Jump to content
3000AD Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Takvah

  1. Not being a fan of the electoral college, I would not be supportive of Kerry dragging this out for a long time. Obviously, he should concede pending the outcome of Ohio. It would be very funny if he actually lost by 3.5 million votes and won the electoral college *snickers*. That said, I did my part and absolved myself of any responsibility for this President. I continue to hope for a more moderate Republican party but I think that I'll have to suffer through radicals for a few more years. So now a question. Since, everything I heard from Bush supporters was ... "if Kerry gets elected and we get attacked it will be his fault," (and indirectly mine for voting for him). I am curious, will it now be Bush's fault if and when we get attacked? I'm just curious because I think that philosophy is used to misdirect blame and takes it from the perp and puts it on the President. I don't feel any safer with Bush, I think we've just been lucky. Honestly if you look at the measures taken to secure us they are woefully inadequate. It is as they said, a matter of time... however, when you guys talked about Kerry you made it seem as though when that attack came it would be HIS burden. I guess if I were small minded, I'd have to blame Bush right? It was something I pondered last night as I thought about all of the rhetoric that's been spewed here since the start of the campaign. So I'm curious to hear the answers.
  2. Takvah

    Raiders in MP

    Shingen, sometimes I have to wonder if I'm not talking to two distinctly different people. One minute you have one viewpoint and the next you change it. I was copping out? What? There are workarounds and now it's all about US? Sure there are workarounds. I think inactivity is more deeply rooted. This is just the kind of thing that has brought some of us to have a very real lack of confidence where it concerns the viability of this fleet. We know that if we apply ourselves we're going to make minced meat of the competition. I believe in every guy that is a member of this fleet and I know that jamotto and others are capable commanders. If you want to scrub the membership and in doing that you believe you will find some new Xanadu then so be it. I don't think that members of this fleet feel any real loyalty to the status quo. I think we have an attitude that has never been fully expanded on. We are raiders and if we're going to be a fleet that has fun and DOES participate we need to make that the centerpiece of our group. We are irreverant. We are arrogant. We are unique. These are the things that should be exploited. I know that I would be happy if we acted like RAIDERS. We should be popping Coronas, yucking it up and scrimmaging against ourselves to test tactics that WORK. We have never been a community and I don't lay the blame at your feet. I think that some of the methods employed were less than Raider like and that presented problems. If you want to motivate this fleet there are ways to do it. I know that my approach would be to get the RP based in us being Raiders and then to rejoice in our brotherhood and the fact that we are NOT ANYTHING like the military fleets. We should embrace the fact that we are rogues, a motley crew of opportunists and bandits and the brotherhood we find within that identity binds us. That's the STARTING POINT... from there I think we fast become the haven for FUN LOVING, real people that just so happen to KICK MAJOR ASS. I don't know that your style or your approach can breed that kind of environment but I know that if this was the approach of the fleet I would likely be more active and I feel confident in saying I think others would also be more active. Then again, I could be wrong... I'd like to hear from some of the others. Maybe I have it wrong in which case if things aren't going to make that kind of turn my continued involvement is pointless. I ran a Klingon fleet... we were irreverant, rag tag... our ships were weak and outnumbered but we were THE FLEET. Anybody with an attitude problem, a great sense of humor and a willingness to be part of a team joined us and we had a helluva lot of fun. Takvah out-
  3. Takvah

    Raiders in MP

    quote:Originally posted by Remo Williams: On a side note I never figured Shingen to be a quitter an obsessive complainer but not a quitter go figure. No offense Remo but does this even concern you? This is a Raider matter and doesn't concern the self-righteous Prime Fleet. If and when we decide to move on or throw in the towel we'll make sure that Derek is properly informed of the status of TDH. Your assistance was not requested as far as I can tell and your meddling in our affairs is becoming tough to take. If you run the server or whatever fine... if we're around to shove a few missiles down your throats or to turn those "Love Boats" you boys fly around in to cinders and ash then interaction is fine but for now you're just seeming to rub salt into our wounds. Perhaps your time would be better spent working with your fleet rather than taking pot shots from your perch. As for TDH and its future I don't know that I have time to run a fleet but perhaps if the duties were split into a "council" of some sort we'd be more efficient. I was thinking a Military Commander role, a Communications/Envoy role for dealing with other fleets and an Operations/Training Officer to schedule fleet maneuvers and tactics. Laying the burden of a free wheeling fleet like this on the shoulders of one person is wrong. The fact is that TDH isn't about being a paper fleet and Shingen is right about that. If we aren't playing we figure why bother and some of us have been concerned about the quality of the matches we'd be involved in. Obviously with UCAWA it seems that there is going to be a multiplayer revision. Can we be content to be active while waiting and hope for the best with revisions to the current UC? I don't know. Likely we need to discuss it. Obviously, in fleets that are about pretending to be active and challenged it is easy to just go along with the status quo. TDH is not content to behave this way and I think it is our strong suit because if and when we do decide to move forward it will be as a PLAYING, ENGAGING and ASS KICKING fleet... not some paper pony with a smug pencil pusher at the helm. I think I've had my say.... as a RAIDER would. We aren't Prime/ISS/Gammulan and for that I am keenly grateful. I think we should take our deliberations to private channels where interruptions will be less likely to interfere in our decision processes. Takvah out-
  4. If we got the names of the levels right LOS we'd be considered fanboys... not knowing says volumes for the fact that we aren't so consumed as to know those details. *snickers* By the way I wasn't attacking your review and if it seemed that way I apologize. I was just countering it and honestly it was more Devil's Advocate than "how dare he say that" heheh. I thought you were fair. Peace
  5. Multiplayer will be modded in, as a matter of fact some guys already found a way to play it multi (there is code embedded in the retail game already just requires skins and some map tweaks). I expect the modders will do a better job with the multiplayer than Valve would anyway. Afterall it wasn't Valve that created CounterStrike or for that matter Team Fortress. The game is damn good. There are some levels that are just too long though (the airboat one for sure) but aside from that very little to complain about as far as design. Technically speaking the game runs well. I do have issues with occassional sound glitches though and considering I am running this game on a pretty high end rig it's a bug (others report this problem too). They need to fix it... it kills immersion at some points. Ravenhold thus far has been my favorite level... it is just plain spooky. Right now I have been volunteered to take out a gunship... I am looking forward to coming through for humanity. I don't think FPS have any new ground to cover so I really cannot (and therefor will not) bash the game because there isn't some new approach contained within. I think the mixture of simple puzzles and gunplay is something that works well with Half Life and I believe in not fixing things that aren't broken. Half Life works on so many levels and at the very least if it follows the formula it does it better than anybody else. The music is almost irrelevant. You get it once in a while and for short segments within the game. I found it suitably scifi (think campy techno) and one or two of the tunes were thumping enough that you drove faster or fought harder. Again, it's not even signifigant enough to really weigh in the scheme of scoring. Half Life 2 will be game of the year... that's a given and it will be because it did live up to the hype. It is FUN. It is gorgeous. Facial detailing is the strong suit that makes you go... "ahhhh". The textures are a little bland and lack depth however and that's a shame. I run this thing on a 6800NU with all of the goodies maxed out (the game recommends all high for my system) so I don't think it's my card. Weapons are balanced and fun to use. The gravity gun might be the greatest weapon ever invented and the way you get introduced to how it is used is GREAT. I don't know, I think that Valve got all of the details right. They didn't set out to redefine the FPS genre all they set out to do was to maintain the high level of story and play they achieved with their first offering. They succeeded and gave HL a worthy successor. What more could you ask for? 90% Rating NOW BRING ON THE MODS!
  6. Definetley a great game. I managed to play for around 20 minutes before work and on the drive in a few things struck me. First of all it was how many emotions it stirred in me. There was excitment, intensity, fear, anger, panic... just to name a few. I actually felt bad for the woman who was at the train station... waiting. (People that play the game will know what I'm talking about). I couldn't help but think about all of the old balck and white footage of Nazi Germany while playing those few moments. I finally looked at the clock and had to run at the teleportation mishap (again handled in a very cool way). I was pissed to have to leave but happy to be savoring the short timed I'd played and eager to jump back in... after all I have some stun gun shots to the head to avenge! "You there... pick up that can." I'll have more to say on it when I get a few hour under the old belt but man... it's already hella good. Peace
  7. Takvah

    Multiplayer Issues

    OK, in support of Shingen and perhaps at the expense of my posting privileges I would like to say a thing or two about the multiplayer. I would really play this game a lot in multiplayer if the space combat were more stable. I don't know if it is connection speeds from 56K players or what it is that causes the problems but they are there. They do make playing multiplayer games of UC a trying experience and the game experience doesn't exactly lend itself to one becoming enthused about fleet action. Now I know that it has been said before that this is a single player game with a multiplayer option... ok. The deal is this though, I think the creation of fleets etc., has always been designed with the express intent and wish of the members of these fleets that at some point and time fleet action was going to be possible. If not I really do not see the point of fleets. So, with that in mind and seeing as this is the second title to offer multiplayer I think that it is a fact that has not escaped Derek either. To cavalierly declare that one can take it or leave it is fine if the approach had always been "the multiplayer will be marginal at best" but that was not how multiplayer was ever described in the buildup to the release. Conversely it could be said with a similarly cavalier attitude that we as consumers do not really care about the problems with Dreamcatcher etc as relates to the release of the game. I think that for the most part (if even a little late in my case) we came to understand and support your assertions that Dreamcatcher screwed the pooch on this title and also hampered your ability to see it achieve an economic success that could have allowed you to direct more time and resources to the project. In the end the criticisms as relates to MP have never been intended to color you as the villain Derek but more accurately have been nothing more than pleas for help so that the fleets (entities that support this game) could interact thereby expanding the BC/UC experience. I have to reaffirm that the single player is great and I do enjoy it. I have even had a multiplayer experience or two that were so cool that they have maintained my desire and HOPE that real fleet ops could be a reality with this game. I am not talking about the "seamless multiplayer game modes with support for up to 64 players in a massive universe" that was thrown on the box. I would be happy if 4 on 4 was a doable reality with the game. So, I guess what I am saying is this... we do love your game. We do support your game. Shingen might express his frustration mnore freely than others as to appear redundant but it isn't anything that people with mushier spines have not spoken privately. All we would like is to know if we're wasting our time or not. That isn't a demand that for the sake of our time you waste yours on a code that can't be improved... it's just a matter of getting and accepting the straight skinny. I'll await my trout bashing *snickers* Takvah
  8. Yeah that was amazing. Gore set himself up and the Republicans pounced. I don't think the Democrats had game in 2000... and I don't think they have game in 2004 either. The Republicans surely do know how to hammer on obscure minutia and make it seem relevant. The only saving grace for the Democrats in 2004 has been EXTREME apathy toward a President that has led us astray. Al Gore supported the internet in it's infancy... when people hardly even knew what it would be. He didn't say he INVENTED IT. That my friends was the spin. The Love Story deal was another great Republican attack. Was it about Al and Tipper? Who the hell cares.
  9. LOL how many electoral votes does Guam have? I think this is a lot of wishful thinking on your part Jaguar but you might as well take the shots while you can. In line in my heavily Republican county of Martin the OVERWHELMING concensus was... "Kerry can't do any worse than this guy has," I REPEAT IN MARTIN COUNTY... OVERWHELMINGLY REPUBLICAN. Latest Drudge headline reads: "Election 2004 has been rocked with first wave of morning exit polls which show Kerry competitive in key states, campaign and media sources tell DRUDGE.... National Election Pool -- representing six major news organization -- shows Kerry in striking distance -- with small lead -- in Florida and Ohio.. MORE..." Let's give it at least until 7PM before making such crazy statements. KERRY CAMPAIGN FINDS COMFORT IN FIRST BATCH OF EXIT POLLS
  10. Takvah

    Standing Orders of TDH

    Yeah well HL2 and Doom3 pretty much made me upgrade the old rig. Joint Ops Typhoon Rising is a game with MONDO amounts of players and those pings I quoted are pretty much the norm even networked with my wife's machine and her intermittently browsing. Thank God for Morrowind, it keeps her off the net for her gaming HAHAH.
  11. I don't think it would do your side of the argument any good even if he had posted that war versus this war. Even with Iraq then having a somewhat formidable force we lost a total of around 300 souls. The Iraq we attacked in 2003 was a shadow of that former self. I would be shocked if we destroyed armor in numbers that are but a FRACTIOn of those destroyed in 1991. Iraq was for the most part unarmed and many soldiers have said, considering the buildup of commanders the fighting in initial combat was light. Now however, well after the declared end of major combat we find ourselves mourning over 1100 souls and contemplating the thousands of soldiers maimed. The toll of this war has been much greater than we had envisioned. This is not a war for great mechanized armies, this is a war fought with guns man to man. I do not think that our soldiers were properly prepared. As for Bin Laden, he should be in hell with his 1487 toothless whores enjoying his fiery martyrdom... but no... he's a more prolific movie maker than Spielberg. GREAT JOB GEORGE. I don't think Bin Laden's approach was "you leave us alone, we'll leave you alone," he was AGAIN making threats. He was again scaring women and children all the while playing on our fear. This sonofa***** needs to be taken out and if that means we march troops over the mountains and into Pakistan to do it then SO BE IT. People here want to attack every country under the sun, well let's put the pressure on Musharef and tell him DELIVER THIS SOB or get the HELL OUT OF OUR WAY! Peace
  12. Takvah

    Standing Orders of TDH

    I'm here, I would just really like to see a more efficient netcode. I love the game and spend many fun hours playing the single player but the multiplayer has never really worked well for me. I don't know if it is a singular circumstance with me being the only one but it is the reason I am luke warm on major commitments. I have a fast rig (Athlon 64 3200+), a good video card (6800), a gig of ram and a solid DSL connection that gets me pings in the 40 to 80 range for all other games. I am waiting for the next patch which if I am to understand what has been posted thus far, will be more multiplayer oriented. I am hoping for the best because there is nothing better than playing this game against human opponents. So between the hurricanes, the clean-up and the multiplayer performance I've been getting to date I have set the game (as far as multi is concerned) aside for now. I still post here and will be VERY WILLING AND ABLE to perform and participate as soon as I know what I shoot will die *snickers* Peace Takvah
  13. ROFLMAO... ohhhh scary. I thought Halloween was yesterday... a day late and a dollar short I guess. Let's just get through the election before we start plotting civil war. Yeesh.
  14. ROFLMAO... Kerry isn't my choice... he is my only choice. Do you understand the subtlety of that statement? I doubt it. Kerry is no winner but I know what Bush has done in his four years. People say, don't vote for Kerry because you hate Bush. I don't hate Bush, I am voting Bush out on his RECORD. He didn't have a record four years ago when I voted him in... I voted against Al Gore because of HIS BOSS'S RECORD and the fact that Al Gore never said, "this is BS" when it came to Clinton's lies. He showed no leadership when I thought he had an opportunity to condemn what was OBVIOUSLY wrong. Bush has failed to kill Osama. Bush has attacked a country that we had contained. Bush has failed to deal with North Korea. Bush has failed to deal with Iran. Bush has alienated this nation and taken us out of the global scheme making us some kind of isolationist regime. This would work if we LIVED ON ANOTHER PLANET... PLANET AMERICA. It doesn't work on EARTH where we are 300 million people out of 6 billion. Some of you need to travel more and observe how SMALL this planet is. Bush spends without accountability or a plan for repayment. It is convenient because he won't be in office when the bill comes due. Bush does not address the people or engage them in debate. He is (much like his policies) a sequestered King in his castle. I cannot believe this guy has been in office for four years and is afraid to answer questions. Bush has opposed most of the 9/11 Commissions suggestions (he even opposed the Commission itself). He couldn't even appear before the commission BY HIMSELF! This is the leader of the free world and he needed Dick there so they could, "get the facts straight?" That was obscene. Bush opposed the Office of Homeland Security. I could go on and on and on. I would love to sit and drink a beer with George W. Bush. I bet the guy is a hell of a lot more fun than Kerry but I don't want him to be my President. I am not impressed with his service and while I thank him for it, it's time for him to go. Nothing personal, I made a mistake voting for him and I won't repeat it. Nuff said.
  15. ROFLMAO... I have read comments by immigrants that have been better written and more cohesive than this one. If you want to be American you should submit to the ideals of this nation (as relates to its people). You should speak the language. You should pledge to protect that which grants you freedoms and opportunities you could not find in your country. What is hilarious though is how irate you people are about this. May I make a few points. HOW MANY SUCCESSFUL BUSINESSES IN THIS COUNTRY ARE NON-ENGLISH SPEAKING BUSINESSES? HOW MANY AMERICAN CEOs DO NOT SPEAK ENGLISH? HOW MANY OPPORTUNITIES ARE THERE IN THIS NATION FOR NON-ENGLISH SPEAKING PEOPLE? HOW MANY OPPORTUNITIES ARE THERE FOR HEAD DRESS WEARING WOMEN THAT CANNOT EXPOSE THEIR FACES? (this whole "editorial" spawned from a case in Florida about the woman who would not remove her head dress for a license photo). The fact is that people that come to this country and are truly seeking to succeed must do all of the things you are screaming about to get there. People that do not speak English or "act" American end up in the most menial of jobs. This is all a bunch of paranoia in this editorial. Personally, I could care less if some immigrant doesn't want to speak English... good, one less bastard to compete with. If you don't want to take off your head dress fine... don't drive (Florida caved on this and that PISSES ME OFF). But for the most part this is a non issue. If they do not speak the language or strive to be "American" they will not end up CEOs or persons of "consequence". For the same reasons that Kalshion will never be an English teacher these people that refuse to speak the language and adapt will never be SUCCESSFUL in this country. Stop making the non threats your enemy. There are plenty of literate and educated immigrants that you should be turning your hatred toward, those are the guys that will be sucking up YOUR job.
  16. I'm sorry but after reading some of this ridiculous rhetoric I have come to a singular conclusion. Jaguar and Kalshion obviously do not extend their train of thought beyond Republican good, Democrat bad. It is actually pathetic to read these kinds of off the wall comments like Clinton destroyed the Reagan economy. I mean how whacky do you have to be to believe that? Hello, Bush (George Herbert Walker) was the recession President. He had a 90% approval rating and lost the election on the lousy economy. CLINTON THE TAX RAISER? Clinton was a scoundrel and a LIAR but hello... DUMMIES... READ MY LIPS, NO NEW TAXES. Well that lil lie along with a LOUSY economy cost daddy his re-election. The revisionist history is ASTOUNDING. I hear about this Reagan economy (I loved Reagan) which invariably SKIPS THE BUSH economy and I shake my head. STOP LYING TO YOURSELVES. PLEASE. It is irksome to someone that is willing to call a spade a spade. I liked daddy, I thought he was a good President. I hated Clinton. Regardless, I just can't take it when people that LIE TO THEMSELVES call people that look at the reality of the situation the liars. Bush's economy tanked when 9/11 occured. Yes there was an economic slowdown but ANYONE THAT KNOWS ECONOMICS KNOWS THAT IT IS CYCLICAL. The Bush economy was weakened by a cyclical turn and aggravated by the terrorism of 9/11. Where Bush has failed us miserably is in continuing to grant tax breaks in a time of war, (something that has never happened before) while amassing debt. I listen to you people scream about Kerry and the 87 billion dollars. KERRY WANTED A BILL PASSED WHICH MADE THE $87 billion a LOAN TO IRAQ and that was PAY AS YOU GO, meaning that the tax cuts had to be repealed so that we didn't end up in this massive DEBT we're in now. You want me to support the war, well at one time I did. I was disgusted though when this President decided that WE'D PAY FOR IT OURSELVES. If the god damn Iraqis wanted freedom so badly WHY THE HELL ARE WE THE ONE'S PAYING FOR IT?! Huh? You talk about immigrants being leeches... YOUR PRESIDENT JUST MADE US A DEBTOR NATION FOR PEOPLE THAT AREN'T AMERICANS! Keep lying to yourselves but don't expect RATIONAL, THINKING PEOPLE to accept this revisionist TRIPE.
  17. Kerry in a landslide. It's already started. I think people actually woke up at the last minute. Regardless of who wins, we're all still Americans and I hope for the sake of this country that people will put that to the fore. Unfortunately, I am not at all optimistic about that happening. We have allowed ourselves to be divided and in the end that will be our undoing. Peace
  18. Takvah

    Night at the Movies: Saw

    I also enjoyed this flick. I just thought the ending was extremely contrived. The "twist" is entertaining enough but we never get enough of the villain to really empathize with what it is this person is doing, or for that matter feel apathetic about it. I know that when I bought the ticket the girl said, "oh you two are going to like this, it really makes you think," but I gotta say there was never really enough information for you to have said, "oh... I know," nah... you just think "oh sh*t," and then think, well I understand the motivation but DO I CARE? Not really. The villain is so inventive and original in the methods employed, the reasoning is sophisticated but what do we actually invest emotionally in this person? Nothing. I don't know, I think this could have been done so much better and it just felt like a GIGANTIC cop-out at the end. Like I said, you think... "oh," but THAT'S IT. For getting the twist halfway right (who you think is doing it versus the reality of the situation) this movie gets 5/10 right off the bat. For some sick imagery (sp?) and the best use of a public restroom I have ever seen it gets another point. Finally for the irony of the ending (not the reveal but what the characters that are imprisoned end up doing when it truly isn't necessary) it gets an additional point. This movie could have been SOOOOOOO much better. I think that the writers got bored or lazy. It's a shame this could have been a solid 10/10 but in the end it's a bit flat... 7/10 is my score. Peace
  19. Well as I have been saying... REAL CONSERVATIVES do not have a voice in this administration. It seems that THINKING Republicans and those that are actually conservative agree with me that for the betterment of this nation we need to take one on the chin... suck it up... and vote AGAINST Bush. Read it all for yourself... I could not have said it better myself. November 8, 2004 issue http://www.amconmag.com/2004_11_08/cover1.html# Unfortunately, this election does not offer traditional conservatives an easy or natural choice and has left our editors as split as our readership. In an effort to deepen our readers’ and our own understanding of the options before us, we’ve asked several of our editors and contributors to make “the conservative case” for their favored candidate. Their pieces, plus Taki’s column closing out this issue, constitute TAC’s endorsement. —The Editors Kerry’s the One By Scott McConnell There is little in John Kerry’s persona or platform that appeals to conservatives. The flip-flopper charge—the centerpiece of the Republican campaign against Kerry—seems overdone, as Kerry’s contrasting votes are the sort of baggage any senator of long service is likely to pick up. (Bob Dole could tell you all about it.) But Kerry is plainly a conventional liberal and no candidate for a future edition of Profiles in Courage. In my view, he will always deserve censure for his vote in favor of the Iraq War in 2002. But this election is not about John Kerry. If he were to win, his dearth of charisma would likely ensure him a single term. He would face challenges from within his own party and a thwarting of his most expensive initiatives by a Republican Congress. Much of his presidency would be absorbed by trying to clean up the mess left to him in Iraq. He would be constrained by the swollen deficits and a ripe target for the next Republican nominee. It is, instead, an election about the presidency of George W. Bush. To the surprise of virtually everyone, Bush has turned into an important president, and in many ways the most radical America has had since the 19th century. Because he is the leader of America’s conservative party, he has become the Left’s perfect foil—its dream candidate. The libertarian writer Lew Rockwell has mischievously noted parallels between Bush and Russia’s last tsar, Nicholas II: both gained office as a result of family connections, both initiated an unnecessary war that shattered their countries’ budgets. Lenin needed the calamitous reign of Nicholas II to create an opening for the Bolsheviks. Bush has behaved like a caricature of what a right-wing president is supposed to be, and his continuation in office will discredit any sort of conservatism for generations. The launching of an invasion against a country that posed no threat to the U.S., the doling out of war profits and concessions to politically favored corporations, the financing of the war by ballooning the deficit to be passed on to the nation’s children, the ceaseless drive to cut taxes for those outside the middle class and working poor: it is as if Bush sought to resurrect every false 1960s-era left-wing clich├® about predatory imperialism and turn it into administration policy. Add to this his nation-breaking immigration proposal—Bush has laid out a mad scheme to import immigrants to fill any job where the wage is so low that an American can’t be found to do it—and you have a presidency that combines imperialist Right and open-borders Left in a uniquely noxious cocktail. During the campaign, few have paid attention to how much the Bush presidency has degraded the image of the United States in the world. Of course there has always been “anti-Americanism.” After the Second World War many European intellectuals argued for a “Third Way” between American-style capitalism and Soviet communism, and a generation later Europe’s radicals embraced every ragged “anti-imperialist” cause that came along. In South America, defiance of “the Yanqui” always draws a crowd. But Bush has somehow managed to take all these sentiments and turbo-charge them. In Europe and indeed all over the world, he has made the United States despised by people who used to be its friends, by businessmen and the middle classes, by moderate and sensible liberals. Never before have democratic foreign governments needed to demonstrate disdain for Washington to their own electorates in order to survive in office. The poll numbers are shocking. In countries like Norway, Germany, France, and Spain, Bush is liked by about seven percent of the populace. In Egypt, recipient of huge piles of American aid in the past two decades, some 98 percent have an unfavorable view of the United States. It’s the same throughout the Middle East. Bush has accomplished this by giving the U.S. a novel foreign-policy doctrine under which it arrogates to itself the right to invade any country it wants if it feels threatened. It is an American version of the Brezhnev Doctrine, but the latter was at least confined to Eastern Europe. If the analogy seems extreme, what is an appropriate comparison when a country manufactures falsehoods about a foreign government, disseminates them widely, and invades the country on the basis of those falsehoods? It is not an action that any American president has ever taken before. It is not something that “good” countries do. It is the main reason that people all over the world who used to consider the United States a reliable and necessary bulwark of world stability now see us as a menace to their own peace and security. These sentiments mean that as long as Bush is president, we have no real allies in the world, no friends to help us dig out from the Iraq quagmire. More tragically, they mean that if terrorists succeed in striking at the United States in another 9/11-type attack, many in the world will not only think of the American victims but also of the thousands and thousands of Iraqi civilians killed and maimed by American armed forces. The hatred Bush has generated has helped immeasurably those trying to recruit anti-American terrorists—indeed his policies are the gift to terrorism that keeps on giving, as the sons and brothers of slain Iraqis think how they may eventually take their own revenge. Only the seriously deluded could fail to see that a policy so central to America’s survival as a free country as getting hold of loose nuclear materials and controlling nuclear proliferation requires the willingness of foreign countries to provide full, 100 percent co-operation. Making yourself into the world’s most hated country is not an obvious way to secure that help. I’ve heard people who have known George W. Bush for decades and served prominently in his father’s administration say that he could not possibly have conceived of the doctrine of pre-emptive war by himself, that he was essentially taken for a ride by people with a pre-existing agenda to overturn Saddam Hussein. Bush’s public performances plainly show him to be a man who has never read or thought much about foreign policy. So the inevitable questions are: who makes the key foreign-policy decisions in the Bush presidency, who controls the information flow to the president, how are various options are presented? The record, from published administration memoirs and in-depth reporting, is one of an administration with a very small group of six or eight real decision-makers, who were set on war from the beginning and who took great pains to shut out arguments from professionals in the CIA and State Department and the U.S. armed forces that contradicted their rosy scenarios about easy victory. Much has been written about the neoconservative hand guiding the Bush presidency—and it is peculiar that one who was fired from the National Security Council in the Reagan administration for suspicion of passing classified material to the Israeli embassy and another who has written position papers for an Israeli Likud Party leader have become key players in the making of American foreign policy. But neoconservatism now encompasses much more than Israel-obsessed intellectuals and policy insiders. The Bush foreign policy also surfs on deep currents within the Christian Right, some of which see unqualified support of Israel as part of a godly plan to bring about Armageddon and the future kingdom of Christ. These two strands of Jewish and Christian extremism build on one another in the Bush presidency—and President Bush has given not the slightest indication he would restrain either in a second term. With Colin Powell’s departure from the State Department looming, Bush is more than ever the “neoconian candidate.” The only way Americans will have a presidency in which neoconservatives and the Christian Armageddon set are not holding the reins of power is if Kerry is elected. If Kerry wins, this magazine will be in opposition from Inauguration Day forward. But the most important battles will take place within the Republican Party and the conservative movement. A Bush defeat will ignite a huge soul-searching within the rank-and-file of Republicandom: a quest to find out how and where the Bush presidency went wrong. And it is then that more traditional conservatives will have an audience to argue for a conservatism informed by the lessons of history, based in prudence and a sense of continuity with the American past—and to make that case without a powerful White House pulling in the opposite direction. George W. Bush has come to embody a politics that is antithetical to almost any kind of thoughtful conservatism. His international policies have been based on the hopelessly na├»ve belief that foreign peoples are eager to be liberated by American armies—a notion more grounded in Leon Trotsky’s concept of global revolution than any sort of conservative statecraft. His immigration policies—temporarily put on hold while he runs for re-election—are just as extreme. A re-elected President Bush would be committed to bringing in millions of low-wage immigrants to do jobs Americans “won’t do.” This election is all about George W. Bush, and those issues are enough to render him unworthy of any conservative support. THANK GOD FOR SANITY. THANK GOD SOME OF US GET IT. THANK GOD I AM NOT ALONE. THANK GOD REAL CONSERVATIVES ARE WILLING TO CALL THIS FRAUD OUT. I've been saying it for two years now, I made a mistake... and real MEN can acknowledge that. Thank goodness the American Conservative is also helmed by real men.
  20. Takvah

    Movie Villian of the Year

    Idiocy is the enemy and people that won't bother to ask tough questions of their government. You guys are like lemmings and it's really very sad. Michael Moore like you guys is just an extremist, I did however find his movie humorous in some parts and insightful in others. You can say what you like about the content but Bush is a lucky SOB that likes to take vacations... even after his NSA has told him that terrorists might be using planes against us. I think you guys have such venom for Moore because he is just like all of you. Hopelessly partisan to a fault.
  21. Takvah

    Maybe Iraq War Has Hurt Al Qaeda

    Then tell me Jaguar what the hell are we doing in Iraq? Please, educate all of us.
  22. This is just more sanity being preached by conservatives. I guess now that the end is near and change within Bush's regime is unlikely honesty is paramount. The War Bin Laden Wanted The author Paul Schroeder looks at things three dimensionally and I hope some of you might be roused from your slumber by the clarity of his reasoning. We've merrily marched along to Bin Laden's drumming and it has to STOP. Peace
  23. So let me get this straight? Now the Christian Science Monitor is a democratic front? Jesus man you amaze me with your crazed denials.
  24. Takvah

    Dear John

    Ok Jaguar... look. You were a radio repairman ok. YOU WERE NOT A GENERAL. You act like you know everything but you surely do not. Now Paul Bremer the guy that was tasked with stabilizing the god damn country of Iraq says, "We didn't have enough troops to secure Iraq," and you say that he is as insightful as Mickey Mouse. You're just nuts. You can put any label on me that you like, frankly I enjoy your rants... but come on. Who the hell are you kidding?