I realise this has probably been covered extensively already, but i've just come across an interesting piece of art, with quotes from both George Bush and Adolf Hitler. The artist sees them as similar people, and it just made me wonder about it. I thought i'd put it in here to see what anyone else has to say about it. Whether they agree with the artist or not.

.axis.of.evil.

I'm not sure I'd agree with the artist.

I think generally you will find that powerful leaders all start sounding the same anyway.

Mainly because I'm sure there is a user manual that all leaders are given, full of handy excuses for them to belt out periodically to justify their actions.

It's so true that it's sickening, and that's only because the truth in question is that disgusting.


And people wonder why I'm an anarchist, Snuggs.

I'm not fan of George Bush...at all...

But this seems kinda silly.

Bush is similar to Hitler because of 3 or 4 quotes? Because he invokes God? Many, many, many leaders, good and bad, have invoked higher powers before. Many leaders have believed themselves moved by divine providence. Those two aspects alone don't make for a good comparison to Hitler. They aren't very good aspects, in my opinion, but still, not Hitleresque.

Need I remind you that during WWII, the alllies produced numerous propoganda demonizing the Germans (or the Huns, as the documents referred to them). Anyone compare Churchill or Roosevelt to Hitler?

I seem to notice a strange lack of 11 million dead bodies. And another strange lack of massive amounts of anti-Muslim propoganda designed to demonize muslims. No gas chambers or furnaces. No firing squads. Problems adhering to the Geneva conventions, yes. Very serious problems that should be delt with in a probably harsher manner than they are now.

But nothing the extent of Hitler.

And no, right and left wing demagogues do not count (Coutler's a moron).

Does Bush's strange fixation on Iraq scare me? Yes. Do I think he's a bad president? For the most part, yes. Do I think he'll screw this country? Yes.

Do I think he's comparable to Hitler? No. Hitler did a hell of a lot more than just invoke God, and Bush would have to do a hell of a lot more to equal him.

As for the artistic approach, um, I'm not sure. I don't know if I'd consider this art, since she seems to have done it in photoshop, just mixing in a picture of Bush with one of Hitler. No particularly small feat, mind you, but nothing I would personally consider truly artistic. But hey, if she likes it, and others like it, fine by me ^_~

And it is skillfull, to be sure.

And I'm also sure I misspelled a whole lot here.

Sincerely and Respectfully,

David Carlson

Hmm, just had to point out (being the born pedant that I am) that the Geneva Convention on Human Rights had not been written and signed during the Second World War's era. It arose as a reaction to the human rights abuses of the Holocaust.

The Geneva Convention on the Treatment of Prisoners of War was largely kept to by the Germans, but only really against the powers in the west. The Russians and Slavic armies that the Germans came across were treated extremely badly because the Nazis saw their troops as racially inferior.

Kind of like how the prison guards assumably saw the mideasterners as racially inferior as well.


No, but Emperor Shrub has been "invoking" the "Christian" god to attack "evil" nations that just "happen" to be run by Muslims. Works just as well, to me.


Only time will tell, amigo.

Polecrunch,

I was referring to the US soldiers' violations of the Geneva Conventions. The text should be taken as such:

"I seem to notice a strange lack of 11 million dead bodies [by us in Iraq]. And another strange lack of massive amounts of anti-Muslim propaganda designed to demonize Muslims. No gas chambers or furnaces. No firing squads. Problems adhering to the Geneva conventions [In Iraq], yes. Very serious problems that should be dealt with in a probably harsher manner than they are now. "

Sorry about the confusion.

Righteous,

"Kind of like how the prison guards assumably saw the mideasterners as racially inferior as well."

I don't think you can assume that, without a statement from one of more of the prison guards that speaks to middle-eastern "racial inferiority."

It's far, far more plausible that the soldiers were:

1. Under extreme stress.
2. Ordered to get information from the prisoners by commanding officers who either weren't paying attention to their [the commanding officer's] words, or who were actually in on it (probably both).
3. Really angry that so many of their fellow soldiers were being killed by insurgents.
-and-
4. Probably had some induced psychological aggression. I cannot imagine how going through basic training and military indoctrination can fail to produce an at least somewhat more aggressive personality.

This doesn't excuse the soldiers, of course, but to assume the guards saw the prisoners as racially inferior doesn't seem like a very good assumption, in my opinion.

"No, but Emperor Shrub has been "invoking" the "Christian" god to attack "evil" nations that just "happen" to be run by Muslims. Works just as well, to me."

What Bush said or is quoted to say is beside the point, where my statement was concerned. I was pointing out a lack of demonizing propaganda from the government, at the level of World War II (on ALL sides in that war). Bush's speeches can be seen as propaganda, but they are not nearly as widespread as the types I was referring to.

"Only time will tell, amigo."

The possibility of Bush or the American government perpetrating Holocaust-era acts does not equate to them having perpetrated or in the process of perpetrating Holocaust-era acts. In other words, the possibility, however remote, of Bush becoming a Hitler in the future is no reason to compare him to Hitler now. Now, Bush is not Hitler. I doubt he ever will be. But if he is in the future, then in the future it will be apt to compare him to Hitler.

Or, more succinctly, how is it right to judge someone for the future actions they may or may not do? To compare them to someone they may or may not become?

Sincerely and Respectfully,

David Carlson

Oh, stop being silly, Ri.

Call me a cynical bastard, but considering the present state of the nation, I'm willing to bet money (which I don't have much of) that there was at least a little bit of racial hatred toward the prisoners and people in Iraq. Either that or the Man porposefully tells its soldiers to commit the many atrocities they have. The soldiers are subjects of the Man, and a lot of the Man's subjects here in the south have a view similar to this (and I've actually heard someone say this verbatim): "We oughta send a nuke over there an' kill all 'em towel-head sand-nigger sunsabitches." It's people like these defending our shores.


Believe me man, I never said that race was the complete motivating force. I figure it as more of a catalyst.


I'm not saying they have or that Shrub is hitler.. I'm saying they're possibility that I deem forseeable, even if I am just a cynical bastard.

You're an intelligent cat there, Ike. I like you. You're one to step back and analyze. Kudoes, bro.


Hey Polo, anything's possible...

I don't like George W. Bush.... Never have never will.... Pretty much it for me.

I strongly dislike George W. Bush. But in no way would I compare him to Hitler until he initiated a Holocaust and a World War and started invading countries to seek territory.

I abhor having him lead this country, and I don't think he's doing too well. But he's certainly no Hitler.

Hitlar is a very man indeed, but I think that if George get re-elected hes going to become worse than hitlar...... I think it's very cheap on how he got president in first place(he pretty much bought his way in)

Well, he dose seem intent on starting a World War, as it were, trying to draw all fronts in an international attempt to "crush terrorism."

And, if I were more of a conspriacy theorist, it could be argued that the wars on Middle Eastern countries in an attempt to instate US friendly governments in order to control the modern equivalent of territory, that is, oil...

---

On a similar note, back when all this nonsense began, Artemesia and I were comparing Bush to the Beast in Revelation. Good, clean, fun of course!

(From the Revelation of St. John, Chapter 13)

"One of its heads seemed to have received a death-blow, but its mortal wound had been healed."
Can you say September 11th?

"In amazement the whole earth followed the beast... they worshiped the beast, saying 'Who is like the beast, and who can fight against it?"
Who, indeed?

"The beast was given a mouth uttering haughty and blasphemous words, and it was allowed to exercise authority for forty-two months."
Well, forty-eight, but who's counting?

"And it was allowed to make war on the saints and to conquer them."
Saints here being interpretted as Muslims, of course... since in some ways this war really amounts to little more than a religious war, Bush's crusade...

"It was given authority over every tribe and peoaple and language and nation, and all the inhabitants of the earth will worship it"
The American Dream...

Then along comes the Second Beast... dear Mr. Blair...

"It exercises all the authority of the first beast on itsbehalf, and it makes the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose mortal wound had been healed. It performs great signs, even making fire come down from heaven to earth in the sight of all."
Go go gadget Air strikes!

"It causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free adn slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, so that no one can buy or sell who does not have the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name."
Can we say economic domination of the US, including economic sanctions on countries it doesn't like?

But as I say, good clean fun. If labelling Bush as the antichrist is your kind of fun.

... 'twould make an interesting art piece, anyway.

I don't think it was meant to literally compare Bush to Hitler, but just some of their attitudes. Like they both believe what they're doing is right. And while they may do evil to other countries, they do it so their own may be better, such as Bush protecting America by declaring a war on terrorism. Hitler did good things for Germany , like buiding roads and stuff, but he lost it when it came to other countries.

Ehh. True. But he's still no Hitler.

Yes, I said something somewhat positive about the president

VOTE FOR KERRY

It all makes sense now. The re-election of Bush will bring with it the coming of the apocalypse. The Bible itself has revealed it...

The Bush administration really frightens me. They have the potential to do some serious damage to world; Bush is well on his is way to becoming the next Hitler.

More proof Bush is the antichrist...

I was actually trying to do the old numerology thingee with Bush's name and the number 666, so I was rooting around online, and someone had already done it. Joy!

Well, whoever wrote it seemed convinced. And coming back to the original point about the piece of art, that page has a similar picture in it.

I do not believe the president is what the artist is trying to make him out to be. I'm sure he is a nice person, but as a president I don't think he can be trusted anymore. I can't vote for a person who wants a very strong mixture of religion and politics.

Bush has the same habit as Hitler, of dehumanising the enemy to make it easier to for the public to demonise them and the military to fight them as less-than-human. By referring to them only as the "axis of evil" or in vague pronoun form--"they" did this, "they did that (who "they"?)-- it is easy to make generalisations and does premote feelings of moral and national superiority.

Bush is probably no Hitler, mostly because he's not smart enough. But perhaps in his stupidity he is potentially as dangerous.

That's rather unfair considering in every war every leader makes "the enemy" less human, and alot of people in the past have done quite a bit worse than Bush. In WWII in comics we portrayed the "japs" as demons or buck-toothed idiots.

I hate him. Me and Dolty both despise him. Eternallybored hates him too. Its like. . . he was a great president but now he just sucks.

The use of dogs, sexual assault and forcing detainees to curse their god sounds like clear enough evidence to me. Dogs are considered unclean in Muslim countries, homosexual acts are regarded with extreme, and I mean extreme disdain, prisoners sexually tortured in Iraq will forever be living in shame. And obviously renouncing god, under duress or not, is also a grave sin. These torture techniques are targeted at muslims, obviously they're terrible already, but they hold particular weight in the eyes of muslims. There is racism pouring out of every aspect of this War On Terror.

"The use of dogs, sexual assault and forcing detainees to curse their god sounds like clear enough evidence to me. Dogs are considered unclean in Muslim countries, homosexual acts are regarded with extreme, and I mean extreme disdain, prisoners sexually tortured in Iraq will forever be living in shame. And obviously renouncing god, under duress or not, is also a grave sin. These torture techniques are targeted at muslims, obviously they're terrible already, but they hold particular weight in the eyes of muslims. There is racism pouring out of every aspect of this War On Terror. "

Evidence for functionally effective (but extremely morally evil) interrogation techniques: sure. Evidence that they didn't consider those people in the prisons to be human beings: sure. Evidence that they didn't consider those people to be human beings because they saw those prisoners as racially inferior: no, not quite.

I guess if you said that any torture technique specifically targetted to affect a group of people (who happen to be the only group of people being tortured) is racist, I would agree.

Racism, at least in my mind, implies a certain hate of a very large group of people because of what they are, or things many members of that group of people have done. Unless someone can show me a quote or a link that attributes to these guards' hate towards the Muslem community in general, rather than towards these prisoners whom they [the guards] think have killed US soldiers, I'm going to say that these actions were not racist. Extremely bad, definitely, but not racist.

Sincerely and Respectfully,

David Carlson

I think Hitler did more good that bush ever has done or will do in his political career. Im not saying Hitler was a good man, far from it. But he did sorta rescue Germany from its economical and social decline. Bush is a warmongering idiot.

You all are giving Bush too much credit. You think that idiot has the brains to do ANY OF THE STUFF he's done so far? It's the 'ministration. Whenever he gives a speech, Cheney's in the background giving Bush a glaring look. I know that he's got his arm up Bush's ass, making him talk. He's a puppet. That Administration is the most corrupt thing this government's ever seen, and that's the truth. *Rant ->* I'm surprised Ashcroft even agrees to working with women, let alone minorities. That m-fer thinks women should be bare foot and pregnant in the kitchen, reading a Bible with one hand and stirring dinner with the other

Yeah, okay...

As for Bush being the antichrist... I'm not gonna disagree.

Comparing Bush to Hitler is an insult to Hitler. Kerry may not be the best one for the job, but at least we'd get some liberal Justices and maybe a half way decent cabinet. Personally, I think Jon Stewart would make a fantastic president. Unrealistic, maybe, but I have yet to disagree with him. Plus he's dead sexy for an old, married man.

Excuse me, Bush has created over one million jobs so far in his term, and even CNN Editorial said so. Hitler put so much money into circulation that it was cheaper to burn money to stay warm than firewood, that is not exactly economic greatness. Bush has done a lot of good for the US.

A million jobs and billions in deficit? Hurray for a sh*t economy! I will admit that a 4.4% (we're something close to that I think) unemployment rate is fantastic, though.

It's going to take more than a prayer to get us out of the hole we've dug ourselves into, though, Guarldi. And so far, Bush hasn't been helping the situation. Even if he's elected again next year (with no paper trail there isn't a snowball's chance in hell for Kerry) what's he going to do about the deficit? WHAT THE HELL IS STOPPING HIM FROM STARTING ANOTHER FORSAKEN WAR? The 'war on terror' isn't just going to stop when he's re elected. It's like that's what he's expected to do from now on, but at least Kerry would start bothering with some domestic policies and maybe try making us some money. Has Bush really done a lot of good for us, or for other people? I'm sorry, but it is not the US's job to go around to every non democratic country and force it down their throats. We should be more worried about our own people.

EDIT: Oh yeah, okay, CNN said so? It may as well be Fox News for as much as CNN saying it is worth. Edited again to shake her head and say : "Poor Jews, gypsies, and homosexuals. Tsk tsk."

Yes. They were probably in weapons manufacturing. So that he can sell them to Iraqis. And then bomb them.

There's nothing I like about Bush, sadly. Same goes for Tony Blair. They completely disregarded the requests of the UN and half of Europe and went on what could be called, in some respects, a wild goose chase.



Actually, I believe that the Wall Street Crash caused that to happen, with the Hyper Inflation and what-not. That was in 1929 - before Hitler came into power, and the Reich was in charge - they were the ones who circulated all that money. Hitler actually fed off that situation in his election campaigns - he did not cause it.

The difference between Bush and Hitler? Aside from the millions of Jews/Gypsies/Homosexuals gassed and a World War (just substitute it for 'Gulf' - Bush Junior finishing off his father's work), that is? Hitler was intelligent. Bush is not.

I'm not a fan of the deficit myself, between that and immigration I disagree with Bush, but I would rather have a deficit than an appeaser in office. Take on the simple things. I don't know where but somewhere in the US they quit lighting something up at night, something like that and saved a bunch. It would be great if they could do that. I am not sure what is plan is, nor Kerry's. Or you could take the Alexander Hamilton approach to the deficit. I'll do some more research and try to post it.

Oh yeah, when you graduate from Yale then you can tell me that Bush is not intelligent.

If I was in office I would have Dave Ramsey and Clark Howard as advisors, heh.

Edit: To create a health care system that puts the needs of patients first, the President proposed steps to:

Help all Americans get affordable health care coverage and ensure access to doctors
Help patients get high-quality care every time
Modernize Medicare with prescription drug coverage that enables seniors to get the medicines they need, without the government dictating their drug choices.
Allow patients the choice of doctors, hospitals, or treatment centers.
Provide full coverage for disease prevention such as screenings for cancer, diabetes and osteoporosis.
Develop new treatments to keep patients healthy and prevent complications from diseases and strengthen the health care safety net.

Prescription drug coverage that enables seniors to get the medicines they need, without the government dictating their drug choices.
Choice of an individual health care plan that best fits their needs just like Members of Congress and other federal employees enjoy today.
Choice of the doctor, hospital, or place they want for the treatment and care they need.
Full coverage for disease prevention such as screenings for cancer, diabetes and osteoporosis.


Education:


Supporting Early Learning: No Child Left Behind targets resources for early childhood education so that all youngsters get the right start on reading and math.
Measuring Student Performance: A student's progress in reading and math must be measured in each of grades 3 through 8 and at least once during high school.
Providing Information for Parents: States and school districts must give parents detailed report cards on schools and districts, explaining which are succeeding and why.
Giving Options Over Underperforming Schools: Children will no longer be trapped in underperforming schools. Children will be able to transfer to higher-performing local schools, receive free tutoring or attend after-school programs.
Ensuring More Resources for Schools: Today, public schools spend an average $7,000 a year per student. Under President Bush’s leadership federal funding for education has increased 59.8% from 2000 to 2003.

Did you just say that I am not intelligent? THE ONLY REASON BUSH WENT TO F*CKING YALE IS BECAUSE HIS....GAH....GRRR....YOU....GAH...I'M SMARTER....THAN.....PUPPET....WHITEHOUSE....YOU....YOU....!

*Counts to 10*
*phew*

Okay, I don't think Bush really deserved to go to such a school, do you? No, Ivy League doesn't seem his type. Junior College, maybe. The only reason he graduated in the first place is because his daddy could afford it.

He graduated anyway, that is a feat. I didn't say you weren't intelligent either. You can have all the money in the world and it doesn't mean you will graduate.

I beg to differ. You can pay your way through anything in this country. He graduated at the bottom of his class. If I strived to go to Yale (Berkeley is my school of choice) then even I, a lowly, poor liberal chick could get better than the bottom of the class.



The federal government has no place in education to begin with. And like No Child Left Behind is worth chicken sh*t. It's just something that sounds nice he pumped out.

Bottom of the class at Yale is much better than graduating at the top of a place like, um, I don't know any public college.

Face it, the man knows NOTHING. He's being run by a bunch of fat cats who tell him what to do.

Also, I personally would rather GRADUATE AT THE TOP OF BERKELEY THAN THE BOTTOM OF YALE, because when you graduate at the bottom you must be pretty damn stupid. At least you learn something when you graduate somewhere above the 50 percentile. That man had to sit in his dorm and stare out the window the whole day and let his family and reputation do the rest of the work. Gah-- I'm going to stop arguing because that is not what the forums are for. Grrr....

Did you just call God a fat cat????heh

Kerry is being told what to do by the democratic party, and being led way more than Bush. I know this discussion isn't about him but you mentioned him earlier. You have to respect his knowledge, even if you do not agree with his policies, he knows more than you think.

But at least I agree somwhat with Kerry. I don't care if he's being run by the Democrats, at least I know he won't start a war for no apparent reason. Maybe, instead of taking down the evil empire that was Hussein, he could get the real terrorists.

And as for God being a fat cat, for all you and I know, if there is a god, he's up there in Heaven sitting on a pile of money, blessing Halliburton and giving Regean a glass of champagne and welcoming him to his right hand.

There are more aspects to the war on terrorism than you might think, and Rome wasn't built in a day.

Okay, I'm gunna fisrt start by saying the the hyper-inflation was under the Weimar Republic's charge. And there was alot more to it that just some folks deciding to start running off money. Hitlers only part in that I believe, was when he later made the man that introduced the new marks (new president of the bank) his finacial advisor when he came to power. Said fellow was responsible for alot of Germany's prosperity if memory serves me correct.

Anyways, I think I may have already compared Bush to Hitler once on here. Its shocking how similar some of the stuff they do is. That said, I dont think that Bush is going to start rounding up certain races of people in his own country and snuff them out, and err I dont have an opinion of what he might do in other countries...

What scares me is that the president can run around deciding if or if not the Geneva Convention applies to a war. What.. how. why.. who does this make sense to?! And doesnt the US have its own War Crimes Act? Does he also get to decide to null that one?


Do you really think he ment it. Do you think Bush wants to put money into any reasonable social programs.
Although this does remind me of the fellow who is running the conservative party here in Canada. And how he's now trying to say he supports healthcare, even though he spent like the last four years trying make it a two tier system.

I can tell you right now, that No Child Left Behind has done more damage than good. Being that I work in a school and listen to the teachers complain about it everyday I should know. They have actually lost funding because of this policy. Take at look at what the NEA has to say about NCLB policy. Take note this is the top educators association in the US.
http://www.nea.org/esea/chorus1.html

PS. Take a look at the articals at the bottom of the page as well.

Hah! That's who I meant. D'oh.



Agreed. People forget that, although Hitler killed millions upon millions of people, he first off did what he promised he would do, and that was pulled Germany out of the gutter. If he hadn't had gone "Ack! I will kill everyone in the world!", he wouldn't been a damn good leader. He was amazingly intelligent, a stunning public speaker and made the best use of propaganda that anyone else. He was just... Um... Well, rather insane.

acid_raid_child made all the points I was going to make about Yale, so I'll put that one in my pocket for now.

But Bush is President strictly by default, because a few thousand Americans didn't know how to put a hole in a piece of paper. He had only been outside his own country once before he was elected, and obviously this is going to reflect on his foreign policy, which is rather ridiculous. In the UK, we've dealt with terrorism for years upon years. Not once have we begged America to join in. Blair did it to the extent he was going against his own country's and own contenient's people. Blair, perhaps unwittingly, has sacrificed our European diplomacy and the next election in supporting a war-monging hypocrite. One that not only looks like his father, but acts like him too.

Bush has some very clever advisors - I'll give him that - but he himself acts like a complete idiot.

And, really - let's face it - one million jobs in a country of 240 million people - it's not that amazing a feat.



Bwahahaha. That was wonderful.

To be fair, no president can "create" jobs. No one person can "create" jobs. The president can only influence the economy so much. It's the market that creates jobs. I will say however that Bush did influence the economy more by his foreign policies (as I see it, shoving his prick into everyone else's business) than by his economic policies. I also agree that his actions and influence killed personal liberties for the sake of temporary security, particularly in the wake of September 11th, which was capitalized on more than the pet rock rage. Policies influencing the degeneration of personal liberties under the guise of defending freedom are what get to me. I read an article once where a Pentagon employee leaked out that there was a mideast military campaign in the works way before September 11th and the destruction of Afganistan, Iraq and most likely the other countries listed in the article (which escape me at this moment). The whole thing about defending freedom from those who threaten it, if you look at the big picture, is utter bullsh*t. They care more about getting back at the US military than getting off by stealing US freedom.

heh.....hehehehe....heheheheheheheheheh.......moron....

what happened to seperation between religion and state....did you just relate bush to god?? you're dumber than i thought....it's like relating kermit the frog to Yoda.....nothing in common at all!!
[Ease-up on the name calling please - Mata]

edit: in my defence i was more than a little drunk last night, my apologies for the name calling....and the bad example, but the way it read looked and still does look like you related bush to god

I did not relate Bush to God, I have no idea how you got that. Yoda and Kermit are both green, and were both puppets, and Yoda was almost voiced by Jim Henson, just to be smart aleck.

Well, no. You did. He got it from the following:



Which stemmed from this:

Easy one here, would the American military do that sort of stuff to white American terrorist prisoners? What about just civilians? Or even British nationals? Or German nationals? Or French nationals?

No, no they wouldn't, and if they did, there'd be alot more of a stink. The Bush administration is trying to paint this as them being maybe a little over-zealous. You know why? Because it goes alot deeper, alot dirtier and with even worse intentions that we know right now. Assuming the rest of the videos and images of the abuse gets declassified before the elections, and last I heard it's on track for that, we'll see some real torture in the media. And if any American citizen can bring themselves to vote for that pig after they see what has only just been kept out of the media thus far, the battle is lost, and there's no saving ourselves.

A scenario:

Bush goes to his fancy presidential laptop in the oval office and starts surfing the web (he's Bush, what more do you expect?). he comes across this forum. He checks it out. He sees this thread. He reads it.

Now what does he do? Does he change the way he is as a president in hopes to make everyone, not just those of his country, but everyone, feel better about the world that they live in? Or does he not understand it at all because he's as stupid as we all say he is?
Only until the next election...
And will our next president be any better? (Or worse?)

"Easy one here, would the American military do that sort of stuff to white American terrorist prisoners? What about just civilians? Or even British nationals? Or German nationals? Or French nationals?"

I am speaking of the guards who committed the acts of toture, not the organization that in all likelyhood ordered them to. I thought that was clear, but after looking at my post, it wasn't.

"No, no they wouldn't, and if they did, there'd be alot more of a stink. The Bush administration is trying to paint this as them being maybe a little over-zealous. You know why? Because it goes alot deeper, alot dirtier and with even worse intentions that we know right now. Assuming the rest of the videos and images of the abuse gets declassified before the elections, and last I heard it's on track for that, we'll see some real torture in the media. And if any American citizen can bring themselves to vote for that pig after they see what has only just been kept out of the media thus far, the battle is lost, and there's no saving ourselves."

You attacking the wrong argument here ^_~ I'm not even touching whether or not the Bush administration is racist. I wouldn't be surprised if some of it were. I'm not touching the American military. I'm solely discussing the soldiers who committed the acts of terrorism. Again, this was my fault.

Applying what you've written to my actual, or rather intended, argument: I cannot say if those individuals would commit the same acts on nonMuslems, if ordered. To be honest, while initially I agreed with you (you made a very good point), without any evidence that would attribute the soldiers' actions TO racism, I'm going to have to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Personally, I think it's probably a bit more complex than "just racism," on the guards' part. Which is why I'm hesitant to attribute their actions to racism.

Of course, if you have evidence, such as quotations or writing, that would indicate these soldiers were racist, then I'll agree with you.

Sincerely and Respectfully,

David Carlson

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't think that Bush is an idiot. Not that I think he's the smartest guy in the world, and he's certainly not articulate, but I think a lot of what gets him portrayed as stupid in the liberal press is his trying to seem like a "nice, regular guy" (even though he comes from one of the richest families in the country). The fact that he's president definitely scares me, though, not because of his intelligence level but because of his warmongering and right-wing views.

It also seems silly and extreme to compare him to Hitler, if you ask me. Yes, he's right-wing, he's a warmonger, he's obsessed with nationalism and power (and overall not the kind of person I'd like to have in office) but that can be said of a lot of leaders and a lot of former US presidents, for that matter. Hitler was all of those things as well but he took them to a level that Bush has yet to reach, and he committed atrocities that Bush, in spite of everything, has not come close to. The treatment of the prisoners in Iraq was horriffic, but I wouldn't compare it to what Hitler and the Nazis did.

Overall I don't like Bush and I really, really hope he doesn't get re-elected, but I wouldn't compare him to Hitler. They're not in the same league at all. They may have some similar traits, but so do most political leaders (particularly the more right-wing ones) and I think it's a real exaggeration to say that Bush is capable of committing crimes like Hitler's. Not that I have much hope for the US in the next four years if he gets re-elected, but like I said it's not on the same level at all.

I've given ACR a warning for this.

Comparison is something that can be done with anyone, if you looked hard enough you could probably find a few ways that Ghandi was like Hitler, but I don't tolerate people saying that a leader of a democracy with good (if debatably misguided) intentions for the world is worse than Hitler.

I don't like Bush, and I don't like his policies. I think he is, for whatever reason, leading his country down an extremely dangerous path, but I will not allow people to say that he is worse than a genocidal maniac. ACR, you've had some fair points and it's clear you feel strongly about this, but please use less inflamatory language.

This does go for other people in this thread too. I've been very pleased that most of you have taken a calm attitude to this. Thanks for doing that and please continue to encourage others to do the same.