Bush's America asks: Why us?
POSTED BY: Ghoulman
UPDATED: Tuesday, October 5, 2004 12:49
VIEWED: 18384
PAGE 4 of 10
Quote:
Originally posted by Succatash:
I am appalled at how many Americans, Christians no less, are glad we invaded Iraq. The love of Jesus, turning the other cheek - where did that go?
My non-Christian friends are the ones opposed to the war. It's kind of strange.
It's not so strange. American Christians are so used to having the power of the majority on their side that they forget that the teachings of the Nazarine aren't about getting the biggest hammer to slam your foes with.
Ask any Anerican Non-Christian, especially one who belongs to a small sect. Ask Wiccans, Pagans, Deists. American Christians take it for granted that they're right because there are more of them than anybody else. It's the same reason Americans are so lousy at learning foreign languages, I think. -- Why bother, when 2/3rds of your continent speaks English?
As usual, "The Simpsons" got it right:
Reverend Lovejoy: "You see Homer? You have many friends, be they Chrisian, Jewish, or Miscelaneous."
Apu: "Hindu. There are 350 million of us, you know."
Reverend Lovejoy: "That's just super."
"You can't enslave a free man. The most you can do is kill him." -- Robert A. Heinlein
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by beenwithawarriorwoman:
If we were all about supporting democracy in Iraq, the election process would have candidates who actually represented public opinion in Iraq, not just candidates who represented American ideas.
As usual, Tom Leher said it best:
For might makes right/until they've seen the light/they've got to be protected/all their rights respected/till somebody we like can be elected.
Of course, he was talking about Vietnam. Nothing to do with our current difficulties, no siree!
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." -- Georges Santayana
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dacute1:
Saddam may have hurt his people but lets look at some of the environmental policies that Bush has put in place...
Wow, You did not just say this. You are more tolerant toward Saddam than President Bush. That's messed up.
Quote:
You're confusing me, first is was because of what Saddam was doing to his people. Then it was because they had weapons of mass destruction. Now it's a war on terror?
There can only be one reason to go to war? All of the above sound like a good reason to me. And it was from the start a "War on terror".
Quote:
Can you do me a favor and enlist in the armed forces then, 'cause I really don't want my family memebers to die because Bush started another war. Thanks.]
I have the utmost respect for the men and women in the armed service. I knew a few myself. But to join the service is a *choice* each and every one of them made. And don't believe Kerry's lies, Bush will not reinstate the draft, it wont happen.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Wow, You did not just say this. You are more tolerant toward Saddam than President Bush. That's messed up."
I'm not more tolerant toward Saddam I'm merely pointing out that Bush doesn't seems to give a rats ass about our natural environment. Something that I feel is right- hense conversation what's right to someone isn't necessarily right to another.
"There can only be one reason to go to war? All of the above sound like a good reason to me."
Which is why you bought each one every week Bush decided to come up with a different reason for war. He used all of them, at different times. And none seem to hold up.
"And it was from the start a "War on terror"."
Former workers of the Bush administration will tell you, Bush had plans to go to war BEFORE Sept. 11. It DID NOT start because of the War on terrorism, the war on terrorism started with the bombing of Afganistan, which I'm not so sure I agree with. Someone not gunho probably could have found a better way to retaliate, I'm not sure how. But Al Quida and Saddam are not connected.
"I have the utmost respect for the men and women in the armed service. I knew a few myself. But to join the service is a *choice* each and every one of them made. And don't believe Kerry's lies, Bush will not reinstate the draft, it wont happen."
They've hired for the draft this year for the first time since the 70's, and that didn't come from Kerry.
Kaylee: Wash, tell me I'm pretty
Wash: Were I unwed I would take you in a manly fashion
Kaylee: 'Cause I'm pretty?
Wash: 'Cause you're pretty
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Boy, I sure can't wait until this War on Terror is over and we don't have terrorists anymore. It'll be great, just like how that War on Drugs made it so we can't buy drugs now...
Oh, and that draft thing? It's in Congress now. Being voted on. And my guess is, since it's not getting a lot of coverage, it won't matter half a hump who gets elected, both of 'em support it. Here's an article:
http://www.bushdraft.com/proof.html
This site's obviously anti-Bush, but Kerry would be making a much bigger stink over it if he planned to shoot it down.
And the part that really kills me is that while all our soldiers are over seas fighting the damn war, Bush is back home cutting their benifits! Does this seem right to you?
And don't get me wrong, I'm not a Kerry supporter, but before you get going on his flip-flop thing (taken DIRECTLY from the Bush camp's vocab book) take a look at the bills in question. Congressional bills have all kinds of things on them, so when Kerry voted against something, you need to look at what else he was voting against. It's conveinient to call it a flip-flop, but in some cases he was also voting against medicare cuts or social security things.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dacute1:
Former workers of the Bush administration will tell you, Bush had plans to go to war BEFORE Sept. 11. It DID NOT start because of the War on terrorism,
If you believe that then I have some beachfront property in Arizona to sell you.
Quote:
I'm not more tolerant toward Saddam I'm merely pointing out that Bush doesn't seems to give a rats ass about our natural environment. Something that I feel is right- hense conversation what's right to someone isn't necessarily right to another.
You may not notice it, but by your posts you downplay the atrocities committed by Saddam and speak more loudly about how Bush is wrong than Saddam. That is being more tollerant toward Saddam than the President.
Quote:
They've hired for the draft this year for the first time since the 70's, and that didn't come from Kerry.
John Kerry is using the "Bush will reinstate the draft" in his campaign. I heard it from his mouth.
Update: john Kerry now doesn't believe Bush will reinstate the draft.
Further Update: John Kerry now denied he said anything at all.
If you dont think Kerry is a flip flop, then you are in denial. Even the far left liberals see that in Kerry.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
JimNightshade, I'm seeing a lot of opinion here from you... which is good, I'm all about people having strong opinions. But what I'm not seeing is a lot of support. I don't want to have to take your word for it. I want to see it myself.
"Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by dacute1:
Former workers of the Bush administration will tell you, Bush had plans to go to war BEFORE Sept. 11. It DID NOT start because of the War on terrorism,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you believe that then I have some beachfront property in Arizona to sell you."
Where do you get that? I've seen articles that say the same thing dacute's saying... so where's your info?
I ask in the interest of political debate and knowledge and all that good stuff... I'm not just ribbing you. I'm interested.
On a further note (and forgive me dacute1 for speaking out of turn) I think Saddam's atrocities speak for themselves. It's not neccessary to debate what he did or did not do and how right or wrong it was - that information is all obvious. Bush, on the other hand, straddles a political line we all like to rip at.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"You may not notice it, but by your posts you downplay the atrocities committed by Saddam and speak more loudly about how Bush is wrong than Saddam. That is being more tollerant toward Saddam than the President."
I'm going to end with because we can go back and forth for days without saying anything new.
As already mentioned we all know that Saddam is a bad man. He's a horrible person that's done horrible things to his people. I've never disagreed with that which is why I don't feel that we have to keep talking about it. We agree.
But the first post I responded to was about how "Bush is right". Yes, Saddam is very very wrong but I don't see Bush as being right either. One, his foreign policy of "You're either with us or F*!@ you" isn't helping matters, he's going to war under false pretenses (more on that look at earlier posts), he doesn't understand the separation between church and state, and he doesn't care about the environment nearly as much as digging for oil (bills passed include removing fines for not cleaning up).
Kaylee: Wash, tell me I'm pretty
Wash: Were I unwed I would take you in a manly fashion
Kaylee: 'Cause I'm pretty?
Wash: 'Cause you're pretty
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JimNightshade:
:If you dont think Kerry is a flip flop, then you are in denial. Even the far left liberals see that in Kerry.
See, I have a problem, and that is that every time people mention "flip-flopping", I see it as just a simple change of mind based on new information. Granted, I don't like all the political posturing, but both candidates are doing it in disgusting amounts, so let's focus on something more real.
I agree with the war in Iraq. I remember watching the news during school, all the things that led up to the decision to go into Iraq without UN support. While I probably wouldn't have done it exactly the same way, if you would have asked me at the time, I would have said yes, we need to go forward with this.
I stand by that.
It's all the things happening now that I disagree with. We went in, we got Saddam, and we made a big mess. The problem is, we're still making a mess. Bush pretends like nothing is wrong. He's announced publically at least once that I know of that we've won the war in Iraq when we clearly haven't. There is no new great democracy in Iraq and soldiers are still dying at an alarming rate. It is time to stop making a mess and take some responsibility. It is far, far past time to go back to the UN and ask for world opinion. To admit we need help with this situation and that it is not our place to be imposing on these people now that they have a chance to be free. And if they choose an un-American future, so be it. As long as they get to choose. That freedom, whatever the end form, will reduce terrorism and it is the purest form of American belief.
This is what I believe and, according to what people say about Kerry, I have done a flip-flop. The thing is, I don't see how that's wrong. Things are different now than they were then and so there has to be room for change. Bush doesn't change. He pretends and he lies to justify his means to a questionable end. He says the same things over and over again and I know (an a non-Christian American) he doesn't respect those different from him, as shown by the blatant religious overtones of the Republican Convention.
When it comes to Iraq, I like this quote, given recently by Kerry in a speech:
"Think about it for a minute. Consider where we were and where we are. After the events of September 11, we had an opportunity to bring our country and the world together in the struggle against the terrorists. On September 12th, headlines in newspapers abroad declared 'we are all Americans now.' But through his policy in Iraq, the President squandered that moment and rather than isolating the terrorists, left America isolated from the world." --John Kerry, Speech to NYU Read it: http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2004_0920.html
I believe it is the current policy in Iraq more than anything that has split America from the world. We cannot continue like we are still justified at this time, whether we were then or not.
So does someone want to tell me why this flip-flop is bad?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Former workers of the Bush administration will tell you, Bush had plans to go to war BEFORE Sept. 11. It DID NOT start because of the War on terrorism.
dacute1
If you believe that then I have some beachfront property in Arizona to sell you.
JimNightshade
There you go with that "belief" stuff again. No, I DON'T believe it, but the people who've made these allegations have proof- including 19,000 pages of documents, eyewitness accounts from Department Secretaries, generals, CIA officers, diplomats etc. Since belief seems to play a major role in your psychology and you don't believe left-wingers, how about these assessments? (Compare to Bush's spinning)
President Bush:
"Our strategy is succeeding. Iraq is on the path to democracy and freedom."
Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE)
"The worst thing we can do is hold ourselves hostage to some grand illusion that we're winning. Right now, we are not winning. Things are getting worse. The fact is, we're in trouble. We're in deep trouble in Iraq."
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ)
"We made serious mistakes right after the initial successes by not having enough troops there on the ground, by allowing the looting, by not securing the borders."
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC)
[T]he situation in Iraq is going to get worse before it gets better, [the administration has done] a poor job of implementing and adjusting at times. We do not need to paint a rosy scenario for the American people...."
Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN)
[It's] "exasperating for anybody look at this from any vantage point."
General William Odom (ret), former NSA head
"Bush hasn't found the WMD. Al-Qaida, it's worse, he's lost on that front. That he's going to achieve a democracy there? That goal is lost, too. It's lost…. Right now, the course we're on, we're achieving Bin Laden's ends." This is far graver than Vietnam. There wasn't as much at stake strategically, though in both cases we mindlessly went ahead with the war that was not constructive for US aims. But now we're in a region far more volatile, and we're in much worse shape with our allies."... "I've never seen [tensions] so bad between the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the military. There's a significant majority believing this is a disaster."
General Joseph Hoare (ret), former Marine Commandant, head of US Central Command:
"The idea that this is going to go the way these guys planned is ludicrous. There are no good options.... The priorities are just all wrong."
Jeffrey Record, Professor of Strategy at the Air War College
"I see no ray of light on the horizon at all. The worst case has become true..."
W. Andrew Terrill, Professor at Army War College's Strategic Studies Institute, top Iraq expert
"I don't think that you can kill the insurgency ... The idea there are x number of insurgents, and that when they're all dead we can get out is wrong. The insurgency has shown an ability to regenerate itself because there are people willing to fill the ranks of those who are killed... Most Iraqis consider us occupiers, not liberators."
Martha Jo McCarthy, whose husband is on National Guard duty in Iraq
"Everyone supports the troops, and I know they're doing a phenomenal job over there, not only fighting but building schools and digging wells. But supporting the troops has to mean something more than putting yellow-ribbon magnets on your car and praying they come home safely.
I read the casualty Web site every day and ask myself, 'Do I feel safer here?' No. I don't think we can win this war through arrogance. Arrogance is different from strength. Strength requires wisdom, and I think we need to change from arrogance to solid strength."
-------------------------------
AND NOW FOR SOME PROPAGANDA
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60725-2004Sep29.html
The Bush administration, battling negative perceptions (Yeah, it's all a "perception"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME