09-15-2003, 08:26 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-15-2003, 08:34 PM by Occhidiangela.)
"You seem to be a living definition of jingoism."
You don't read much, do you? Like the last year's worth of my posts on this topic. What are the two questions that I find unanswered, to this day?
As to Iraq: 1. Why now? Answer not yet good enough for me. 2. Can you implement democracy at the point of the gun? Not that I've seen
As to Terror: The war was already on long before 2001, I have been in it. You know less than crap, in comparison. And as to how you break up a terror network, you don't do it by hiding your head in the sand and hoping to hell it goes away. You do it the same way you break up an organized crime ring: with information. And you sure as hell do it by being a sonofabitch. Why do you think RFK was killed? Because he was so nice as Attorney General?
By the same token, you don't waste billions on an illusion of security while harassing the public. Why wast the time and effort?
You don't like Bush's style? You don't like the fact that there is risk? Fine, you aint alone. Now, like I asked, what is your better idea that will work? Gee, it really aint the critic who counts, is it? Carp away, but carping is about as useless as the fish tastes.
"Clinton was almost impeached, over a fib about his sex life."
And the point is, pinhead, that he was not removed from office. The system in our Constitution worked. Got it? What do you not understand about that? He was in fact impeached by the House, if you bother to check the record, (as was Andrew Johnson) but he did not get tossed on his arse because, (neither did Johnson,) funnily enough, plenty of Senators did not find a knobber or two in the Oval Office and lying about it to be a high crime or a misdemeanor worthy of dumping the President. Even funnier, justice was served, since the blowhard behind wasting all of our time on that, Newt Gingrich, was sent packing soon after. Thank goodness, but I guess you missed that bit. That's OK, what do I expect from a "short attention span theater" point of view?
"While the current holder of that office goes about his way after deliberately lying in his address to the nation concerning Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and their acquisition of uranium from Africa."
Check your facts on the speech transcript. You might be surprised, I was. I find your "perfect knowledge before making a decision" standard to be naive in the extreme, but at the same time I still ask: Why now? The only answer I come up with is internal politics and complete lack of confidence in any international body that suffers from paralysis by analaysis.
Now, was that the only reason the US went to war? No. Was the entire WMD issue a key reason that bought internal support? Yes, IMO, without it not enough emotion is harnessed, and without emotion, some political actions are not feasible. Is our Senate still looking into that? Did they let themselves get caught up in the emotion, on both sides of the aisle?
Yes.
Were the International appeasers like the Canadians, French, and Germans, guilty of enabling behaviour in Iraq? Sure. I do not find it simple, not in the least, this topic, and am appalled at those who do.
But guess what, like the system is supposed to, it is working. The case is still open, and we have not heard the last of it in the halls of Congress: just watch. He may yet be brought up short on that, or the voters may toss in his towel next year, or he may do as any politician does, like your own PM's, and sell his program successfully.
You think GW Bush is a problelm for world peace? Why, then, did he just a few months ago and get the sign off from Putin on the next enormous nuke drawdown with the Russians? Yeah, read the news, Chicken Little, yet another step down over time, arsenals going down to one third of current levels. Do you have any idea how many nukes are going away?
"As for America taking over Canada, they have learned enough over the years to know that a military takeover is not the best way, when an economic takeover has all of the benefits with none of the detriments. They HAVE been working toward that end for over 50 years. Consider the ongoing dispute over softwood lumber, and the US refusal to abide by the WTO rulings. Consider the ban of the import of Canadian beef, long after the evidence showed it was not necessary."
Yeah, the Japanese taught us pretty well. :) What, you think Canada should be immune to globalization and politically charged nonsense in trade? What makes you all so special, your good air? Join the effing club, brother, we are all in that one together: pick the topic, pick the commodity, pick the week, and ask who holds the bond on your government loans.
Now, ask yourself why you need to consider Yamamoto's words: "We have awakened a sleeping giant." Osama did the same thing. I am not referring to America, we've been a world power since Manilla Bay and Santiago Harbor. I refer to waking up the "silent majority" who would rather be left alone by them damned ferrinners. You wake them up at your peril, and as some find out, to everyone's peril. The urban elites, of which you appear to be a card carrying member, still do not GET who the hell provides the political muscle to send America go to war when they are aroused.
None of them live in Washington, D.C.
You don't read much, do you? Like the last year's worth of my posts on this topic. What are the two questions that I find unanswered, to this day?
As to Iraq: 1. Why now? Answer not yet good enough for me. 2. Can you implement democracy at the point of the gun? Not that I've seen
As to Terror: The war was already on long before 2001, I have been in it. You know less than crap, in comparison. And as to how you break up a terror network, you don't do it by hiding your head in the sand and hoping to hell it goes away. You do it the same way you break up an organized crime ring: with information. And you sure as hell do it by being a sonofabitch. Why do you think RFK was killed? Because he was so nice as Attorney General?
By the same token, you don't waste billions on an illusion of security while harassing the public. Why wast the time and effort?
You don't like Bush's style? You don't like the fact that there is risk? Fine, you aint alone. Now, like I asked, what is your better idea that will work? Gee, it really aint the critic who counts, is it? Carp away, but carping is about as useless as the fish tastes.
"Clinton was almost impeached, over a fib about his sex life."
And the point is, pinhead, that he was not removed from office. The system in our Constitution worked. Got it? What do you not understand about that? He was in fact impeached by the House, if you bother to check the record, (as was Andrew Johnson) but he did not get tossed on his arse because, (neither did Johnson,) funnily enough, plenty of Senators did not find a knobber or two in the Oval Office and lying about it to be a high crime or a misdemeanor worthy of dumping the President. Even funnier, justice was served, since the blowhard behind wasting all of our time on that, Newt Gingrich, was sent packing soon after. Thank goodness, but I guess you missed that bit. That's OK, what do I expect from a "short attention span theater" point of view?
"While the current holder of that office goes about his way after deliberately lying in his address to the nation concerning Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and their acquisition of uranium from Africa."
Check your facts on the speech transcript. You might be surprised, I was. I find your "perfect knowledge before making a decision" standard to be naive in the extreme, but at the same time I still ask: Why now? The only answer I come up with is internal politics and complete lack of confidence in any international body that suffers from paralysis by analaysis.
Now, was that the only reason the US went to war? No. Was the entire WMD issue a key reason that bought internal support? Yes, IMO, without it not enough emotion is harnessed, and without emotion, some political actions are not feasible. Is our Senate still looking into that? Did they let themselves get caught up in the emotion, on both sides of the aisle?
Yes.
Were the International appeasers like the Canadians, French, and Germans, guilty of enabling behaviour in Iraq? Sure. I do not find it simple, not in the least, this topic, and am appalled at those who do.
But guess what, like the system is supposed to, it is working. The case is still open, and we have not heard the last of it in the halls of Congress: just watch. He may yet be brought up short on that, or the voters may toss in his towel next year, or he may do as any politician does, like your own PM's, and sell his program successfully.
You think GW Bush is a problelm for world peace? Why, then, did he just a few months ago and get the sign off from Putin on the next enormous nuke drawdown with the Russians? Yeah, read the news, Chicken Little, yet another step down over time, arsenals going down to one third of current levels. Do you have any idea how many nukes are going away?
"As for America taking over Canada, they have learned enough over the years to know that a military takeover is not the best way, when an economic takeover has all of the benefits with none of the detriments. They HAVE been working toward that end for over 50 years. Consider the ongoing dispute over softwood lumber, and the US refusal to abide by the WTO rulings. Consider the ban of the import of Canadian beef, long after the evidence showed it was not necessary."
Yeah, the Japanese taught us pretty well. :) What, you think Canada should be immune to globalization and politically charged nonsense in trade? What makes you all so special, your good air? Join the effing club, brother, we are all in that one together: pick the topic, pick the commodity, pick the week, and ask who holds the bond on your government loans.
Now, ask yourself why you need to consider Yamamoto's words: "We have awakened a sleeping giant." Osama did the same thing. I am not referring to America, we've been a world power since Manilla Bay and Santiago Harbor. I refer to waking up the "silent majority" who would rather be left alone by them damned ferrinners. You wake them up at your peril, and as some find out, to everyone's peril. The urban elites, of which you appear to be a card carrying member, still do not GET who the hell provides the political muscle to send America go to war when they are aroused.
None of them live in Washington, D.C.
Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete