Have your say! "Free Speech" or Muslim bashing? Do you support Iraq troop withdrawal? Iran invasion?
  • Please read our posting policy before adding a comment
  • Target areas: Operation "Anyone But Labour" 2006
  • Saturday, January 29, 2005

    Bush has made the world more dangerous

    According to a BBC World Service poll, 58% of those questioned, and 16 out of 21 countries' citizens polled say that the "re election" of Bush has made the world a more dangerous place. From this article:

    Only three countries - India, Poland and the Philippines - out of 21 polled believed the world was now safer. The survey found that 47% of the 21,953 people questioned now see US influence in the world as largely negative, and view Americans negatively as well. None of the countries polled supported contributing their troops to Iraq. "This is quite a grim picture for the US," said Steven Kull, director of the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA), which carried out the poll with GlobeScan.
    See all recent "A Logical Voice" posts"

    8 Comments:

    At 1/25/2005 02:15:00 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

    which is more dangerous....Bush....or the Status Quo?

     
    At 1/29/2005 05:09:00 pm, Blogger Voice 1 said...

    Bush is the "staus quo"

     
    At 1/30/2005 03:35:00 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

    yes....the new status quo...the one that says your crying and whining is a waste of time...the one that says you total dependency on out dated organizations and treaties are the problem! you are on the wrong side of this debate and history will prove it... you and Chamberlin and Limberberg....you support doing nothing and complain about those who are willing to act. you are a hypocrit that pretends to care for human rights yet you deny human rights in your own logic.

     
    At 1/30/2005 04:14:00 pm, Blogger Voice 1 said...

    If it were upto me, no rogue regimes would be traded with, no rogue regimes would be assisted with their flouting of human rights by our "civilised societies" supplying weapons to them. Then again, you conveniently ignore these points in your simplistic "with us or against us" logic

     
    At 1/30/2005 04:30:00 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

    my simplistic with us or against us argument...is the argument. you use it too, when it serves your needs.


    the problem is you say you don't want rogue regimes stomping on their own weak populations, but you are not in favor of doing anything about it. well at least anything that will work. you want to sit and talk at the UN and nothing else...therefore you are part of the problem. you are aiding those same tyrants that know they can just keep on with the same old plan because nobody will do anything to stop them. it is you and people like you who say they care for human rights but do more against human rights than you believe.

     
    At 1/30/2005 05:01:00 pm, Blogger Voice 1 said...

    You continue to ignore the issue of supplying rogue regimes the tools to suppress their own people, maybe Mr Rove doesn't like you talking about that.

     
    At 1/30/2005 05:01:00 pm, Blogger Voice 1 said...

    You continue to ignore the issue of supplying rogue regimes the tools to suppress their own people, maybe Mr Rove doesn't like you talking about that.

     
    At 1/30/2005 05:40:00 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

    Chamberlain? Be serious. What nation was making imperial moves in 2003? Not Iraq. If you want to make a historical comparison, you are choosing the wrong event. Read a book.

    Also, you must have something against U.S. law because the UN Charter is a ratified treaty and is thus "the supreme law of the land" according to the U.S. Constitution.

    PS. Stop supporting Islam Karimov. I'm getting sick of him boiling people to death.

     

    Post a Comment

    Links to this post:

    Create a Link

    << Home