Skip to comments.
President Bush Wants UN to be 'More than Empty Debating Society' in MI Speech
January 29, 2003
| prairiebreeze
Posted on 01/29/2003 10:28:30 AM PST by prairiebreeze
Edited on 01/29/2003 10:33:55 AM PST by Admin Moderator.
[history]
President Bush just gave another GLOOOORRIOUS speech in Grand Rapids MI. In talking about Iraq he stated that he "went to the United Nations because I wanted the UN to be something other than an empty debating society". It was priceless.
He also asks citizens to contact their Senators about putting reasonable caps on medical malpractice so "this lawsuit lottery doesn't ruin our health care".
You'll see transcript of speech soon.
TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Breaking News; Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: axisofweasels; bush; iraq; unitednations; wetrustbush
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-138 last
To: ewing
Dubya is hoping to kick the UN's rear end and get some action. This was directed at Germany and France, I believe who said they would veto the 2nd Security Council resolution and then reversed field the next day. The President wants no more of that.. Yes, so that's a LOT different than telling the UN to take a flying leap and that we'd go it alone.
To: NotJustAnotherPrettyFace
I think the objective is to name them as their behavior warrants (empty debators) and expose them as the ineffective collection of parasites that they are. And to try to shame them into not being spineless and following through on what they are supposed to do
To: knighthawk
Thank you!
To: anniegetyourgun
Yes, I heard some of the exact same terminology that appears on FR with some frequency.
To: All
To: ApesForEvolution
--We're bad, we're worldwide
Frank, Billy, and Dusty
To: ApesForEvolution
Doing just swell.
:-))
127
posted on
01/29/2003 3:03:38 PM PST
by
SerpentDove
(Shave The Whales)
To: Nick Danger
That must be why he pushed through the Kyoto Treaty and signed us up for the International Court.He didn't speak against either treaty in principle, but only complained about the extent of their requirements. And he effectively ratified the ICC treaty when he negotiated for exemptions for American servicemen.
128
posted on
01/29/2003 5:59:29 PM PST
by
inquest
To: cake_crumb
It's characteristic of useful idiots to focus on one or two irrelevant truths while blinding themselves to the more important points. Calling the UN irrelevant is not necessarily the mark of pro-UN sentiment. Urging the UN to make itself more relevant most ceratinly is.
See the difference? (Hint: you have to take off your blinders in order to see it)
129
posted on
01/29/2003 6:10:38 PM PST
by
inquest
To: inquest
he effectively ratified the ICC treaty when he negotiated for exemptions for American servicemen. Stop telling people this stuff. It isn't true.
San Francisco Chronicle
August 21, 2002 Although President Bill Clinton signed the treaty that created the ICC, the Bush administration withdrew this nation's support of the court. Then, Washington announced that it would use military force to free any U.S. citizen detained by the court. Now, in a final attempt to undermine the court's authority, the Bush administration has threatened to cut off military aid to any nation unless it promises never to surrender any suspected American citizen to the ICC.
What more do ya want?
130
posted on
01/29/2003 6:44:20 PM PST
by
Nick Danger
(Heave la France)
To: Nick Danger
Nice try, but he made that statement after the enactment of the Servicemembers' Protection Act, which requires him to do just that, and which Congress essentially forced upon him. What he did prior to that was far more telling. He negotiated with the Security Council to grant a one-year exemption to American servicemen in Bosnia from the ICC's jurisdiction, thus giving the ICC legitimacy it was far from deserving.
131
posted on
01/29/2003 7:17:18 PM PST
by
inquest
To: knighthawk
Thanks for the ping. I think.
I purposely didn't listen to the speech last night. Dubya, IMHO, can't dupe Saddam this time the way George Herbert Walker did with former Iraqi Ambassador April Glaspie.
True, we need the oil. But there are things that rub me the wrong way - media silence re: the recent signing of a Unocal contract to build a pipeline across Afhganistan. The Taliban were in Sugar Land, TX, only a couple of months before 9/11.
It galls me that our troops are in fact working for giant corporations!
And if nobody likes what I'm saying, I really have ceased to care.
132
posted on
01/29/2003 7:45:57 PM PST
by
lakey
To: NotJustAnotherPrettyFace
The question is............ what does Bush hope to accomplish by saying this? To make the point that the UN is an empty debating society. To get this point mentioned gazillions of times by the media. To inject this point into our national political discussion.
It worked with the Axis of Evil. The media hated him for saying that, and they kept repeating: "Bush is baaaaaaad because he called these three countries an 'Axis of Eeeeeevil!'" Soon enough, all the world was aware of the fact that Iraq, Iran, and North Korea form an axis and they're up to no good.
Then, President Bush educated the world by making it known that the U.N. "might become" irrelevant. Why? Because they're just an empty debating society. Of course, President Bush "feels their pain" and wants to help them overcome their "relevancy-challenged" status. He helps them by giving them a chance to act as grown-ups and pass a resolution outlawing Saddam. Which, of course, they won't do--so they will become irrelevant, and you can't blame President Bush for it.
133
posted on
01/30/2003 4:17:59 AM PST
by
Smile-n-Win
(beats whine-n-lose)
To: lakey
The Taliban were in Sugar Land, TX, only a couple of months before 9/11. Oh those diabolical Bushies, getting the Taliban to fly jetliners into the World Trade Center just so they could score cheap crude from the Afghani pipeline. Evil geniuses, they are!
If you have an elephant on one side of the see-saw, and a housefly on the other, the see-saw will not balance.
134
posted on
01/30/2003 6:06:14 AM PST
by
gridlock
(Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue)
To: gridlock
Bush didn't have to know the exact target, or magnitude of an attack. He certainly did know the Taliban were not happy with whatever deal Unocal offered.
The Patriot Act and Homeland Security laws were ready on the spot....and thousands of illegal immigrants continue to flow into this country daily!
Gimme a break.
135
posted on
01/30/2003 12:23:33 PM PST
by
lakey
To: lakey
And construction on the Afghani pipeline begins.... when?
Oh, wait a minute, we're on to them now! So the fact that nobody has started to build the Afghani pipeline is proof that there was some sort of mysterious deal afoot.
I'm sure that Dick Cheney and his evil henchmen are cursing Ted Rall for putting an end to their nefarious plans!
136
posted on
01/30/2003 12:57:35 PM PST
by
gridlock
(Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue)
To: gridlock
Up-to-date, aren't you? Search Google, "The Caspian is Widely Believed to be on the Brink of Becoming one of the Largest Oil Producers in the World, Second Only to the Middle East." You might even like to attend the Annual Oil and Gas Exhibition and Conference in San Diego this coming June. 2 + 2 might = 4.
Cartoonists see light more often than most, and they zero in on absurdities. When a politician says his constituents aren't allowed to critcize, they (and I) ask why not?
137
posted on
01/30/2003 8:35:03 PM PST
by
lakey
((Thinking is unpatriotic - Wiley - non-Sequitur))
To: lakey
So you are saying that in order to get oil from the Caspian we would build a 2500 mile long pipeline across Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, some of the most rugged, inhospitable and politically unstable places in the world, instead of building a 300 mile long pipeline to the Black Sea?
Those evil geniuses at Halliburton must have been working overtime to figure that one out. But we're on to them now. They'll never try it, or a harshly worded editorial might show up in the Village Voice.
And all they had to do was trick the Taliban into destroying a few or our landmarks and killing a few thousand of our citizens. I'm sure that they feel that this is a small price to pay to line the pockets of Dick Cheney and his corporate cronies.
138
posted on
01/31/2003 6:37:34 AM PST
by
gridlock
(Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-138 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson