Speeches

Discussion in 'Et Cetera, Et Cetera' started by Shelby, Sep 21, 2006.

  1. Shelby

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,159
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    in the internet
    So if you had to pick one whose speech was better?

    Ahmadinejad

    Bush

    Chavez


    The predictable response of course is they all sucked. That's why I italicized had to. I'm just curious how the board membership will shake out.
     
  2. SurferGirlCA

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,175
    Likes Received:
    148
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Los Angeles (CA, US)
    They all clearly have agendas, as expected.

    Ahmadinejad may seem like he's gone mental, but I think he's played his hand very well so far, assuming his aim is to be the new power broker in the Middle East. He basically says, "We are a duly-elected government, replacing a corrupt regime the U.S. supported, and now you want to tell us what we can and cannot do... oh yeah, and you support the Zionists" - not hard to tell who his audience is, huh? Whether his strategy pays off or he comes to regret it, remains to be seen.

    Chavez is so far left he's fallen off the map. Ironically, some of his proposals might be welcomed by the far-right in the U.S. (i.e., moving the U.N. out of the USA). Beyond that he represents a position many in the U.N. probably agree with; smaller countries feeling locked out of most of the important decisions by the Security Council/permanent member nations. He's a populist leader and he presents populist ideas, albeit skewing way left. BTW, based on the rest of his speech, I'm assuming he would relocate the U.N. to Utopia.

    President Bush's speech is filled with platitudes, but I don't know how much of what he says is through rose-colored glasses. The reality on the ground sure doesn't seem to reflect the "conventional wisdom" used to get us into Afghanistan and Iraq. I also am sure he feels the responsibility for his actions and the need to try and right the wrongs, to ensure his legacy if nothing else. I just find it ironic that he now appears hat-in-hand to the same international body we regularly thumb our collective noses at. More than anything, that's what makes me concerned about the road ahead; apparently, even the Bush Administration feels the need to ask for help so they must be worried.

    Yes, my parents were big on political discussions around the dinner table. :smile:
     
  3. Shelby

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,159
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    in the internet
    You might want to consider journalism as a profession. Those are amazingly concise yet thorough insights.



     
  4. SurferGirlCA

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,175
    Likes Received:
    148
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Los Angeles (CA, US)
    Awwww, thanks, Shelby; that means a lot coming from you. Unfortunately, I have much more fun dressing people than I ever could filling in for Rita Cosby. :tongue:
     
  5. Dr. Dilznick

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,662
    Likes Received:
    1
    Herpes > Ahmadinejihad's speech > Mo'Nique > Bush's speech > prison rape > Chávez's speech

    Chávez holding up the *gasp* Noam Chomsky book was goddamn comedy, though. Hugo be keeping it real with his "for the people" roots. He used their money to buy the paperback instead of the hardcover. And you thought liberals never showed fiscal responsibility with the taxpayers monies. He's not all that relevant currently, though, save for the oil in his country and even that ain't worth all that goddamn much. But that's beside the point. I don't care if it was the leader of the smallest, least powerful, least influential country in the world, his speech should've been received by nothing but a chorus of boos. The fact that it was received with applause tells you where the UN's head is at (see: directly up its own ass).
     
  6. ClaireTalon

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,947
    Likes Received:
    2
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Puget Sound
    He IS duly elcted, but his administration isn't replacing a corrupt regime. They are the successors of an administration that was headed by a more liberal party, which would have helped the country much more out of its international isolation. As it is now, he'll have to rely on unstable allies, and his open sympathy to western right-wing organizations and mid-east terrorists won't help him much in resurrecting Iran.

    He is a poor man's edition of Castro. Acts like an original Castro, but lacks the charisma of the original. Also, he shouldn't forget his most who his financially most powerful crude client is, and whether he really wants to trade them for the notoriously stingy Russians. His points aren't new, they have been addressed before often, and I don't think he will contribute a lot to the acceleration of a restructuring of the UN. But at least he sounded like he should, and said what suited him best.

    He was as predictable as always. I wonder if his PR people and authors have run out of materiel for his speeches and now use components and sentences of the old ones, mix them together to new speeches. I think it's probable.

    Yes, my parents were big on political discussions around the dinner table. :smile:[/quote]
     
  7. SurferGirlCA

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,175
    Likes Received:
    148
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Los Angeles (CA, US)
    I agree that his immediate predecessors weren't as fundamentalist (or provocative, for that matter), but I was referring to his identification with Khomeini and his followers who overthrew the Shah of Iran. I've heard him trot that comparison out on several occasions, always to point out that the U.S. doesn't like his government because our side "lost" in that revolution. For that matter, I dunno how "duly elected" Ahmadinejad and his party are, considering the lack of access to media/publicity for any one brave enough to challenge them during elections. I was just saying what HE likes to claim. As I said, they each have an agenda, and unadulterated truth/reality is rarely present. :rolleyes:
     
Draft saved Draft deleted