|
|
 |
|
|
|
#1
09-04-2006, 05:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
None of that really addresses the issue of why Bush and his administration are somehow supposed to be exempt from criticism. If I recall correctly, both DTS and I acknowledge that Clinton wasn't perfect by any means (hello, who would suggest that??). There absolutely should have been more outcry over Bosnia or Rwanda. So maybe critics should have fixated on genocide instead of blow jobs...but they didn't, did they? As a feminist, I definitely should have been more critical of Clinton. I was 19 when he left office, and what I've learned as I've grown older has helped me see and analyze his very real flaws. I hope that I won't let partisan allegiances sway my ability to rationally assess a person's leadership abilities now. Nevertheless, Clinton's errors do not in any way negate or change what's going awry with the current administration, just as Bush Sr.'s mistakes did not provide excuses for Clinton's, etc.
Even in the best case (i.e., no duplicity on the part of the administration, just ineptitude), when world leaders with tremendous power make avoidable mistakes that cost *lives*, it's a profound moral transgression. "Everybody makes mistakes" hardly excuses Iraq or Katrina. I also struggle with the idea that everything they've done is really just another mistake or misstep. Either that points to profound incompetence, or it suggests that they are willing to pursue their agenda at the expense of anyone who gets in their way. Neither is comforting, in my opinion. If evidence suggests, as plenty did, that going into Iraq in the manner they chose might be a mistake, that hiring a quarter horse judge to run FEMA might be a poor idea, etc, then why wouldn't you at least consider it? It's like they have preestablished views of how the world works, and they look at any conflicting evidence as a square peg that should be thrown out because it doesn't fit in the round hole...except the round holes aren't actually round anywhere but in their heads. Do hardcore liberals make the same mistakes? Of course they do. Does that somehow make it okay to write off or overlook the Bush Administration's record? Not by any means. 
|
|
#2
09-04-2006, 05:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#3
09-04-2006, 06:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Irishtrekker. Thanks for the Olberman u-tube.
Olberman's commentary was very interesting. After he claims Rumsfeld was touting criticism as being akin to a nonpatriotic stance, just like the Nazi's did, he then compares Rumsfeld with Joseph McCarthy, one of the most distasteful, power hungry people ever. This man had innocent people (yes old JOe knew they were not Commies) thrown in jail for his own political gains. McCarthy stirred up hate to further his own political future. Olberman also states that the US is barely a democracy?These comparisons are absolutely awful, just like he claims Rumsfeld statements were. Contradictions abound. He attacks Rumsfeld exactly like he thinks Rumsfeld made and an assault on the American people's distaste for the current administration. I find that ironic and humorous. And that is what Olberman is. Funny. But when he tries this high and mighty, self-righteous bull... It just does not go over. Especially when he does exactly what he claims Rumsfeld has done. Rumsfeld imo has screwed up royally in his underestimations. But comparing him with McCarthy... Thats disingenous and wrong. Rumsfeld is frustrated because he sees real threats to the US. He is NOT running for office or trying to further his own political might. The man is old and did not want the job until he was begged because of his expertise. Shame on Olberman. Stick with the comedy. He is so much better at that.
|
|
#4
09-04-2006, 07:11 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
2. Put the Dems in in '06. Gov't works much better when one party controls the WH and the other Congress. Look what a disaster having one party control all three branches has been the past 6 years. 3. Next time a man says God told him to invade Iraq, treat it like the crazy ass statement it is. (that one was just to get under your collar, RP.  )I'm enjoying reading everyone's thoughts, as always.
|
|
#5
09-04-2006, 07:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
And if your eye got poked out in this life. Would it be waiting up in heaven with your wife. - Crash Test Dummies
|
|
#6
09-04-2006, 07:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
My friends, so intelligent, so varied.
I also agree that this discourse is quite interesting, and I apologize for mixing up Sunni and Shia...my brain was working faster than my fingers. So, back to the issue at hand. I do not wish to dwell in past actions, though I'm certain they will have an effect for quite a while. It is quite apparent which administration involved the United States in current foreign adventures, but I don't want to devolve into a blame game. Current insights can not erase the past, only find "meaning" so as to redirect efforts. So, let's not discuss the recent past, however attractive that avenue may be. There is no way we can go backwards, and no use faulting ourselves for making wrong turns on that road to find us where we now are. History does not allow "do overs". Let us discuss the current situation, where we are here, now... Not how or why we arrived here. Find where we are now. The question that I ask is, where are we going? That is the issue. Back to poker. The cards have been dealt. They ain't great. Fold 'em? (Cut and run?)...out. Stay the course? (ante up)...all in. How would you play the hand? DTS
|
|
#7
09-05-2006, 03:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well, here is the answer, folks.
Seems to me that he's still trying to justify the present with 9/11. Not that there's anything wrong with fighting terrorists. It's about time to stop creating them. This hand has been played and played again. It hasn't been a winner...other than in "red states". Take a minute and do a news search on google. 1/3 of Iraq is now in the hands of the insurgents. Good luck with that. All the "emporer's spin" won't make it less. Dubbya's words: Bush reminds U.S. country is at war 2006/9 By MERRILL HARTSON, Associated Press Writer 15 minutes ago WASHINGTON - President Bush reminded Americans that the United States is a nation at war on the same day his administration proclaimed significant progress in the war on terror but said the enemy has adjusted to U.S. defenses and that "America is safer but we are not yet safe." Earlier today, the administration released an updated counterterrorism strategy. The White House said: "The United States and our partners continue to pursue a significantly degraded but still dangerous al-Qaida network." The White House also rejected Democrats‘ calls for replacing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. "It‘s not going to happen," presidential spokesman Tony Snow said. "Creating Don Rumsfeld as a bogeyman may make for good politics but would make for very lousy strategy at this time." "Years of failed Republican policies have made America less safe and less able to effectively fight terrorism, and Democrats are ready to take this country in a new direction," Democrats said in statement. The updated White House strategy came in the wake of the release of a new al-Qaida video over the weekend that raised concerns about the possibility of another attack as the fifth anniversary of Sept. 11 approaches. The tape featured an American — believed by the FBI to have attended al-Qaida training camps — calling for his countrymen to convert to Islam. "We‘ve seen tapes before. We‘ve seen these sort of releases right near Sept. 11," she said on ABC‘s "Good Morning America." The Department of Homeland Security had raised the terror threat for aviation to red — its highest level — in mid-August at the time the British, working with the United States, broke up what was purported to be a plot against international flights bound from Britain to the United States. The administration‘s Iraq war policy and terrorism strategy have come under increasing criticism in recent months, and Republicans and Democrats returning to Capitol Hill Tuesday for the fall season were set to debate the strategy as the midterm elections draw near. Five years after the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon , about a third of the American people think the terrorists are winning, according to a recent AP-Ipsos poll. In its updated terror-fighting strategy, the administration took credit for some successes, saying that "we have deprived al-Qaida of safe haven in Afghanistan and helped a democratic government rise in its place. It also said that "a multinational coalition joined by the Iraqis is aggressively prosecuting the war against the terrorists in Iraq." _"Terrorist networks today are more dispersed and less centralized. They are more reliant on smaller cells inspired by a common ideology and less directed by a central command structure." _"While we have substantially improved our air, land, sea and border security, our Homeland is not immune from attack." _"The ongoing fight for freedom in Iraq has been twisted by terrorist propaganda as a rallying cry." Bush has said on many occasions that the country must be prepared for a drawn-out battle against a new kind of enemy, and the new counterterrorism strategy released Tuesday says flatly that "the war on terror will be a long war." It says that among the strategies the United States must emphasize are making all sovereign nations accountable for what happens on their soil, strengthening existing coalitions and partnerships against terrorists and continue to develop more expertise in this area. One particular problem, it noted, is an "increasingly sophisticated use of the Internet and media" by terrorists and would-be terrorists, saying these tactics have allowed enemies of the United States to "rally support, proselytize and spread their propaganda without risking personal contact." It also maintains that terrorism "is not simply a result of hostility to U.S. policy in Iraq." "The United States was attacked on September 11 and many years earlier, well before we toppled the Saddam Hussein regime," it said. "Moreover, countries that did not participate in coalition efforts in Iraq have not been spared from terror attacks." "There will continue to be challenges ahead, but along with our partners, we will attack terrorism and its ideology and bring hope and freedom to the people of the world," the policy statement said. "This is how we will win the war on terror."
|
Hybrid Mode
