Full Version: Reaction to the President's Speech
So here it is, ready and waiting for your comments.
My first impression is that he believes what he says.
I also noticed he addressed many of the issues and answered many of the questions that we have brought up in this forum. While I'd like to think that the President has his staffers checking into our forum, I think it shows that a lot of people have had a lot of unanswered questions.
The President has addressed those questions and stated his position. Are you convinced? Do you think he has outlined a sensible plan?
I also noticed he addressed many of the issues and answered many of the questions that we have brought up in this forum. While I'd like to think that the President has his staffers checking into our forum, I think it shows that a lot of people have had a lot of unanswered questions.
The President has addressed those questions and stated his position. Are you convinced? Do you think he has outlined a sensible plan?
I thought he did a great job. He answered many of the questions being asked by people and by the legislature. I think he is sincere, and he wants what is best for the country. Also, I have to believe that the President knows a lot more than we do about what is going on over there.
I don't know about you, but I prefer not to wait until a spray can of biological terror is released in the airport or grocery store I'm in....or a school...the possibilities are endless.
Well, that is just my opinion.
I don't know about you, but I prefer not to wait until a spray can of biological terror is released in the airport or grocery store I'm in....or a school...the possibilities are endless.
Well, that is just my opinion.
I don't know how much he convinced me that Iraq is a direct nuclear threat. I do, however, think he did a good job at convincing me that given nuclear weapons, Iraq would use them.
I don't think he hit the UN issue hard enough. I never think he hits the UN enough.
Mike
I don't think he hit the UN issue hard enough. I never think he hits the UN enough.
Mike
I am not convinced, but I'm listening.
The speech was pretty much what I expected, but I think Bush has learned that it
is a mistake to announce his decisions without consulting with Congress
and the American people. It sounds like his WE'LL GO IT ALONE IF WE HAVE TO
speech to the UN was not a good idea. I think he has settled down to the fact
that he is not a dictator.
The senator from California said that he is not satisfied that the connection
of 9/11 and Saddam has been substantiated. He said that to go ahead and
strike first will set this country back 200 years.
The generals are warning that this war will be like none we've ever
seen, such as urban fighting in Bagdad
And there is still the question of why now? Some say that the date 11/5 is more important
than 9/11.
The speech was pretty much what I expected, but I think Bush has learned that it
is a mistake to announce his decisions without consulting with Congress
and the American people. It sounds like his WE'LL GO IT ALONE IF WE HAVE TO
speech to the UN was not a good idea. I think he has settled down to the fact
that he is not a dictator.
The senator from California said that he is not satisfied that the connection
of 9/11 and Saddam has been substantiated. He said that to go ahead and
strike first will set this country back 200 years.
The generals are warning that this war will be like none we've ever
seen, such as urban fighting in Bagdad
And there is still the question of why now? Some say that the date 11/5 is more important
than 9/11.
He isnt the best speaker sometimes, his speech today wasnt that good ... but he did hold good points on why we need to go.
I thought he did quite well, they didn't give him any hard words to say.
If you live on the west coast like I do, you were probably getting off work about the same time Bush was speaking. I missed it 
However, thanks to the Internet and the age of information, I found a full text link:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20021007-8.html
Get caught up if you need to.
There are a few things about this speech I really liked:
I liked his speech, I wish I could have seen it. Oh well.
--cheers
However, thanks to the Internet and the age of information, I found a full text link:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20021007-8.html
Get caught up if you need to.
There are a few things about this speech I really liked:
QUOTE
First, some ask why Iraq is different from other countries or regimes that also have terrible weapons. While there are many dangers in the world, the threat from Iraq stands aloe -- because it gathers the most serious dangers of our age in one place. Iraq's weapons of mass destruction are controlled by a murderous tyrant who has already used chemical weapons to kill thousands of people. This same tyrant has tried to dominate the Middle East, has invaded and brutally occupied a small neighbor, has struck other nations without warning, and holds an unrelenting hostility toward the United States.
QUOTE
As a former chief weapons inspector of the U.N. has said, "The fundamental problem with Iraq remains the nature of the regime, itself. Saddam Hussein is a homicidal dictator who is addicted to weapons of mass destruction."
QUOTE
If the Iraqi regime is able to produce, buy, or steal an amount of highly enriched uranium a little larger than a single softball, it could have a nuclear weapon in less than a year. And if we allow that to happen, a terrible line would be crossed. Saddam Hussein would be in a position to blackmail anyone who opposes his aggression. He would be in a position to dominate the Middle East. He would be in a position to threaten America. And Saddam Hussein would be in a position to pass nuclear technology to terrorists.
QUOTE
Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.
QUOTE
As President Kennedy said in October of 1962, "Neither the United States of America, nor the world community of nations can tolerate deliberate deception and offensive threats on the part of any nation, large or small. We no longer live in a world," he said, "where only the actual firing of weapons represents a sufficient challenge to a nations security to constitute maximum peril."
I liked his speech, I wish I could have seen it. Oh well.
--cheers
I think the speech was very good.
I'm glad he's backing off on being the Lone Ranger and barreling into Baghdad with guns ablazing.
I think it's a wise move to get the US people, politicians, and the UN together and put up a resolution that states clearly what they want from Iraq and what are the consequences.
I'm glad he's backing off on being the Lone Ranger and barreling into Baghdad with guns ablazing.
I think it's a wise move to get the US people, politicians, and the UN together and put up a resolution that states clearly what they want from Iraq and what are the consequences.
I didn't think that he really said anything that we haven't already been told. I AM glad that he does seem to be a little more concerned with the intl community at this point but we'll see. Words are just words I guess.
I hope we take every step possible before going to war.
The threat of Saddam obtaining Nukes wouldn't threaten the US it would just make our job easier. Saddam knows that the second a nuke is launched from his country his ENTIRE country will be turned to glass. He values his life and legacy too much to do something soo stupid.
I hope we take every step possible before going to war.
The threat of Saddam obtaining Nukes wouldn't threaten the US it would just make our job easier. Saddam knows that the second a nuke is launched from his country his ENTIRE country will be turned to glass. He values his life and legacy too much to do something soo stupid.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.