I'm a nonpartisan but Debate revealed Bush as the Dullard he truly is! - Russian Ukrainian Belarus Travel Music Woman Dating News

	The Russian Meeting Place: A place to meet people and talk about all things Russian... International Discussions about Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Travel, Music, Russian News, Ukrainian culture, Belarusian Dating, Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Kiev and other intelligent topics about life in the former Soviet Union.

Pages: 1

I'm a nonpartisan but Debate revealed Bush as the Dullard he truly is!
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: CDarwin

OK, OK....I commend Bush for his tax cuts but hell, he just came off as the most inane and one dimensional president EVER in Debate #1.

Posted by: spamer

"yawn"

and your point is?

( didn't you say you were a "I'm a nonpartisan"?)

Then again Kerry named a Russian town. but the name he used was a German death camp during W.W.II. Like I said "Yawn"

Posted by: CDarwin

Am I better off than I was four years ago? Absolutely!

However, just look at all the TRAGEDIES and BAD LUCK that occurred during the last four years to the USA! Coincidence? I think NOT! Latest case in point- Florida: FOUR devastating hurricanes in a row.......during a presidential election year no less! Yes, Florida, the same state that "gave" the presidency to Bush in 2000.

My point is I want someone who will actually HELP the average American, not just Big Corporations, the "haves" and the "have mores" !

That's the END!

Posted by: RomanticTX

OMG,
Now bush is guilty for the hurricans and terrrorists attacks and famine, and bad hair days, and me being lonely.

Or even better, Florida is being punished by some kind of deity because it gave Bush the presicency!

Sometimes I don't get some of the rationale in this board!

Posted by: Jim_FL

I tried to watch the debate with an open mind, and I've got to say I was somewhat underwhelmed by Bush. Although, he did speak much better than he usually does in front of a crowd. Someone on the radio this morning, who was there last night summed up my feelings well: "He just didn't inspire any confidence in his ability to lead this country for the next four years"

Posted by: Jutman

Hi all

I will here give some comments about what we europeans don't understand / like.

DEMOCRACY:
a) The old 'winner-take-its-all' system is not a good system and the oldest modern democracy do not deserve this. UK has also introduced some representative votes and New Zealand has totally abanned this system.

b) Why must you registere !!!

c) Why criminel loose their rigths to vote after serving their time.

d) there is NO debate !! people go to a political meeting, to a party they allready is member of.

e) the mud-trow. Not worthy for the biggest and oldest democracy and for that person who will get the most powerfull job in the world.

ECONOMY
In generel americans are way to most focused on the money. So:

a) tax level. People don't want to pay tax and yet they want good public service. In example from this board I understand the visa application time is long due to lack of funds. (of course the system is also an issue)

b) the debt. At some time in the future, you are gonna pay with interest.

Comments: For us in Europe, we get the picture that Democrates understand this.

c) unemployment. The short time you can be registered as an unemployed person. When you finish this period with no job, you simple no longer are in the statistic = not unemployed. This is such a manipulation with the facts.

Comments: done by the Republicans. But not much will change under a Dem. President.

DOMESTIC ISSUES
Is something there is a very little focus over here. However there is one issue, we understand.

a) the level of Federal influence. The Rep. wants a little as possible, and thats why many 'free' men like this party.

- Personally I find it strange that Bush wants to introduce a federeal band against abortion and gay-marriage. Its should be clearly a violence of the single states right.

IRAQ:
a) the legitime of the war. Its so simple logic, that Iraq did not have these mass destruction before the invasion. Why?
I: If Iraq has these weapons, USA will never had enter the country. North Korea is a kind of evidence. If they wanted to stop North Korea before they developped A-weapon, they could have, but did not because they (CIA, NSA etc.) knew Korea would kick back.
II: Iraq was a devasted during the war in 90. After that there was sanction against Iraq. Ok, there occasionally a truck entering Iraq from Jordan, but never so much they could have build the needed facilities. And with the satelitte image and UN reports, there was no prove.

WHY WAR?
Simple because of oil. After 6 months, it was revealed that the 18 different Ministries in Iraq had different military rescue sizes.

The 17 of the Ministries were freed by 50 to 250 troops, but the Ministry of oil were freed by a brigade or approx. 3000 soldiers. The explanation: a coincidence. REALLY ? OR NOT.

Of course it was for oil. Because when The Pr.Bush got into office, the decrease of Economy started. An important factor to boost the economy is to lower the price of oil. Iraq has a huge potential, but it will take some time.
Secondly as a winner of a war, its easy to be reelected.

INTERNATIONAL
The arrogance of America is main reason to why many europeans has a hard time with currents administration.

a) If you are an allied and a good friend, you take advice and follow the majority, even you are the biggest power.

b) Globally, its seems strange that America would'nt listen to when 180 countries say there is something called global warming. Again America should follow the pattern of democracy.

and strangely enough, only few weeks ago Pr.Bush seems to acknowledge this issue now.

c) same issue, connected to the war. USA did not have the approval by UN and why should other countries follow democracy when USA do not.

d) As a result of this, the weird CO2 deal where a rich country can sell its surpluse of polution to a lower develloped country. Like its really going to help, the areas with polution.

e) Israel - Paleastine conflict.
USA can stop this situation and there is only one bad guy, in this game. (has David star, in their flag) but it seems Davids land has the hands of the b@lls on both parties in USA.
So here is simple not important who will be in the office.

Anyway, thats was a long list of issue we/I don't understand/disagree about. Hope its was just a list of difference approach to politics.
My last comments: I had many times listen to why Americans ask:

Why does foriegner has an opinion of the an American election.?
A: Simple because America is the biggest economy and military power in the world. So it will affect the hole world, what person/people who seats in the oval office and in the congress.

Posted by: spamer

CDarwin,

You are making no sense.
you say "Am I better off than I was four years ago? Absolutely!"
then you say "I want someone who will actually HELP the average American" are you not a average American?

Then you do "just look at all the TRAGEDIES and BAD LUCK that occurred during the last four years to the USA! Coincidence? I think NOT!" Good thing you weren't a live when Lincoln was president. You would of have a heart attack.

(the bad luck followed that poor guy, some of his children died, wife went insane, a war, gets re-elected and gets shot!)

Posted by: gino

jutman, i can answer 2 of your questions. 1. you must register to vote so that you can be entered in the the jury selection process. 2. if you are a convicted felon you can still vote. there is a common misunderstanding about this situation. however, you can not vote during your time of incarceration. Gino

Posted by: Pin Boy

gino,

I believe that convicted felons permanently lose their right to vote. Can anynone substantiate this?

Pin boy

Posted by: Khashyar

Hi guys...

I'm glad that we are able to speak about the Presidential campaign, and keep things civil

I have hope for this thread....

Khashyar

Posted by: gino

yea pinboy i can from first hand experience. i got in some trouble when i was 18 a felony. i have voted in every election never had a problem. Gino

Posted by: Khashyar

Hi Gino...

I really appreciate your candidness and openness...

I think that all of us benefit when each of us can share our experiences and thoughts openly.

Khashyar

Posted by: gino

hi Khashyar, it happened 21 years ago. i think i might have stuck my neck out a little on this one and I'm sure someone out there will rag on me about it. but it's the truth I'm a convicted felon . i have nothing to hide. and to be honest with you it turned out to be a blessing in my life. also, before anyone has anything to say about it. yes my fiancee knows all about it and all the details. she dose not pass judgment on me for it. this is just one of many reasons why i love her. Gino

Posted by: gino

however, i cannot sit on a jury because of my criminal record. But i have been called for jury duty twice. gino

Posted by: spamer

OK, gino I'll pick on you... (ppphhhhhhhh) LOL.

If you have learned from your experience, good for you!

Really the debate was boring to me.... I wanted the jabs, pokes.... I wanted Theresa Kerry commits...LOL
Who else can tell a reporter to "shove it" when she is asked to explain herself on a word she used in a speech? She is the person who is making me watch the race!!!! I want to be entertained

Posted by: Khashyar

Gino...

You can feel grateful that you were able to openly share that event with your fiance, and that she has the character and intelligence (and love) to understand. (It was a long time in your past anyway).

I think that it takes courage and self-confidence to be able to share something very personal in this (most of the time) forum of friends.

Khashyar

Posted by: BradIL

Gino--- Whether or not convicted felons vote is the decision of each state legislature. In Illinois... I may be mistaken... but once a felon has completed a sentence, that is to say, incarceration and the court prescribed time of probation/supervision the felon's right to vote is re-established EXCEPT in cases of treason, AND maybe in the case of bribery of a public official, but I am open to correction here. I'll have to review the Illinois Elections Code to find out.

Jutman--- it would take a long time to cite the disagreements I have with your previous post on what you/europeans dislike about the Bush administration. But I would address one regarding the environment and the Kyoto Treaty.

The "presumed" global warming is a stampede to false security based on models of which there is shaky evidence. Indeed, science seems to be a missing part in all this. The air in the United States has never been cleaner. In the debate over amendments to the U-S Clean Water/Air Act the major parties can differ by 4-8 parts per BILLION of the permissible amount of pollutant in the air or water.

The evidence that justifies punishing the U-S economy includes models of assumptions that generate inaccurate results. Meanwhile, science is not answering the major questions that can determine why global temperatures change. For instance, many models assume the sun produces the energy that creates heat on Earth in a narrow range; is the Sun's energy output constant over periods of time, what is the range of its output? No one can answer with any certainty.

Yet studies of the air locked in ice at the South Pole from millions of years ago shows that greenhouse gases were massively higher than at any time during modern history. Yet, the dinosaurs and now-extinct plant life thrived. But science is at a loss to explain this FACT when it comes to the global warming debate.

Posted by: BradIL

Jutman---

Your comments regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are perhaps the most sensitive. This is one gentile-WASP Midwest American who finds european criticism to be "rich" in my most polite view. America's past with anti-semitism leaves much to be desired, but the U-S government & its constituent states have always rallied in the end to protect the right of Jews to worship & take their place in american society like all others.

But for europeans to blame Israel for the modern conflict is over the top. The Jews of the 20th century are a people who have been picked on by most of the nations on the earth. Who, in the 1930's and 40's, suffered death, personal property loss, and humiliating treatment on a level that is INCONCEIVABLE in the modern world. A people who have every reason to be skeptical of promises of 'special treatment' and protection by the states of the world; and as deserving of their own SOVEREIGN homeland, as any people on this planet, to provide for their own future.

What support have they seen from Europe? A modest acknowledgment at best. While the abuse & death camps grind on the Jews all europeans can do is appease Adolf Hitler so they don't have to get their hands dirty having to oppose hatred with armed force, so they don't have to be inconvenienced with a disruption to their daily routine. They congratulate themselves for avoiding military conflict and can only shrug their shoulders as a people are slaughtered, hoping nobody will notice. Perhaps the classic definition of benign neglect if there was one.

And what consideration do the Jews get from modern diplomacy?
Oh, when the Arab nations align in 1967 to obliterate Israel, and the Israelis start winning, the europeans so disgusted by war, decide to force an armistice and establish a green line that failed to end any conflict.

Noooo, but it did succeed in establishing guerilla warfare as preferred weapon, it did establish that babies in the arms of their mothers are legitimate targets, and it coddled acceptance of the bombing of teenage girls wanting to hang out & share a pizza.

Meanwhile, europeans encourage cease-fire after cease-fire, each crumbling within months, but so proud their green line holds and armies remain in their barracks.

That aside, I am interested on your views of the Palestinians who put AK-47's in the hands of children, or who turn teenage girls into suicide bombers. I'd ask dissenting Palestinians, but most of them on the West Bank get their brains beat out by PLO thugs, so they're not available for comment. Your thoughts will have to suffice.

But your post confirms one POV I have: IT TAKES A LOT OF ***NERVE*** for any european to offer any advise or criticism on Israel's attempts to secure itself.

---Brad///

Posted by: Jutman

BradIL

First I am not against Jewish and today its to late to reverse the existing of Israeli state. Historical its was a major mistake, one of the 10 biggest political distaster of the 20th century.

You referee to the situation in the 1920 and 30 in Europe. Basically, you need to go 500 year back where the Jewes were almost not welcome and many places they were exilied.

Concerning WWII, is not fair to judge all Europe on what Nazi-Germany did. There where puppet goverment around Europe who also sent their jewes to KZ camps, but a lot of private people did a great deal to rescue Jewes, and some states.

---

Secondly its of course not okay, that extremes use children to commit these horrible actions. Its just not right to hold the moderate politicans and people accountable for these actions.

I don't know the argumentation in other countries in Europe, but here its something like this: That Israel is the BIG/adult and the Palestines are the small/child. It should be the big who strat the process.
If the Palestines were a reel treath to Israel, it would not be suicide bombs we see. If they were a reel military power, the Palestines would shot airplanes and chopers down. Use artilley and rockets to fighth the Israeli state.

In addition to this, the Israeli states demand a complete 'cease' fire before they will not start talking. But this is a uneal demand. In eample of Nrthern Ireland and Basque land, we would see that eve after 75 yeras or 300 yearas there is extremes who don't follow the main decisions.

What we in EU don't like and ask Israel about. We pay for houses in the Gaza strip and Israel just destro them. Will they reimbourse these?

What takes it to stop the extremes? Answer: a Palestine state.

So basically Israeli must make decision:
A) Over the next 10 years live with a constant deadth of 250 a year in status que. OR
B) Create the Palestines state and in 10 years the death toll will fall to maybe 25.

A complet nihilition is not realistic with reference to N.Ireland and Basque territory.

Thirdly concerning USA. israel has occalisioally accept a peace treaty, sometimes signed in USA in front of the US President. Most of times its broken within a month by the israeli, in one situation just 48 hours after. So why does USA allow Israel to Buxx fuk USA?????????

Posted by: BradIL

Jutman---

Israel breaking peace treaties/cease-fire agreements??? I don't think so...

Palestinian/islamic militant groups consistently sponsor terror acts in violation of the cease-fire agreements. The destruction of Israel is the current predominant identity of Arabs in the Middle East.

Why shouldn't it be. A people so loyal to their own tribal interests, incapable of recognizing a common good among their own people, so ingrained with the master/subject mindset, they are being left behind into the dustbin of modern history. Uneducated, unloved (even by fellow Arabs), and content to wallow in victimization & miserablism, what possible relevance do Palestinans have in our modern world? None.
This happens as their fellow Arabs, who haven't offered a single parcel of land to establish a homeland (such as the sinai peninsula, the plain of northwest jordan & syria, sit on massive reserves of the very raw material that makes the world energy industry run--- oil--- billions of dollars worth.

For a european to call the establishment of Israel one of the biggest mistakes of the 20th century is a simple denial of what took place across Europe from 1933-1945. european states barely lifted a hand to protect Jews from the savage treatment of the Hitler's Third Reich. Its is an act of denial to treat the murder of 6 million people on the basis of their ethnicity & religion as just another war statistic.

More appalling is the state of european leaders as the murders took place. But, then again, it took the U-S pulling europeans by the nose to get NATO forces into Bosnia, and only after the death toll exceeded 150,000, so why should any american be surprised?

So what happened 500 years ago is really nothing, when compared with what's happened in the last 60 years, with european leaders all dressed in their 20th-21st century sensibilities of human rights, and sophisticated theories gleaned from their diplomacy skill. How did it all come to bear in preventing the deaths of 6 million Jews. It didn't!!!

Who could blame the Jews for wanting their own homeland. Who would they have provide their security--- Europe??? What a joke.

Meantime, you direct me to a european effort to build homes for Arabs on the west bank. Not many big oil dollars there, is there? Of course, big oil dollars don't go to build schools and teach children to read (given the appalling illiteracy rate in the West Bank), or for any substantive health care. NO, the money goes to the PLO- only too willing pay its fighters up to $400 a month- a major job source on the West Bank, oh unless you don't count taking a job sewing at a PLO linked clothing factory, or work at the PLO linked casino. The only other better job is run heroin across the middle east to western markets. so your housing dollars mean so much!

No I'll leave it to the european mentality to continue to dismiss the Jews, just as they did during the 1930's and 1940's.

And now to today, as terrorists stand to challenge europe, what's the response? cower to the demands, lower your head, and hope the whole thing goes away. Boy, Hitler really did a job on your mental state.

And can America ever count on europe to help us defend freedom around the world. NO I SUPPOSE WE CAN'T!

Posted by: Jutman

The comments of the mistake of Israeli state, is not a European political statement. Just some private and some other have.

Israel did not brake a cease fire, they broke a international agrement.

How: Like they sign a treaty, in this treaty has there always been the paragraph where Isreal must stop build new setltements. In worst case, they start 2 days later after the agreement.

The explanation:
The settlements were already planned before the treaty was signed.

Okay, this attitude can be excused the first time, but not the 2nd time. Of course, not a single Israeli mistake ince the negoatiater and the Palestine sould have been awared of that.

---
So whats is the idea. Now maybe 20% of the Palestine support the militants indirectly and some 2 to 3 % directly (provide people, money). So with an Palestine state, where the 'freedom' is on increase, the economy is at increase the 20% will rapidly decrease.
As I wrote, a complete nihilation of the terrorist attack is unlike to cease, perhaps ever. But is the classic question, what come first: the egg or the hen, here the war or the peace.

You attacked PLO.
The first 40 years in the Israel existence, the PLO wanted a Palestine is that same land, naturally since the it was called Palestine during the British colonial age. Then PLO accept the Isreali state and accpet a Palestine never could be more than the Westbank and the gaza strip.
In this connection we must rememebr that the Westbank is actually Jordanian land, but have accept to give this up to the Palestine.
From PLO view is there is there only 2 issues which has not been solved.:
1) That Palestine want use the name Jerusalem in the new capital, like Jeresalem heights or East Jerusalem.
2) That they want the exiled people to return to their home land.

An issue PLO has accepted, but not the Israeli state is the square with 3 different holy items, one for the Jews, one for the Moslems and one for the Cristians. Its like 500 x 300 yard and can not be divided to location and geophysics. Here PLO has accept thats this land UN administration.

So what can PLO do more? Start a domestic war against Hamas to cease the attack against Israel?
But why? The PLO want peace and accept the current borders. Hamas don't.
Secondly PLO has no change to get the weapons to stop Hamas, due to the control.
To argue that PLO is nor democratic is or relevant. You can't get all from scratch.

Posted by: Pawel_PL.USA

Let me say that I'm not happy with George W., but he's still better than that idiot Kerry ... but then I'm not surprised that some Russians preffer Kerry from Bush - Kerry is, after all, a bit more ... shall I say ... tavarish

Posted by: Menehune

Jutman, i agree with you that difference in american and european eco-social-political systems will generally conflict.

American political system is not "winner takes all". if you look historically at the presidency and congress. when one political party is in the presidency, congress will usually be lead by the opposition party. that usually change after the president 2nd year in office. congress can always over-ride the president with a 2/3 majority, which usually happens in his first 2 years in office. having one party controlling both the executive and legistlative branch is very rare as with the case with Bush. I know some country will make the losing party a vice-president or it's equivilant. our political system is just different.

It's not that americans don't want to pay taxes. i believe that most americans don't want to pay for someone's free ride. We just happen to be less socialistic than most european countries. this is neither good or bad, it's just the way americans are. i don't want to work hard, pay 50% to taxes, so lazy people can live off welfare and take vacations every year, while the hard workers pay for it. i don't know about the other states. but in hawaii, you can only receive social welfare for 5 years and in that time you have to enter some kind of training program or lose your welfare. after 5 years you are cut off completely, with the exceptions of special cases like mentally or physically impaired. another reason not to pay more taxes to fund exhorbient social programs. the more you allow the govt to do for you, the less you will be able to do for yourself

i agree with you on the debt level and unemployment statistics.

"the level of Federal influence. The Rep. wants a little as possible, and thats why many 'free' men like this party.

- Personally I find it strange that Bush wants to introduce a federeal band against abortion and gay-marriage. Its should be clearly a violence of the single states right."

the american political system is a federal system, a dual govt system. the federal govt and the state govt. when it comes to interstate affairs (affairs bwteen states), the federal govt has juristriction over state govt. b/c this is an interstate matter, the federal govt has juristrictions. Bush's views just happen to be more conservative than most. banning abortion and gay-marriages by bush will not happen b/c the supreme court already ruled it as being unconstitutional. this is not to say that it won't be banned in the future when the make-up of the supreme court becomes more conservative.

about iraq. personally, i never approved of war against iraq, but not for the same reason as most europeans (wmd and oil). i am half vietnamese/chinese and japanese. my mother saw her vietnam go to hell b/c of war. my japanese grandfather saw the same in japan. all wars are bad for what ever reason. americans have different views on this, but it's not clearcut as wmd or oil.

"The arrogance of America is main reason to why many europeans has a hard time with currents administration."

please don't correlate americans with our govt. i know many view americans as being arrogant. but i find it ironic that the world wants us to be the world police and then when we become the world police, the world calls it arrogance. This was forced on americans after WW2, b4 WW2 most americans were quite content to be isolationist. although FDR wanted to enter the war, the general public resisted until Pearl Harbor was bombed. Our military was laughable b4 WW2 compared to england's, france's, russia's, and germany's military b4 WW2. i find it really funny when ppl say, sadam this sadam that, he was a creation of america. well we are the by products of WW1 and WW2. Europeans made the US into the world power.

"Globally, its seems strange that America would'nt listen to when 180 countries say there is something called global warming. Again America should follow the pattern of democracy."

we know about global warming, if you're refering to the Kyoto summit on global warming and america's refusal to sign the treaty, it has to more to do with economics, not our ignorance of global warming. I wish ppl would stop thinking that americans are ignorant.

it would be more difficult and costly for a country of our size to revamp and change than the other 180 countries who can start from scratch. the cost associated with the meeting the demands in the Kyoto treaty is unreasonble when compared to developing countries cost b/c those industries maybe non-existent or just starting to take root. it is always cheaper to build from nothing than to revamp. for the US to meet the demands of this treaty will cost the US atleast 1000 fold compared to say the netherlands or other countries. i believe that when the cost associated with this treaty is more reasonable, then you will see the US signing it.

"USA did not have the approval by UN and why should other countries follow democracy when USA do not."

to me the UN is a farce. look how long it took the UN to act in Kosovo. they are refusing to use the word genocide in regards to Sudan to avoid sanctions against Sudan and avoid sending assistant to Sudanese. so again the US is not waiting for UN approval and currently providing about 80% of the humanitaring aid in sudan. look how long it's taking the UN to deal with Iran and it's nuclear development, that the EU is now taking up the matter. they just love to drag their feet. In a recent wall street journal poll, 56% of those polled believe that the UN is anti-american. 72% feel that the UN tries to undermined the US in all international matter. if it was up to me, i would evict the UN from NY city and stop funding 70% of the UN's upkeep. this may well take place when the UN's audit on the oil-for-food program is completed and shows corruption in the upper echelon of the UN.

"Israel - Paleastine conflict.
USA can stop this situation and there is only one bad guy, in this game. (has David star, in their flag) but it seems Davids land has the hands of the b@lls on both parties in USA."

please tell me how we can stop this conflict that has existed since biblical times? it's not as simple as cutting off economic and military aid to israel or waving a magic wand and poof there is peace. i have seen many news reel in europe regarding this conflict and they are mostly pro-palestinian. where as in the US, it's mostly pro-israeli. i would really like to see a palestine state but i don't see it happening in my lifetime.. the hatred btween the two are to great to overcome at this time.

btw your quote above is very anti-semtic. whether you are anti-semitic or not, i can't judge b/c i dont know you, but you are using "star of david" in a very derogative manner, in a similar manner the star of david was used during WW2 to label those who are jewish and sent to death camps. I have an israeli friend who was born in france. the reason for his emmigration from france? "Europe has become very anti-semitic, I do not want to raise my daughter in a country that will treat her as a second class citizen" why would someone want to raise a family in a turbulant region over to a peaceful region? you should ask yourself that. perphaps in his eyes europe is more turbulant for the jewish ppl than the bloodshed in israel. and from your comment, i don't blame him for leaving europe all together.

when i first joined this site, i thought i can learn from you guys in matter regarding russia and FSU. but in this section, i mostly see anti-americanism and bashing on one side and americans defending themselves on the other. just b/c we view the world in a different light we are dubbed as arrogant, ignorant, and intolerant, oh and let's not forget the "divine US". just b/c we don't agree with european views doesn't mean we are wrong and you are right and vice-a-vis. this is really not surprising if you look throughout history, when ur at the top (like sumarians, cammanites, pheonecians, carthagenians, minoans, egyptians, greeks, romans, prussians, spainards, frenchs, britishs) you are the envy of other cultures and will always be painted as the devils. this sickens me, so i will no longer participate in this forum...Japan is smart, they can become the #1 power if they want to, japan can easily surpase the US economically and militarily but they are well aware of the luggage that comes attached with the position..

Posted by: Jutman

Quote:

please don't correlate americans with our govt. i know many view americans as being arrogant

I was'nt. I was refering to the administration.

Quote:

we know about global warming

Yes, maybe Democrats and the Green Party. Officially its not more than few weeks ago Pr.Bush did, public.
- I only partial accept the economic issue. Yes, I am aware the biggest problem for USA is the amount and therefor the expenses.
But then I don't understand why not have a political view like, we have this money x US$ and for that we will reduce the CO2 emission.

Quote:

to me the UN is a farce

Maybe, but then you must choose to be out. If you are a member you must work within the current system. Of course with the purpose change the system into a better.

Concerning the Israeli, was a bad joke. Maybe because I am a Jute and is close to a Jew (especially in my own language). I am not against moderate Jews and as I wrote the Israeli state.
- How to stop it? Simple by enforcing a negotiated treaty. The USA military are the only one, the Israeli is afraid of.

Regarding USA. Yes, there is much I don't like in USA, but there is also much to like/admire and so on. So I guess most of negative feelings is towards the admiistration.

Posted by: Pawel_PL.USA

I think the only way to have peace in the area is for Israel to deal a crushing blow to the Arabs - otherwise, it suffices to glance at the map to see that any compromise-settlement will only breed future conflicts.

Similarly, I've been in the United States for over 11 years - I've had an opportunity to notice that many Americans are indeed cocky and arrogant and they lack any sort of self-criticism. Unfortunately, I've also noticed this among many of my own Polish people.