P2P-Zone  

Go Back   P2P-Zone > Political Asylum
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Political Asylum Publicly Debate Politics, War, Media.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 17-08-04, 09:28 AM   #1
Repo
Registered User
 
Repo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 123
Default They Just Don't Get it...

The problem with the Bush/Cheney Administration is that they just don't get it. They don't get the war on terror, they don't get how to make America safer, they don't get what makes one a terrorist and most importantly they don't get why they are making the world a more dangerous place, especially for Americans. George W. Bush and Dick Cheney just don't get it...

Senator John Kerry made the statement, "I believe I can fight a more effective, more thoughtful, more strategic, more proactive, more sensitive war on terror that reaches out to other nations and brings them to our side and lives up to American values in history." Dick Cheney's response was "America has been in too many wars for any of our wishes, but not a one of them was won by being sensitive." Dick Cheney just doesn't get it. Cheney doesn't mention being "effective" or "thoughtful" or "strategic" or "proactive" all of the things the Bush Administration wasn't, he only lifts the words "sensitive war on terror" from John Kerry's sentence, leaving out the vital part, "that reaches out to other nations and brings them to our side." As usual Dick Cheney is misleading Americans. The only thing the Bush Administration does good is mislead. Bush and Cheney just don't get it...

First a little history, America's war on terror started the day the first President Bush stationed troops in Saudi Arabia to watch over Saddam after the first Gulf War. Osama bin Laden didn't want the American military in Saudi Arabia for two reasons, the first reason was he saw American troops propping up the Saudi Royal family's dictatorship, a regime he wanted to overthrow; the second reason was he didn't like the American military in the religious land of Mecca. The embassy bombings, the Cole and 9/11 may never have happened had the U.S stayed out of Saudi Arabia. Presidents should be sensitive to people around the world because if they are not their actions may come back to kill us all...

Dick Cheney mocked John Kerry's statement. So let's look at the statement. Kerry said he would, "fight a more effective, more thoughtful, more strategic, more proactive, more sensitive war on terror that reaches out to other nations and brings them to our side and lives up to American values in history." As for the Iraq war, it surely could have been more effective, thoughtful and strategic. Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld rushed into a war with weak information, no exit strategy and far too little troops. They acted tough on a go it alone plan with a coalition made up of token countries that now bleeds American blood. When Kerry says, he will lead a, "more sensitive war on terror that reaches out to other nations and brings them to our side," he means he will have the tact that Bush lacks to bring the traditional allies to America's side...

By invading, occupying and installing a puppet government in Iraq, Bush and Cheney have turned many moderate Muslims around the world into bin Laden supporters if not out and out terrorists and they, Bush and Cheney have made the world a much more dangerous place, especially for Americans but they just don't get it. Rightwing conservative ideologues like Bush and Cheney are not sensitive to world opinion, Muslims, women, gays, minorities, or the environment, they're just not sensitive. While acting tough and not being sensitive may show bravado, it is not in the best interest of Americans. Bush calling himself a compassionate conservative is just another attempt to mislead the American public. Bush and Cheney just don't get it. America needs a president that is sensitive to world leaders and world opinion, Bush and Cheney may not get it but the American public does get it...
Repo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-08-04, 12:57 PM   #2
JackSpratts
 
JackSpratts's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 10,013
Default

"The country committed itself to a 'war on terrorism', but still pays billions of oil dollars to the Saudis, knowing that those dollars fund all the groups with whom America purports to be at war. Fifteen of the nineteen 9-11 hijackers were Saudi, but no one wants to talk about that. Can you imagine the reaction if the hijackers had been Iranian or North Korean?

I think if America were a person, a psychiatrist would classify her as being in profound psychological denial.

I don't know how you can trust an employer like that."

- Assasin John Rain, from Barry Eisler's new thriller Rain Storm.
JackSpratts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-08-04, 09:31 PM   #3
Mazer
Earthbound misfit
 
Mazer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Moses Lake, Washington
Posts: 2,563
Default

Sorry Repo, I'm not scared of terrorists. Maybe you think I should be but I actually feel quite safe here in the USA, and among others I have the current administration to thank. You can go on worrying everyday that the sky might fall, but that's no way to live is it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Repo
As for the Iraq war, it surely could have been more effective, thoughtful and strategic. Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld rushed into a war with weak information, no exit strategy and far too little troops. They acted tough on a go it alone plan with a coalition made up of token countries that now bleeds American blood.
I think by contrast to previous wars you will find that this one was the most careful, least bloody war we have engaged in. Civilian casualties were minimal and American soldier deaths were far below the administration's projections. Nobody can go into a war and come out clean, but this time around we made our best possible effort to do so in our two and a quarter centuries' history of warfare, showing more compassion to our enemies than any conquering army has ever done throughout history, and having achieved a level of training and planning that no other military force on Earth is capable of equalling. If you can point to an example of a better war, fought by us or any other country, then I'm open to your ideas. Failing that, tell us about the strategies you would have used instead if you had been in charge of the invasion. I'd love to know why you think the war was undermanned and poorly planned.
Mazer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump






All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© www.p2p-zone.com - Napsterites - 2000 - 2024 (Contact grm1@iinet.net.au for all admin enquiries)