Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by Own Goal Hat-Trick, Nov 11, 2005.
From cnn.com frontpage...
this oughtta be good...
What, again? I guess the last time didnt take root. Maybe he needs some miracle-gro.
The last time Dubya had a "major" new speech on Iraq, it was just another stump speech. I'm thinking of a cow chewing its cud.
Prepare yourselves for another 9/11 reference, or 2 or 3.
Bush still wants us to believe that AQ wanting to destroy us is the same thing as having the ability to actually do so.
We've been treated like ignorant hillbillies since day one.
He really is crap on selling his ideas, even if they are sound.
Probably because we voted as such
Nevermind if they aren't!
I don't have time to go into any detail, but I really agree with you here. There was a great case to be made for the war in Iraq (human rights, our ongoing involvement there, etc.) and Bush spectacularly failed to make it.
I agree here as well. The case that should have been made wasn't. The case that was made was wrong.
If BushCo had not of tied terror and WMD to Iraq, there was little chance he would have gotten any support to do so. They had to strike quickly while they had momo and they knew it.
When Moore was on the emmys and said "Shame on you Mr. Bush" (for invading Iraq), I was outraged. Thats when I really started gettnig involved in politics and in hindsight, it looks like he was right.
And you called yourself liberal? You imperialist ********.
Using the millitary to spread democracy is a long held liberal belief.
I would say that that is a great oversimplification. E.g. the PNAC statement has never been confused with being a liberal document.
Actually, all of the authors are former liberals. Which is why guys like Pat Buchannan cant stand the Neo-Cons
I don't mean to be naïve here, but when were Cheney and Wolfowitz and Rummy liberals?
Long held? How long are you talking about?
Of the group, only Wolfowitz is a true neo-con. The rest are just power hungry ass holes.
VBD, this has been a liberal belief since Wilson was president.
I agree with your post except I wouldn't go as far as to say 'great' case; I would say 'reasonable' case.
Curious, did anyone think Bush wasn't going to defend the war?
Of course Iraq is the central point in this war as a result of the US invading. Maybe this was the strategy. Fight the war in Iraq and not Afghanistan since they felt maybe cause the Soviets didn't do well there that the US wouldn't either so they figured Iraq would be an easier place to fight it even though they knew AQ wasn't in Iraq at the start of the war??
I am almost only half-kidding about that. How sad is that?
I have said this before, I think if a similar case were made about Iraq as was made concerning Serbia then that would have been more reasonable. I do think you could draw enough similarities to make a case for war.
Now I wonder if Iraq's fate shouldn't be a similar one to the former Yugoslavia. Make a couple of states out of the area, Kurds, Sunni's and Shia's all with their own nations. Afterall, it is proven that none can really co-exist with each other without some sort of iron fisted ruler over them.
Or maybe a confederation of the 3 under one Flag??
Ideas people, we need ideas!
Wilson had never ever advocated invading a country of his dislike to spread democracy like GWBush did. He merely stated that America could not remain neutral in the World War, that's all. That's totally different from what GWBush are practicing today: go to a war of his choice or preference even if he has to lie about it to do so and in the process killing tens of thousands of human lives on both sides.
Does he ever make these speeches while surrounded by people who aren't military personnel?
I have wondered that too. Of course I don't recall Bubba making too many in front of military people though. He may have, I just don't recall many.
Of course today being Veterns Day and with the country at war it makes sense that he is in front of Military People more to show support. Nothing is done that doesn't have an ulterior motive.