WOW! Just when I thought the Bush administration couldn't get any lower...
- Thread starter pinelandpaddler
- Start date
Well, that was the most stupifying thing I've in some time. If God is on Bush's side, don't you think things would be going better in Iraq?
Eh, what do I know? I'm not a Bush fan, so I must be a baby-killing, terrorist-sympathizing, mentally-ill liberal, eh?
Bob,
King already said he thinks Kerry meant exactly what he said. Why does it need to be interpreted? How else can that statement be taken? You said in an earlier post that the administration was putting a spin on it. I disagree. Kerry is the only one spinning. He put his foot in his mouth and doesn't like the taste.
Steve
Yes, I'm sure that Americans would have been mesmerized by Al Bore and stood idly by while terrorists stormed the borders and raped and pillaged.
Believe me, Al Gore is no more my ideal President than John Kerry. The Democratic party does need some retooling in order to get in touch with its base (labor, blue collar workers, the middle class, etc...), but I'm not abandoning it. Well, we started out killing terrorists in their own lands-in Afghanistan were Osama bin Laden was, and Al quaeda based their operations from. That was actually going pretty well. Then the administration decided to send troops to Iraq, a place where none of the 9/11 hijackers had ever been anywhere near.
Also, one of the more interesting things that receives very little press is the huge difference between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden and radical Islam in general. Radical Islam grew partially out of a hatred for the dictatorships that cropped up in the Middle East after World War I. Extremists were angry that not only did these leaders wield absolute power, they also did not care much for adherence to the religious laws of the Koran. The groups that eventually formed Al quaeda were engaged in trying to overthrow regimes like Saddam's all over the Middle East before they ever set their sites on America.
Saddam Hussein would never have in a million years cooperated with bin Laden, knowing that it would eventually mean the end for him. Saddam was a torturing, raping, whoring, hard drinking thug, not a follower of Islam, and so were his henchmen. Granted, Al quaeda and Saddam's Baathist regime are both assemblies of some of the most vile scum on the face of the earth, we could have fought one (Al quaeda) and left the other alone because it posed no threat to us, and would simply be a waste of our time, energies, and resources.
The last time Saddam used chemical weapons was 1988. If it was such a concern, George Bush senior should have disarmed him during the first Gulf War, a war which, except for the premature pullout, was masterfully executed. Also, forgive me if I seem a bit cold, but Saddam using chemical weapons, or otherwise abusing his own people is of little concern to me. Dictators abuse their power, torture people, and kill their own citizens in every part of the world. The U.S. can't stop it all, and should be looking out for its own people first and foremost anyway. That being said its hard to keep a straight face every time a Conservative talks about how badly they want the Iraqi people to be free.
You misread my statement. I'm comparing the reaction of Islamist radicals to the reaction of the Mujahadeen during the conflict. The Russians were trying to make a simple land grab, I wasn't attempting to connect that to the U.S.
The plan is simply to not "stay the course." The course isn't working, it hasn't been working for a very long time. It's not going to work. I want a President who knows that you need a plan to end a war, that you can't just show up on an aircraft carrier in a flight suit and say "Mission Accomplished," and expect the other side to lay down their guns.
Like who?
And that has what to do with the war?
Is that you superlicious?
Seriously though, as much as I like a good debate, Ben please tell me if I'm hijacking the forums. The discussion of politics is banned on a lot of other forums, the reason for which is obvious, so if I'm out of line just say the world and I'll bow out of any future discussions.
I would be in favor of that policy here. Discussing politics does nothing but divide us. I like it much better when we share our mutual interest for the pines. There are plenty of other places to carry on political debates.
Badfish, I posted this thread in General discussion because, as its description says, we can discuss almost anything here. If people don;t want to discuss politics, then they need not post. On that note, your posts are well-reasoned and very impersonal. Keep up the good work.
Boyd,
Can't we have respectful conversations concerning things not pine-related?
Boyd,
Can't we have respectful conversations concerning things not pine-related?
Bob, there is nothing to interpret. That's the point. I think he meant if you don't do good in school you end up in Iraq. That is not my interpretation, that is what he said. If you press me however, I could interpret it as, "Hi, I'm John Kerry and I'm an idiot."
Steve
I was looking for him on Sunday. He could be anywhere.
Sure we want Osama's ass but he's just one man that wants to kill us. There are hundreds of thousands more.
Steve
I made it Pines related. Remember? I said we should have left Bob in the swamp.
Steve
Whatever Kerry meant to say, I don't care. He's not the Democratic party-he never was and never will be.
Bob, there is nothing to interpret. That's the point. I think he meant if you don't do good in school you end up in Iraq. That is not my interpretation, that is what he said. If you press me however, I could interpret it as, "Hi, I'm John Kerry and I'm an idiot."
My point is that when pressed to put down on paper just what he said, anyone would be hard pressed to show definitively that he meant to disrespect the troops. You can interpret it many different ways.
I had white castle jalapeno cheeseburgers tonite. Yum. I have not eaten there in about 5 years.
I saw a bunch of polish guys with guns in "Bed, Bath and Beyond" tonite. They said they were looking for Bed Linen. They heard he was in there.
Not exactly. The Spanish American war was a result of the US blowing up their own ships and blaming the Spanish. More men died from the canned food we gave them then from the enemy.
WW2 -Just saw on the war channel how the Brit general surrendered 130K men to Japan in Singapore even though the Japanese where just about out of supplies otherwise they would have not asked the Brits to surrender but killed just about every one of them.
Right when Patton was about to take France he ran out of Gas.
The Victory ships were welded so cheap at first they would split and sink to the bottom of the ocean.
Also released the bomb when the war was already over and released it on the least damaged civilian cities so we could judge how much damage the bomb created.
Biggest mistake is we did not listen to Hitler when he said he was going to do what he did. So we stuck our heads in the sand and the war was much bloodier in the end as a result. Why repeat history.
How better to fight Iran than through Iraq. We are bankrupting Iran like we did to Russia.
I should have stayed our of this one you guys argue to well.
My point is that when pressed to put down on paper just what he said, anyone would be hard pressed to show definitively that he meant to disrespect the troops. You can interpret it many different ways.
I had white castle jalapeno cheeseburgers tonite. Yum. I have not eaten there in about 5 years.
Gee Bob, I don't know. You must be talking about some other quote.
Steve
Well if a plan is "Hey, lets give a bunch of guys guns and tell them who to shoot." well then yeah, it was planned.
Steve