This is a skill known as talking out your ass...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JE48XHKG64
noting Cheney's Youtube confessions that Iraq would be a quagmire, but after 9/11, we need to show we can bleed pointlessly in quagmires.
But you know, I personally don't give a shit about these fellows, so I look for ways they might be right, as much as I look for ways they could be wrong.
One of the STUPIDEST things we Americans do is fly off the handle declaring war on a third of the world before we know anything about them. I think our view of Muslims will become more detailed, (you know like distinguishing between shias & sunnis, no shit) but meanwhile, I will be damned if I can understand Cheney's logic, and no English speaker can understand Bush's words, but I can understand Gore's plea to figure out more of WTF we are doing before we do it. I mean, I must have been all of 19 before I learned that I didn't HAVE to get into EVERY damn fight, and sometimes it's smarter to look before you leap, you know? Sure it's never as much fun, but I'm getting too old & impatient for that shit anymore.
that it was a bad idea to arm Saddam Hussein back then. Do you disagree with that? Now please point out where he says that we are supposed to invade and occupy Iraq for the rest of eternity.
well, lets just say someone has to be talking out both sides of their neck when gooore says backing Hussein then was bad,
but Bush supplanting him today is too
""Now please point out where he says that we are supposed to invade and occupy Iraq for the rest of eternity."""
wtfsalt?
slippery slope, that requires some degree of information, and another degree of judgment.
It is theoretically possible that it can be a lousy idea to sell weapons to a bad guy because he is/was involved/connected with some bad stuff; and still not be such a bad guy that we have to get thousands of people killed knocking him over. Evidence that he's done a dozen bad things is not evidence that he's Satan. Not everything is either black or white.
This is a major problem with Republicans, they need to think that everything in the world is like a fucking light switch, black, or white. Some of them are that way because they're plain simple; others are that way because they're panicked and need mental certainty, even if it's a delusion. it's very rare to meet a committed rightwinger who doesn't have an opinion about everything, and especially the things he knows least about.
Fairly, you could say that of any ideologue, but most ideologues are in fact rightwingers.
we don't get to choose (at least in the absolute) who we get to back, you can only screw someone who's at the dance..like with SH. He was the evil dictator "we propped up" and that made us evil, yet the same crowd wants to crow about how we removed a stabalizing influence.....WTF?
that's the thing about leftwingers, they are just can't see they're trying to have it both ways.
Now there's al goore, playing the role or rightwinger who knows jackshit about what he's yapping about, you can't win for losing with these guys, I go back to what you said before, we need solutions but it ain't from this tinfoil head crowd either.
-- Modified on 9/1/2007 10:46:07 PM
that we only get to vote republican or democrat?
not at all, just that we don't always get to pick between apple sauce and blueberries
not be sold weapons because he was involved with terrorist attacks on the Achille Lauro, etc, does not mean he's saying Saddam is involved with all terrorists, or that Iraq should be invaded.
Contrary to Republican practice, sometimes a thoughtful and consistent policy works. You don't really have to swing from one extreme to the other. Well, maybe Republicans have to. I just don't understand why.
Just as you can't equate all muslims, there are limits in equating terrorist groups.
Bush fucked the USA by "declaring war" on "terrorism", because that approach pretty much guarantees that we will chase our tail and never get bin Laden, and while we are running around shooting at anybody with a towel on their head, we'll make one hell of a lot of unnecessary enemies.
You can't declare war on a tactical plan. You shouldn't dignify criminals by declaring war on them, as if they were a state with people or territory to defend.
He should have sat down with all the countries of the world that won't support terror (none of them want free-lancers) and gotten some sort of understanding of open season on the free-lancers, just like 17th century pirates. Then we have 90% of the world on our side, instead of taking on 90% of the world.
Sure, every nation will continue to pursue its own interest. But at least there is a framework of the rules of engagement. Only the stupidest leaders march into battle without a plan, or without preparing the battle. I'm convinced they did plan - but that plan really considered only Republican campaign contributors.
Now we are thinking about living with the fact that the neighboring states - inlcuding Iran and Saudi (one of the most dubious allies we have ever had) are going to be involved in regional security. That should have been obvious on Day 1, and we might not have had to pay retail to get our goal.
But I have this suspicion that this is a backdoor into a permanent military presence in Iraq, like Korea; and I will tell you, I don't think it's manageable. It's like sticking your dick in the door jamb and hoping nobody's going to close the door.
But WTF can we expect from a guy whose most profound comment is to tell a CIA briefer that he'd "covered his ass" w/r/t terror warnings?
It's not that I'd defend Gore or the Democrats here, or that I would find every fault with every Republican.
It's that our own thought about these issues has to be reasonably clear.
All other things being equal (as they never are) I would rather not lob any bombs willy-nilly that might kill some kid somewhere.
But that's really secondary to protecting American interests, and that is protecting American lives 1st, and particularly the lives of people the govt orders into a combat zone. I don't want to waste any PFCs life - he doesn't get paid enough for that.
This whole thing - and particularly after the experience of Vietnam - is an obscenity. I can hardly imagine how he could have made it worse, short of ordering the 6th Fleet scuttled in the Persian Gulf.
BS that it is a "right wing" position to not sell arms to military dictators would deprive you of all credibility if you had any.
you are espousing, namely that you should either sell chemical, biological and nuclear weapons to a country or invade and occupy it. What do you call that, Neo-insane?
Most normal people would see the benefit of falling somewhere in the middle of those two extremes. Then again, you are not normal.
more smart people talking.....very imaginative!
-- Modified on 9/1/2007 10:19:09 PM