Re: Bush goes Nuclear!

From: boer (nanos04_at_adelphia.net)
Date: 07/13/04 

Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 11:26:46 -0400

mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
> In article <xvGdnQMINdlyF2_d4p2dnA@adelphia.com>, boer <nanos04@adelphia.net> writes:
>
>>
>>mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
>>
>>>In article <7WlIc.47291$9t6.32508@bignews3.bellsouth.net>, "zayton" <zayton@bellsouth.net> writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"dudalb" <dudalb1@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:xRgIc.374$Qu5.215@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>>>

<snip>

>>>>Bush should have kept his anger directed at Bin Laden and Al Queda. He
>>>>allowed us to be diverted from the war on terrorism and into a pointless
>>>>incursion into Iraq.
>>>
>>>
>>>It takes a pretty dull or ognorant mind to think that all there is to
>>>the war on terror is dealing with Bin Laden and Al Queda. Al Queda is
>>>just one particular manifestation of Muslim Extremism and 9/11 was
>>>just one particular demonstration of Al Queda activities. Learn to
>>>evaluate and analyze, not just react. One doesn't fight malaria by
>>>swatting mosquitoes, even less so by directin all efforts on swatting
>>>the one particular posquito that happened to bite him.
>>>
>>
>>Wonderful that you are soooo judgemental! The word is spelled "ignorant"
>
>
> Oh, you can spell. Good.
>
>
>>bin Laden defied the US. Fact. bin Laden has SURVIVED; to date 2004, the
>>Bush administrations best shot!Fact.
>
>
> Indeed. And you think that, would the administration's policy on
> social and environmental issues would've been easier?
>
> Bin Laden is a needle in a haystack. Such, aren't easy to find. And,
> you still failed to understand that Bin-Laden is not *the* issue.
> This ain't no James Bond movie, where you've an "evil mastermind" and
> once he's eliminated the world is back at peace. In Holywood things
> work like this, reality is different.
>
> You're (whether you acknowledge this or not, it makes no difference)
> in a war with a movement, one based on adherence to an ideology, not
> on loyalty to a specific person. Capturing or killing Bin Laden will
> be nice, it'll have a symbolic value and provide a morale boost. But,
> it'll be no more than a tactical victory. It is not going to end the
> war. A war ends when the will to fight is broken, on one side. And
> this is not achieved by chasing needles in haystacks.
>
>
>>The Irag unpleasantry has produced
>>more uncertainty in Americas' security brought about by the Republican
>>unLeadership. Another unpleasant fact.
>
>
> Nope, all the uncertainty in America's security was there years ago,
> you just weren't aware of it till 9/11. Al Queda is proactive, not
> reactive. And, if anything, events which go a long way to convince
> Arab leaders that associating with or tolerating in their midst
> unsavory elements can be bad for their health, can *only* improve
> America's security.
>
> Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
> meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"

Well, at least we agree on spelling.<g>
Yep. Uncertainty is a manifestation of "perceived" reality. The problem
  appears as an imposition by force of the US freedom culture. Remember
our era of "gunboat diplomacy"? This culture represents itself as a law
abiding community. Its actions are far far different. The problem of
Cheney and Bush is perception; their Republican POLITICAL adventure
contravenes 200 years of policies by patriots willing to invent a law
abiding Nation. Their willingness to cast aside Law without discussion
is a perceived threat to all of our American ideals, not just
republican. Their policy is an abrupt shift from the precious said
histories. Placing the Republican Party Agenda ahead of all American
national endeavors is a disservice to the Republican Party and the
Nation. Good intentions are not good behaviour. Displayed by the
Republican "christian" right. Is there a "christian" left?

I am not discussing the Cheney Bush social policy or their environmental
policies. I am discussing going to WAR for Republican POLITICAL reasons
without the consent of the constituency at home or abroad. There was
little chance to breathe during the run-up to war. I find that the ratio
of haves vs.the have not relationship to those killed in the Irag
intriquing. How come the bubble of privilege protects the "have"
children. Are Bushs' and Cheneys' children in the war?

Bin Laden certainly is not a needle in the haystack to locals that
harbor him and assist him in his labours.

I find it fascinating you couch your discussion of real world events as
James Bond hollywood perception as related to American policy. Are you a
James Bond wannabee?

Nice of you to know my "state of mind". My "awareness" of American
unsavory behaviour goes back to Vietnam. Did You serve?

boer

Relevant Pages

  • Re: But still interesting: The USs Geopolitical Nightmare
    ... plays in US policy today, ... The creation by Bush and Cheney, Defense Secretary ... their band of neo-conservative war hawks, ...
    (rec.music.artists.springsteen)
  • War Turns Southern Women Away From GOP
    ... War Turns Southern Women Away From GOP ... Ulysses S. Grant," said Barbara Knight, a self-described Republican ... Bush in 2000 but turned away in 2004. ... nationally favored Democrat John Kerry, ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Iraq War has fueled Iraq Extermism
    ... Bush was in Tampa Bay area, he raised money for Gus Bilirakis, a Republican who really does have a record of compassion. ... Perhaps only Republicans still believe these lies, perhaps the GOP looks forward to another war in which billions will be spent on useless military projects. ... WASHINGTON - A newly disclosed intelligence assessment that contradicts President Bush's claim that the war in Iraq has made America safer also casts doubt on the Republican campaign strategy for the November elections. ... "Despite what President Bush says," Kennedy said, "the intelligence community has reported the plain truth - the misguided war in Iraq has metastasized and spread terrorism like cancer around the world." ...
    (alt.politics.bush)
  • Re: Chicago Conference On Truth vs. Terror
    ... George W. Bush: War criminal? ... Is Pope John Paul II telling the world that if President George W. ... Bush goes ahead with his plans to invade Iraq without United Nations ... who served as a speechwriter for Republican presidents ...
    (rec.games.go)
  • Re: States of Denial
    ... We can't very well declare the present government of Iraq ... Bush will be a lame duck after this election. ... Bush doesn't need political capital to trade with Congress insofar as foreign policy is concerned. ... Actually I think that any Republican candidate for President in the next presidential election will not be defending the Bush policy in Iraq, either, unless the party has a death wish. ...
    (soc.retirement)