Soon to be the USs most wanted.......

#2
'Iran is obviously part of the problem'

That's an away match not to be missed :)
 
#3
I actually agree with what he has to say there. I just don't think he has the walk to match the talk though.
 
#4
"If we ever give up the desire to help people who want to live in a free society, we will have lost our soul as a nation,"
That is nothing short of blackmail , and a bloody insult to the majority of the American people.

I am hard pressed to think of a more generous, friendly and champion of the underdog nation than the people that make up the USA.

The people of Vietnam wanted to live in a free society , and America didn't lose it's soul as a result. It bled for a while, it searched it's soul , but it did not lose it.

America is in danger of losing it's soul and it's reputation , thanks solely to the actions of this administration.
 
#5
Chief_Joseph said:
I actually agree with what he has to say there. I just don't think he has the walk to match the talk though.

He is saying things the whole world already knows though.

'Hezbollah must not re-form'..........

Is that so Mr President, why is this??
 
#6
QUOTE

"Iran is obviously part of the problem," Bush said. "They sponsor Hezbollah. They encourage a radical brand of Islam. Imagine how difficult this issue would be if Iran had a nuclear weapon.

I think someone needs a hug
 
#8
"If we ever give up the desire to help people who want to live in a free society, we will have lost our soul as a nation." - G.W. Bush

I wish he would read his damned oath of office and tell us where it says he was elected president of the world. And read the Constitution and tell us where it says politicians can tax the labor and sweat of the American people and give the money away to foreign governments.

...I'm sick of this pseudo-philanthropic, pseudo-compassion-for-the-world bilge which spews forth from the mouths of our politicians like the filth that comes out a broken sewer pipe.


"A Poor Understanding of Where World is Headed"
by Charley Reese
http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/New_World_Order/poor_understanding.htm
 
#9
Not_Whistlin_Dixie said:
"If we ever give up the desire to help people who want to live in a free society, we will have lost our soul as a nation." - G.W. Bush

I wish he would read his damned oath of office and tell us where it says he was elected president of the world. And read the Constitution and tell us where it says politicians can tax the labor and sweat of the American people and give the money away to foreign governments.

...I'm sick of this pseudo-philanthropic, pseudo-compassion-for-the-world bilge which spews forth from the mouths of our politicians like the filth that comes out a broken sewer pipe.


"A Poor Understanding of Where World is Headed"
by Charley Reese
I agree entirely, NWD! A further problem is that Bush the Befuddled actually doesn't really give a shite about any other people in the world. So maybe we ought to add "hypocritical" to your list.

MsG
 
#10
I assume that many, perhaps most Lebanese want to live in a free society.

Providing the munitions that were used to reduce 25% of them to the status of refugees strikes me as a peculiar way of "helping" them do so.
 
#12
From Sunday's Meet The Press:

GEN. BARRY McCAFFREY: Well, I—you know, first of all, I applaud the efforts by Secretary Rice and by others, Steve Hadley, trying to start the beginnings of building an alliance to confront the Iranians. The notion that we can threaten them with conventional air attack is simply insane. First of all, we’re more vulnerable than they are to having the Persian Gulf closed, to leaving 135,000 troops 400 kilometers up into Iraq with a Shia population on our supply lines. Never mind our allies who I think are terrified by this, the—you know, the notion that we would use air power to go after 70-some odd nuclear sites.

The Iranians are going nuclear. It’s going to change the region for the worse in the coming 10 years, and hopefully not provoke the proliferation of WMD, where you end up with an Arab Sunni bomb to counter the Persian Shia bomb. So I think the answer to this one is diplomatic, economic: build alliances, stop threatening military action.

MR. GREGORY: Dr. Nasr, on that point?

DR. VALI NASR: I do agree with the general. First of all, there’s very little—the only difference I would have is that our allies in the region are not going to be able to do much. In other words, the ascendent forces in this region are with Iran. Hezbollah is a pro-Iranian force and in Iraq also, the upper hand is going to be with the Shia militias who are now very pro-Iranian. And Iran has the capability to fight the U.S. if it comes to multiple different arenas: in Iraq, in Lebanon, in Afghanistan as well. So I do think that we have to have a much more nuanced and much more effective diplomatic strategy of dealing with Iran, in terms of being able to contain and regulate its power. Because a frontal confrontation I don’t think will work, and as we saw with Israel and Hezbollah, it can actually be counterproductive. You’re going to turn Ahmadinejad into a second Hassan Nasrallah, strengthen the Iranian government and you—and not accomplish what you want in terms of curtailing its nuclear capabilities.
Further on:

GEN. McCAFFREY: Well, you know, from the start, I’ve done everything I could to say there is no point of connection between Vietnam and Iraq. Completely different strategic connotation. However, the domestic politics of this are starting to look eerily, uncannily, like the late ‘60s. You know, one of the, one of the other problems that I think the administration is trying to face up to finally, certainly the National Security Council is, we drained $55 billion out of the U.S. Air Force and the Navy and we’re putting that money into ammunition, medical care for wounded soldiers. We’re, we’re literally giving up our modernization program for the forces that need to be there in 10, 20 years to deter the People’s Republic of China. We don’t need the F-22 to confront the Iranian—Iraqi insurgents; we need that high-tech capability to make sure we maintain stability in the coming years.

So the danger is, we end up 36 months from now with our military fundamentally broken. And that’s what I’m concerned about.
Full Transcript: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14390980/page/5/
 
#13

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top