The Grim Hamster lord

What an interesting outlook on politics you have TGHL! You mean one which isn't endorsed by News Incorporated? I feel slightly proud. I made a comment on the BBC new website about Murdoch and it got read on BBC News 24. You'd have to know about BSkyB and Virgin Media in order to understand it, but I am still quite happy that my view is appreciated. I feel quite disappointed that daily mess ups are now so common it is worthless commenting on them.

Ah, this has returned. I give it ten minutes into Topazia or Toto's appearance here for it to burst into flames and burn to the ground. Anywho, the people who call you atheist M_K are ignorant bigots. You can't base something like belief (well, technically atheism is not a belief as atheists know God doesn't exist. Belief implies that something must be assumed to be true or that there is nothing substantial to believe in. Like the Tooth Fairy.) on clothing style or the way you dress. Its only two steps away from saying that everyone who appears to be of Middle Eastern extraction a Muslim. On a related note, you can give as much as you want to Pat Robertson and you get automatic entrance into heaven. I mean, how can he be lying? He wants money, he is a priest ergo God wants money and shall reward me accordingly. Perfect.

We have our first Republican Party candidate forward. Shame it is a doddering, ancient relic of the bad old days whose idea of cohesion is to bomb France. Next up for the Presidential candidate for the Republic Party: An evangelical nut/Someone who was in 'Nam/Someone who wasn't in 'Nam because his Daddy pulled some strings/A Nazi. Delete as appropriate.

I do so love the people who supply the US' military intelligence. They quite obviously don't use Google Earth, otherwise they'd know approximately where British troops were stationed. Of course, this isn't the first time the US has refused to court martial or release evidence to a UK court. There was the famous example of a brave tank commander who rescued his entire squad from a burning tank after hit by an anti-tank missile by Iraqi forces, returned to Britain for recovery, recovered and then when he got back to Iraq, got attacked again and was sent home once more after another brave feat of derring-do. He would have got the Victoria Cross too. If it wasn't for the fact that the latter occasion was after US troops decided it was time to play a game of shooting gallery with our Challenger II tanks which are completely unlike any other tank visually in the world. And now the US Government wants an armed militia of teenage hicks running round Iraq? Oh, how we all dread that day.

I would not want to see us involved in Iran. Nobody does and I especially don't. There is no need for action in Iran and as a far as I am concerned no need for sanctions either. If the CIA was aware of where exactly Iran was (next to Pacmanistan, right?) then maybe they'd know that. Within a few years Iran may be peaceful and supportive of the West, after the liberals in Iran who hold the most influential posts (the University places and the intellectuals) gain office after President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad isn't relected after everyone gets sick of an economy which isn't improving and a removal of freedoms, the only thing which holds Iran together is hatred of the West, but mostly of the USA. Oh, and why the United Kingdom hates the USA at the minute:

^^^ That is the US General in charge of Baghdad's idea of what he should do to follow Bush's change in strategy. Sorry, how stupid do you have to be not to remove obvious threats before they attack you? "Yes, I can see the mortar outpost where Sunni loyalists are lobbing bombs at us, why don't we remove it? Well, it hasn't been part of the plan." Well, if comments made by our Foreign and Defence Secretary are anything to go by, we are leaving Iraq this year meaning the US Army has no more friends to shoot up any more. How sad. This is me, not sympathising with the US troops because they just shot a clearly marked British convoy and killed several troops.

Do we have any orders apart from reminiscing on Tayino's attempts and other fun times? Oh, and making cheese fondue.

EL GASP! Kimmy has agreed to take steps towards nuclear disarmament in return for Fuel Aid! Does this mean I get to go back to South Korea now without being attacked by US Airport Security?

Since when did this turn into a Naruto thread? Now, would anyone like to place any orders?

You can never keep a good Phoenix down. 'Course not! What about a mediocre pheonix? They're a bit damp, so they don't rise quite as well.

In the USA a budget surplus does not happen onernight. So you have to look back in years. There were lots of Presidents who did more with foreign policy. As for coming to my conclusion that he was a useless President, sexual exploits never entered into my thinking. Wasn't it also Clinton who had a hand in the bombing of foreign countries? I remember have some friends in middle school who were from those countries. I cannot remember....starts with a B I think. Bosnia probably, and US and UK involvement there was to stop the genocide of thousands of people. If you need context, Yugoslavia was being broken up, and after the elections, all out civil war broke out. Serbian war leaders pursued policies of religious genocide against anyone who wasn't Serbian, terrorism and guerilla warfare was rife in the entire region and atrocities committed on a daily basis. The UK, US and Europe sent in armed peacekeeping forces to stabilise the situation and now we have a near stable Balkan region, with the war crimes trials going on even today of people like Slobodan Milosevic (who died in the Hague). Foreign Policy Success for Clinton in that respect. And to defend Clinton some more, I'd point out that the surplus only appeared late on in his term as President, so it can be attributed to his early financial policies in that respect and that his Foreign policy was good if you compare it with a large majority of Presidents who have made disastrous foreign policy choices. He was also liberal (this is not a swear word you Neo-Conserative Fascists out there) and forward thinking, as he tried to allow people into the armed forces regardless of sexuality and tried to introduce more equality into the United States.

You can never keep a good Phoenix down.

Horatio winz one internets.

I think you just got slapped for calling Bill Clinton useless, Horatio. I'd argue he wasn't useless. He maintained a strong dollar, a good economy and moved the country away from the doldrums Bush Sr. had put it in, he even managed to get a surplus in the federal budget. Just because he wasn't what you might call "sexually ethical" doesn't mean he wasn't a good president. Look at what he has gone to do, and what he did then. He did a lot of good work for the American people in his first term, and went onto do more. He helped solve the Northern Ireland Crisis over here, he tried to help the Middle East peace process and has furthered humanitarian work now he has retired.

I expected Lincoln to come up as the first choice. I would be more hesitant in giving him that title. Mainly because I question his motives for freeing slaves, as after studying the period I could argue that he freed the slaves, not out of any ideal of egalitarianism, but out of strategy to get the advantage over the Confederacy after months of stalemate, to maintain his position in the Party after pressure from the Radicals and to preserve the Union. He'd still be considered, but I wouldn't give it to him so easily just for freeing slaves. I think he'd still win it based on his excellent leadership qualities, his oratory and the huge amount of good he did for the United States and the Union. FDR wouldn't even get a look in for best president. The New Deal was, largely, a failure. The amount of expenditure put in for the amount of jobs it saved and created was far too minimal. While you can attribute success in terms of sorting out the banking crisis, the New Deal was not a New Deal for all, as the most poverty stricken were not the ones the New Deal helped. As a war leader, you could argue a good case for him being a good leader in many aspects. I would just criticise him for being so easily manipulated by Stalin at the numerous conferences held between the Big Three, he also condemned some of his allies to economic troubles after the war, his reluctance to get in the war in the first place and help Britain and Russia more actively than just the Lend-Lease program and his increased distance from Churchill as the war grew on as the two fell out due to Churchill's suspicion of the USSR's motives. Sorry, I've just gone and trashed one of the more highly regarded presidents. I'd tell you who would get in at about 2-5 though. Bill Clinton.

*slips back into generic Godfather style accent* Da Boss is back!

The electoral college which means you have, in effect, no true democracy? Can someone name a good president of the United States?

Of course I was. LOL You owe me H$ for my crocodiles still I might remind you. Would you like to give me the bill before or after you zap me in the microwave? I believe I gave it to you back in 2005, Horatio. That adds up to a lot of interest...

Are you really going to like what happens under Gordon Brown? He is another control freak. Anything is better than ThatcherCameron. I'm just anxious that Labour stay in power so I can take over the party and become Prime Minister without selling my soul myself to the Tory Party. We can't vote Lib Dem because they are incompetent. We can't vote Conservative because they are even more incompetent and that leaves only Labour. Better the devil... I was thinking the lesser of three evils, personally. Anyway, isn't this US Government topic rather than the UK? Let's see what you have. You have the police getting cheap deals from the US military, a gigantic protest against Iraq, a system which strives to provide no welfare at all and an economy on the edge of a recession - 1929 style. Enjoying yourself? UK: no constitution... shall I continue? LOL UK: Has a constitution, just unwritten and compromising a series of laws, bills and legislation. US: Has a constitution so shoddy it requires a near infinite amount of amendments. Also says that you can carry guns round. EU: No constitution yet. May have one when the French decide to stop being so difficult. I see you have such a sunny view of the US. LOL WHAT!? You have a sun in the US!?!? And it isn't the US people, it is the US government which I have such a bleak outlook on. That is, after all, why we are here. Now, who voted Eisenhower into the Presidency? The man was an incompetent war leader, forget peacetime leader.

Of course I was. LOL You owe me H$ for my crocodiles still I might remind you.

Are you really going to like what happens under Gordon Brown? He is another control freak. Anything is better than ThatcherCameron. I'm just anxious that Labour stay in power so I can take over the party and become Prime Minister without selling my soul myself to the Tory Party. We can't vote Lib Dem because they are incompetent. We can't vote Conservative because they are even more incompetent and that leaves only Labour. Better the devil... I was thinking the lesser of three evils, personally. Anyway, isn't this US Government topic rather than the UK? Let's see what you have. You have the police getting cheap deals from the US military, a gigantic protest against Iraq, a system which strives to provide no welfare at all and an economy on the edge of a recession - 1929 style. Enjoying yourself? UK: no constitution... shall I continue? LOL UK: Has a constitution, just unwritten and compromising a series of laws, bills and legislation. US: Has a constitution so shoddy it requires a near infinite amount of amendments. Also says that you can carry guns round. EU: No constitution yet. May have one when the French decide to stop being so difficult.

You weren't expecting this to live were you? *thanks Google bot for uncovering it*

I can never slip anything past you. Of course, that is exactly why Glowurm made that comment. LOL Indeed. He 'subtly' removed the part of my message asking how a link got through Like he's "subtly" going remove both our posts talking about what got edited? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: Never forget rule 1; Beware small smiling Hamsters.

*gets Maggie Thatcher to distract TGHL* *wins H$* *snipes Maggie* *Horatio is still 900 M away* *jumps into invisible ink* *Horatio overlooks flaw of invisible ink; it is only the ink which goes invisible, not the person dunked in it.* *switches over to thermal for extra targeting*

Are you really going to like what happens under Gordon Brown? He is another control freak. Anything is better than ThatcherCameron. I'm just anxious that Labour stay in power so I can take over the party and become Prime Minister without selling my soul myself to the Tory Party. We can't vote Lib Dem because they are incompetent. We can't vote Conservative because they are even more incompetent and that leaves only Labour. Better the devil... I was thinking the lesser of three evils, personally. Anyway, isn't this US Government topic rather than the UK? Let's see what you have. You have the police getting cheap deals from the US military, a gigantic protest against Iraq, a system which strives to provide no welfare at all and an economy on the edge of a recession - 1929 style. Enjoying yourself?