In
So far the truth flowing out has confirmed the media, what media do you read
and watch? The media I read and watched today just confirmed he is a
hypocrite and liar and by the Whitehouse's own admission. And so blatantly
disguised as political spin, that they didn't even have a reason it should
be believed as anything but a lie to deceive the gullible public that still
support Bush.
I forget the comic that described how when Bush speaks, "Bush makes stupid
people think they are smart". I guess the downward support ratings show the
people must be getting smarter, so in a way Bush is the great educator he
promised his administration would be.
I've not seen anything in the media, any source, that has claimed FACTS,
I've seen plenty that claims it may or might or could or in their
opinion, but I've not see the hype media present anything as a "Fact"
that leads to your position.
Finger pointing comes when all guilty parties try to place the blame on
other guilty parties. Where the hell did you get your definition of finger
pointing?
To cut down on bandwidth, I mirror the reply kurt gave you except for the
"You are a lily-livered pansy" part. I would have probably said "You are
delusional and tragically uninformed".
And just maybe, you might find that I'm not delusional or tragically
uninformed. There are a lot of people, more than the 3x% the believe the
opposite of what the polls are showing - in fact, I've not run into more
than 10% that have the same opinion as the polls state.
Now if you reply, please try to be rational and understand, I am not
anti-American. I am seriously concerned that this Bush administration has
seriouly damaged our diplomatic ability to negotiate with forign nations,
created the impression to a large mass of the world community that we are
not much better than the people we invade and that has created enemies that
were at one time our allies, created a massive national debt that had to be
artificially masked by raising the national debt, weakened our armed forces
to the point that countries like North Korea and Iran are major threats to
gain MDA's that can't be properly managed.
I don't believe our connections with any reasonable country have been
damaged, but I do believe that the ones that WERE a threat before 9/11
now see us as a larger threat and have much greater concern - and, based
on their (the foreign) motivations and plans, they should be concerned.
Who has the blinders own? If you can truly explain where this administration
has been a success and not say by my displeasure and critical opinion I am
hurting the soldiers and the effort in Iraq when the Bush administration
sent them to war with inadequate equipment and dragged their feet with
cover-ups and excuses for years and still are?
Please reply.
You do know the American troops are still not properly outfitted?
Equipment was only a small issue, and yes, it could have been better,
BUT, look at who cut the funding, killed all the bills that would have
provided that needed equipment, it didn't have a thing to do with Bush.
We always needed things when I was in the service, and we either managed
to get them on our own or we did without, but we still got the job done,
it's always been like that - so I don't fault Bush, I fault all the
congress a$$holes that voted against the spending.
I don't see where there was any "cover-up" of the lack of resources, at
least I've not seen anything factual to point to it - heck, I've had
family over there, in the military, since Iraq started, and I've still
not seen anything to indicate there was a "cover-up" on equipment.
Plus can
you say draft? If the current strategies of lowering the enlistment
standards e.g. allowing tattoos visible (gang plea bargains maybe), upping
the age a person can enlist, allowing convicted felons, we are talking about
draft.
That's a funny one - that was the Democratic tactic used to scare kids
into voting for them - the Dem's put that out. None of the Military
people (including Recruiters) say that a Draft is even remotely likely
to start. I've seen a lot of political scare mongers stating that we'll
need a Draft, but it's not going to happen, not going to be put on the
table by the Republicans (at least as far as I can see).
Also please reply if you have a good opinion and not a spin on the above.
Done - thanks - hope you can see the mistake in your ABOVE.
BTW, Can you think of a US president that instigated or joined a war that
had not already attacked the sovereign USA or been a world threat already in
progress ever having an agenda that really was justifiably humanitarian?
For a "long" time we've not had wars, we've had "Conflicts", many of
them.
Please tell me which one of those wars was a success?
War, depending on how you look at it, is never a success.
When you are the greatest and strongest country in the world, you do not
start a war any intelligent person knows will never succeed.
Even Ghandi would not want people to sit back and die without fighting
back. Sometimes you have to take the fight to the enemy, and more so
after they hit you to test your resolve.
Because you are
the strongest, you win the right to negotiate. That is the only reason you
become the strongest in the first place, you want to have the negotiating
power to influence all your allies to convince the adversary to strike a
compromise that works for all.
And I would agree with you in most cases, it's best to talk it out, but
it just doesn't work in all cases. I can't believe you honestly believe
that "Talk" will solve ALL problems and not cost more lives.
No one wins in a war. The only way to truly
win a war is to have a Hitler mentality and eradicate your opposition,
otherwise you have only created a passion to breed a new opposition.
War is never the answer.
I agree with some, not the way, of what you said. War is always bad,
it's always a act of last resort (or should be), and it's an all or
nothing type of thing. In this case, I believe that it was justified,
and I believe it enough that I'm willing to let my oldest son join the
service this summer.
