Picture of the Day - "Progress" in Iraq / Update

[mabadesc]

Come on now....this is so sappy and "syrupy" if a diabetic read it he would die of hyperglicemia.

I've read better (not to mention more objective and cohesive) high school essays...

[Chandernagore]

QUOTE

Come on now....this is so sappy and \"syrupy\" if a diabetic read it he would die of hyperglicemia. I've read better (not to mention more objective and cohesive) high school essays...

Nya nya nya. I knew you would not like it

[mabadesc]

You got me, I admit.

[cnflyboy2000]

QUOTE

[ Well, sure. On a quantitative scale it doesn't compare. But that's not what is so sad. After jettisoning the WMD casus belli, the Bushites jumped to another : bring the western value of democracy to Irak. In that light it just doesn't look well to indulge in the same kind of bullying behavior than the regime you just kicked out. It kind of undermines the purpose of the whole affair and any pretense at morale high ground. So what have we left ?

___________________________________
If u r looking for an appologist for this war, it ain't me, babe.

But, the record is: Mideast democratization was the neocon agenda from the outset. Some would call it a foolish pipedream, but it's hard not to get behind it, philosophically. The rest of the neocon philosophy is specious at best, IMHO.

Also IMO, the sub rosa text was/is Oil. The Bushies have been in bed with the Saudis for three generations. The Western economies are totally oil dependent, I'm sure u know that. The U.S. is addicted to gasoline. The oil stops, we stop.

Why they picked Iraq is a mystery to me, The Taliban, who is the real enemy of the House of Saud, was inimical to Hussein. Last time I looked they (the TB) were (still) in Afghanistan. Maybe Rummy figured they had them under control there, so next in line was Iraq, and let's do it right this time, thank u. (he said).

The WMD was a canard. They either knew it or were engaging in more self deception. But this was their sales point, to the American public, much of whom bought it and the world (much of which did not, it seems) They didn't so much switch objectives, as u suggest, IMO. They thought the WMD's would suffice; when non turned up, they just started trumpeting the democritization louder.

I agree 100% that bullying behavior undermines the moral high ground.
Winning "hearts and minds of the people" is the strategic war we r losing very very badly, even as we appear to triumph strategically.

It's the Battle of Algiers, all over, only worse.

IMO, an even greater problem is the one of civilian casualties. They r not even attempting to count these. This is bad. But it does not get the same attention as do photos of a female soldier leading a naked (Muslim!) POW aound on a dog leash.

[cnflyboy2000]

[quote="Chandernagore
Cnflyboy, who is this Mc Cain and how exactly can he/will he impact Republican politics ?[/quote]
______________________________

John McCain is a Republican U.S. senator from Arizona. He has impacted Rep. politics quite a bit already. He was Bush's main opponent in primaries 4 yrs ago, and remains a thorn in his side. He's fearless. And he even has a sense of humor.

He likes to hold their (the Republican "establishment's") feet to the fire. He's cool; a real standup guy, as straight a shooter as they come in politics. He was a leader in long overdue campaign finance reform.
He's no loose cannon; very articulate and smart.

He was a POW of North Vietnamese (not VC as I said) after his plane was shot down over, I think , Hanoi during Vietnam War. Bush doesn't come off too well in comparison there: B. spent those war years in a National Guard champagne squadron down South, never came close to flying a combat mission anywhere. In fact there r major gaps in his service record. (NG at the time was refuge for some who did not want to see combat.)

Bush's nightmare scenario: A Kerry/McCain ticket. (McCain switches parties, the two authentic warriors campaign against the flag waver.)

If u Google McCain u will undoubtably find a lot more, but that's it in a nutshell. :cheers:

[mabadesc]

QUOTE

Bush spent those war years in a National Guard champagne squadron down South, never came close to flying a combat mission anywhere.

Ok, so he was a pilot in the National Guard and he didn't see combat.
That's still better than Clinton, who left the country and spent those years In Oxford and London to avoid getting drafted. Not to mention the fact that while he was there, he took part in some radical protests which involved burning American flags and holding up signs calling US soldiers murderers and babykillers.

QUOTE

Bush's nightmare scenario: A Kerry/McCain ticket. (McCain switches parties, the two authentic warriors campaign against the flag waver.)

For those who don't know much about McCain, he is indeed a great guy.....a great Republican guy.
In the 2000 presidential election campaign, he endorsed Bush and campaigned in his support against Al Gore.
Needless to say, he's not a fan of John Kerrey, so cnflyboy's scenario is pure fantasy....

P.S. By the way, since when does being a war hero make you a better president?

[Chandernagore]

QUOTE

P.S.  By the way, since when does being a war hero make you a better president?

Doesn't make you better, just more trustworthy I guess than an AWOL flagwaver :laugh:

(sorry couldn't resist).

[Florin]

QUOTE

P.S.  By the way, since when does being a war hero make you a better president?

Looking to people close to me (by the way, Romanians), I saw that the most aggressive regarding international policy, and regarding solutions to Middle East, are those who never performed military service.

Some military service in a regular army (or even better, in a real war, like candidate Kerry) is useful to cool down most of the Bush-style blah-blah in the mind of the average citizen. Continuing the idea, you can expect that an US president who served in a real war to choose more moderate solutions and to think twice before starting a war.

[Florin]

When I considered the previous post I thought about some Romanians. It is true also about some Americans I knew, and I guess it is true regardless the nation.

[Chandernagore]

QUOTE

Continuing the idea, you can expect that an US president who served in a real war to choose more moderate solutions and to think twice before starting a war.

My feeling, exactly.

[dragos]

The grisly case of the American beheaded as response to Iraqi POWs torture

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/05...reax/index.html

[cnflyboy2000]

QUOTE

Ok, so he was a pilot in the National Guard and he didn't see combat. That's still better than Clinton, who left the country and spent those years In Oxford and London to avoid getting drafted.  Not to mention the fact that while he was there, he took part in some radical protests which involved burning American flags and holding up signs calling US soldiers murderers and babykillers.

Are the Republicans going to run against Clinton again? They should find another punching bag.

If u missed it, almost any protest in those days had it's radicals foaming at the mouth and screaming things.

QUOTE

so cnflyboy's scenario is pure fantasy....

admittedly. But politics makes strange bedfellows, it's been said. I think B and K speak civilly to each other, though, maybe even respect each other. Which is something rare lately in political discourse here, it seems. Each side seems to think the other is in bad faith rather than error.

[mabadesc]

QUOTE

Are the Republicans going to run against Clinton again? They should find another punching bag.

Oh.....I see. When you hear an argument which you can't dispute, you just say "Let's move on".

I'm just pointing out the double standard you are using. If you, as a proud Democrat, had no problem with Clinton being the epitomy of a total draft dodger, then you shouldn't complain that Bush didn't participate in combat. At least he did time in the Coast Guard and flew a jet, instead of hopping on the first plane to London.

So let's drop the hypocrisy... :wink:

[Alexandru H.]

Now, now, behave! AT least, you have to choose between 2 idiots (no offense). We have to deal with a couple of thousand feudal lords over here...

[Florin]

QUOTE

.......... If u missed it, almost any protest in those days had it's radicals foaming at the mouth and screaming things.

As somebody living for some years in the US, I dare to say that both sides are "foaming at the mouth and screaming things", to use your words. This is one big problem of the American everyday life: seeing everything in black-or-white, and missing the countless shades of gray. Very often, the truth is in the middle, but neither side would accept this.