Presidential address on Irag

[JGREGORY]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

I Know that Kilgore he was honoring treaty obligations with Japan. <br /><br />My point being is that if we got involved earlier instead of saying it is just a Eurpeon problem do you thing things would have gotten as carried away as they did. Meaning we get involved at the same time Britian and France did. (forget France!!) Or maybe as soon as he started annexing Territory. What I am saying is We can not afford to be Isolationist It cost us alot in WWI and WWII. Do you think Japan would have Gotten away so easily on Dec. 7 had we been on a war footing then.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

SCO read it again. This is what it says<br /><br />"When George W. Bush was elected by the slimmest of margins in such a disputed way, conventional wisdom held that he would be a caretaker president, always struggling with his own legitimacy." <br /><br />No "liberal" lies here. Half the country questioned his legitamcy<br /><br />it then says: <br />Then Sept. 11 happened. It was President Bush's defining moment. His legitimacy was unquestioned. Foreign policy became pre-eminent. <br /><br />Believe me the Orange County Register is not a liberal newspaper.<br /><br />The truth. You can't handle the truth!

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

jgregory: If you remember our history, the United States was in no position to wage a war in 1939 (or 1936 when the Japanese invaded Manchuria)<br /><br />Our military was antiquated and using obsolete equipment.

 

[oddjob]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

Trout<br /><br />Revisionism is all that EDITORIAL! is.<br /><br />Put any liberal affiliate next to that editorial: CNN,ABC,CBS, Herald, Sentinal,Times etc.<br /><br />Or you can call it the Liberal Koran!

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

Revisionism? What revisionism? How is it revised?

 

[JGREGORY]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

Here we go again! <br /><br />That is my point. After WWI we tucked are head under our wing and let the world turn. After losing so many American boys in that war we wanted nothing to do with Europeon issues. Our Short sightedness cost us many more lives that "might" have been avoided or reduced. But do you not think that lesson is the reason why we have our policies today. We need to take a proactive approach especially with areas of the world that can activly effect our economy.

 

[SCO]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

Trout, come on now. You think that was written by a conservative??? or represents a conservative viewpoint??? Thats the way you are presenting it, and that is what I am disagreeing with. You want to take that piece as a fair and balanced objective summary of fact. Here are some of the false premises in that piece(ignoring the election stuff and patriot act stuff): <br /><br />"Still others(policies by Bush) were, quite simply, terrible."<br /><br />"The war on Iraq, however, was not adequately justified." <br /><br />Those are simply the writers opinions, no better than mine , yours , or Plywoody's.<br />I still think that piece was written by a liberal, but who cares. If it was a conservative, I disagree with his/her assessment.<br /><br />You do have me on a technicality, as it doesnt say the election was illegitimate. What it does is go out of it's way to bring up the liberal illegitimacy of election charge to the readers mind. I'll be more precise next time. Yes I can handle the truth. That you get this wound up over a goofy premise( that reasonable editorial writing conservatives disagree with iboats board conservatives) makes me think that we conservatives are starting to get to you.

 

[oddjob]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

Trout <br /><br />

Revisionism? What revisionism? How is it revised?

During the campaign between Mr. Bush and Al Gore, both men emphasized domestic policy. Pundits concluded that, for the first time since the end of the Cold War, foreign affairs would not dominate the presidency.

BullHockey!Only Gore relied solely on that. <br /><br />You weren't paying attention to the debate I guess. You let the media fill you in later right?<br /><br />You really should pay attention tr.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

First, Saddam tried to assasinate a US President. That alone is enough for me to declare war and remove him from power. Not doing so makes it open season on US Presidents and more broadly, the US.<br /><br />Next, he was a madman with a blood feud against this country. He had WMDs. He had friends that had no problem using them. So, for our own security we asked him to turn over the weapons. He wouldn't do that. Then we asked him to go into exile and he wouldn't do that either. So, being the sane people we are, we took him out before he could take us out.<br /><br />As President Bush said in his address to the nation, I am paraphrasing, "trusting in the sanity of mad men with dangerous WMDs is not a strategy and not an option"<br /><br />And then there are things like this which prove nothing per se but give you a sense of where that madman's head was<br /><br />

<br /><br />Oh, by the way, newspapers do not put people in office, the electerate put people in office.

 

[SCO]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

Ralph, is that Saddam in that poster?<br />Trout/ Wvit, this has been real, but I've got to go. I'll check in tomorrow if you want another shot at me. .

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

I SHOULD PAY ATTENTION?<br /><br />I am. And there are some scary things going on.<br /><br />Give me a break about Weapons of Mass Destruction. The Weapon of 9/11 was a box cutter, an airline ticket and lax immigration laws. The next attack will also be a simpe, yet devestating attack. No nukes. No Anthrax. Thats what we need to find andshut down. Not some third rate dictator surrounded by a bunch of yes men.<br /><br />I am sorry that I don't fall lock step into the my country right or wrong mind set.. I question Authority and their agendas. Always did, always will. I have major distrust for all politicians.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

Yes that is Saddam and the picture was taken in Iraq during the war.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

How much anthrax can you fit in your pocket and how many more people can you kill with it? Just because the first attack was brilliantly simple does not mean the next one would be more complex. In fact, it just insured that the follow up attacks would have to be bolder and more complex. I just don't get your logic. I am glad you did not fear them. I did and do. I could hardly be considered unsophisticated or easily duped. i for one am not willing to absorb any more hits before we act, unless, I can somehow insure only people who want to do nothing will be affected.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

Yes that is Saddam. He had nothing to do with the 9/11. <br /><br />He is playing on the sentiments of his muslim population to galvanize his own position. <br /><br />Kind of like how Ronald Reagan used Bruce Springsteens "Born in the USA" (without really listening to the lyrics)

 

[SCO]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

Sorry, I can't resist another post. If you distrust all politicians, then if sometimes they are trustworthy aren't you sometimes wrong to distrust them. For me, some I trust and some I dont. I acknowledge that I could be fooled. When Nixon went down, I remember the dogmatic support and final shock of one older fellow. Course we all think we're smarter than that...especially Wvit I dont take that poster as proof that he (Saddam) was involved in the 9/11 atrocity, but do find it amusing that you conclude that it was only opportunistic PR for him. How do you know that he wasn't involved?

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

Well, he wanted to prented like he had something to do with it he should be willing to pay the price of such asssrtions. And how do you know anyway what he was trying to do? <br /><br />Funny how you are so willing to stand up for one of the biggest mass murdered in history. I don't understand it at all. The graves would still be being filled today if you had your way. The threat would alsoi still ecist today. look how much chaos a few letter laced with anthrax caused. Don't your remember? It nearly crippled this country.<br /><br />Funny also how you just chose to ignore that he tried to assasinate a US President. I guess because it was GB you really don't care much.

 

[SCO]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

Ralph, is it just my imagination, or are we mopping the floor with these guys? This is like shooting fish in a barrel.

 

[oddjob]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

Bingo! Ralph, the end justifys their means...<br /><br />oh.. liberal..liberal..liberal..

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

I really want to know if they disagree with what has been done fuindamentally or if they are just so driven by their hatred of GW they will say or do anything, even at the Nation's expense.

 

[SCO]

Re: Presidential address on Irag

I can't imagine they could be consciously aware of that kind trade off.