CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Mandela Calls Bush a Total Asshole
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mandela Calls Bush a Total Asshole

post #1 of 60
1/31/03 at 2:28pm
Thread Starter 
JOHANNESBURG, South Africa--Former President Nelson Mandela called President Bush arrogant and shortsighted and implied he is racist for ignoring the United Nations in his zeal to attack Iraq.

''One power, with a president who has no foresight and cannot think properly, is now wanting to plunge the world into a holocaust,'' Mandela said Thursday.

He also criticized Iraq for not cooperating fully with the weapons inspectors and said South Africa would support any action against Iraq that was supported by the UN.

''Why is the United States behaving so arrogantly?'' he asked. ''All that [Bush] wants is Iraqi oil.''

He accused Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair of undermining the UN and Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who is from Ghana.

''Is it because the secretary-general of the United Nations is now a black man? They never did that when secretary-generals were white."

Mandela said the UN is the main reason there has been no World War III and it should make the decisions on Iraq.

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer responded to Mandela's criticism by citing a letter by eight European leaders supporting Bush
Reply
post #2 of 60
1/31/03 at 2:41pm
I'm with him up until the white/black stuff. The reasons are clear.

Bush is trying to get (in this order): Political gain by winning a "war," the achievement of deposing Hussein, oil, and anything to keep people's minds off of domestic issues that he's handling so badly.

Blair simply wants to follow the US lead whenever possible and suck up to us.

But so far - at least in action - we've respected UN mandates, and until we stop doing that, I can't condemn Bush for something he hasn't done.

The puffed chest talk of "leading a coalition" is worrisome, undiplomatic, and worst of all dumb. Alas, it's also par for the course.
Reply
post #3 of 60
1/31/03 at 2:43pm
Thread Starter 
I think there is a TON of racism inherent in how conservatives view the UN. They always seem to have some problem that a tiny nation full of brown people gets a say in what the big white guys do.
Reply
post #4 of 60
1/31/03 at 2:50pm
Quote:
Mandela said the UN is the main reason there has been no World War III and it should make the decisions on Iraq.
this guy was in jail too long. that's why I'm against long prison terms; they come out more fucked up than when they went in.
Reply
post #5 of 60
1/31/03 at 2:58pm
Quote:
Conflict Lad:
I think there is a TON of racism inherent in how conservatives view the UN. They always seem to have some problem that a tiny nation full of brown people gets a say in what the big white guys do.
I think this is true, but I think Mandela's accusation that they're undermining him because he is black is wrong. I think Bush and Blair would be doing this if the Secretary-General was white.
Reply
post #6 of 60
1/31/03 at 3:01pm
Anyone have the full transcript of what Mandela said? Including the anti-semetism bit that was in there? Like I said in another thread the NY Times left out some stuff that the Johannesburg newspaper didn't. I just can't find the link.

Oh and I like how Clinton wasn't condemned as a racist for his bombing of Iraq when a non white was leading the UN and he choose not to listen to them.
Reply
post #7 of 60
1/31/03 at 3:02pm
Quote:
Conflict Lad:
I think there is a TON of racism inherent in how conservatives view the UN. They always seem to have some problem that a tiny nation full of brown people gets a say in what the big white guys do.
Well, to be fair, they say that about Europe as well, and that's where most of these conservatives come from, so...

It's just "Americanism:" Equal opportunity contempt for any other country in the world that has an opposing view on their affairs.
Reply
post #8 of 60
1/31/03 at 3:03pm
Thread Starter 
Shut up about Clinton already, you dung monkey.
Reply
post #9 of 60
1/31/03 at 3:08pm
Quote:
Conflict Lad:
Shut up about Clinton already, you dung monkey.
Hmmm..."shut up?" Isn't that restricting my right to free speech you so clamour we conservatives are taking away?

I'm gonna say things that tick you off.

Deal with it.

And by the way...

make better posts.
Reply
post #10 of 60
1/31/03 at 3:17pm
Yeah, I mean the guy is a terrorist, he was in jail for close to 30 years!

And he is the perfect example of how the Nobel peace prize is a pinko pussy award. Even Arafat got one. Now that I think of it, them two must be in cohorts. Yeah, them and Al Quaeda. Let's bomb Mandeland.

Mandela, why do you hate America?

(just in case, you do know that the above statements are ironic, right?)
Reply
post #11 of 60
1/31/03 at 3:31pm
Mandela has certainly changed his tune...

<a href="http://www.usembassy-israel.org.il/publish/peace/archives/2001/november/111307.html" target="_blank">From here:</a>

At a November 12th 2001 meeting with President Bush at the White House, Mandela said...

Quote:
...when the United States lost so many
people on the 11th of September. But I know that you have quite a
strong leader, and the people of the United States of America can face
disaster, and I'm sure that they will overcome this unfortunate
incident.
Quote:
And it would be disastrous if the President gave in to the call that
the army must now withdraw, before he has actually flushed out the
terrorists. That would be disaster. They will claim that they have
defeated the United States of America, and they will continue doing
the same thing. So I support him to continue until those terrorists
have been tracked down.
Reply
post #12 of 60
1/31/03 at 3:36pm
Not a change of tune at all. He's praising his efforts to stop terrorists.

Iraq has nothing to do with that whatsoever.
Reply
post #13 of 60
1/31/03 at 3:37pm
Quote:
CTDeLude:
Anyone have the full transcript of what Mandela said? Including the anti-semetism bit that was in there? Like I said in another thread the NY Times left out some stuff that the Johannesburg newspaper didn't. I just can't find the link.

Oh and I like how Clinton wasn't condemned as a racist for his bombing of Iraq when a non white was leading the UN and he choose not to listen to them.
I have a feeling Mandela could give two shits whether we have a Republican or Democrat in the office, if that's what you're implying. This is potentially a situation with far greater consequences to the rest of the world, so naturally he's gonna have more of an opinion on it.

Regardless, I think much of what he has to say is correct (regarding American arrogance and such), although the rationale he attributes to Bush sounds ridiculous to me. There are so many OTHER reasons Bush has to not listen to the UN that the race thing probably never even occurred to him.

Here's a more fleshed-out version of the story (no anti-semitic references, though):

<a href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030130/wl_nm/iraq_mandela_dc" target="_blank">http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030130/wl_nm/iraq_mandela_dc</a>
Reply
post #14 of 60
1/31/03 at 3:39pm
That was before Bush made an ass of himself and let greedy warmongers run the show.

Attacking Nelson Mandela, of all people, for not supporting this war is a new low and I'm positive all of the good people here are better than this.
Reply
post #15 of 60
1/31/03 at 3:45pm
Well, you must admit, mastronikolas, that the racism accusation was a big reach. It's unfortunate that it devalues some other things Mandela said about the matter.
Reply
post #16 of 60
1/31/03 at 3:45pm
We should always be able to question even the greatest men.

God knows what a crime it probably once was to question the men that were George Washington or Abraham Lincoln.

No man is above the critcisms of his fellow men.
Reply
post #17 of 60
1/31/03 at 3:46pm
Quote:
mikah912:
Not a change of tune at all. He's praising his efforts to stop terrorists.

Iraq has nothing to do with that whatsoever.
He changed his tune about the current President.
Reply
post #18 of 60
1/31/03 at 3:47pm
I don't think anybody here is attacking Mandela for not supporting the war. He isn't the leader of a nation, and he's entitled to his views, just like ANSWER or Not In Our Name.

What people ARE attacking Mandela for is his incredibly stupid comments. He's pulling out the race card for something that has nothing to do with race. It has to do with differing national interests, and that's it. Kofi Annan doesn't have the same priorities as the US, just as it would be if some Finnish guy was the head of the UN.
Reply
post #19 of 60
1/31/03 at 3:48pm
I think Mastronikolas just pulled the race card, like Devin before him...

Reply
post #20 of 60
1/31/03 at 3:52pm
Quote:
Burke:
Quote:
mikah912:
Not a change of tune at all. He's praising his efforts to stop terrorists.

Iraq has nothing to do with that whatsoever.
He changed his tune about the current President.
How so? He was strong in going after terrorism (at least, in the short term). Now he's being a blithering idiot about dealing with Iraq. Where's the tune change? Both cases, he's calling 'em like he sees them.
Reply
post #21 of 60
1/31/03 at 3:53pm
Quote:
about sorro:
What people ARE attacking Mandela for is his incredibly stupid comments. He's pulling out the race card for something that has nothing to do with race. It has to do with differing national interests, and that's it. Kofi Annan doesn't have the same priorities as the US, just as it would be if some Finnish guy was the head of the UN.
I think we're almost all agreed the race angle is stupid and beneath him.
Reply
post #22 of 60
1/31/03 at 4:10pm
Total agreement about the race issue. I have to agree with the view that many conservatives are pissed off that small "backwards" countries have an equal vote with that of the US, but it has little to do with race. It's more jingoism than anything else.

So, apologies if my post was not clear.

My disagreement is with claiming that he has changed his stance towards terrorism, because he doesn't support war in Iraq.

I think everyone knows that this war has nothing to do with terrorism.
Reply
post #23 of 60
1/31/03 at 4:15pm
Quote:
mikah912:
How so? He was strong in going after terrorism (at least, in the short term). Now he's being a blithering idiot about dealing with Iraq. Where's the tune change? Both cases, he's calling 'em like he sees them.
More Mandela from late 2001

Quote:
NEW YORK (CNN) -- President Bush's international stature got a boost Tuesday when former South African President Nelson Mandela said he was "tremendously impressed" with the U.S. leader.

"I left with the impression that we're dealing with a president who was misrepresented," Mandela, speaking from the Washington area via satellite, told CNN's Larry King. "He is doing very well."

"I'm tremendously impressed by President Bush, because many of us expected that he would sideline Africa," Mandela said. "But he has taken very courageous steps because he has met the leading African leaders. ... And I came out with the impression that the United States of America has got a president who is constructive in his approach, especially in regard to the problems of Africa."
Mikah, my point is that he has seemingly done a complete about face regarding Bush the second's character. Now, I realize that consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds but this is a bit on the extreme side. So he meets Bush and is tremendously impressed, is happy with Bush's war on terror and his dealings with the African continent. A little more than a year later, Mandela launches the most pitiable personal attacks imaginable up to calling Bush a racist, not one day after Bush asked for a ton of funds for African AIDS projects.

Either Mandela is an extremely poor judge of character, or his arguments are so weak that he needs the crutch of race-baiting to try to feebly get his point across.

Praising Bush's character, then dissing Bush's character are changes in tune.
Reply
post #24 of 60
1/31/03 at 4:21pm
Again, that's in regard to Africa.

You can talk about Bush's character regarding many issues. You can be "arrogant and shortsighted" regarding one thing and "courageous" regarding something else.

The Africa AIDS thing - though not particularly courageous - was clear-headed, well-thought out, and a good move for all involved. It's a drop in the bucket, but a good FIRST step.

Likewise, I like the hydrogen fuel cell initiatives, tho I need to see some followthrough before I am impressed in any way or accept that he's not sucking at the teat of oil.

But his way of dealing with Iraq? I'd agree with Mandela 100 percent. Rumsfield provided the arrogance. The lack of any detailed long-term plans is where the short-sightedness comes in.

The racial stuff - as I've already said - is just absurd. The rest is spot-on.
Reply
post #25 of 60
1/31/03 at 4:26pm
Quote:
mikah912:

You can talk about Bush's character regarding many issues. You can be "arrogant and shortsighted" regarding one thing and "courageous" regarding something else.
He said Bush couldn't "think properly." That covers a wide swath of character issues.
Reply
post #26 of 60
1/31/03 at 5:04pm
Quote:
Burke:
Mandela has certainly changed his tune...
Why shouldn't he? Bush has done a lot of things since November 2001, and not all of them have made him friends in the international community. Just because Mandela was impressed with him a year and a half ago, he should blindly support him now, regardless of everything that's happened?

Or can you only disagree with the President if you've always disagreed with him?
Reply
post #27 of 60
1/31/03 at 5:38pm
Quote:
CTDeLude:
Anyone have the full transcript of what Mandela said? Including the anti-semetism bit that was in there? Like I said in another thread the NY Times left out some stuff that the Johannesburg newspaper didn't. I just can't find the link.

Oh and I like how Clinton wasn't condemned as a racist for his bombing of Iraq when a non white was leading the UN and he choose not to listen to them.
For a person who often demands proof of what someone else is posting...you post a lot of random ass shit. Why not back up YOUR words with facts? Why not start listening to yourself?
Reply
post #28 of 60
1/31/03 at 5:43pm
You misunderstand me. Not once have I said Mandela shouldn't have changed his tune. I merely point out that he has. You can make up your own mind whether or not he really has had a change of heart regarding Bush's character.

I think his personal attacks at this point in time were pointless and self-serving. Who does Mandela think he is... the cover of a British tabloid?
Reply
post #29 of 60
1/31/03 at 5:53pm
Quote:
CTDeLude:
We should always be able to question even the greatest men.

God knows what a crime it probably once was to question the men that were George Washington or Abraham Lincoln.

No man is above the critcisms of his fellow men.
For someone who encourages the critiszing of great man...you sure dont critisize Bush very often...
Reply
post #30 of 60
1/31/03 at 6:51pm
I wonder though...would criticism of Nelson Mandela be met with irrational accusations of racism?
Reply
post #31 of 60
1/31/03 at 7:14pm
Quote:
Ned Fats:
Quote:
CTDeLude:
We should always be able to question even the greatest men.

God knows what a crime it probably once was to question the men that were George Washington or Abraham Lincoln.

No man is above the critcisms of his fellow men.
For someone who encourages the critiszing of great man...you sure dont critisize Bush very often...
I just happen to agree more often. But as I posted in the SOTU thread I don't agree wiht everything he does. Too much of the first half of his speech was pandering to soft hearted liberals.

That isn't my game.

As for the proof...alright Ill give it. But there was a reason why I asked if anyone else could find it. I obviously wasn't afraid of anyone else finding it so there you go.

All I know is that it was posted in a Johannasberg paper and quoted when I heard about it. Doesn't seem to be posted on the website yet but that's fine. You can choose not to believe me but as much as I'd like to be right all the time I never lie here to look better to anyone. There's no point. But in this day and age I guess you really can't take anyone on their word. So be it.

Proof sooner or later.
Reply
post #32 of 60
1/31/03 at 7:16pm
Quote:
The Kronos Newshour:
I wonder though...would criticism of Nelson Mandela be met with irrational accusations of racism?
Of course.

Let's start with my belief that the man is over-rated in the relevance of his words today. So whether he is praising Bush or not (which we see) either way it should be taken with a grain of salt because obviously he can change his tune.
Reply
post #33 of 60
1/31/03 at 7:17pm
Quote:
The Kronos Newshour:
I wonder though...would criticism of Nelson Mandela be met with irrational accusations of racism?
Possibly, go ahead and let's find out....
Reply
post #34 of 60
1/31/03 at 7:27pm
Ah but let me add that I do think he should be given a certain amount of regard for everything he has done and the people he has led.

We all have our bad days.
Reply
post #35 of 60
1/31/03 at 7:34pm
Oh....and I'm an infidel!
Reply
post #36 of 60
1/31/03 at 7:37pm
Quote:
CTDeLude:
Oh....and I'm an infidel!
BURN HIM!
Reply
post #37 of 60
1/31/03 at 7:41pm
That's what you do to a witch...you hang an infidel.

DUUUHHHH!

Reply
post #38 of 60
1/31/03 at 7:52pm
Quote:
Burke:
I think his personal attacks at this point in time were pointless and self-serving. Who does Mandela think he is... the cover of a British tabloid?
Yeah, that whole "free press" thing can be a real pisser when you're trying to drag a country into an unneccesary war for dubious motives.
Reply
post #39 of 60
1/31/03 at 7:53pm
Mandela is a politician just like any other, not he second coming of Christ.

It is politically beneficial to hold the "opinion" he does now, just like it was politically beneficial to hold the exact opposite opinion a year ago.

Here's a poem I wrote about politicians:

"Say nothing
say nothing
say nothing.

Hot air evaporates
and still they
say nothing.

Like on Espn,
When gatorade gurus
talk for hours,

but say nothing.

At least Washington
could pull out
X's and O's,

Make C-Span
Worth watching."

Crappy? Yes. True? More so.
Reply
post #40 of 60
1/31/03 at 8:07pm
Quote:
Dan Whitehead:
Quote:
Burke:
I think his personal attacks at this point in time were pointless and self-serving. Who does Mandela think he is... the cover of a British tabloid?
Yeah, that whole "free press" thing can be a real pisser when you're trying to drag a country into an unneccesary war for dubious motives.
My tongue is firmly planted in my cheek regarding the Brit papers. I mean, the Blair with bloody hands cover was sodding funny.
Reply
post #41 of 60
1/31/03 at 8:10pm
Quote:
Smirk:
Mandela is a politician just like any other, not he second coming of Christ.
When George Bush spends a couple of decades in prison for his political views, you let me know, k?
Reply
post #42 of 60
1/31/03 at 8:18pm
Quote:
Jacob Singer:
Quote:
Smirk:
Mandela is a politician just like any other, not he second coming of Christ.
When George Bush spends a couple of decades in prison for his political views, you let me know, k?
Jesus. I wasn't defending Bush in any way, or trully putting down Mandela. He is a great man and did great things, but some people diefy (sp?) him. He's a man, and a politician. What does jail have to do with being a politician.
Reply
post #43 of 60
1/31/03 at 8:38pm
All I'm saying is that I think Mandela is cut from a different cloth than the vast majority of American politicians, who wouldn't cling to their 'values' if they were facing prison time.

I don't think Mandela is the second coming either, but I respect him about ten to the tenth power more than I do any Bush or Clinton.

edited for spelling.

Reply
post #44 of 60
1/31/03 at 8:40pm
Quote:
Jacob Singer:
Quote:
Smirk:
Mandela is a politician just like any other, not he second coming of Christ.
When George Bush spends a couple of decades in prison for his political views, you let me know, k?
At least Bush hasn't given his tacit approval of this monstrosity...

<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2483215.stm" target="_blank">Plans afoot for Giant Mandela Statue</a>

<img src="http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38473000/gif/_38473621_mandela_size_150.gif" alt="" />
Reply
post #45 of 60
1/31/03 at 8:48pm
Thread Starter 
I'll take that over the rape of the Alaskan Wilderness for oil any day.

Reply
post #46 of 60
1/31/03 at 10:16pm
Jiminy Christos even the leader of the "Free Africa Foundation" said Mandela was out of line with his comments. And I didn't know he supported the likes of Fidel Castro and Khadafi. Hmmm.
Reply
post #47 of 60
2/1/03 at 12:12am
Quote:
Burke recruits...:
Quote:
Jacob Singer:
Quote:
Smirk:
Mandela is a politician just like any other, not he second coming of Christ.
When George Bush spends a couple of decades in prison for his political views, you let me know, k?
At least Bush hasn't given his tacit approval of this monstrosity...

<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2483215.stm" target="_blank">Plans afoot for Giant Mandela Statue</a>

<img src="http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38473000/gif/_38473621_mandela_size_150.gif" alt="" />
He didnt even give his tacit approval:

"A spokeswoman for Mr Mandela said he would not be involved the scheme directly but appreciated the "honour of the initiative". "

Which means absolutley nothing...cant you find better things to say about the man than that? Is that really a good reason that Bush is in any way a better man than Mandela?
Reply
post #48 of 60
2/1/03 at 12:18am
That illustration is hilarious.
Reply
post #49 of 60
2/1/03 at 1:09am
What do you expect? This guy married that brutal bitch Winnie Mandela. The guys bound to have a couple of screws loose.
Reply
post #50 of 60
2/1/03 at 1:16am
Quote:
Ned Fats:

"A spokeswoman for Mr Mandela said he would not be involved the scheme directly but appreciated the "honour of the initiative". "

Which means absolutley nothing...cant you find better things to say about the man than that? Is that really a good reason that Bush is in any way a better man than Mandela?
You read a lot more into my posts than is there.

Tacit means "Implied by or inferred from actions or statements", or in other words by not disapproving of the project by inference he approves of the project.

Sometimes, when people want to erect a 110 meter statue of your physical body, you just have to say, "fellas, I'm not sure this is a very good idea."
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Mandela Calls Bush a Total Asshole