thought to myself you pompous sack of sh*!

We invaded a foreign country under false pretenses, failed to secure the country, failed to restore water and electricity, failed to rebuild the infrastructure, disbanded the army, allowed historical treasures to be stolen, killed and maimed thousands of innocents, and we have nothing to apologize for????

[toontra]

I had to turn the interview off within the first 2 minutes. I was ready to go ballistic when the interviewer asked Bush if he felt he owed the Iraqis an apology, and he said "no." I thought to myself you pompous sack of sh*!

Exactly like his last statement when he said that if mistakes had been made then he took the blame - not admitting that he'd been the one who'd made the mistakes. :mad:

[clevin]

I just think we should get them before they get us.

u think too much, u need to face the real rules in this world rather than the revenge or "get them before they get us" story in movies.

maybe u don't realize this

as much as "get them before they got us" sounds so heroic, its stupid in reality, u are basically destroy the rule of world, and further destroy the world. when that happen, u are dead. and no human would survive.

ever see a cop road race to stop a stolen car, and crash 20 cars in process? in this case, imagine the cop is psycho and "think" the car was a stolen one.

[Thomas Veil]

My gut feeling tells me that there have been numerous attempts made by terroists to detonate nuclear devices inside the U.S. And if it weren't for Bush being so head strong, we'd already been blown up 4 or 5 times over by now."Gut feeling"? Macdrive, check out the meaning of "truthiness" (from Wikipedia):
Truthiness is a satirical term invented by Stephen Colbert in reference to the quality by which a person claims to know something intuitively, instinctively, or "from the gut" without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or actual facts.

If there had been unsuccessful, government-thwarted attempts to blow up nukes in the U.S., don't you think the Administration would be trumpeting the fact, as a way of proving that it's following the right course?

I'm not trying to make fun of your contention, but without any kind of reasonable evidence, the idea of saving us from nukes smacks more of Jack Bauer than of George Bush.

[yg17]

They're working on it, and fast.


The US is the only country to ever use a nuclear weapon on another country.....what in the hell gives us the right to tell other countries that they can't have nukes?

I had to turn the interview off within the first 2 minutes. I was ready to go ballistic when the interviewer asked Bush if he felt he owed the Iraqis an apology, and he said "no." I thought to myself you pompous sack of sh*!

We invaded a foreign country under false pretenses, failed to secure the country, failed to restore water and electricity, failed to rebuild the infrastructure, disbanded the army, allowed historical treasures to be stolen, killed and maimed thousands of innocents, and we have nothing to apologize for????

He also said that the Iraqis should be thankful for all we did for them. He is so ******** dillusional and living in his own little world, he's not mentally fit to run this country.

[Queso]

The US is the only country to ever use a nuclear weapon on another country.....what in the hell gives us the right to tell other countries that they can't have nukes?
The US could only use nukes then because nobody else had them. Iran has Russia to the north, Pakistan and China to the East, Israel to the West, and US fleets just off its coast. And we're surprised they want nuclear weapons?

Having nukes is the only way you are going to protect your borders against all comers. Every country that has developed them since 1945 has done so for the same reason, protection. This idea that Iran will actually use them is just propaganda. Nobody can use them, but possessing them strengthens your hand.

[Dont Hurt Me]

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/60minutes/main3415.shtml

This man is completely arrogant and out of control.

He needs to be removed from office, in any way possible.I agree, he has used the terrorist threat as an "EXCUSE" to grab more power for the Executive Branch and in turn moving the U.S. into a police state ran by a overbearing federal govt that answers to no one, and even ignores its own laws. He put us in Iraq and he had the Intel that showed little to nothing. They were cherry picking anything they could use,manipulating facts and even using false documents,outed a CIA agent to make a case for war. This man calls himself a Christian,its a lie. This man says he wants to keep us safe, another lie when he still hasnt secured our own borders. He works for the Corporations not the people. His actions as President has led to the deaths of thousands and thousands while Bin Laden is still free. He is derelict of duty to his Oath of office.

The only reason he wont be impeached is because we have a split Congress, a Dick as VP and less then 2 yrs before he is gone. He makes Nixon look like a Saint. A Republican Congress let this president do anything at all he wanted including starting this war,spying on Americans,Torturing people without trials, and this list never ends. After 911 he should have gone after Al-queda instead he gives us a war with Iraq when most the hijackers were Saudi. He is a discrace to this great nation of ours and has destroyed any goodwill we had. Wonder why all the nations on the planet are scrambling after weapon systems again and are making all kinds of deals? He has sold fear like no president ever before in our nations history.

[leekohler]

I agree that Bush has made alot of mistakes; in large part because of Cheney. But I think there's alot of information that he feels we shouldn't know; either because it would scare us to death, or because he doesn't want the terrorists to know what he knows. The info we get from the media is just a drop in the bucket compared to what's really going on out there.

Well, they must be everywhere then! :) Someone go raise McCarthy's corpse! He'll find them terr'rists! ;)

[IJ Reilly]

We invaded a foreign country under false pretenses, failed to secure the country, failed to restore water and electricity, failed to rebuild the infrastructure, disbanded the army, allowed historical treasures to be stolen, killed and maimed thousands of innocents, and we have nothing to apologize for????

Hey, they got purple index fingers. What else do you want?

[BoyBach]

It's not something I spend countless hours researching no.


:D

Nice reply, I like it.

[skunk]

I don't see him as arrogant, but rather hell bent on doing what he believes is right to protect the American people. I used to think you were just plain clueless. Now I realise you are completely mad.

[Dont Hurt Me]

I agree that Bush has made alot of mistakes; in large part because of Cheney. But I think there's alot of information that he feels we shouldn't know; either because it would scare us to death, or because he doesn't want the terrorists to know what he knows. The info we get from the media is just a drop in the bucket compared to what's really going on out there.
You mean misinformation we shouldnt know like.......Iraq didnt have the WMDs Cheney/Bush promised? your right who needs to know that because it could scare us real real bad. I feel a lot safer knowing the govt is going through my bank records,mail and phone calls and removing our Constitutional freedoms while at the same time letting in millions of unknowns every year. Safe indeed because....... George says he's making us safe. IT MUST BE TRUE IT WAS ON TV!

[MACDRIVE]

as much as "get them before they got us" sounds so heroic, its stupid in reality, u are basically destroy the rule of world, and further destroy the world. when that happen, u are dead. and no human would survive.

I was refering to the small tactical nukes that just destroy underground concrete storage facilities. The kind they're going to be using in Iran shortly.

"Gut feeling"? Macdrive, check out the meaning of "truthiness" (from Wikipedia):

If there had been unsuccessful, government-thwarted attempts to blow up nukes in the U.S., don't you think the Administration would be trumpeting the fact, as a way of proving that it's following the right course?

I'm not trying to make fun of your contention, but without any kind of reasonable evidence, the idea of saving us from nukes smacks more of Jack Bauer than of George Bush.

Bush knows that if he were to brag about all the attempted terrorists attacks, he would be informing the enemy of our tactics. So as much as he would like to take credit for it, he can't.

When I say gut feeling, by that I mean I can't provide any links because there are none. ;)

The US is the only country to ever use a nuclear weapon on another country.....what in the hell gives us the right to tell other countries that they can't have nukes?


Bush is fine with countries having nuclear weapons for defense, but would rather they not have them for offensive reasons like controlling the global oil market.

Well, they must be everywhere then! :) Someone go raise McCarthy's corpse! He'll find them terr'rists! ;)

The old boy's from Texas yes. ;)

:D

Nice reply, I like it.

Thank you. :)

I used to think you were just plain clueless. Now I realise you are completely mad.

Comming from you sir, that's a compliment; although I like the way Minnie Driver says it better in the movie Good Will Hunting. ;)

You mean misinformation we shouldnt know like.......Iraq didnt have the WMDs Cheney/Bush promised?

I was refering to all the attacks that almost happened since 9/11. Attempted attacks using nuclear weapons. Losing some of our privacy is better that being vaporized with nukes stollen from Russia in my opinion. ;)


One final note: I don't like Bush any better than you guys do, but I'm trying get everyone to think beyond the past and present, and to look beyond just what the media provides us. ;)

[Queso]

I was refering to all the attacks that almost happened since 9/11. Attempted attacks using nuclear weapons. Losing some of our privacy is better that being vaporized with nukes stollen from Russia in my opinion. ;)
Hmm....a badly conceived science-fiction plot. Have you been hanging round the local Dianetics Centre?

[MACDRIVE]

Hmm....a badly conceived science-fiction plot. Have you been hanging round the local Dianetics Centre?

Nope, but I've got my sources.

[Queso]

Nope, but I've got my sources.
Well, good job we're ruled from Outer Space by a race of silicon based shape changers, otherwise I might be worried :)

[Dont Hurt Me]

Attempted attacks using Nukes? Please you have been sipping the KoolAid just a little to much. You may want to start watching several news channels rather then just Fox. This president has snowed many, me in the past and you in the present.

[IJ Reilly]

Nope, but I've got my sources.

http://1kbwc.popamericana.com/cards/smp-you_lose_your_tin-foil_hat.jpg

[MACDRIVE]

I drink Propel rather than KoolAid because it has the same great taste, but with only 25 callories per the 16.9 ounce bottle. And I don't watch Fox News, that's for the far right folks. ;)

[skunk]

Nope, but I've got my sources."Curveball", perhaps?

[zimv20]

"Curveball", perhaps?
screwball, more likely.

[BoyBach]

Well, good job we're ruled from Outer Space by a race of silicon based shape changers, otherwise I might be worried :)


Did you, by any chance, play in goal for Coventry City FC at some point in the early 1970's? ;)

[skunk]

Did you, by any chance, play in goal for Coventry City FC at some point in the early 1970's? ;)He hasn't been the same since he married Katie.

[Queso]

Did you, by any chance, play in goal for Coventry City FC at some point in the early 1970's? ;)
I can't quite remember that far back. Was that before or after the Isle of Wight sank? :D

[pseudobrit]

pseudobrit -- If you want to go on living in your protective bubble, rather than face reality, that's your business. ;)

If you want to live in abject fear rather than face reality, that's between you, your therapist, and the pharmacist who fills your Xanax 'script.

[MACDRIVE]

"Curveball", perhaps?

screwball, more likely.

LOL!!! :p :) :D

[hulugu]

Nope, but I've got my sources.

Interesting. My sources indicate that while Al Qaeda and others have attempted to buy nuclear weapons, included those lost in the former Soviet republics they have been unable to do so. Partially this is because of the Soviet designs which had a poor shelf-life and because of Russian security forces which were able to retrieve the more viable nukes. The Russians were especially fearful of the Chechen's seizure of such a weapon, and thus were better than expected at tracking and retriving such weapons.

Lastly, the Bush administration has been able to crow about possible attacks in LA, exposing our intelligence tactics and strategies in the same way that a similar reference to a possible nuclear attack would.

While I'm sure Al Qaeda would love to destroy Washington D.C. with an nuclear weapon, there's a limit to their abilities.

[obeygiant]

Is a dirty bomb considered a nuclear weapon?

[MACDRIVE]

You don't know the first thing about nuclear weapon design and manufacture.



I don't know how to nicely point out the fact that you're talking out of your ass.

If you want to live in abject fear rather than face reality, that's between you, your therapist, and the pharmacist who fills your Xanax 'script.

pseudobrit -

There is absolutely nothing you can say to make me feel insulted or angery. You are on my top 10 list of favorite MR members because I value your witt and political insight. Just the mere fact that you respond to any of my posts, makes me feel honored and privilaged. I have always enjoyed your partisipation on the Political Forum and always will. :) :) :)

[hulugu]

Is a dirty bomb considered a nuclear weapon?

No. A nuclear weapon is more accurately called a thermonuclear device which implies the use of high-explosives to cause an atomic chain reaction.

A dirty bomb is really a variant of a chemical weapon, except it spreads radiological debris rather than a chemical or biological agent.

The use of DU munitions, for example, could be called a 'dirty bomb' because the resulting radiation from the metal flakes burning at high-temperatures, but this would be inaccurate as well.

[pseudobrit]

Is a dirty bomb considered a nuclear weapon?

No. Unless there's critical fission or fusion it's not a nuclear weapon.

[IJ Reilly]

No. Unless there's critical fission or fusion it's not a nuclear weapon.

No, but it might be a nookular weapon. Different thing, you know.

[solvs]

I was ready to go ballistic when the interviewer asked Bush if he felt he owed the Iraqis an apology, and he said "no.
Didn't you know, it's because it's all their fault. :rolleyes:

When Scott asks Bush if we owe the Iraqis an apology for not doing a better job, Bush says: "We didn't do a better job, or they didn't do a better job?" Talk about hubris. It's all the fault of the dumb Iraqis that has resulted in this horrendous and violent civil war. No blame here.
You are being far too kind to our Pompous *** in Chief b&t. ;)

One final note: I don't like Bush any better than you guys do, but I'm trying get everyone to think beyond the past and present, and to look beyond just what the media provides us. ;)
So you're kidding then? That's the only thing I can think of to rationalize your posts in this thread. Either that, or someone hacked into your account because they're too ashamed to post as themselves.

Not that I would blame them. I wouldn't want to be a neocon right now either. Noticed that none of them seem to be defending Bush here.

[MACDRIVE]

So you're kidding then? That's the only thing I can think of to rationalize your posts in this thread. Either that, or someone hacked into your account because they're too ashamed to post as themselves.



No one's hacked into my account; it's all me.

"I take full responsibility for any mistakes that have been made." ;)

[solvs]

No one's hacked into my account; it's all me.

"I take full responsibility for any mistakes that have been made." ;)

Then you're just being sarcastic/playing the devil's advocate?

Right?

[MACDRIVE]

Then you're just being sarcastic/playing the devil's advocate?

Right?

It gets boring around here when everyone's viewpoint is the same. I'm trying to get people away from mainstream media's sterilized format and come up with their own probable scenarios of what [could] happen. Zim's been reading the Guardian Unlimited lately, and they have some good stuff over there.

I think land mines all far worse than nuclear weapons. They don't always kill you, but just maim you; leaving you without arms or legs or worse.

I think the real bad guys are the corporate oil tycoons. Bush is far from perfect, but if it weren't for big oil buying up any patent that has the potential to derail the nation's dependence on oil, we wouldn't be having this war.

[takao]

I think land mines all far worse than nuclear weapons.

tell that the US government who refused to ban anti personal land mines

and check out the list of others who haven't
http://www.icbl.org/treaty/snp
nice neighborhood for the US .. isn't it

[skunk]

It gets boring around here when everyone's viewpoint is the same. I'm trying to get people away from mainstream media's sterilized format and come up with their own probable scenarios of what [could] happen.You apparently haven't noticed that not everybody agrees here, which is hard to believe since you have posted in the relevant threads. How is suggesting yet more idiotic warmongering going to move the discussion forward?

I think land mines all far worse than nuclear weapons. They don't always kill you, but just maim you; leaving you without arms or legs or worse.Firstly, it's not a choice between the two, and secondly, the effects of a nuclear strike are not quite as "clean" as you seem to think:
No one will ever know for certain how many died as a result of the attack on Hiroshima. Some 70,000 people probably died as a result of initial blast, heat, and radiation effects. This included about twenty American airmen being held as prisoners in the city. By the end of 1945, because of the lingering effects of radioactive fallout and other after effects, the Hiroshima death toll was probably over 100,000. The five-year death total may have reached or even exceeded 200,000, as cancer and other long-term effects took hold.

The immediate cause of death was primarily from burns, 60% at Hiroshima. The burns were a result of either the radiation flash burns or the fires that engulfed blocks of the city after the bombings. Falling debris accounted for another 30% of deaths at Hiroshima. Other causes accounted for the last 10% killed at Hiroshima. About 30% of those who died in Hiroshima had received lethal doses of radiation; however, this was not always the immediate cause of death.

The initial effects are most closely related to the proximity and size of the fireball. At Hiroshima more than 80% of the population within 0.6 of a mile of ground zero were casualties, and over 90% of these casualties were killed. In contrast, of individuals who were beyond approximately 1.6 miles from ground zero, less than 5% were killed.http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/ops/hiroshima3.htm

I think the real bad guys are the corporate oil tycoons. Bush is far from perfect, but if it weren't for big oil buying up any patent that has the potential to derail the nation's dependence on oil, we wouldn't be having this war.This is not just about oil: this is a testing ground for all sorts of weapons and techniques, and an excellent way of transferring hundreds of billions of taxpayers' money to the military industrial complex without any oversight whatever. The fact that Bush is a willing stooge in this process is of course a big contributing factor.

[MACDRIVE]

This is not just about oil: this is a testing ground for all sorts of weapons and techniques, and an excellent way of transferring hundreds of billions of taxpayers' money to the military industrial complex without any oversight whatever. The fact that Bush is a willing stooge in this process is of course a big contributing factor.

I understand your other points, but that one their I'm wondering about.

[skunk]

I understand your other points, but that one their I'm wondering about.In the same way that the Falklands War was used to showcase both French Exocets and British Harriers, every major arms exporter needs a regular opportunity to demonstrate his products in real conditions. How better to do that than in a war where the opposition is barely armed at all?

[MACDRIVE]

How better to do that than in a war where the opposition is barely armed at all?

You're making this war out to be some kind of Expose' farm tractor show. Tell me this world is not that screwed up.

[Queso]

You're making this war out to be some kind of Expose' farm tractor show. Tell me this world is not that screwed up.
America needs wars every 10 years or so to empty its stockpiles. Otherwise the arms suppliers start having to lay off large numbers of staff because sales drop. So much for the Peace Dividend eh?

[skunk]

Gotta use all that HE before the "Shell By" date, don't you know.

[mactastic]

The military also prefers to have a war every decade or so, so that they constantly have a leadership class who's been bloodied in combat. They fear losing the warrior culture if no one besides the top brass have ever seen real combat.

The grunts from Desert Storm are now the mid-level leaders of OIF. These men and women will lead the US military in our operations in the next ten to twenty years. The military wants their leaders to be experienced, same as any organization.