U.S. May Escort Ahmadinejad to Ground Zero
A Can of Man
Je suis aware
Bury his ass there.
Team Infidel
Forum Spin Doctor
i really hope this doesn't happen
phoenix80
Banned
Yes... I, too, hope this doesn't happen....
Updated: ABC just reported that the head of the terrorist regime's request to see Ground Zero was denied....
GooD NEWS
Last edited:
Team Infidel
Forum Spin Doctor
right on......
mmarsh
Active member
Unfortunately he is still a head of state, and a semi-elected one at that. We let absolute dictators like Musharaff and the Saudi Royal Family (whom I am certain knew something about the 9-11 attacks as they play both sides of the GWOT) visit then we have no grounds to stop Ahmadinejab.
We cannot barr him access, if we did, imagine the worlds reception of Bush the next he was abroad? He would never be allowed to leave the US, he would be banned everywhere. The only reason he is allowed to travel is because he is the President of the USA, not because people like him. Bush is far more unpopular in world opinion than Ahemedinejab
We cannot barr him access, if we did, imagine the worlds reception of Bush the next he was abroad? He would never be allowed to leave the US, he would be banned everywhere. The only reason he is allowed to travel is because he is the President of the USA, not because people like him. Bush is far more unpopular in world opinion than Ahemedinejab
Last edited:
A Can of Man
Je suis aware
That's because the world opinion is retarded.
It's like how before, the world opinion was sympathetic to Saddam Hussein and if anything happens in Korea, the world will be sympathetic to Kim Jong-il.
phoenix80
Banned
Well-Said
the guy cant even hide his hatred for pres. Bush in the face of enemy!
LOL
Last edited:
A Can of Man
Je suis aware
He can keep going that route if he enjoys having JDAMs rammed up his ass
mmarsh
Active member
The world was sympathetic to Saddam? Maybe a few countries might have done business with him, but NOBODY (except the Palestinians) was sympathetic. Despite the loss of business, I don't think even the Russians or Chinese were shedding any tears for Saddam. Nor is anybody that sympathetic to Iran aside from Syria and maybe Pakistan. The Sunni Arabs hate Iran, and would have probably been more supportive toward military action if Bush hadn't decided to play cowboy in Iraq. Same with North Korea, excluding perhaps China. Nobody else is going to shed any tears over Kim Jong-il.
I would rank Iran #3 as the most hated country in the world.
As for world opinion, who's fault is that? Is it the World's fault that they hate Bush more than Ahmedinejab? Or can you think of a few things Bush *might* have done to really piss the world off? If you act like a jerk, you get treated like one. Compared to Bush, all Ahmedinejab is done (so far) is to blow hot air to the world media, make a few empty threats, and defy the UN. I can think of at least a few other countries that have done the same.
I am no admirer of Ahmadinejab, but I can say Ahmadinejab is far more skilled at playing world politics than Bush. Take Iran, its a pissant compared to the size and power of the USA. Yet, we have Ahmedinejab who has constantly made us out to the biggest fools in the world. I have to give him credit, his ability to enrage the West and get away with it has been masterful so far, although I do think his arrogance will cause him go too far some day. I have read reports that some of the Mullahs are beginning to question that strategy of deliberately provoking the U.S. Personally, I think Ahmadinejab will be much less arrogant and adversarial the moment he has a opponent who can play the game at his level, and that ain't the neocons.
Last edited:
mmarsh
Active member
You're mistaken on both counts. First Ronald Reagan was absolutly hated in Europe except by Maggie Thatcher (but not the UK has a whole), and secondly Bill Clinton was (and this is) extremely popular in Europe (except in Serbia, for obvious reasons). George Bush Sr wasn't disliked, -he actually had good relationships with the Far-Left Socialists like Francois Mitterrand and Helmut Kohl. In fact the only good think W has done, was to remind people how much a better President his father was.
US Conservatives (Reagan, Bush II) are not liked very much in the World. Moderates and Liberals are much better viewed (Bush, Clinton, Carter, Kennedy).
Last edited:
A Can of Man
Je suis aware
I don't care what you say, I clearly remember there was a LOT of Saddam sympathy going on.
Plus Europe's relationships with US presidents have to do with their political stance more than their character. Europe doesn't like to hear America going on about how the European social security system will destroy their economy blah blah and generally they get that from conservative administrations. Europeans are absolutely crazy about their social security system. To be fair, I don't think the US really should try to convince the Europeans to change their system. They like that system, then so be it. Besides, the Euro's doing pretty darn good right now anyway while the US Dollar is under some heat.
But yeah I really do agree that these Iranians have played this game EXTREMELY well and there is going to be hell to pay in future because of it. Smooth, real smooth. People ought to treat these guys with a level of respect (doesn't mean you like them, just means give a lot more thought) a cut above what we gave the Iraqis. Heck, you got these Persians using ARABS against us.
Then again, this is what is known as home turf advantage.
UN.. the UN defies the UN anyway. Heck, remember the run up to the war in Iraq? Resolution 1441 was it? Saddam actually did not comply with it (regardless of WMDs) and the UN just laughed. I guess laughing is the UN's idea of "severe consequences."
MMarsh, you will be surprised. People WILL shed tears over Kim Jong-il. Heck, even a lot of South Koreans will.
The explanation behind it is quite similar to the explanation behind the Stockholm Syndrome. I'm sure you're familiar with that, but not many people know why. You might, you might not but let me explain it anyway. Once the authorities show up (or in this case a stronger power), the small criminals look weak and helpless. The human being, for some strange reason, always feels a need to protect those who are weak and helpless, even if they are very much in the wrong. It is THIS effect that leads people to sympathize with ACTUAL criminals such as Saddam Hussein and Kim Jong-il. If you don't believe this, you are quite blind. During the outbreak of the Iraq war, people felt SYMPATHETIC towards Saddam Hussein, a feeling, regardless of whether the US was right or wrong, that should NOT be associated with such a person.
Plus Europe's relationships with US presidents have to do with their political stance more than their character. Europe doesn't like to hear America going on about how the European social security system will destroy their economy blah blah and generally they get that from conservative administrations. Europeans are absolutely crazy about their social security system. To be fair, I don't think the US really should try to convince the Europeans to change their system. They like that system, then so be it. Besides, the Euro's doing pretty darn good right now anyway while the US Dollar is under some heat.
But yeah I really do agree that these Iranians have played this game EXTREMELY well and there is going to be hell to pay in future because of it. Smooth, real smooth. People ought to treat these guys with a level of respect (doesn't mean you like them, just means give a lot more thought) a cut above what we gave the Iraqis. Heck, you got these Persians using ARABS against us.
Then again, this is what is known as home turf advantage.
UN.. the UN defies the UN anyway. Heck, remember the run up to the war in Iraq? Resolution 1441 was it? Saddam actually did not comply with it (regardless of WMDs) and the UN just laughed. I guess laughing is the UN's idea of "severe consequences."
MMarsh, you will be surprised. People WILL shed tears over Kim Jong-il. Heck, even a lot of South Koreans will.
The explanation behind it is quite similar to the explanation behind the Stockholm Syndrome. I'm sure you're familiar with that, but not many people know why. You might, you might not but let me explain it anyway. Once the authorities show up (or in this case a stronger power), the small criminals look weak and helpless. The human being, for some strange reason, always feels a need to protect those who are weak and helpless, even if they are very much in the wrong. It is THIS effect that leads people to sympathize with ACTUAL criminals such as Saddam Hussein and Kim Jong-il. If you don't believe this, you are quite blind. During the outbreak of the Iraq war, people felt SYMPATHETIC towards Saddam Hussein, a feeling, regardless of whether the US was right or wrong, that should NOT be associated with such a person.
senojekips
Active member
Redneck, it is a foolish man who thinks that world opinion "doesn't count". Regardless of what we may think as individuals, that is democracy on a world scale. I didn't like him, obviously you didn't either, unfortunately our opinions don't count for much on the world stage unless we have a majority backing.
Some people are so wrapped up in their own self importance that they think they can ignore world opinion, that's part of what got us into our present mess.