Iraqi reporter throws shoes at Bush, calls him a dog

[chri'stina 190]

If Bush is as evil as some people like pretending, he would have had the man "accidentally" shot outside or something. You think someone like Saddam would just have joked and waved off his guards like it was no big deal? Puh-lease.

I don't think that's the point really.

When you've had your country's destiny determined first by a dictator then by a foreign power via a war that put the populations rights pretty far down on the list of priorities, I think people have the right to be angry.

I just don't get why people are so outraged at this - or why Iraqis should be expected to kiss Bush's feet in gratitude.

If he's not exempt from criticism in this and other countries, he surely isn't exempt from criticism by people actually living in Iraq.

I don't mean that in terms of the Iraqi(though I still don't see how living under Saddam could be better unless you were among the lucky), but of the outsiders of Iraq who rant about how evil and vile Bush is. I know people hate him and think he's made horrible decisions, I just think it goes beyond reality when people write certain things.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

If Bush is as evil as some people like pretending, he would have had the man "accidentally" shot outside or something. You think someone like Saddam would just have joked and waved off his guards like it was no big deal? Puh-lease.

I don't think that's the point really.

When you've had your country's destiny determined first by a dictator then by a foreign power via a war that put the populations rights pretty far down on the list of priorities, I think people have the right to be angry.

I just don't get why people are so outraged at this - or why Iraqis should be expected to kiss Bush's feet in gratitude.

If he's not exempt from criticism in this and other countries, he surely isn't exempt from criticism by people actually living in Iraq.

I don't mean that in terms of the Iraqi(though I still don't see how living under Saddam could be better unless you were among the lucky), but of the outsiders of Iraq who rant about how evil and vile Bush is. I know people hate him and think he's made horrible decisions, I just think it goes beyond reality when people write certain things.

True - but I find it very difficult to believe that many people seriously equate Bush with Saddam or Hitler, though those comparisons have been made in the past. He is a deeply divisive and unpopular leader - that's a given.

Its not that living under Saddam was "better" as much as how the war policy has affected people's lives. Given that pretty much everyone knows someone who was involved in 9/11 - its not a stretch to imagine how much of an impact the war has had on the civilian population.

There was also a survey (I think in '06) where Iraqis stated that they though that their lot was actually better under Saddam because at least they didn't have to worry about market bombings, sectarian violence, worrying about how to feed their families - or having basic utilities in their homes.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I don't mean that in terms of the Iraqi (though I still don't see how living under Saddam could be better unless you were among the lucky), but of the outsiders of Iraq who rant about how evil and vile Bush is. I know people hate him and think he's made horrible decisions, I just think it goes beyond reality when people write certain things.

How could you ever see this? Have you lived there then and now and in-between? Can you even begin to imagine? I sure don't think so.

Remember that Bush is the very guy that told the people he supposedly "liberated" in no uncertain terms that their civilian lives and blood ain't as valuable as ours. Not sure how you'd feel about a foreign leader that would bring such a message to you.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't mean that in terms of the Iraqi (though I still don't see how living under Saddam could be better unless you were among the lucky), but of the outsiders of Iraq who rant about how evil and vile Bush is. I know people hate him and think he's made horrible decisions, I just think it goes beyond reality when people write certain things.

How could you ever see this? Have you lived there then and now and in-between? Can you even begin to imagine? I sure don't think so.

Remember that Bush is the very guy that told the people he supposedly "liberated" in no uncertain terms that their civilian lives and blood ain't as valuable as ours. Not sure how you'd feel about a foreign leader that would bring such a message to you.

Well Abu Ghraib and the whole Blackwater fiasco certainly didnt do us any favors..

[HAL 9000 96]

We watched the US news and the Arabic satellite news....totally different stories. The things they were saying to him according to US news were very light and not so "harsh"...but to hear how the Arabic news stations portrayed the story...Yikes

While I do not like Prez Bush, I think throwing shoes at him was ridiculous. But I also think his "Goodbye" visit to Iraq was beyond ridiculous.

Oh its quite a symbolic act to be honest. Not that many US Presidents get to remember that one time some dude threw a shoe at him. Future generations will likely remember Bush as having gone to Baghdad at the end of his disastrous administration and getting shoes thrown at him.

Holy moly.

OK... after laughing I thought for a moment... what if the Iraqi dude had something dangerous in those shoes though?

Nevertheless, I'm with PD on this one. Hope he definitely got both his shoes back.

If he did the fault would have been with the presidents security.

I wonder would the shoe throwing moron have done the same to Saddam ?

i wonder if this story would get the same remarks about the shoe thrower getting his footwear back if the target was obama.

Absolutely. If Obama would willy-nilly and against international law invade a foreign country and get tens of thousands of it's citizens killed, the comment would be all the same.

I do see your point. Saddam was a kind and caring man who should have been left alone. He was never a danger to any other country and certainly never hurt any of his citizens.

Irrelevant. Specially while he was a buddy buddy with our own Government in the 80s.

[HAL 9000 96]

You think so? The way I look at it this journalist was making a political statement at someone who had basically destroyed his country.

The same country where had he tried a stunt like this (or even just tried to make a political statement) with Saddam in power, he and his family would have probably vanished from the planet...? That same ^{"basically destroyed"} country?

I wouldn't relativise the issue and I suspect the shoe thrower didn't either.

What kind of irritates me is why people expect gratitude from the population. We removed Saddam sure - but we put that country through years of almost civil war with a death toll many times that of 9/11. I tend to think that the people have a right to be angry.

Not according to the keypushers. Ironic they are so gung-ho about supporting this stupid war and seemingly have done little to actually participate in its maintenance. I assume their tune would be a little different in that case.

Time magazine.

[Teacher Mark 53]

Well he said they would be throwing shoes at the feet of their liberators! Oh wait, it was supposed to be roses. Maybe the local florist was out?

[HAL 9000 96]

I don't mean that in terms of the Iraqi (though I still don't see how living under Saddam could be better unless you were among the lucky), but of the outsiders of Iraq who rant about how evil and vile Bush is. I know people hate him and think he's made horrible decisions, I just think it goes beyond reality when people write certain things.

How could you ever see this? Have you lived there then and now and in-between? Can you even begin to imagine? I sure don't think so.

Remember that Bush is the very guy that told the people he supposedly "liberated" in no uncertain terms that their civilian lives and blood ain't as valuable as ours. Not sure how you'd feel about a foreign leader that would bring such a message to you.

People will live in the circumstances they live in. Hence, after 5 years of foreign occupation and countless reactive terrorist movements in their own country... there is a point to be outraged at the instigator of said rage. You can't liberate a country that doesn't express its sentiment as needing liberation.

[HAL 9000 96]

Oh its quite a symbolic act to be honest. Not that many US Presidents get to remember that one time some dude threw a shoe at him. Future generations will likely remember Bush as having gone to Baghdad at the end of his disastrous administration and getting shoes thrown at him.

This is what's so delicious about the whole thing to me. In Bush's mind, he was there to grace a "liberated" Iraq with his presence one final time, so that history could see him finally project his "peacemaker" image. Instead history will forever remember this visit as the time some Iraqi journalist threw shoes at him. I would say that it sums up this administration perfectly, but for it to be perfect there would have had to be clowns (and I don't mean Dana Perino), a kazoo orchestra, an army of cymbal-banging monkey toys, and these guys to even begin to capture the ridiculousness of the last 8 years.

Indeed. It is rather symbolic that this lamebrain will probably have, among many of the ungraceful images of his domestic Presidency, will likely have this symbolic image mean quite a lot about his administration.

So perhaps it will be the Iraqi people throwing roses at Obama after all. He is withdrawing the troops intelligently, or so we are told.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Oh its quite a symbolic act to be honest. Not that many US Presidents get to remember that one time some dude threw a shoe at him. Future generations will likely remember Bush as having gone to Baghdad at the end of his disastrous administration and getting shoes thrown at him.

This is what's so delicious about the whole thing to me. In Bush's mind, he was there to grace a "liberated" Iraq with his presence one final time, so that history could see him finally project his "peacemaker" image. Instead history will forever remember this visit as the time some Iraqi journalist threw shoes at him. I would say that it sums up this administration perfectly, but for it to be perfect there would have had to be clowns (and I don't mean Dana Perino), a kazoo orchestra, an army of cymbal-banging monkey toys, and these guys to even begin to capture the ridiculousness of the last 8 years.

That sounds about right.

So perhaps it will be the Iraqi people throwing roses at Obama after all. He is withdrawing the troops intelligently, or so we are told.

We'll see. I (obviously) voted for Obama, but I'll be watching him with just as critical an eye. I don't expect (or necessarily want) the Iraqis to throw roses to Obama, I'll be happy if he's just able to get us the hell out of there and maintain some level of stability while doing it.

Yep.

[HAL 9000 96]

So perhaps it will be the Iraqi people throwing roses at Obama after all. He is withdrawing the troops intelligently, or so we are told.

We'll see. I (obviously) voted for Obama, but I'll be watching him with just as critical an eye. I don't expect (or necessarily want) the Iraqis to throw roses to Obama, I'll be happy if he's just able to get us the hell out of there and maintain some level of stability while doing it.

Not that it really matters since its more stupidity... but you can bet that the sore losers will still consider it being a blind follower to still be critical of an Obama administration. Then they b!tch about accountability in government. With some people you just can't please.

All I could really care to see in Iraq is that we get our troops out and we retain some kind of ability to work with the Iraqis as international equals so as to help them if they ever ask for our help.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Not that it really matters since its more stupidity... but you can bet that the sore losers will still consider it being a blind follower to still be critical of an Obama administration. Then they b!tch about accountability in government. With some people you just can't please.

I welcome that argument. Because my first reply to anyone criticizing how open an Obama administration is, is going to be "where was your concern about accountability during the Bush administration? Why all of a sudden did it become so important to you?

Not that I would dismiss any criticisms outright. I expect the Obama administration to be 100% accountable for their actions. If he falls back on this promise, I'll be right there with all the wing nuts demanding answers. (unlike the wing nuts, however, I'll hopefully be asking more intelligent questions than demanding his **real** birth certificate, etc)

I agree with you there - though I'm more disgusted with Tony Blair than I am with Bush, as Blair insisted on staying in the job while the best of his cabinet resigned around him.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I agree with you there - though I'm more disgusted with Tony Blair than I am with Bush, as Blair insisted on staying in the job while the best of his cabinet resigned around him.

I'm disgusted with Blair because there were so many opportunities where he could have stepped up and said "enough is enough." But he continued to stay in lock-step with Bush, even after it had become clear that he'd been duped. (and quite frankly, I'm only giving him the benefit of the doubt that he'd been duped, because I honestly don't believe British intelligence were that stupid.) It's really a shame because I think Blair could have made a huge difference in how things turned out. He certainly could have kept Britain and Europe's hands a lot cleaner.

Well they weren't stupid - the Downing St. Memo is quite clear on that.

A lot was expected from Blair, certainly given the high idealism with which he went into the job after years of Tory misrule, only for him to end up as corrupt as the rest. My gut reaction is that Obama will turn out much the same, though on the basis of the campaigns - he was miles better than the opposition.

Edited December 15, 2008 by Paul Daniels

[HAL 9000 96]

Not that it really matters since its more stupidity... but you can bet that the sore losers will still consider it being a blind follower to still be critical of an Obama administration. Then they b!tch about accountability in government. With some people you just can't please.

I welcome that argument. Because my first reply to anyone criticizing how open an Obama administration is, is going to be "where was your concern about accountability during the Bush administration? Why all of a sudden did it become so important to you?

Not that I would dismiss any criticisms outright. I expect the Obama administration to be 100% accountable for their actions. If he falls back on this promise, I'll be right there with all the wing nuts demanding answers. (unlike the wing nuts, however, I'll hopefully be asking more intelligent questions than demanding his **real** birth certificate, etc)

All I could really care to see in Iraq is that we get our troops out and we retain some kind of ability to work with the Iraqis as international equals so as to help them if they ever ask for our help.

Word. Honestly the best we can hope for is that it doesn't completely collapse into tribal warfare. Anything above and beyond that should be considered a success.

Ditto on both accounts.

On the irrelevant part it really is more of the same sore-loser-itis. If it came to that... I'm sure we'd be asking based on logical things to base accusations instead of lame whining based on being unequivocally misled as to what is an issue based on reality.

[HAL 9000 96]

I agree with you there - though I'm more disgusted with Tony Blair than I am with Bush, as Blair insisted on staying in the job while the best of his cabinet resigned around him.

I'm disgusted with Blair because there were so many opportunities where he could have stepped up and said "enough is enough." But he continued to stay in lock-step with Bush, even after it had become clear that he'd been duped. (and quite frankly, I'm only giving him the benefit of the doubt that he'd been duped, because I honestly don't believe British intelligence were that stupid.) It's really a shame because I think Blair could have made a huge difference in how things turned out. He certainly could have kept Britain and Europe's hands a lot cleaner.

Well they weren't stupid - the Downing St. Memo is quite clear on that.

A lot was expected from Blair, certainly given the high idealism with which he went into the job after years of Tory misrule, only for him to end up as corrupt as the rest. My gut reaction is that Obama will turn out much the same, though on the basis of the campaigns - he was miles better than the opposition.

Yeah I wouldn't condemn intelligence gathering on either side of the pond on those issues.