 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Wiglaf
|
 |
Cambridge
Dec 2000
time: 23:20
|
|
To recap -
Wiglaf's propostion -
quote:
You have this entire thread dedicated to trashing Bush. Imran's quote targeted his character four years ago ("He talked bad about cripples!") and all of Bush's mistakes. But no one here can stand up and say, John Kerry would be better, he has a better vision. He voted for the war and then backs down when Dean leads in the primaries. His running mate makes out with Christopher Reeve's widow. And he certainly has no grand vision of what the hell do to with America's foreign policy. Assemble a coalition (Gulf War I, which he voted against), abide by the UN (Oil-For-Food, Gulf War I), track down Osama bin Ladin (apparently he is global terrorism), and maintain Bush's plan for Iraq. What a candidate.
What you want to do is punish Bush for something virtually everyone - including Kerry - thought was a reasonable thing to do. You want to punish him and send a message to terrorist and rogue nations - sanctions and resolutions can be broken, your own people can be murdered with WMD's, you can just forget about telling us where they are, you can be a radical fundamentalist nation state with murderous feelings for America. In fact, Saddam said the US government deserved what happened on 9/11.
A vote for Kerry would be an effeminate way to express your hindsight and pseudo-intellect, when in fact all your hindsight has shown is that Saddam violated international law after international law in losing weapons he so clearly possessed when he slaughtered his fellow Iraqis. All your hindsight shows is that, even in the post 9/11 world, we give the terrorists the benefit of the doubt.
http://www.ause.org/ezine/0002/003/images/kurdboy.jpg
And while we're on the subject of fear, Kerry boy, I think I need to make a comment on the liberal pseudo-intellect here. You are terrified that we are losing troops in Iraq, that we are there. The beheadings, the rocket attacks, and the IED's going off daily do not strike you as the products of a fundamentalist cult of hatred but instead as the result of a somehow rational Iraqi reaction to the removal of one of the most vile dictators in the world.
You and John Kerry believe that, without a smoking gun, we have no reason to suspect nations composed of such individuals. You say we have no reason to depose, in a post-9/11 environment, a nation that toys with international law, bribes international institutions, attempts to assassinate presidents, gasses its own people and, when threatened with certain destruction, cannot explain where the weapons to create those gasses went.
Let the system work its way up until the next 9/11, or until Libya supplies terrorists with biological weapons. That's something to be afraid of. |
Response -
quote:
Come on, who would you hit it with?
I'd have to pick Bush's daughter Barbara. |
I change my mind. Apolyton's liberals are the pride and joy of the intelligenisa  Only a group of barely college-educated / not college educated pale internet posters can present such a reasoned defense of the leftist ideology. Hats off to intelligence
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Oncle Boris
|
 |
Once in a brown moon
Aug 2001
time: 00:20
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Oncle Boris really has lost it, hasn't he? |
I'd rather think that the belief that Demons are Pukes aren't the same is a successfull ideological mythology.
When was the last time in history an American admin imposed a radical change of course?
Of course, you're sitting here, talking about deficit size, and % of steel tariffs, and debates about whether 200 or 140 billions should be spent on Iraq... and you think it's something like a big difference?
In 50 years from now, whatever America votes for, you will be a decadent country, globalization will follow its course, China will be rising, etc, etc.
What was the difference between Marius and Sylla already? Between Pompeius and Caesar? Marcus Antonius and Octavianus?
Historical determinism
Ted Striker
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Gatekeeper
|
 |
United States of America
Feb 2000
time: 23:20
|
|
President George W. Bush repeated again on Friday that, had he known then what he knows now about Iraq, he would *not* have changed a single thing in regards to his actions. So that means:
1. There *still* wouldn't have been any post-war planning.
2. We *still* would have relied on Ahmad Chalabi and his exile cronies to bring peace and stability.
3. We *still* would have gone in with far *fewer* combat troops than needed — 150,000 or so vs. the minimum of 250,000 or so that members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff had recommended.
4. The State Department would *still* have been waylaid and sidelined by civilians in the Pentagon (read: Feith, Rumsfeld, et al.) for well over a year before finally getting to pick up the pieces afterward.
5. Bush would've *still* landed on that aircraft carrier, all gussied up in his flight suit, and declared an end to major combat (with an escape clause, of course, for "mopping up" action).
6. We *still* would've left Iraq's borders porous and virtually undefended.
7. We *still* would've used a system of persuasion that led to the abuse incidents at the Abu Ghraib prison complex.
8. There would still be *no* weapons of mass destruction.
9. Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahari of al-Qaida fame would *still* be free, since our armies would *still* be tied up in Iraq.
10. One *good* "still," however, is the fact that there'd *still* be one less dictator in the world. But, frankly, I don't give a damn when other nations — Iran and North Korea come to mind here, along with Russia's increasing turn to authoritarian rule — pose a greater risk to the world than a beaten down (but defiant) Iraq ever did.
Do you know what, Mr. President? There *is* a difference between being a steadfast, unflappable leader and being a stubborn mule about things.
Gatekeeper
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20.
Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
23-10-2004 08:21
I will call the Apolyton police if you don't live up to your words. 
This is the height of your debating skills. 
.
|