djst's nest

It's quite depressing. We had much the same happen in the recent Australian election. Everyone could see that our incumbent party had lied about many things but they were still voted back in by scaring the voting public. I was hoping that the American election would change things a bit for us in the smaller countries that have a habit of following America blindly.

I'm always for understanding things before speaking about them... The people has spoken, now it's time to count. What's the rush?

Well in the US they tend to have a very biased view of the world on their news and lets be honest a lot of Bush supporters do not care one little bit from the rest of the world. They're too stupid to see that Bush is making terrorism worse. Turning the rest of the world against you is not going to help defeat terrorism.

Not that Kerry was particularly good, but Bush is one of the most dangerous people in the world right now, maybe not a bin Laden but still bad.

Half of americans seem to be braindead. I can't believe, that they reelected this liar and war monger.

Maybe we don't want a communist traitor as our Prez...what's wrong with the rest of the world???

> Maybe we don't want a communist traitor as our
> Prez...

Do you know what communism is? Get yourself an lexicon.

> what's wrong with the rest of the world???

LOL, is this loss of reality typical for all americans?

Mr. Kerry is the obviuos WRONG choice. Our country could not survive with him at the helm. Although even more conservative would be nice, we will vote for President George W. Bush.

> Our country could not survive with him at the
> helm.

How many people (americans and citizens of other countries) will not survive, because George W. Bush will be your president for the next four years?

USA, please let the rest of the world alone! We don't need you, we don't want you!

I can't believe that the most influent country in this world elect a so stupid, liar and dangerous person, who don't care about environnement, the poor people, and the rest of the world...

Next 4 years will again be a disaster...

yes It's sad :( now let's see how things will go in Ohio but it will be hard..

An unspoken issue may be at work here. The American Constitution and American people have been suffering from judicial activist rulings too long. America can't afford any more of this disaster. It needs to replace judicial activist justices with strict constructionist justices. That historically requires a conservative president. Kerry doesn't fit that requirement.

>USA, please let the rest of the world alone! We don't need you, we don't want you!

Thats right!
USA, you don't own us! get a hell out of Europe!

..and stay away!

Well when it comes down to, Although Americans try act as if they don't like the government and bla bla. They are ready to surrender all their rights as long as they can have guns. I mean what do you expect from a society where 20% of the people think that you shouldn't raise taxes for the richest 1% of the population because they plan on joining that 1%. They will learn, or they won't have any choice. Their conservatism and and willingness to give up their rights (not only to governments but to corporations as well) will hit them hard in the long term.

It's like in Germany in the 80's and 90's. Everyone didn't like Chancellor Kohl, but everyone voted for him.

God help us, God help us, God help us... The only consolation for the despair about the election results is that things will be so bad over the next four years for any president at all that perhaps it's fitting that the Bush-neocon chickens come home to roost in their very own coop. Then maybe we can hope for a rebirth of both parties.

What is wrong with the rest of the world? When did turning a blind eye to mass-murdering tyrants become a stance you could feel you had the moral high ground on?

Under George Bush's leadership, the US has had the courage to do what the world has not: make the world a better place by removing a brutal dictator (Hussein), a repressive regime (the Taleban), and pushing all others in the right direction (see: Libya).

When the rest of you can look at those results, and not only still think Bush is a poor choice, but be seriously unable to even comprehend why we might consider him a good choice, you have lost touch with ethics and reality.

(Note: when I say morality, I do mean it in a secular fashion. I'm an atheist; I disagree with Bush on many domestic issues: but the President is not primarily responsible for those issues).

> Everyone didn't like Chancellor Kohl, but everyone > voted for him.

Kohl didn't started unjustified wars against other countries! He didn't limit the citizen rights substantial. Maybe he wasn't very popular, but he wasn't bad for germany or the rest of the world during his reign.

All you need to know about this election is that when quizzed on where their candidate stands on a given issue Bush supporters are 80% wrong and Kerry supporters are 80% correct.

Please remember not all of us are morons. We just happen to share the same land with idiots.

When many US citizens think "Well that 1 billion dollar tax cut for the rich means I'm paying less in taxes," it's no wonder the country is going down the toilet. Hello moron, $10 a year is not a tax cut because you now pay more in services. Neo-conservatism is such a pain.

When I leave the country I have to say I'm from Canada, that way I don't have to hang my head in shame that I'm from a country where half the population are morons. Anyone want to adopt a US citizen so I can get out of this rotten place?

> When did turning a blind eye to mass-murdering
> tyrants become a stance you could feel you had
> the moral high ground on?

George W. Bush?

> make the world a better place by removing a
> brutal dictator (Hussein)

What right has America to attack other countries and kill thousands of innocent civilians? This war was totally build on lies (weapons of mass destruction, connections between al qaida and iraq, ...).

> and pushing all others in the right direction

Right direction == Americas direction? Stop thinking that you know what is good for the rest of the world.

> When did turning a blind eye to mass-murdering
> tyrants become a stance you could feel you had
> the moral high ground on?

George W. Bush?

> make the world a better place by removing a
> brutal dictator (Hussein)

What right has America to attack other countries and kill thousands of innocent civilians? This war was totally build on lies (weapons of mass destruction, connections between al qaida and iraq, ...).

> and pushing all others in the right direction

Right direction == Americas direction? Stop thinking that you know what is good for the rest of the world.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. Where exactly do you stand if you can't agree that Libya ending it's weapons program and increasing transparency is a good thing? If you can't even admit that Hussein killed a lot more innocent civilians (intentionally) than were killed (accidentally) during the war in Iraq?

Sorry for the double post and sorry for insulting the americans who are not following their Führer Bush.

> Where exactly do you stand if you can't agree that
> Libya ending it's weapons program and increasing
> transparency is a good thing?

When is the USA stopping it's weapons of mass destruction program? I think most of the world is more afraid of your weapon program than Libya's.

> If you can't even admit that Hussein killed a
> lot more innocent civilians (intentionally)
> than were killed (accidentally) during the war
> in Iraq?

Hussein was a tyran, that's right, but the things you were talking about, happenend in the beginning of the 1990's and not in 2003. Why didn't Bush sr. arrested Hussein during the first gulf war?
Tell me one good reason for this war! I know one: oil.

Thomas, thank you for making the Bush/Hitler comparison. All it takes is one insane blanket statement to completely invalidate someone's opinion. You've just been invalidated.

The Bush Administration's foreign policies are simply a method of clouding domestic policy which allows them to use propaganda convincing ordinary American citizens to give up ever-diminishing rights and pass control to big business. They're preparing you all for fascism idiots!

Almost every country in the world isn't run by radical fundamentalists, and populated by brain-dead religious zealots. Except for the countries we invade, of course.

I was hoping Bush would get kicked out also, cause I'm sick of seeing John Howard, our Australian Prime Minister, blindly following that war mongering president and going along with every disastrous decision Bush makes! Of course, the Australian election a few weeks ago didn't go well either, since I was hoping for Howard to leave also.

Disappointing, but in a way it's interesting to see the analogy between US elections and Mozilla's products. Meanwhile everyone _knows_ what's the best choice, however the big multitude of stubborn/conservative/'average user' people simply refuses to admit and choose for it..

I am not a braindead American, and I voted for Kerry.

The reason why "everyone" as you put it, is voting for Bush is because we have one thing in the US that I'm glad to say Europe does not...an inbred hick bible belt.

This wonderous thing encompasses the entire center mass of the country. Any president who rallys behind Jesus gets voted for. Religion is a huge player in campaigns here (yes, I know, it sucks).

I personally can't stand Bush and his manipulation of my nation. Its hard to believe that over half the population has been tricked or scared into voting for Koko the Gorilla's inbred second cousin, but this is a country whose news services are mostly slanted right-wing, and in the political off-season you've got them doing political scare stories.

And as to why Bush Sr. didn't get rid of Hussein the first time around, the UN TOLD HIM HE COULDN'T. Don't blame us for that one. At least Bush Sr. had respect for the UN.

Why is it that mozilla.org has to link to political blog posts with nothing to do with mozilla? This might alienate some potential users with differing political opinions.
Oh, and am I the only one who has really slow scrolling on this page?

Actually, Bush Sr. didn't topple Hussein the first time because he knew the coalition, which included much of the Arab world (unlike this time when it's mostly full of small countries we bribed w/ aid), would fall apart if we went into Baghdad. He knew that to occupy Iraq successfully, we'd need those Arab troops and their governments' support. Since they would never support toppling Hussein, Bush Sr. sensibly stopped short of invading Baghdad. If only the son was that wise.

the problem is, that if 51 percent of all americans watch Fox News, they'll never know what REALLY happens in the world and they'll never see the truth, hence the election results... fuck that. the USA has the poorest democracy in the modern world...

okay, i'll give a statement here too - guess it's necessary in this discussion...

first we have to take a look at the development of freedom, peace, economy, human rights, relationships to former allies and last but not least of democracy itself. all these points did not get better but mostly much worse within the last four years under president george w. bush.

this stupid cowboy is probably the most dangerous person in the world - looking at his war acts he should be judged to a lifelong penalty in one of his own prisons (perhaps guantanamo bay would be a nice place for him?!) what is terrorism?? doesn't he bring terror to other countries? and the most interesting question: for what??

to save america's citizens from terror? - obviously not, the danger of terror acts has never been that high as it is nowadays and that's no wonder because he increases the number of anti-america fundamentalists by bringing war, suffer and pain to civil inhabitants of other countries. don't you think that there'll be a reaction on this or do you really believe that these enemies can be defeated with these methods?

or is it just to bring democracy to the world and to fight for a better world? - no, it's not - democracy in bush's own country decreases step by step since he cheated in 2000 and since he's working in a high degree on cutting civil rights.

it's anything else but not a land based on freedom and peace he's planning. he's scaring people by one propagated coming terror act after another and he uses this potential of fear for basing his own power structure on it and for decreasing freedom - and best of all, he makes them/you believe that it's necessary for them/you.

there are so many points that could be given on this place but i really do not have the time to bring them all up to you... just have a look at the following link

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/02_11_02_lucy.html

a very interesting compilation of facts that should give every objective viewer much to think about and constantly provided with exactly sources for these informations (bbc, cnn, the observer, guardian, the new york times, le figaro, frankfurter allgemeine zeitung,...many big and serious journals or tv-stations).

hope all of you guys have seen the new michael moore production "fahrenheit 9/11" - for sure it's propaganda but it's mostly based on serious and horrible facts as you can see on the website www.michaelmoore.com - there you can also find the sources for the stated thesis and the "fahrenheit 9/11 fact sheet" in which the 9/11 commission report confirms the authenticity of the key fahrenheit 9/11 facts.

isn't all of this reason enough to get rid of this criminal. hope they/you'll use the next chance in four years if it comes on what it looks like at the moment.

by the way, i don't think that kerry is a brilliant alternative for bush but if there's only this one choice, how can they/you vote for the terrorist, liar, cheater, loser...?

i really do not understand!

All this outright hostility is really quite sad. I'm sorry if your disappointment in the way the election turned out, but are the personal attacks really necessary to get your point across?

If France would stop selling technology to build weapons of mass destruction to Iraq then maybe there wouldn't have been the urgent need to go there (if you call giving Hussein 10 yrs, to clean up his act, urgent).

How can people say Hussein was not a terrorist. He gased tens of thousands of Kurds, or don't they count, and he threatened to do the same to everyone else. He also used chemical weapons against the Iranian. So how can anyone say Hussein would never want to use them again.

Hussein gave $25,000 to families of suicide terrorists. Hussein let known terrorists safely live in Iraq. Hussein let al-Qada have training camps in Iraq...

And have you forgotten what he did to Kuwait, that should be enough to require that he lose his power.

Most of Europe let terrorists do whatever they want. They did stop the genocide in Yugoslavia until the US stepped in. They complained but are doing too little too late in Sudan. And they did nothing in Uganda. All France and Germany can do is complain. They have no courage to actually do anything.

P.S. I'm sorry to rant here, I also think Mozilla websites should be for Mozilla related stuff also, but I had to speak up.

the initial post had "And what the hell is wrong with your voting system?"

i haven't seen this addressed - instead people in here are attacking the voters, when the question posed was about the system.

so djst, what do you find objectionable or problematic with the system itself?

i'm curious, because i see the usual bashing rhetoric in here, but you asked a different question than i usually see in blogs.

==> If France would stop selling technology to build weapons of mass destruction to Iraq then maybe there wouldn't have been the urgent need to go there (if you call giving Hussein 10 yrs, to clean up his act, urgent)

Are you NUTS, who the hell do you think supplied Iraq with the gas in the first place. You should really get you history right before commenting on such things....

There was not just one other choice. I voted for Badnarik (Libertarian). Most people didn't know about this alternative through which a much less overpowering government would have been possible because this country is blinded by the two larger political parties. They wouldn't let Badnarik enter into an open debate because the Democrats and the Republicans both feared that if the Libertarian party got more exposure, they would most certainly get more votes. Something about the two-party system makes me want to vomit.

Kerry or Bush?

Well, who am I to vote for? - One will probably start the draft, and the other definately will. They ought to be tarred and feathered for even thinking about that.

>If France would stop selling technology to build weapons of mass destruction to Iraq

What a joke... You are the one talking about that when the USA sold weapons to Irak during the Iran/Irak war. Remember that during one period Saddam was a contact of your government. Please do not forget half of the truth next time.

sad sad bush suxzors and im american

France provided Iraq with the nuclear reactor technology. Knowling full well Iraq wanted to eventually pursue it's use for non peaceful purposes.

It's one thing to sell/give the gas or guns. But if you give it to someone who you now will be using it not for defensive purposes but for offensive or genocidal purposes, then that is different.

>if you give it to someone who you now will be using it not for defensive purposes but for offensive or genocidal purposes

Exactly, so do you really think that when the US sold guns and gas to Irak, they thought it would be to hunt animals for food and to heat the house? Come on... Nobody is white in this story, all the governements think about money first, and when it come to money, the US are always number one, which is sad in this context. To make money is not a problem, but to use your position in politics to do so is really something else.

You have got to be kidding.

Your French president personally profitted from selling nuclear techonology to Iraq.

And let's not forget the sweetheart oil deals France got from Iraq's Hussein, to look the other way, when it came to putting in sanctions for not cooperating with inspectors.

France didn't pay market prices for their Iraqi oil!

Bush washed your brain and memory?

"If France would stop selling technology to build weapons of mass destruction to Iraq then maybe there wouldn't have been the urgent need to go there (if you call giving Hussein 10 yrs, to clean up his act, urgent)."

The fact is that US sold weapons of mass destruction to Iraq to fight with Iran, not FRANCE. Don't push the responsibiility to other country.

"How can people say Hussein was not a terrorist. He gased tens of thousands of Kurds, or don't they count, and he threatened to do the same to everyone else. He also used chemical weapons against the Iranian. So how can anyone say Hussein would never want to use them again."

How can people say Bush IS not a terrorist. He sent army to Iraq and killed HUNDRED of thousand innocent people, and threatened to do the same to other countries. US also used chemical weapons in Vietnam. MOST IMPORTANTLY, Hussein did not have any chemical weapon to use in 2003.

"Hussein gave $25,000 to families of suicide terrorists. Hussein let known terrorists safely live in Iraq. Hussein let al-Qada have training camps in Iraq..."

That's not truth. All the world other than blind US people know that there's no relation between Hussein and al-Qada. They are enemies rather than friends. Bush is LIER.

"nd have you forgotten what he did to Kuwait, that should be enough to require that he lose his power."

If you open you eyes and look at what Bush did in the past 4 years, that should be enough to require that he loses his power.

"Most of Europe let terrorists do whatever they want. They did stop the genocide in Yugoslavia until the US stepped in. They complained but are doing too little too late in Sudan. And they did nothing in Uganda. All France and Germany can do is complain. They have no courage to actually do anything."

Is that because all France and Germany can do is complain and have no courage to actually do anything, US can become terrorist and do whatever Bush want?

I have a question?

If you think Bush should be kicked out of office because he invaded Iraq and killed civilians, even though terrorists are killing a lot of civilians themselves.

Why shouldn't Hussein have been kicked out of office after invading Iraq and Kuwait, and gasing tens of thousands of his own people, when all the bodies are counted, Hussein is personally responsible for the deaths of about a million (Iraqis, Kurds, Shiites, Iranians, and Kuwaiti)?

What does someone have to do before France and Germany say enough is enough, he has to go?

It is sad when the politics of FORCE wins over the poltics of cooperation;many will pay for this vote one way or another and I am not talking about money. Although it is only fair that the US votes for the President they want; and according to their views and so forth it is STILL too bad THE REST of us also has to live with the consequences. Wild-Wild West with Colts from the 1800s is one thing; Wild-Wild World with the biggest arsenal of WMD in the World is another thing. This added to the WILL to use it; and a public which supports this will; makes it all down-right scary!

I can only say one thing!! Good luck to us all!

Am I the only one who is getting tired of people outside of our country trying to portray Americans as idiots who cannot effectively choose a leader. America has been a leader in everything that we have focused on for the majority of our history. We give more in aid to other countries than all other countries combined. Our science and technology advancements have made the world better for everyone. We continue to push for freedom above all else for everyone on Earth.

Please stop trying to imagine that you know better how to handle our affairs than we do.

We have done fine by ourselves, thank you very much.

[Arrogant American]

"France provided Iraq with the nuclear reactor technology. Knowling full well Iraq wanted to eventually pursue it's use for non peaceful purposes."

Does that Bush tell you? When did France provide nuclear technology to Iraq?

The truth is United Nation confirmed that Iraq did not have actual plan to develop nuclear weapon and even did not have ability to develop any weapon with mass destruction.

Chris,

France provided Iraq with nuclear reactor technology in the 1980s. Israel bombed the facility before it was completed, because the correctly understood that this technology was innapropriate for a country like Iraq.

Please... I wish people would understand the issues before pontificating.

Regarding the last of ME's postings; well I think actually the US has managed to kill off more civilian Iraqis; directly or indirectly after the INVASION. In addition it has become another incubation center for terrorist together with the other US success story Afghanistan. If the US really just wanted to get rid of Saddam they could have assasinated Saddam as the cost of one Spec Forces team or an assasin is quite much lower than the current toll on all sides involved.

Although Saddam was a good old fashioned previously sponsored, and supported by the US dictator he was not really on the top 10 countries to clean up list. Up there are the Saudis and other nations which totally lack any democracy OR respect for human life. But what the heck; what to do with them? Their the friends of the Bushes...

>>Please stop trying to imagine that you know better how to handle our affairs than we do.

That's what rest of the world wants US to do - Stop interferring.

I personally am grateful that Bush will be re elected. By the way, shouldn't a firefox forum be about firefox and not politics. Your anti american comments may actually drive people from using Firefox.

About election systems; well we all choose (uhm) how we do this in our respective nations. However; why can't the richest country in the world manage to get ONE system for election nation wide; and make it electronic? Maybe one can actually use all those nice HOME LAND SECURITY gizmoz for something practical and peaceful. Many European countries is making it possible to vote online so why not use the great technological advantage of US for something good :-)

Maybe we wouldn't be so "into" US politics if the US wasn't so "into" the World ;-).

Onkar,

99% of the interfering you are talking about is pure propaganda. People in other countries should start spending more time understanding that forward thinking on their part will do far more to further their causes and conditions than complaining about the far off boogeyman of the United States.

Lets give the far right Conservatives a fair chance; maybe they will become pro-democracy; pro women's right to choose; and pro peaceful problem solving before we bash Bush more. Maybe he even gets some input from "GOD" which he refers to so often. In that case; let's hope it's a peaceful; forgiving, and loving "GOD".

"France provided Iraq with nuclear reactor technology in the 1980s. Israel bombed the facility before it was completed, because the correctly understood that this technology was innapropriate for a country like Iraq."

Oh my God! you said 1980s. If France should be critised for transferring a technology to a country which would POTENTIALLY become weapon in one day, then US should be blamed MORE to sell ACTUAL weapons to Iraq in 1980s too. Is that why god called Reagan to hell this year?

"One will probably start the draft, and the other definately will."

actually, it was a Democrat in the House which brought up the draft proposal as a little bit of dirty politicking - and when the Republicans forced it to a vote to get rid of it, the only two people who voted FOR the draft where Democrats.

you can spin it any way you want, but that's screwy for the Dems.

Also, in international affairs as well as peronal, when Reason fails, Physics do not. Both Germany and France declared in the UN Security Council that NO MATTER what was found, they would not join the war. Reason had failed at that point.
Also, Saddam had been under several UN mandates without cooperating for over 10 years, when reason fails...

Now i don't think the Iraq issue has been handled properly. Once we decided to go in, we have been far far too nice. I'm disgusted that this war has now not been left up to the military to run. If it was left up to anyone familiar with Sun Tzu, Falluja would be flattened rubble right now, and the Coalition would have fewer casualties.
We have overwhelming force - it should be used once the political powers that be determine we are going in.

and don't be a typical retard and confuse the decision to go to war (good or bad) with how force should be used once decided on.

Chris,

Even in the 1980s it was very clear that Saddam Hussein (The Butcher of Baghdad) did not need nuclear materials of any sort.

But anyway... there is no need to answer your messages anymore as you have so thoroughly discredited yourself with the content of your postings. (at least... to reasonable people)

Rob,

You can't tell me that. I am from India. And most of the country knows the peace initiatives taken by India towards Pakistan. I know that people from both countries want peace.
Pakistan fought 1971 war with the strength of Paton tanks provided by US. And you think US never interferred in our matters?

I think the more important thing that should be levied against France is the oil for food scandal. Hell, the entire UN for that matter. Why should we put any faith in how those other countries are run as opposed to here in the US? What exactly is the insurmountable proof that (evidently) every country in Europe is more properly governed than the United States? By the way, the earlier comment that there was "no link between Iraq and Al-Qaeda", please, get it right... there was no link between 9/11 and Iraq, not Al-Qaeda at large.

The US provided the Anthrax that Saddam used on the Iranians and his civilian population but it is interesting to see how short memory people has even in this Digital Age. In addition the US is the only country EVER to use any ATOMIC bombs on civilian populations (i.e. Japan) - although it might have seemed a good idea at the time it is a bit interesting that the "WMD hunter" is the "WMD user" and has the biggest storages of WMD in the World. WMD should be abolished; and we should go back to fighting with bows, swords and arrows to reduce collateral (uhm; oh yes another word for NON US CIVILIANS) damage.

Anyways; Good luck to you all. Once one has made one's bed one has to sleep in it ;-). Hopefully it won't be a long and dark sleep.

There has been no proof between a link between Saddam's dictatorship and Al-Qaeda nor 9-11. He was a bastard but he was rather "secular".

Onkar,

I understand that throughout our history that we have taken sides on conflicts of one sort or another. So has every country. Iraq had weapons in it from France and from Russia. We fought in the balkans and afghanistan against weapons provided by the French and Russians.

Shoot, at one point in our history, the Brittish sacked our capital.

If you look at American dominance in the world (in economic and "power" terms), there has never been a country so powerful that has shown as much restraint. People talk about us like we are the Roman Empire and have taken all of Europe.

It is mostly nonsense.

Yes, Saudi Arabia isn't a free loving country, but they haven't invaded anyone. Something Hussein loves to do. Also Hussein has in the past said, and his past deeds seem to support, his goal of having a large pan-Arabic country, which I'm sure he would have wanted to lead.

Some who hate Bush compare Bush to Hitler, but to me it is obvious Hussein was the new Hitler.

I have some advice for you americans. Why can't you just build a wall around america, so there you can sit and that way you can't hurt anyone else then your self.

And after 4 years you might re-enter the international comunity (maybe)

You have a problem I hope you (america) understand what u did last night.

To Henry, are you insane in that you want to be able to vote online???

I fear the day that any vote for something as important as the President of the United States is conducted over a medium so INCREDIBLY PRONE TO ATTACK AND TAMPERING as the Internet. I'm sure that the hacker population (which has a HUGE Democratic tilt) would love online voting in the US, but thankfully our country has enough sense to not take part of such a ridiculous idea... yet at least.

Are you also insinuating that dropping the A-Bomb on Japan was the "wrong move"? You would've rather the WORLD WAR raged on for months or years longer, killing countless more tens, or hundreds, of thousands on the battlefield?

Give me a break.

Comparing Saddam to Hitler or Stalin for that matter is a huge "overstatement". Comparing Bush to Hitler is likewise unfair.

However; Saddam was more like the US old buddies in South America during the cold war - all the South and Central American far right dictatorships. Too bad no one helped the civilians and so forth down there when they were slaughtered during the cold war.

No Sthe Saudis has not invaded anyone recently; but they export and represent a very intolerant form of ISLAM, and what was true about Afghanistan and and Talibaan is true for Saudi. Saudi exports terrorists and fanatics in hordes! Maybe we should consider liberating all middle Eastern women who's not even allowed to be outside without a veil; nor in public alone; nor allowed to have a job, education and so forth.

Anyways; thats for another discussion; and for another forum I guess. I just wish for the best for us all.

PEACE!

"I just wish for the best for us all."

Agreed.

Yes, Iraq isn't a free loving country, but they haven't invaded more countries than US did.

Bush and Hitler both are devils and invaded other countries but won elections. Obvious Hussein did not participate any election.

Some who hate Hussein compare Hussein to Hitler, but to me it is obvious Bush was the new Hitler.

alphadec

We can have a wall built around you and your countries, and one around the US and it's friends, but if Iraq or anyother country in your wall wants to cause trouble inside our wall, then don't be surprised if we come to visit.

This is REALLY bad to have linked to on the main page of mozilla.org
Hi were the mozilla foundation, our products include yadda yadda yadda, oh and by the way AMERICA SUCKS YOU SHOULD ALL BURN IN HELL AND BE ASS RAPED REPEATEDLY BECAUSE YOU INVADED IRAQ.

Well we can secure our all beloved financial systems online; banking; purchasing and so forth so we can also VOTE securely online. I am sure with all the US resources you can make the ONLINE solution much more safer than the old system you have today. What is good enough for financial applications is also good enough for elections; and as one can see from previous experiences - the more human interaction; the more ERRORS.

One would think someone smart enough to both find this blog (and post to it) would be able to recognize the difference between someone who invades a country for the purpose of total world domination (and race based genocide) versus one who "invades" a country for the purpose of removing a lunatic, genocidal dictator.

Guess not though.

Henry,

It's very nice that you are concerned about demorcacy and women's rights in the US. I guess women in Iraq, Iran, and Alphganistan never needed it.

How about the right of French school girls to wear scarfs on their heads. 60 years ago most European and US women also warf scarfs on their heads in church. But I guess when it's non-Christians doing it, then it's not okay, Muslims can't do it if Christians aren't doing it.

Well I wasn't around during WWII but I do not support killing any civilians; and even less wiping out entire population centers when quite a few conventional bombs could have taken out the miltary production facilties. However; I understand that it probably cut the war with some months. But it is always preferable with military casaulties than civilian ones; not that the Japanese were too picky during their offensive campaign.

However; WMD is bad (understatement of the EON) and should not be HAD or used by ANYONE.

Anyways; at a lighter sidenote; thanks to the great Mozilla Team who provides such great SOLUTIONS to the World; and even hosting some nasty US Bashers such as ourselves.

Take care all; and PEACE!

Onkar,

My apologies... I accidentally typed in your name into the wrong field when replying to your post several posts above.

I might think about voting for a democrat if they ever stop telling me "abortion is a woman's right to choose" She could have chosen to have her boyfriend wear a rubber couldn't she? And why can't the baby be put up for adoption?
And then there are partial-birth abortions, which Kerry supports, if you're too stupid to realise that life has begun AS THE BABY COMES OUT OF THE WOMB then america has serious problems.
Don't give me this crap about Kerry being the best candidate, what kind of man allows babies to be killed by a bunch of irresponsable teenagers who don't want to use protection? What kind of man would cheat on his wife?
Yeah, Kerry is a lot better than GWB.

On the topic of religion.

1. Don't mix school and religion.
2. Don't mix politics and religion.

Any religion mixed with anything is usually bad.

---
Women's rights in the US are great I guess; I was talking about Saudi; as I guess should be fairly clear. I don't THINK women are much better of in Afghanistan now except for in a few areas of Kabul; and for IRAQ; I think they're up for a wave of more fanatic religious lunatics who will give them no rights at all.
---
Headscarf discussion; well I was never allowed to wear a cap in school; nor have a mobile (hell there wasn't any); nor chew chewing gum. So I guess it's just one of those rules. One shouldn't have to WEAR one's religion though; it should be a personal matter.

I am sure there's more important moral issues; in addition to being nice; caring and compassionated that counts more in most religions than what we wear or eat. But I am just a simple country pumpkin so I will rest my case here.

Anyways; now I must really be off!

Nice talking to you guys, and PEACE.

The founding fathers of the US implemented the electoral college system because (at least in part) they felt the American populace was incapable of making an intelligent, properly informed decision on their leader. The 2004 election has verified that their assumption was right. Bush has demonstrated severe economic ineptitude during the course of his term. He also demonstrated that he is likely the single most impotent wartime president in American history with a total lack of planning and no sense of discernment with regards to international politics. He has also demonstrated a severe lack of insight into domestic social issues such as Social Security, Health Care, Environmental Conservation, and more. Overall, Bush has demonstrated that he is a miserable failure as President. He has not satisfactorily handled the responsibilities and duties of the Presidency. However, the majority of American people have turned a deaf ear to the facts. They have chosen to re-elect a man who has proven himself to be an incompetent imbicile.

Tim wrote:
Are you also insinuating that dropping the A-Bomb on Japan was the "wrong move"? You would've rather the WORLD WAR raged on for months or years longer, killing countless more tens, or hundreds, of thousands on the battlefield?

I just had to answer this. Dropping two bombs was totally unnecesarry and was only done to please the blood thirst of the american public.

Wrong, it was done because Japan had no seeming intent of surrendering after dropping the first bomb. You want to blame someone for us dropping the second bomb, blame Japan. They were warned of the new weapon that we had prior to its dropping on Hiroshima. They refused to surrender. AFTER witnessing what it could do, with Hiroshima, they refused to surrender. I suppose that, even though we had another bomb, we were supposed to NOT use it and instead send one hundred thousand American's to fight another ground battle after the devastation caused by the European campaign.

I am very glad you were not President at the time.

Chris... even if you don't like the electoral college, bush has also handily won the popular vote this time around. What exactly is the point of your post?

Followers of Bush have to take a step back and reflect over the fact that so many strongly oppose the Bush administration.

This is not because we like to hate USA, but because we fear USA and Bush. Something must be completely wrong with a country's foreign affairs when it nearest allies fears it.

Chris, side note: if you honestly believe that the President of the US (all of them) has virtually ANYTHING directly to do with the economy, you are far more ill-informed than I previously thought.

Ok, guys, let's get and keep our facts straight...

America did not begin as, nor was it ever intended to be a democracy (read: 'dumbocracy'). In a democracy, there are no restraints on the power of those elected - if they want to vote and declare that on Wednesdays, everyone has to wear green leotards, then that becomes law. There are ample statements by our founders and others explaining just why democracy's have always died violent deaths and are always doomed to failure. Once 'the people' realize that they can vote themselves 'bread and circuses', it's only a matter of time before the house of cards collapses.

America is *supposed* to be a Constitutional Republic - with a few democratic *principles* thrown in (ie, voting for Reps). In a Constitutional Republic, the power of those elected is very *limited*. That is what is meant by the phrase 'a nation of laws, not men'. It should not *matter* - at least with respect to our individual liberties - who is elected, because they can only exercise power in the few and defined areas that are delegated in the Constitution. Likewise, if Congress had not abdicated their responsibilities and obligations, we wouldn't be fighting any number of 'police actions' as we have over the last 50-60 years, we would only go to war in self-defense.

The fact is, 95% of the things that the Federal Government does right now are UNCONSTITUTIONAL. There is *no* Constitutional delegation of power to Congress over Education, 'Social(ist) (In)Security' or 'Welfare' (both simply being the stealing from one to give to another), Energy, etc, etc ad nauseum.

It is only the State Governments that are supposed to have any kind of real power over private, individual Citizens, but the fact is, the States abdicated their responsibilities and obligations long ago, when the Federal Government declared bankruptcy in 1933, by signing the 'Declaration of *Inter*dependance', whereby the States agreed to assist the Feds in destroying our monetary system, rather than routing the vipers and thieves (debt/usury based fractional reserve banking system known as the Federal Reserve System).

Ok, enough of my rant... we do indeed live in interesting times...

Tim, I think you have to check your references. It was 3 days between those bombs.
Do you really think that 3 days is enough? 150 000 died in the second blast.

Stop making a foul out of ourself, check the facts before you starts accusing others:
http://www.peak.org/~danneng/decision/usnews.html
http://www.dannen.com/decision/index.html
http://www.doug-long.com/

to the rest of the world:

i'm sorry... i really am...

to the rest of america:

why?

to canada:

your looking more beautiful every second.

Many good opinions here. I am an American, and I voted for Nader. I really feel as if I have no place within this country. Unfortunately since the Fast Ferry's been shut down here in Rochester, the commute from Canada would be too long. To the rest of the world, please remember that not ALL Americans voted for Bush, and please try to realize how powerless many of us feel in this monarchy.

I'm not accusing anyone. You are the one accusing an entire country of irrational bloodlust. How exactly is three days NOT enough time to surrender after such a demonstration.

slappy, please go to Canada then... have fun.

travis, please give detailed explanations of how our country is now a monarchy.

Tim,

The reference to the electoral college was a side-note used to refer to that assumption that the founding fathers had: the general public lacks the cumulative intelligence to properly relate fact to their votes.

As far as the ecomony goes, it is true that the President has no power over monetary policy (this is under the influence of the Federal Reserve) he does play a central role in fiscal policy, which can have just as drastic effects. Whether or not you believe in Keynesian ecomonic models, modern ecomonic analysis has evolved from many of those ideas and many of Keynes' principles are still successfully used. Bush has made serious economic blunders that make any knowledgable economist cringe.

I was not referring to stock markets in any way, shape, or form. The stock market will do what it will no matter who sits in the Oval Office.

The recent Nobel Proze winner for Economics when asked said that the tax cuts that Bush fought for were not nearly enough. so if that's what you mean by 'blunder' then i agree!

also, when the country was founded, you had to be a property owner to vote. the principle was that you had to be a more direct stakeholder and not just a beneficiary to vote. i agree with this principle.
people like to wax poetic about how great it is that everyone can vote, but seriously - if you take no time to educate yourself about the issues, or if you simply do not care and you go in and vote for whoever, you are in no way benefitting the process.
if you ask me, anyone on the government dole should not vote - it's called a conflict of interest.

>>>USA, what's wrong with you guys?
What's wrong with a country everyone is jealous of? We're rich, we're cool, we're strong, and kicking ass.

>>Almost every country in the whole world would vote for Kerry, yet you're voting for Bush...

That's why the rest of the world is not as cool as us.

>>And what the hell is wrong with your voting system?

It is quite retarded, but most of the time, popular vote matches electoral, the exception being 2000 and some other year. At least the US votes.

Tim,
Monarch's, usually appointed by their heredity, believe they have been placed into power because they were divinely chosen. Would you like me to post all the specific examples of Bush claiming that he has been chosen by God?

Janos wrote:
> the initial post had "And what the hell is
> wrong with your voting system?"
>
> i haven't seen this addressed - instead
> people in here are attacking the voters,
> when the question posed was about the system.

I'll tell you what's wrong with the voting system. First of all, different states can have different rules, i.e. what times people can vote on. Second, it's insane that you can actually win in terms of number of total votes but still loose because different states have different number of electors. For example, Bush won in Florida with 52% against 47% for Kerry, but that means Bush wins ALL of the 27 electors in that state! Is that democracy? No, American elections is not about democracy, it's just a crazy legal mess with as many lawyers involved as there are politicians. I could go on with more examples of what makes the voting system suck, but I've made my point already.

me3 wrote: Don't give me this crap about Kerry being the best candidate, what kind of man allows babies to be killed by a bunch of irresponsable teenagers who don't want to use protection?

It's not of your business what teenagers decide to do to their embroyos, they are not babies. Keep you religion to yourself and don'y tell other people how to live. Religion has only brought pain and suffering to this world.

David, you might want to take a look at the post earlier. America isn't, and has NEVER BEEN, a true 100 percent democracy. It is a representative democracy... for the better of the people. Don't tell me no one involved in Firefox development understands this point. It is reitterated over and over and over how it is important that Firefox be driven by a select few, since if everyone had a say on everything, nothing would ever get done. Put simply, if America were a 100 percent democracy, it would turn into Seamonkey. I just don't understand all the people that suddenly started complaining about the electoral college system in 2000 and now again 2004. Didn't anyone ever take civics in school? Everyone seemed so outraged in 2000 that that is how it works, as if it was somehow a surprise that the electoral college is what really matters.

And to reiiterate, David, Bush WON the popular vote this time. WITH a MAJORITY, which Clinton never did (not that that matters).

travis, last time I checked, Bush has been elected both times by the electoral system of our country, not by heredity... thus not a monarch. I don't challenge your points about him feeling he was "chosen by god", though I think you are taking that a BIT too literally. He is not claiming to be Joan of Ark, simply that he has been put in the position he is now in, by God... but it is a common Christian belief that God has a plan for every individual, not just the President. I myself am agnostic, but I don't immediately claim Bush a psycho religious zealot just because he has the belief in a higher power.

Interesting read, particularly the pros and cons of the system.

http://jceb.co.jackson.mo.us/fun_stuff/electoral_college.htm

>> Don't give me this crap about Kerry being the best candidate, what kind of man allows babies to be killed by a bunch of irresponsable teenagers who don't want to use protection? 40th in infant mortality rate in the world; 5-11 per 1000 die because they are not properly treated... meaning, because they didn't have health care coverage. Especially since we are the 2nd richest nation by that same documentation. So where the hell are our priorities now?

51% of this country are simple minded, intolerant, baby boomers who's blatant disconnection with the rest of the world is more harmful than beneficial. Regardless if that is an elitist or general point of view, I'm saddened by the choices of my country -- this administration will go down second only to Richard Nixon, and if our population majority voted for it... then you guys deserve it. Don't say I didn't warn you.

>>He is not claiming to be Joan of Ark, simply that he has been put in the position he is now in, by God... but it is a common Christian belief that God has a plan for every individual, not just the President. I myself am agnostic, but I don't immediately claim Bush a psycho religious zealot just because he has the belief in a higher power.<<

Well, that would be contrary to Christian belief, and putting him in the category of a religious zealiot -- I am agnostic as well, but isn't it safe to say that believing God put you in a position of power is much more Catholic (which I was raised) than Christian... aren't you to ask if your path is in view of God, and not assume God is with you? If that were the case, war would never be justified regardless.

F*** all the blind american people that voted for Bush.

Imagine the world with every rich countries's president thinking they're the single rulers of the entire world.

Goddam people who call themselves "america". Most US people are so stupid that they don't even know they're not AMERICA, they're just a fucking stupid country messing with all others's peace and life.

People shouldn't call "all" Americans stupid - the result - 51-48 - shows that there is clear division amongst the people of this country as to what the right path is, and that a significant portion of people do NOT back what Bush is doing. Name calling is worthless, and doesn't make you much better than the people you claim to hate.

At times like this it's better not to be blinded by rage: just hope for the best and be thankful that this will be his last term.

All i have to say is this to the Europeans who do not care for the influence the United States carries in the world - you are really not going to like China as China develops into a powerhouse.

The best step is not to ask us to be less powerful or less involved or less influential - it is to step up the plate yourselves and displace the power-gap.
One of the reasons i say this is because China will inevitably become fairly powerful and you will not like their "bamboo curtain". you'll have no idea what goes on there, you will be barred from many aspects of their society and political process and they will most certainly make decisions alien to your way of thinking.

so for those who think it's even somewhat reasonable to call President Bush some sort of Hitler, you might want to buck up, buddy.

One bomb attack in Madrid and you are scared. And now you are giving us advice on how to vote. I'd rather be an American than an wimpy European

I live in Madrid and we were not scared. We just got angry with our government for supporting a war we doesn´t care and lying us about the true terrorist involved in Madrid bombs
They tried to mislead the news and media and tried to spread terror until elections finished,but at last we heard what was said in the rest of the world.All but spanish mass media reach towards Al-qaeda bombs.
May be it´s time for the americans to hear the rest of the world..
do you really think we don´t want your country was a healthy and wealthy one? are you so egocentric and paranoid that thinks all rest-of-the-world are against you?

carlos,
since our press is only #22 in the world as far as freedom goes, we don't have much choice of hearing "the rest of the world".

http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=11715

Ask yourself -
What country are the people of the world trying to get too?
What language would you be speaking if the USA had never been??

Get on your knee's and thank God that we in the USA are liberators and not conquerors.
54,000,000 people are free and you call our president rude names, How many more people would be dead in Iraq if we hadn't gone in???
How many would have been raped and dropped into wood chippers. You only appreciate the USA when you need them.
Guess we just can't be Spain, Gutless Europeans !!!
You blind fools !!!

One quick question for all of you Europeans who are so angry with the US. What part of Europe are you from? The part who's ass we saved in WWII, or the part who's ass we kicked in WWII?

Uhm, Europe is quite abundant in neutral countries that did not participate in WW2 and countries whose ass was saved (and then generally annexed) by the Soviets.

What language would you be speaking if the USA had never been??

Uhm... Britishese, eh?^-^

I would have thought that the rest of the world have learned something from WW2 but apparently you all idiots.

What is the moral of WW2?

"Genocides must be stopped"?

* looks incomprehendingly at Iraq and meaningfully at Sudan, Burma, and Nepal *

"War is hell"?

w00t, peace!

"Mass-murdering dictators are okay as long as they are our mass-murdering dictators"?

* drinks in honour of Saudi Arabia, the country that would rather girls burn to death than escape from an inferno without veils *

* looks incomprehendingly at Iraq and meaningfully at Sudan, Burma, and Nepal *

well, don't look at us, look at the UN first. afterall, if the US were to go in to help, that would just be unilateral aggression. The UN is sitting on their hands again.

Yeah let's all be like France and ban people from wearing head scarves, yalmulkas and crosses in school =P Everyone in the world thinks ANYBODY but Bush. The truth is there are people worse then Bush. Kerry was one of them. I myself voted for Badnarik of the libertarian party but in my opinion, Kerry would have caused more disaster then Bush would have. Also I am sick of the world trying to influence the American election. We elect who we think is best for our country, not for who is best for Canada =P Why were our allies not helping in Iraq? Despite what you think it was not becuase of Bush's attitude but because France, Germany and Russia were abusing the Oil for Food program getting kick backs from Saddam in power. Thanks Russia, you were paid to remove Saddam's weapons and did so diligentally to make the USA look stupid =)

Fuck, David! Give me a break! First off it would have been impossible for Kerry to cause more distruction than Bush, because Bush has already been in office for four years. Now, four more years is basically gonna be an appocalypse.

Second, the US was founded on seperating church and state, just as France's actions represent. It seems now, however, that we are a theocracy. And get off the France bashing. It's played out. It makes American's look like morons (oh, yeah...we are).

The simple fact is that Bush has lied time and time again. I'm not talking about the "I did not have sexual realtions..." kind of lie. I'm talking about the kind of lie where people die. Many, many people. Americans, Japanese, Spanish, Iraqi's, English, etc...

However, that doesn't seem to matter to 51% fo us lumpen americanus. That majority wants to "support or troops", protect innocent cells and herd all gays to California where a massive project of well placed explosives will send the evil state floating off into the Pacific. That is the extent of their concerns. Oh, and what "rollbacks" are happening at Wal-Mart this week.

For those of you not from the U.S., let me help you out with a little information about the mindset of a great many of that 51% majority. They just don't give a fuck. If they are told they are being made safer, they believe it and will do anything you ask. At the airports, they may get pissed because they are scanned, searched and delayed, but they don't give a fuck because they feel safer.

"So," you say. "Why didn't they vote for Kerry when he also said he was gonna make them safer?" He said he was gonna bring troops home. He wasn't gonna keep killing. Except babies. He was gonna kill lots and lots of babies. Their preacher told them they would go to hell if they voted for him. That is not safe.

P.S.

For all you "Patriotic" Americans who think you're part of a country who's making the world a "Freer" more safe place place from Weapons of Mass Destruction and can't comprehend why anyone would see it otherwise, I have two words...
Hiroshima, Nagasaki.

Your always most afraid of that which you are.

Simon,

I hoping it is your intent to be insulting, because you are being rather effective.

For one thing, the seperation of church and state means that there will be no state-sponsored religion. the head-scarf thing is a newer phobic version and is not what the seperation means.

for another, i am not a walmart shopper.

i am one of the 51% and i do 'give a fuck'. i happen to give a different fuck than you. how is it that soft, nice, peace-loving left-wingers (yes a stereotype) tend to be the most aggressive personal attackers around? if you want to debate issues, that's fine, but calling us idiots is not a way to get your points seen. that only throws up walls because people who might listen to your arguements have just been insulted and won't really get past that. please try a different tack.

i'm not interested in France-bashing.

i personally am not interested in world-policing. it's nice and all that we have freed dozens of millions of people from tyranny in the past few years, but i don't think that's our obligation.

i'd rather not have troops on the ground in harm's way. i'd rather have CIA operatives all over the world to tell us where to send missles and robot armies so that we don't spill our own blood if it means we are safer.

I'm going to assume from your Hiroshima and Nagasaki reference that you don't understand the tactical reasons for such horrors. I'm also gathering from the Bush Administration's handling of the war that they don't either. You very intentionally make war utter hell so that people are less inclined to enter into it - on both sides.
Not to mention our nuclear arsenal has ceased to become a deterrent because i don't believe there is any chance we will use it. After Japan, our arsenal deterred many actions for decades because we had shown a restrained but necessary will to use them. As horrible as it sounds, this was a good thing.

ok, enough rambling from me.

just try to be less about personal attacks if you wish to make any positive change.

Well done James, well spoken.
Something Simon will never understand, the reason he is free is because of men like President Bush.
God seems to bless this country with the right leaders at just the right time.

Use the "F" word a few more times Simon, I'm sure someone will pay attention.

"the reason he is free is because of men like President Bush. "
LOLOLOLOL

Please, read again what you wrote.

We enter parliament in order to supply ourselves, in the arsenal of democracy, with its own weapons. If democracy is so stupid as to give us free tickets and salaries for this bear's work, that is its affair. We do not come as friends, nor even as neutrals. We come as enemies. As the wolf bursts into the flock, so we come." Joseph Goebbels, Nazi.

Herman,

that's an illustration of what is meant by "The US Constitution is not a suicide pact".

Just because we believe in liberty - the liberty we have is first and foremost for the citizens who are governed by, protected by, and hold high the US Constitution - not for others. To others, if they come with ill-will should be crushed and destroyed with no questions asked, not given our trials, not given our rights, not given our protections. - the very things they seek to destroy should not be used by them.
personally i do not think many americans have the stomach for that and that is very sad.

Enough said.