Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How Bush has screwed up the War against Iraq Senator Byrd is a pontificating blowhard. Perhaps he sides against force because his real goal is the destruction of Israel, given his KKK past. Had David Duke spewed this nonsense everybody would be up in arms that he's pushing for Israel's demise but Byrd gets a free pass on his worthless opinions.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How Bush has screwed up the War against Iraq It's obvious when you don't have a valid retort Ian because you always take the low road. If you would have bothered to read the comments instead of just taking the Hannity line you would have seen that all Byrd is asking for is for us to take a step back and really look at what we are doing here, Democrats and Republicans alike. Glad you are showing your true colors on the board.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How Bush has screwed up the War against Iraq Why should we heed the advice of a former Klan member? The guy has no credibility as far as I'm concerned. It's not like he made a "youthful indiscretion" like taking pop's car out for a drive when he was underage and getting into a fender bender. The guy was freaking burning crosses on the front lawns of blacks, Jews, and Catholics. How you can hold him up in high regard is beyond me.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How Bush has screwed up the War against Iraq How many founding fathers owned slaves? Mr. McCracken immediately dismisses Thomas Jefferson's opinions because of that? Byrd was majorly wrong on race relations a long time ago and has admitted as much. So was Strom Thurmond, so was Jesse Helms. The point was that Sen. Byrd's speech about the war on Iraq (the topic of this thread) was on the money. If you are interested in discussing the merits of that let me know.
Even his Pappy's CIA doesn't agree with Bush's assessment of Iraq: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20021009/ts_nm/iraq_usa_bush_dc_9 If Dumbya can't even get the CIA to cook up some "intelligence" to support his case, maybe it's time for him to just go out and buy some of those little green plastic army guys if he wants to play soldier.
Re: Re: Re: How Bush has screwed up the War against Iraq I don't think the war is necessarily popular, but I don't think its unpopular. For the same reason selling most other conflicts is often necessary. My biggest problem, though, is someone claiming that because people are discussing whether or not we should go to war, then war preparations are a failure. That's utterly flawed logic. Pet peeve alert: all history is "past". Sorry, I couldn't help myself. But "media-led hatred" of Arabs? C'mon. Outside of CBN and the 700 Club, that just doesn't wash. I wholeheartedly disagree. As has been pointed out, the numbers are somewhat lukewarm on unilateral action on Iraq (if you consider somewhere between 45% and 60% lukewarm), but they're an absolute slam dunk when you add in a few allies and Congressional approval. Well, I know you're in Chicago, but the New York Times has been beating the "Why Iraq?" drum for months now. Howell Raines considers it his duty. As I pointed out in another thread, support for ousting Iraq from Kuwait was at 37% in November, 2-3 months after they invaded Kuwait. 37%! And this was during the massive troops and equipment deployment, when people knew war was coming.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How Bush has screwed up the War against Iraq Why should we heed the advice of a former drunk coke-fiend?
Re: Re: Re: Re: How Bush has screwed up the War against Iraq So what is it then? Are you saying people don't care? That rather contradicts your assertions that it is one of the top priorities of the American people, right? Fair enough. You forgot to mention Fox News. Anyway, who have been the bad guys in action films ever since the '73 oil embargo and especially after the Iranian hostage crisis? Soviets, to be sure. But after them, it's been Arabs. Arabs are almost always evil oil princes or terrorists. The US media's bias towards Israel and against Arabs in reporting that conlflict is well known. And, of course, even if you discount that Coulter nutjob, we still have the spectacle of conservative news commentators trying to convince us that there is something uniquely violent about Islam (as if Christianity has been any better). Sure, Falwell was more blatant about it in his remarks. He didn't hide his main thesis behind euphemism and innuendo. At the same time, he did articulate what many more responsible media commentators think but are usually too smart to actually come out and say. You're entitled to your opinion. I say that given the other factors that should have 90% of the country baying for war, the fact that half the country is saying "Whoah, waitaminnit..." is a tremendous failure for Bush. If it was his Pappy's original propaganda team selling the war, we'd have troops in Baghdad by now. I'm looking at national news media sources, especially TV where most Amercians get their news. Until VERY recently no serious questions were being asked let alone dissent raised. So much for the sovereign American people, then, huh? Support for Gulf War skyrocketed once it was clear that we'd win and that it would be quick and generate few casualties. Bush had better hope his war will be the same.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How Bush has screwed up the War against Iraq Yeah really, where do they come up with this stuff?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How Bush has screwed up the War against Iraq I'm saying people aren't necessarily blood thirsty for this war (and they shouldn't be - it is war). But that in and of itself doesn't mean that it is unpopular. As for me asserting that its on the of top priorities of the American people, I don't believe that I did. I think many Americans consider it important, but as I mentioned on the other thread, it's certainly not the most important thing to most Americans (even those that wholeheartedly support it). Hollywood has pretty much strayed from this stereotype in the 1990s. If anything, Arabs have been notable for their absence in Hollywood films. (I recall The Siege and True Lies being the notable exceptions). Just like Jewish control of the media is well known, right? True enough. Although I would put a "some" before "conservative news commentators". This is the same propaganda that you excoriate quite often. So shouldn't you be praising Bush for not resorting to that? You may think he's grasping at straws, but at least he's not pissing into incubators or whatever it was that your always on about. Well, the selling didn't start in earnest until recently, so this wouldn't be surprising.
Sadly, I fear you are incorrect here. Underestimating the American public's short memory is always a good bet. I loved how the CIA came out today and basically said, "Hm...he was kinda lying about all that evidence the other night." Makes one wonder how much control the Younger really has over certain agencies.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How Bush has screwed up the War against Iraq Joe, No Christian leader is saying that "martyrdom" by killing Arabs will secure a place in heaven. Whether Islam has been "hijacked" (as Bush puts it) or has been subjected to political devices, it's foolish to ignore that there are some serious problems with the practice of the religion when people are willing to slam three airliners full of people into buildings in the name of Allah.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How Bush has screwed up the War against Iraq Just like there is something wrong with a religion that launched the Crusades, the wars of the Reformation, the Inquisition, pogorms, etc.? There is nothing unique to Islam about religiously motivated violence. Look at the Muslims and the Jews duking it out in and around Israel, for example. Or the Christians and Muslims in the Balkans recently. Or the continuing existence of anti-semitism in America. The main difference is that the nominally Christian areas of North America and Europe have been thoroughly secularized through consumer capitalism and free, state-provided education and so now Christianity isn't strong enough to motivate most people there to ANY action, let alone violence. Most people in the USA and Europe are much more interested in what Alan Greenspan or their stock broker have to say than what their priest or preacher tells them and I don't know too many people who would crash a plane into a building in the name of Monsanto or IBM. this is not to say that capitalism doesn't breed its own types of violence, of course.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How Bush has screwed up the War against Iraq Yeah, right. Christians all over America and Western Europe are just waiting to break free of the bonds of secularism so they can wreak war and havoc on non-believing infidels. You can go back to the crusades if you want, or the KKK, or the pogroms or the shameful position of the Serbian Orthodox Church during Milosevic, or other twisting of Christian beliefs to legitimize or remain silent on a violent purpose. But that's not the point. The point is that "radical Islam" is, today, a motivating force for war and violence that is actively being advocated by Islamic leaders. It is silly to deny it and ascribe the impression of Islam held by most Americans as solely the result of media manipulation. Here's a link borrowed from Spejic's thread on Kuwait. Note that one of the martyrs was sufficiently secularized that he recently bought a Porsche. http://www.arabia.com/afp/news/mideast/article/english/0,10846,307424,00.html?IE=H1