[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by anand: *
My Dear CM Malik,
Did any one ask you about your mental problems?
[/QUOTE]
Ooohh...personal insults. The definitive signs of someone who does not have much argument themselves. I am honoured by your comments. :)
^ yep anand definitely is also in need of a brain transplant and crores of ppl in India will also benefit from a regime change there :D
I have rarely seen so many blue-collars heads together in one place. But it sure is nice to see that.
CM. I am very proud of you that you are thinking. Good going man. Now can you also tell us what kind of new regime do you have in mind? Do you want the new elections to be held, or Bush be replaced by some Christian Fundamentalists’ Party? How about a Military takeover?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by CM: *
Yeah benedict Lahori. Sure he destoryed international treaties by putting them in political limbo, Kyoto, ICC, ABM etc. Want more? With out these treaties the world is a worse off place dont you agree.
Mr. Fantastic, i have a life, it is showing Americans what they are blind too.
[/QUOTE]
Benedict !! Lol. Good one. I agree with you on this one. I really don't understand scrapping of Kyoto. USA should have hung in there and tried for a better position. I support killing ICC. I dont know anything about why and what fors for the ABM. The world is definately not a nice place these days. I agree we need a better international arrangement.
Tell me though, who am I a benedict against? I haven't figured that one out. Although thank you for considering me part of the camp once atleast.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Ali_R: *
Not that I have question myself long enough. But what is this all. A war between Muslims and Christians. A conflict between cultures and traditions? It's not so!
Its a fight for the right, your right, my right.
It's not in sake of Saddam coz he is labeled as Muslim and I can ensure you even if Mr. Bush would be one of us, I would condemn him with hard words and the thoughts.
Unfortunately our own "brothers and sis" fail to understand the fight for justice and equality (peace) and complain about religious fanatism, extremism or simply call us the KEYBOARD JIHADI's.
Ain't it that way?!
[/QUOTE]
I am glad to read that you oppose Bush on principle!! What do you suggest is the alternative? What will the world be like if as Bush said the smoking gun comes in the shape of a mushroom cloud? Austria was in the eye a hurricane about 55 years ago. Would it not have been better if the tyrant of that time had not been appeased? As NYA said above: what do you suggest?
Dear CM Malik,
You have all complexes against the democratic world.
Can you pls name two or three Islamic States where even Muslim community is enjoying human rights? If you do so, pls call all your brothers to leave the Devil America and live nearby you.
Best rgds
Malaysia. Happy Anand?
NYA i personally suggest to take over the govt. With an history of american ass kissing you should be awarded something. Or maybe they should make you a citizen. I bet Bush will be very happy with that.
Old one, ABM would have cut the weapons in the world far less. Thus limiting what al Qaeda could use or buy. Not so safe now is it? ICC would have tried Al Qaeda and with international legitmacy the US could continue its war on terrorism. Kyoto would have made the world alot cleaner and more enivornmently friendly. What is wrong with these 3 treaties?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by OldLahori: *
What do you suggest is the alternative?
[/QUOTE]
There is no alternative to Bush, is that what you are saying? Are you saying that if not Bush, then it would be the Christian Fundementalists ruling America, as someone suggested above?
"Old one, ABM would have cut the weapons in the world far less. Thus limiting what al Qaeda could use or buy. Not so safe now is it? ICC would have tried Al Qaeda and with international legitmacy the US could continue its war on terrorism. Kyoto would have made the world alot cleaner and more enivornmently friendly. What is wrong with these 3 treaties?"
The argument I have heard for scrapping ABM are lame in my judgement. I have to agree with the Chinese and the Russians that scrapping ABM and building a "star wars" defense against a few missiles does not make much sense. The gungho guys are planning on spending billions of dollars and in the end have had to enunciate the "pre-emptive" doctrine to deal with an actual perceived threat. So I agree that scrapping ABM does not make sense. Building star wars with billions of $'s makes even less sense. Kyoto appears to be a sell out to the oil, coal and petroleum industry. I honestly don't see a good reason why to completely pull out. If there were problems with the time table or the limits then we should have negotiated in good faith. So I again agree that it is a terrible idea to junk Kyoto. ICC is bad because it gives too much power into the hand of an unelected and uncontrolled prosecutor who go on a personal vendetta and political agenda of fringe groups can easily creep in. So thumbs down on ICC still.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Malik73: *
There is no alternative to Bush, is that what you are saying? Are you saying that if not Bush, then it would be the Christian Fundementalists ruling America, as someone suggested above?
[/QUOTE]
God forbid!! I like the other suggestion that NYA made. We have to wait for the elections. We have bush for atleast 2 more years and I think he is a good enough of a politician that he is likely going to win the next time too; so most probably 6 more years.
Look Bush is enunciating new doctrines. No doubt about that. That is the life in American democracy. Americans are not bound to keep doing things the old way wether they work or not. The country is trying to deal with the threat that it clearly saw on 9/11. That threat is not going to be ignored. I remember reading the Taliban spiel how the ants were going to bother the American lion and it will react in anger and hurt itself, etc. Well the lion is reacting, but it did not react in the manner they expected or a lot of other people. Americans are evolving a new policy, and since they are powerful their changing posture affects many others. The policys evolution will be influenced by a whole lot of Americans around the globe, but it is the President who finally spells it out and enunciates it.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by OldLahori: *
God forbid!! I like the other suggestion that NYA made. We have to wait for the elections. We have bush for atleast 2 more years and I think he is a good enough of a politician that he is likely going to win the next time too; so most probably 6 more years.
[/QUOTE]
Well, that is not a sure bet. Remember his father, George Bush Snr had a 92% approval rating after the Gulf war in 1991, yet the next year he lost the election badly only winning some 37% of the vote if I remember rightly?
But Bush could win as America does not exactly have a "one person, one vote" electoral system, as we saw in the 2000 elections. So like our the Supreme Court could again make him President for a second term? :)