Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Other Topics > Politics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 11-13-2005, 08:00 PM
Cyrus Cyrus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Tundra
Posts: 1,720
Default Fantasies and dreams

[ QUOTE ]
Iraq violated the armistice multiple times and the even tried to assassinate Bush41 when he went to Kuwait.

[/ QUOTE ]
The part about armistice violations is mostly hogwash. The Iraqis have only fired at American and British airplanes when the latter were bombing Iraqi installations. The UN had authorised two no-fly zones over Iraq, in the North and in the South, but there was never any authorisation for airplanes monitoring the no-fly restriction to bomb Iraqi targets! (not except in self defense.) The American and British pilots were bombing everything they characterized as "threatening" or a "military target", including hits on civilians, as it turned out. The Iraqis exercised their legitimate right of self-defsne and fired on those airplanes (by the way, hitting almost nothing and nobody). This was characterized by the American side as a vilation of armistice!

As to the part about Saddam organizing the assassination of Dubya's dad, it belongs in the realm of fantasy. The president simply claimed it happened -- and we are supposed to believe it happened. If that was the reason for the royal mess in Iraq, then it was a fabricated, moronic reason.

[ QUOTE ]
You are DREAMING. Clinton did no such thing.

[/ QUOTE ] What exactly are you disputing? That Bill clinton went after the REAL anti-American terrorists, such as bin Laden and his ilk? You would be totally wrong if you thought so.

Are you disputing that Clinton went after those who bombed the USS Cole and the World Trade Center? He caught them for crying out loud. He put them in jail. They are still there!

[ QUOTE ]
I'll believe Freeh and others.

[/ QUOTE ]
What "others"? Most of those working in the intelligence community and law enforcement agencies have come out in praise of what Clinton did -- which was what an adult president would do anyway, unlike the moronic policy of Dubya and the neo-cons who rule over America since 2000.


I don't know what agenda Freeh is on. All I know is the historical record. I could provide you with details, if you are interested and willing to examine that with an open mind.
[ QUOTE ]
I read a story where many Kurds admire Israel.

[/ QUOTE ]Your nanny read that story to you? You're basing your assessments on "stories"? Have you ever, at all, studied the political and cultural History of the Kurds? You obviously know little of the subject, yet you are ready to support extremely important geostrategic changes in the region ("the Kurds should have their own country" etc) on the basis of half-digested info and "stories". Did you know, for instance, that the Kurds have been, for centuries, the most brutal and ferocious soldiers among the Ottoman armies? They were something like that the Gurkhas are to the British!
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 11-14-2005, 11:26 PM
Blarg Blarg is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,519
Default Re: Disgusting Comment by President Bush

This is standard operating procedure for anyone in power, especially if he has the crutch of a war to lean on for his popularity.

Of course it's despicable, but there's nothing particularly unique about it. And in the case of Bush types, there's of course nothing surprising about it.

Anybody who thinks the currency of politics is truth is severely misguided. The currency of politics is power, and truth is only an occasional handmaiden when convenient. Certainly it's no kind of goal or standard.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 11-15-2005, 12:00 AM
Lestat Lestat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 383
Default Re: The Bottom Line

<font color="blue"> You can not be intellectual honest and accuse Bush43 of lying about Iraq without calling Kerry, Kennedy, Edwards, Pelosi, and other democrats liars as well. </font>

I am not a political junkie, so someone please point out where I'm wrong. I hear the above defense OVER and OVER and OVER again and I'm sick of it!

IF I understand it right, what these guys did (Kerry, Kennedy, Edwards, Pelosi, and other democrats), was vote to give the president AUTHORIZATION to use military force if he DEEMED it NECESSARY!!!!

That's a FAR cry from voting in FAVOR of the Iraqi war. They looked at this same (FAULTY) intelligence and put their trust in the president to make the right decision. This DOESN'T mean the right decision was to rush into war!

Btw- I am a republican who happens to think that this guy will likely go down as the worst president in US history. This guy is truly a moron who's studity is only equaled by the democrats who can't seem to defend themselves against such transparent lies and deflections from what really happened.

As to your assertion:

<font color="blue"> The USA made the correct decision to invade Iraq because Hussein violated the armistive NUMEROUS times and he tried to assassinate Bush41 in Kuwait in 1991(?). </font>

Saddam Hussein was in violation and DID need to be dealt with. But this in no way should've been made a higher priority than fighting the REAL and more IMMEDIATE war on terror, and aprehending Bin Laden and dismantling the Al-Quada network. Our focus was completely taken off of where it needed to be and in the process we have single handedly created a recruiting boom for our enemy. I'm sure Bin Laden himself couldn't be more pleased.

<font color="blue">If the new Iraqi govt can get control of their country soon, I would like the USA to take out Iran.........
</font>

Since diplomacy doesn't seem to be in your vocabulary, wouldn't just nuking everything south and east of Europe achieve your goals much quicker?
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 11-15-2005, 03:53 AM
Cyrus Cyrus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Tundra
Posts: 1,720
Default You are drunk

[ QUOTE ]
If the new Iraqi govt can get control of their country soon, I would like the USA to take out Iran.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are drunk with power -- and so is the whole American administration. Drunk with post-Cold War omnipotency.

This is not completely bad, though. We just may get to see the final act sooner, that is all. See, my take is that hybris begets entropy.

...Provided we ride through some rough spots along the way, of course.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 11-15-2005, 05:53 AM
ACPlayer ACPlayer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Foxwoods, Atlantic City, NY, Boston
Posts: 1,089
Default Re: The Bottom Line

[ QUOTE ]
F I understand it right, what these guys did (Kerry, Kennedy, Edwards, Pelosi, and other democrats), was vote to give the president AUTHORIZATION to use military force if he DEEMED it NECESSARY!!!!


[/ QUOTE ]

... and they did it so that the President could use this authorization to convince the UN -- it was sold by the prez that if we are not all speaking with one voice nothing will get done at the UN (of course the UN was not swayed by that piece of silliness).

Of course this does not excuse the vote -- it was dumb, stupid, political cowardice, naive etc, etc. The only think dumber was what W did with the vote and the powers he had.

Robert Byrd's speech on that vote was absolutely stellar and on the mark.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 11-15-2005, 11:34 AM
Lestat Lestat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 383
Default Re: The Bottom Line

<font color="blue">Robert Byrd's speech on that vote was absolutely stellar and on the mark. </font>

Do you know where I might be able to read this speech?
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 11-15-2005, 01:24 PM
andyfox andyfox is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,677
Default Re: The Bottom Line

"Do you think that overthrowing Hussein was discussed during meetings in previous administrations?"

I would imagine it was. But it wasn't acted upon and, therefore, there was no duplicity in explanation about why it was done. Had it been done, I'm, sure there would have been such duplicity. As I've posted many times, this is par for the course.

"Also do you believe that Bush only started being concerned about terrorism as of 9/11?"

Seems that way, from the testimony of several individuals.

"Was the Clinton administration ever duplicitous?"

Of course. For a while, Clinton was blaming Bin Laden for anything and everything without any supporting evidence. Governments lie all the time, especially when they go to war. It makes sennse logically that they would, and the empirical evidence is substantial and overwhelming.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 11-15-2005, 01:40 PM
andyfox andyfox is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,677
Default Re: The Bottom Line

Just a few months before using the mushroom cloud imagery, Powell testified that Hussein had no effective way of delivering any WMDs. Nobody expected a nuclear attack on America from Iraq. The mushroom cloud was a scare tactic. If it was an opinion, it was ill-informed. It was calcaulated statement designed to muster up support for the war.

Powell himself was not happy with the info. he brought to the UN. He told an aide that he was being instructed to make the presentation, let's make the best of it.

Richard Clarke and his assistant assert that Bush pressured them to find a connection between Iraq and 9/11. The Bush administration at first denied that Bush had even met with Clarke, then had to back down and said they did indeed meet.

Bush on finding the WMDS: Interview of the President by TVP, Poland, 2003-05-29:

Q: But, still, those countries who didn't support the Iraqi Freedom operation use the same argument, weapons of mass destruction haven't been found. So what argument will you use now to justify this war?

THE PRESIDENT: We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories. You remember when Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said, Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons. They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two. And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them. [end]

Criticism of government policy is not giving aid and comfort to the enemy. It is the essence of democracy, as the president pointed out in his Veterans Day speech. He then ignored the implications of that observation. Anyway, have Pelosi et al really said the insurgency is winning? (And if they have, wouldn't those be just opinions?) I'll look for quotes, any you can provide would be appreciated.

I'm not critical of our military performance which was exemplary. The regime fell immediately. What I am critical of is the willful ignoring of post-occupation planning. All of the things that happened--infrastructure collapse, looting, problems with disbanding the army, failure to enact martial law, etc.--were analyzed and planned for, yet those analyses and plans were ignored.

One can be in favor of haaving gone to war and still recognize that the administration oversold its case and underprepared for the occupation. You want to run the kitchen, you need to be able to stand the heat. Harry Truman said the buck stops here. This administration is trying to pass the buck by accusing its critics of being disloyal. It's shameful behavior.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 11-15-2005, 04:56 PM
ripdog ripdog is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Seattle area
Posts: 305
Default Re: The Bottom Line

[ QUOTE ]
<font color="blue">Robert Byrd's speech on that vote was absolutely stellar and on the mark. </font>

Do you know where I might be able to read this speech?

[/ QUOTE ]

This one?


Published on Wednesday, March 19, 2003 by CommonDreams.org
Arrogance of Power
Today, I Weep for my Country...
by US Senator Robert Byrd
Speech delivered on the floor of the US Senate
March 19, 2003 3:45pm



I believe in this beautiful country. I have studied its roots and gloried in the wisdom of its magnificent Constitution. I have marveled at the wisdom of its founders and framers. Generation after generation of Americans has understood the lofty ideals that underlie our great Republic. I have been inspired by the story of their sacrifice and their strength.

But, today I weep for my country. I have watched the events of recent months with a heavy, heavy heart. No more is the image of America one of strong, yet benevolent peacekeeper. The image of America has changed. Around the globe, our friends mistrust us, our word is disputed, our intentions are questioned.

Instead of reasoning with those with whom we disagree, we demand obedience or threaten recrimination. Instead of isolating Saddam Hussein, we seem to have isolated ourselves. We proclaim a new doctrine of preemption which is understood by few and feared by many. We say that the United States has the right to turn its firepower on any corner of the globe which might be suspect in the war on terrorism. We assert that right without the sanction of any international body. As a result, the world has become a much more dangerous place.

We flaunt our superpower status with arrogance. We treat UN Security Council members like ingrates who offend our princely dignity by lifting their heads from the carpet. Valuable alliances are split.

After war has ended, the United States will have to rebuild much more than the country of Iraq. We will have to rebuild America's image around the globe.

The case this Administration tries to make to justify its fixation with war is tainted by charges of falsified documents and circumstantial evidence. We cannot convince the world of the necessity of this war for one simple reason. This is a war of choice.

There is no credible information to connect Saddam Hussein to 9/11. The twin towers fell because a world-wide terrorist group, Al Qaeda, with cells in over 60 nations, struck at our wealth and our influence by turning our own planes into missiles, one of which would likely have slammed into the dome of this beautiful Capitol except for the brave sacrifice of the passengers on board.

The brutality seen on September 11th and in other terrorist attacks we have witnessed around the globe are the violent and desperate efforts by extremists to stop the daily encroachment of western values upon their cultures. That is what we fight. It is a force not confined to borders. It is a shadowy entity with many faces, many names, and many addresses.

But, this Administration has directed all of the anger, fear, and grief which emerged from the ashes of the twin towers and the twisted metal of the Pentagon towards a tangible villain, one we can see and hate and attack. And villain he is. But, he is the wrong villain. And this is the wrong war. If we attack Saddam Hussein, we will probably drive him from power. But, the zeal of our friends to assist our global war on terrorism may have already taken flight.

The general unease surrounding this war is not just due to "orange alert." There is a pervasive sense of rush and risk and too many questions unanswered. How long will we be in Iraq? What will be the cost? What is the ultimate mission? How great is the danger at home?

A pall has fallen over the Senate Chamber. We avoid our solemn duty to debate the one topic on the minds of all Americans, even while scores of thousands of our sons and daughters faithfully do their duty in Iraq.

What is happening to this country? When did we become a nation which ignores and berates our friends? When did we decide to risk undermining international order by adopting a radical and doctrinaire approach to using our awesome military might? How can we abandon diplomatic efforts when the turmoil in the world cries out for diplomacy?

Why can this President not seem to see that America's true power lies not in its will to intimidate, but in its ability to inspire?

War appears inevitable. But, I continue to hope that the cloud will lift. Perhaps Saddam will yet turn tail and run. Perhaps reason will somehow still prevail. I along with millions of Americans will pray for the safety of our troops, for the innocent civilians in Iraq, and for the security of our homeland. May God continue to bless the United States of America in the troubled days ahead, and may we somehow recapture the vision which for the present eludes us.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.