 |
| |
|
|
Pax
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Japher
I'm not, but I will accuse his party and that line of thinking responsible for the events of 9/11... ok, even through the party out.
Who was it who was yelling at Bush and his cabinet members after 9/11 for doing nothing?
Who was it who was yelling at Bush and his cabinet members after reports came in that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction?
Such hypocracy. Libs want action, and it is always not enough or it was the wrong type of action. Quit living in the past. Kerry is and that has nothing to do with what he will do in the future apart from the fact that he would do nothing. |
Actually, if you blame Clinton and Dems for 9/11 then you might as well blame Reagan/Bush Sr. and the RP for Saddam and AQ(seperate issues still no connection to eachother). Let's not dwell on how AQ and Saddam achieved and maintained power. Let's not look at the President's record pre-9/11. Let's just look at what he has done since 9/11.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
gunkulator
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Edan
Jim Lehrer gets a D as moderator. |
Huh? What on earth for? Lehrer just asked the questions and stayed out of it. This was a debate between candidates, not an interview. I can't stand it when moderators with big egos feel the need to insert themselves into the debate.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pax
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Japher
Exactly, Pax, lets.
He's erradicated the Taliban, a government which was known to support terrorism.
Took out Saddam, a leader who was know to support terror.
And what does Kerry say he would do? Nothing. Talk about it. Let the policies of foreign countries determine our foreign policy and the safety of our people.
Bush made some mistakes, yes, but he did something, which is something Kerry will not do. |
Taliban alive and kicking
AQ alive and kicking
Saddam in prison
OBL ?
It looks like Bush is 1 for 4. That's an F. Still, take into consideration the situation in Iraq, before we invaded and the situation now. I would say that both the common american and iraqi were safer before. Even if you believe the common iraqi is safer today when he does not know if he will be kidnapped, beheaded, maimed, raped, killed, or which side to watch out for you still must agree that americans are not safer now that we have more enemies and our previous enemies hate us even more.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pax
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Japher
taliban, AQ, and OBL are all on the run instead of attacking us, I like that better. I'll give him partial credit on all three. |
I'll also give him partial credit, but the value of the persons and groups responsible for the USS Cole, 9/11, and embassy bombings outweighs Saddam and Iraq. AQ was an actively hostile group that had to be dealt with. Good job to the President for taking action. Still, he lost my vote when he successfully transformed 9/11 from being about defending us against real terrorist acts to attacking a country that was uninvolved with 9/11. The logic and methods the President used were brilliant and could just have easily been used to attack the U.K.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Edan
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by gunkulator
Huh? What on earth for? Lehrer just asked the questions and stayed out of it. This was a debate between candidates, not an interview. I can't stand it when moderators with big egos feel the need to insert themselves into the debate. |
Poor choice of questions (Where were the questions on Iran, on the Patriot Act, on the CIA? Is Iraq and a little bit of North Korea the only foreign relations and national security issues out there?). He didn't ask any follow up question (OK, granted, it wasn't an interview). He gave way too many extensions (why not just set the time limit 30 seconds higher for each candidate?) with the candidates usually using it to hit their soundbites ("Wrong war, wrong time", etc), rather than expand on the questions. Bush also interrupted Kerry once ("I'm trying to put them on a leash").
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pax
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Japher
I'd agree, if we can be certain that Bush knew that the intelligence was wrong prior to entering Iraq. I don't think he knew that. Also, you can't just dismis or blame Bush for Iraq seeing as everyone in the house, including Kerry, not only gave him permission to go in, but encouraged him to.
If the issue was that he did not have weapons but was thought to be a terrorist threat I am certain that Bush would not have gone into Iraq. However, that is something none of us knew, and something I am proud to of had a president to act in the way he did. |
Articles I read in Time magazine suggest that President Bush had Iraq on his agenda prior to 9/11. Also, the house/senate did not push the President anything to a war. he drummed up support for it. The evidence presented was the evidence HE presented for his case against iraq. Through his rhetoric, he made the position of being against the war(Iraq) politically unsafe.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999
time: 21:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Drachasor
This is actually 100% consistent.
Kerry says Bush promised numerous things would be done about Iraq before going to War:
1. Exhaust all other possibilities
2. Build a large and strong coalition as in the first Iraq War
3. He said he would plan it carefully
He also lied about there being Nuclear Weapons or a Nuclear Program (and it was known well before we went in that this wasn't true).
So, Kerry expects Bush to do all of those things, and Bush doesn't and goes in anyway.
Now we don't have enough troops to go around.
Why? No large and strong Coalition, and no careful planning on how to handle the aftermath. If we had both of those, we easily could have done Afghanistan AND Iraq. We didn't and so we can't. A new president is the only chance we have of changing the level of foreign help in Iraq now.
This doesn't mean cow-towing to foreign wants, but it means being aware of their desires and interests and working with them. The World is a community, and like a community you have to work together on big projects so that you can get them done right.
So, in short, Kerry was consistent (as he has been consistent, even though he doesn't always state his positions well). We could have done both quite well, but Bush didn't follow his plan; we needed a real coalition.
-Drachasor |
The DAY the war started, Kerry said his ONLY regret is that Bush did not form a large coalition like his father, but the decision to take out Saddam was correct.
Now, compare Kerry's position then with what Dean said.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22.
Apolyton Time is 00:22. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-10-2004 01:11
I wish the news organizations would get together and decide to host the debates and refuse to televize the Federal Comminsion on President Debates farces. 
|