Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums
Over 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers (it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

SEARCH
the Forums & Piano World

This custom search works much better than the built in one and allows searching older posts.
(ad 125) Sweetwater - Digital Keyboards & Other Gear
Digital Pianos at Sweetwater
(ad) Pearl River
Pearl River Pianos
(ad) Pianoteq
Latest Pianoteq add-on instrument: U4 upright piano
(ad) P B Guide
Acoustic & Digital Piano Guide
PianoSupplies.com (150)
Piano Accessories Music Related Gifts Piano Tuning Equipment Piano Moving Equipment
We now offer Gift Certificates in our online store!
(ad) Estonia Piano
Estonia Piano
Quick Links to Useful Stuff
Our Classified Ads
Find Piano Professionals-

*Piano Dealers - Piano Stores
*Piano Tuners
*Piano Teachers
*Piano Movers
*Piano Restorations
*Piano Manufacturers
*Organs

Quick Links:
*Advertise On Piano World
*Free Piano Newsletter
*Online Piano Recitals
*Piano Recitals Index
*Piano Accessories
* Buying a Piano
*Buying A Acoustic Piano
*Buying a Digital Piano
*Pianos for Sale
*Sell Your Piano
*How Old is My Piano?
*Piano Books
*Piano Art, Pictures, & Posters
*Directory/Site Map
*Contest
*Links
*Virtual Piano
*Music Word Search
*Piano Screen Saver
*Piano Videos
*Virtual Piano Chords
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#852830 - 09/10/03 05:09 PM Bush again?
zorro Offline
Full Member

Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 271
Loc: Mesa, AZ
Not wanting to start an "mhr-looking" thread, I've had this question in my head for some time:

If the date of the reelection for president was now, today; would you give Bush a second chance?

This is assuming he got the US out of the war, without spending more after the 87 billions...
zorro
_________________________
"I love Beethoven, especially the poems."
Ringo Starr

Top
Piano & Music Accessories
#852831 - 09/10/03 05:44 PM Re: Bush again?
gryphon Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/09/01
Posts: 11678
Loc: Okemos, MI
Yes, especially considering his potential rivals.
_________________________
"If we lose freedom here, there's no place to escape to."
MSU - the university of Michigan!
Wheels

Top
#852832 - 09/10/03 05:54 PM Re: Bush again?
jodi Offline
6000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/26/01
Posts: 6959
Loc: The Evergreen State (WA)
Ooh, I LIKE that smiley. Frank need to add it down there.

\:\) Jodi

Top
#852833 - 09/10/03 07:51 PM Re: Bush again?
Tony C Offline
Full Member

Registered: 06/09/02
Posts: 95
I don't think so, I think that this country has had enough crap from this administration, if there is a chance for reelection, I am pretty sure Bush/Cheney et al won't stand any chance.

Half of the population didn't' vote in 2000 (that's how we got ourselves into the current situation for being silent), given the second chance, most likely people (especially those didn't vote last time) would choose a candidate who knows how to run the country, protect us from the REAL threat.

CHANGE IS GOOD!

Top
#852834 - 09/10/03 08:01 PM Re: Bush again?
pdolce Offline
Full Member

Registered: 03/01/03
Posts: 478
Loc: CA.
I wouldn't vote for Bush if I had a gun to my head!!!

pdolce
_________________________
But, I played it perfectly at home!!

Top
#852835 - 09/10/03 08:22 PM Re: Bush again?
ChickGrand Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/02/03
Posts: 3231
Loc: Midwest U.S.
No.

Top
#852836 - 09/10/03 08:28 PM Re: Bush again?
.rvaga* Offline
2000 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/14/02
Posts: 2046
Loc: Portland, Oregon
 Quote:
If the date of the reelection for president was now, today; would you give Bush a second chance?

This is assuming he got the US out of the war, without spending more after the 87 billions...

zorro
[/b]
Second "chance?"

"...got the US out"

There is a question in the screwed-up syntax, tense, and thought process, I'm sure.

Top
#852837 - 09/10/03 11:06 PM Re: Bush again?
jkeene Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 07/08/03
Posts: 701
Loc: Central Florida
Yes, Bush again.

Here's why, item by item, as compared to the likely opposition.

As a country, the USA needs to get the following things done during the next president's term:

One, continue the economic recovery from the circumstances of 2000-2001. You can argue the primary cause, but there were many of them in there. We just need to get out of it, more than we already have. I'd give this one to Bush, even though he spends a bit more than I think is appropriate. Only possible member of the opposition seems like Dean, but at best that's a tie.

Two, kill more terrorists, where they live. Bush gets it, and shows no sign of losing grasp of it. Lieberman seems to get it. Clark gets it, but I worry he'd be too cautious in execution.

Three, establish a hundred year alliance with a large power in Asia. China, India, Indonesia and others are continuing to develop as countries and our trade with them is growing. But using the island nations, or South Korea, as an ally to project force to ward off disturbances isn't going to cut it. We need one of the big two, China or India, or perhaps a coalition centered on Indonesia. I think Bush could handle this job, and I'd like to see him work with India on it. Clark could probably handle building an alliance around Indonesia, but that would not be our strongest position. The other candidates couldn't handle the job.

Four, appoint some Supreme Court Justices. I'd like some more O'Connors. Scalia can be okay, but he had a more human tone in his earlier years than recent. I'd like Lieberman for this task. Bush could do it, if he'd stick to the Texas moderates of his gubernatorial days. The others will sink us.

Five, return science funding to more appropriate levels. I almost didn't put this in, but it's made a noticeable contribution to our current way of life today. Dean would do it, but shorting the military. Bush will do it, emphasizing the military research enough, but shorting the rest.

Right now I'm scoring it for Bush, and don't foresee a change.

Top
#852838 - 09/10/03 11:29 PM Re: Bush again?
Palindrome Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 12/22/01
Posts: 3915
Loc: Chicago, IL USA
ANY election* is a choice between two different candidates. (And what is the sound of one hand clapping?) The "Would you vote to re-elect..." question is only half a question. I'm sure the Democrats could find somebody that would distress the electorate enough so that Bush would win.

But practically speaking, with or without an opponent to give a reference point, the poll numbers on re-election should certainly be giving the Bush team some sleepless nights.

Oh, and jkeene - Bush will not be seriously nominating anyone to the Supreme Court, even if one of the incumbents should involuntarily leave. The Democrats threw down their marker on Estrada, and held the line for two years on that judicial nomination. The White House got the message. The only person they would nominate would be someone to consolidate their political base, and that would be just as likely to solidify the liberals.

*Having said that, I'm thinking that the California recall may be an exception.
_________________________
There is no end of learning. -Robert Schumann Rules for Young Musicians

Top
#852839 - 09/10/03 11:58 PM Re: Bush again?
Tony C Offline
Full Member

Registered: 06/09/02
Posts: 95
And here are some excerpts form NewsMax.com http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/9/7/181331.shtml.
Sounds like the Bush Team do really have something to worry about:


Less than half (45%) of the respondents said they rated his job performance good or excellent, while a majority (54%) said it was fair or poor.

A majority (52%) said itís time for someone new in the White House, while just two in five (40%) said the president deserves to be re-elected. Last month, 45% said re-election was in order, and 48% said it was time for someone new.

Just two in five (40%) said they would choose Bush if the election were held today, while 47% said they would elect a Democratic candidate.

Top
#852840 - 09/11/03 12:09 AM Re: Bush again?
Steve Miller Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/26/01
Posts: 3290
Loc: Yorba Linda, CA
 Quote:
Originally posted by Palindrome:
*Having said that, I'm thinking that the California recall may be an exception. [/b]
Funny you should say that. The recall has pretty much boiled down to a repeat of the last gubernatorial election. With Uberroth gone, there are only 3 serious candidates left.

Two of them appear to be the same guy in a different suit - Davis and Bustamante. I'll count them as one Democrat.

Two Republicans; McClintock and Schwarzneggar.

I can't imagine that the Republican faithful are going to go for Schwarzneggar. The orgies and lurid interviews are bad enough, but I don't think even California is ready for a governor who has naked pictures of himself circulating on the Internet. He's definitely not your father's Republican, and he sure as hell isn't mine.

McClintock, then. This guy is even farther to the right than Simon was, and appears in fact be just to the right of Atilla-the-Hun. Even though I give him points for being at least competent (unlike Simon), and even though his politics would be much favored by several of the august contributors to the Piano Forum, he is never gonna fly in California. Simon couldn't get it done a year ago, and McClintock doesn't stand a chance this time - especially with Schwarzneggar siphoning off some of the Republican vote.

That means the winner will be..... BustaDavis!

Remember folks you heard it first on the Piano Forum.
_________________________
Defender of the Landfill Piano

Top
#852841 - 09/11/03 12:14 AM Re: Bush again?
Steve Miller Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/26/01
Posts: 3290
Loc: Yorba Linda, CA
Oh, and as far as whether I would vote to re-elect Bush?

Put me down as a no.
_________________________
Defender of the Landfill Piano

Top
#852842 - 09/11/03 07:02 AM Re: Bush again?
JBryan Offline
9000 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/19/02
Posts: 9798
Loc: Oklahoma City
Tony C,

Your link does not work.
_________________________
Better to light one small candle than to curse the %&#$@#! darkness.

Top
#852843 - 09/11/03 10:35 AM Re: Bush again?
Ron Alexander Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 06/17/03
Posts: 1292
Loc: North Carolina
TonyC wrote:

would choose a candidate who knows how to run the country, protect us from the REAL threat.[/b]

What is your definition of the REAL threat? Is a faltering economy a greater threat than terrorist strikes here in the US?

I would vote for Bush with reservation, the Dems have yet to put forth a candidate that will not tax and spend us into further chaos.

Regards,
Ron
_________________________
-----------------
Ron Alexander
Piano Tuner-Technician

Top
#852844 - 09/11/03 10:40 AM Re: Bush again?
gryphon Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/09/01
Posts: 11678
Loc: Okemos, MI
 Quote:
Originally posted by jkeene:
I'd like some more O'Connors.[/b]
Dear God I hope not! I think O'Connor is one of the worst we've had. Not necessarily for her positions (some of which I disagree with) but her reasoning and defense of them. Her opinions are some of the most ill-reasoned things I've ever read.
_________________________
"If we lose freedom here, there's no place to escape to."
MSU - the university of Michigan!
Wheels

Top
#852845 - 09/11/03 10:44 AM Re: Bush again?
Nina Offline
6000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/13/01
Posts: 6467
Loc: Phoenix, AZ
I would not vote for Bush again. (Didn't vote for him the first time, either.) However, IF I understand your hypothetical, which is would Bush get re-elected if the Iraq war were over and we were not an additional $87B in debt, I think he probably would be re-elected in that scenario. (Pardon the grammar all :p )

I still wouldn't vote for him, though!

Steve, where's Issa in all this? We're not hearing anything about him outside of California (at least, once he decided not to run...)

Nina

Top
#852846 - 09/11/03 11:35 AM Re: Bush again?
Steve Miller Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/26/01
Posts: 3290
Loc: Yorba Linda, CA
 Quote:
Originally posted by Nina:
Steve, where's Issa in all this? We're not hearing anything about him outside of California (at least, once he decided not to run...)

Nina [/b]
Issa dropped out early on, literally in tears on television over the whole thing. $1+ million down the tubes and no one was interested in his being governor.

He has not been heard from since. Maybe he learned something, no?
_________________________
Defender of the Landfill Piano

Top
#852847 - 09/11/03 12:03 PM Re: Bush again?
Steve Miller Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/26/01
Posts: 3290
Loc: Yorba Linda, CA
 Quote:
Originally posted by rjalex:
What is your definition of the REAL threat? Is a faltering economy a greater threat than terrorist strikes here in the US?
Ron [/b]
Let me take a shot at this one:

The real threat is the suspension of constitutional protections in the name of a war that is not a war at all, and will have no end.

The real threat is the alienation of the global community.

The real threat is a president who shoots first and aims later. "Axis of evil" isn't the half of it.

The real threat is an action in Iraq that we can not win, and shows every sign of being another Vietnam. There is no exit strategy - never was.

The real threat is 20 guys with box cutters and airplane tickets, and a military that is completely clueless as to how to stop them from doing what they aim to do. Box cutters will beat tanks every time.
_________________________
Defender of the Landfill Piano

Top
#852848 - 09/11/03 12:05 PM Re: Bush again?
bcarey Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/14/02
Posts: 3378
Loc: North Carolina
Didn't vote for him the first time. Will not vote for him, for a second term.

Top
#852849 - 09/11/03 01:08 PM Re: Bush again?
Tony C Offline
Full Member

Registered: 06/09/02
Posts: 95
 Quote:
Originally posted by JBryan:
Tony C,

Your link does not work. [/b]
Sorry, try this:
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/9/7/181331.shtml

Top
#852850 - 09/11/03 04:00 PM Re: Bush again?
.rvaga* Offline
2000 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/14/02
Posts: 2046
Loc: Portland, Oregon
 Quote:
Tony C:
Just two in five (40%) said they would choose Bush if the election were held today, while 47% said they would elect a Democratic candidate. [/b]
Sure, without thinking, I'm sure countless millions simply vote party line.

Or, "vote Democratic" to get rid of the war-monger Bush.

How many thought the same thing, and ended up with Johnson. . . ?

Top
#852851 - 09/11/03 05:45 PM Re: Bush again?
jkeene Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 07/08/03
Posts: 701
Loc: Central Florida
 Quote:
Originally posted by Steve Miller:
Let me take a shot at this one:
[/b]
Let me put some replies to this:


 Quote:

The real threat is the suspension of constitutional protections in the name of a war that is not a war at all, and will have no end.
[/b]
The Patriot Act generally expires in December 2005. Some restrictions have already been placed on it (HR2799). I'd not like to see another Patriot Act, particularly one without sunset provisions, but this is far less onerous than the WWII internment camps.
 Quote:

The real threat is the alienation of the global community.
[/b]
Britain, Spain, Poland, a number of the Eastern European countries, India and Kuwait do not seem to be too alienated.
 Quote:

The real threat is a president who shoots first and aims later. "Axis of evil" isn't the half of it.
[/b]
Then what is?
 Quote:

The real threat is an action in Iraq that we can not win, and shows every sign of being another Vietnam. There is no exit strategy - never was.
[/b]
The exit strategy existed, the planning to implement it was sketchy, flawed, and victim of some wishful thinking. It's getting fixed, in an overdue fashion.
 Quote:

The real threat is 20 guys with box cutters and airplane tickets, and a military that is completely clueless as to how to stop them from doing what they aim to do. Box cutters will beat tanks every time.
[/b]
And strong cultures with hope for all citizens beat the box cutter terrorists every time. We use tanks and similar assets to defend ourselves and our cultural allies by destroying those states who aid and abet the terrorists.

Failure to take the war to the enemy's heart is the real threat.

Jeff

Top
#852852 - 09/11/03 08:30 PM Re: Bush again?
Ron Alexander Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 06/17/03
Posts: 1292
Loc: North Carolina
Jeff wrote:

Failure to take the war to the enemy's heart is the real threat.[/b]

Jeff IMHO you hit the nail on it's head. I hope it is just the warming of the political climate for the 2004 election, but my fear is Americans don't have the guts to endure and sacrifice (when and if it comes to that) to win the War on Terrorism. Will it take another attack like 9-11
or worse, to make us realize we cannot win the hearts and minds of those who hate us??? The only thing a terrorist understands and respects is strength. They will not stop until they dominate the world. We cannot afford to rest until we have rid the world of them.

I'm beginning to believe we are returning to our sleep, and dreaming those who believe in radical Islam are basically nice people who will embrace us if we can only sit down and talk and come to understand each other. Two kinds of people, brainwashed - but on opposite ends of the spectrum.

Regards,
Ron
_________________________
-----------------
Ron Alexander
Piano Tuner-Technician

Top
#852853 - 09/12/03 12:19 AM Re: Bush again?
Steve Miller Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/26/01
Posts: 3290
Loc: Yorba Linda, CA
 Quote:
Originally posted by jkeene:
Failure to take the war to the enemy's heart is the real threat. Jeff [/b]
First you have to find them, Jeff.
_________________________
Defender of the Landfill Piano

Top
#852854 - 09/12/03 12:31 AM Re: Bush again?
Larry Offline
9000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/25/01
Posts: 9217
Loc: Deep in Cherokee Country
 Quote:
Originally posted by Steve Miller:
 Quote:
Originally posted by jkeene:
Failure to take the war to the enemy's heart is the real threat. Jeff [/b]
First you have to find them, Jeff. [/b]
Or....dig your way into the center of them and lure them all to you. Oh wait..... that's what we're doing!
_________________________
Life isn't measured by the breaths you take. Life is measured by the things that left you breathless

Top
#852855 - 09/12/03 12:35 AM Re: Bush again?
gryphon Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/09/01
Posts: 11678
Loc: Okemos, MI
Well, there is something to be said for inserting the military of the most powerful nation in history right smack in the middle of one of the most volatile and important regions of the world without everyone around them raising a fuss. \:D (I know, shhhh...don't tell...)
_________________________
"If we lose freedom here, there's no place to escape to."
MSU - the university of Michigan!
Wheels

Top
#852856 - 09/12/03 12:35 AM Re: Bush again?
Brendan Offline


Registered: 05/26/01
Posts: 5317
Loc: McAllen, TX
 Quote:
Originally posted by Larry:
Or....dig your way into the center of them and lure them all to you. Oh wait..... that's what we're doing! [/b]
And we're also sustaining casualties!
_________________________
http://www.BrendanKinsella.com

Top
#852857 - 09/12/03 12:36 AM Re: Bush again?
Tony Offline
Full Member

Registered: 01/24/02
Posts: 151
Loc: Houston
Didn't vote for him the first time and certainly won't this time.

We saw what he did as Texas governor to the Texas economy, services, and quality of life. He's doing the same thing as president. This is the fox and the hen house story.

By the way, you may not know there is no state income tax in Texas. This alone, tells the story of the advantage to the Texas mega rich when fedral taxes for higher incomes are reduced.

In choosing the next president, I hope it will be someone who has been successful at something. No more oil baron failure, failed investor , or failed ball team owner who left his investors holding the bag when he took the profits and invested in other enterprizes.

Consider his background for foreign relations: the son of an American president who has had almost unlimited resources at his disposal at fifty something had been "abroad" twice in his life and both times were to Mexico! Remarkable world curiousity, don't you think?


If he couldn't make it as a business man with the family money and connections at his disposal, there was never any reason to believe he could run the world's largest business!

Top
#852858 - 09/12/03 12:38 AM Re: Bush again?
gryphon Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/09/01
Posts: 11678
Loc: Okemos, MI
Hey Tony, I suggest you don't vote for GWB next time. Fair enough? :p
_________________________
"If we lose freedom here, there's no place to escape to."
MSU - the university of Michigan!
Wheels

Top
#852859 - 09/12/03 12:46 AM Re: Bush again?
Tony Offline
Full Member

Registered: 01/24/02
Posts: 151
Loc: Houston
Great idea! Don't think I will, but then, who counts votes, anyway?

Top
#852860 - 09/12/03 12:48 AM Re: Bush again?
Steve Miller Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/26/01
Posts: 3290
Loc: Yorba Linda, CA
 Quote:
Originally posted by Larry:
 Quote:
Originally posted by Steve Miller:
 Quote:
Originally posted by jkeene:
Failure to take the war to the enemy's heart is the real threat. Jeff [/b]
First you have to find them, Jeff. [/b]
Or....dig your way into the center of them and lure them all to you. Oh wait..... that's what we're doing! [/b]
How do you see what we are doing as "luring them to us"?
_________________________
Defender of the Landfill Piano

Top
#852861 - 09/12/03 12:50 AM Re: Bush again?
shantinik Offline
4000 Post Club Member

Registered: 09/23/01
Posts: 4271
Loc: Olympia, WA
 Quote:
Originally posted by Tony:


If he couldn't make it as a business man with the family money and connections at his disposal, there was never any reason to believe he could run the world's largest business! [/b]
I believe you WAY underestimate him. And I think that's dangerous.

Top
#852862 - 09/12/03 12:56 AM Re: Bush again?
gryphon Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/09/01
Posts: 11678
Loc: Okemos, MI
 Quote:
Originally posted by Tony:
who counts votes, anyway? [/b]
Well, apparently San Francisco doesn't because ballot boxes keep turning up in the bay. And not Chicago, because...oh, wait, Chicago does count votes, even ones that don't exist. And not Madison, WI or Minneapolis, MN...
_________________________
"If we lose freedom here, there's no place to escape to."
MSU - the university of Michigan!
Wheels

Top
#852863 - 09/12/03 01:51 AM Re: Bush again?
Larry Offline
9000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/25/01
Posts: 9217
Loc: Deep in Cherokee Country
 Quote:
Originally posted by Steve Miller:

How do you see what we are doing as "luring them to us"? [/b]
Well, it's been pretty widely discussed on the news, for one - as in this article:

Al Qaeda plans a front in Iraq

For another, I've talked to more than a few guys who have returned from there, and they all tell me the same thing. They are congregating in Iran, just over the border where they're safe, and coming down two highways that lead to Baghdad, sniping at the troops. That's where all the attacks on our troops are coming from, not from the Iraqis. And they are a mixed bunch too - Even Hammas are sending people.
_________________________
Life isn't measured by the breaths you take. Life is measured by the things that left you breathless

Top
#852864 - 09/12/03 11:24 AM Re: Bush again?
Steve Miller Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/26/01
Posts: 3290
Loc: Yorba Linda, CA
 Quote:
Originally posted by Larry:
 Quote:
Originally posted by Steve Miller:

How do you see what we are doing as "luring them to us"? [/b]
Well, it's been pretty widely discussed on the news, for one - as in this article:

Al Qaeda plans a front in Iraq

For another, I've talked to more than a few guys who have returned from there, and they all tell me the same thing. They are congregating in Iran, just over the border where they're safe, and coming down two highways that lead to Baghdad, sniping at the troops. That's where all the attacks on our troops are coming from, not from the Iraqis. And they are a mixed bunch too - Even Hammas are sending people. [/b]
Are you proposing then, a bombing run across this front?
_________________________
Defender of the Landfill Piano

Top
#852865 - 09/12/03 11:39 PM Re: Bush again?
jkeene Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 07/08/03
Posts: 701
Loc: Central Florida
 Quote:
Originally posted by Steve Miller:
 Quote:
Originally posted by jkeene:
Failure to take the war to the enemy's heart is the real threat.

Jeff [/b]
First you have to find them, Jeff. [/b]
Steve,

While I was thinking culturally, I see that others have well answered from the operational perspective.

We know precisely where the cultural problems lie. In Egypt, Saudi Arabia, in many parts of Pakistan, and still deep in parts of Afghanistan. Anywhere dictators for life wrap themselves in religious imagery and blame the American devil, to divert the masses with no jobs and no hope from focussing too closely on the fact that their warlord, or king, or president has stolen their country's wealth, destroyed the economy, ruined the social structure, made a puppet of the press, and made a career of lying about the future.

So when we water the flower of democracy in the center of the Baghdad Caliphate, we're acting right at the heart of the problem.

Ghaddafi may have been scared back on to the civilized path. Saudi Arabia is making sounds and motions, too soon by far to know for sure. In Egypt the matter of presidential succession will be telling. Afghanistan and Pakistan will have something, I don't know what, but something major happen in the next five years.

We need someone in the office of the President capable of dealing with it.

Jeff

Top
#852866 - 09/13/03 12:11 AM Re: Bush again?
John Andrew Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/24/03
Posts: 3041
Loc: Southern California
Jeff

We obviously have a right to defend ourselves.

But what right do we have to tell others the type of government they should have -- even if it is dictatorship wrapped in the mantle of theocracy?

Since the beginning of this country, we have been able to deal with countries and peoples who do not like us, indeed hate us. Since WWII, we have been able to coexist with them, even while keeping our guard up and adequately defending ourselves. Yes, since 9/11 we need to rethink how we do that, but we can continue to coexist with those who hate us while ensuring our defense.

If we are going to spend $100's of Billions over and above our normal defense needs, I think we would be much more secure spending it here in the US to secure our borders, our ports, etc, rather than taking over other countries.

If the people of Afganistan want/allow the Taliban to take over again,that is their decision. We have no right to impose a governmental structure on them. Our job is to find a way to deal with whatever threat they may pose for us.

If the people of Iraq want an Iran style Shiite government, it is not up to us to say no. We have no right to. Our responsibility is to ourselves, to ensure our security from any threat they may be for us.

There have been in the past, there is now and there always will be countries which are run in ways we disapprove of -- perhaps disdain. We have no right to keep them from doing this.

All we have a right to do is to defend ourselves. The $200 Billion we are now spending in Iraq -- and it will go up significantly -- would be far better spent here in the US directly related to our owjn security, not spent taking over countries we have no right to take over.
_________________________
You can be disappointed, but you cannot walk away. This fight has just begun. Senator John Edwards

Top
#852867 - 09/13/03 12:26 AM Re: Bush again?
ninjanitor Offline
Full Member

Registered: 09/11/03
Posts: 31
I agree. We should beef up our defense instead of waisting money and lives on these imbeciles, all the while blowing the living daylights out of muslim nations who harbor terrorists. The world is ingrate and often uses America as a skapegoat for their own ills. I shudder to think what this world be like without a country like America who has the balls and witts to at least try and do whats right.

Top
#852868 - 09/13/03 01:15 AM Re: Bush again?
Larry Offline
9000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/25/01
Posts: 9217
Loc: Deep in Cherokee Country
John Andrews wrote: If the people of Afganistan want/allow the Taliban to take over again,that is their decision. We have no right to impose a governmental structure on them. Our job is to find a way to deal with whatever threat they may pose for us. [/b]


My God, man, do you think the people in Afghanistan *wanted* that? Do you think the Taliban put it up for a vote, and the people made a decision?

Your thinking is too shallow, John. We are not "imposing" a governmental structure on them any more than we are imposing one on Iraq. In both cases, we have helped them set up a broad based group made up of their own people, and let them take charge of what kind of form their government will take. The only thing we've "imposed" on either country is to keep one group from taking control of everyone else, so they won't end up with a small faction dictating the rest. Afghanistan now has an Afghan government. We don't control it, we didn't create it, and we don't tell them what to do. The same is happening in Iraq. But in both cases, the governments the people are creating are friendly to the US. You see, the majority of the people in both countries are thankful to us for liberating them. The only ones who aren't are the terrorists, the dislocated benefactors of the former regimes, and folks like yourself.
_________________________
Life isn't measured by the breaths you take. Life is measured by the things that left you breathless

Top
#852869 - 09/13/03 12:01 PM Re: Bush again?
netizen Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 06/02/01
Posts: 1926
Loc: New York
No.

Bush and his handlers need to be given the boot.

While far from confident, I am quite hopeful that this will happen. I find some measure of hope in the small but growing number of old-school Eisenhower republicans, like my parents, who are fed-up with Bush and his recreant witlings. They are for the most part older Americans who've at length become disgusted with the fiscal trashing of the country, worried by the unfolding chaos in Iraq, and completely repulsed by the lying neo-conservatives who've hijacked American policy.

Unable or unwilling to vote dem, my parents plan to sit-out the next election.

To bad. Perhaps this an answer for them: Republicans for Dean

I am undecided about Dean, I was interested in his candidacy long before it began to develop any traction. In part, I've been waiting to see what happens with Clark . It's prolly going to be between these two candidates for me. I am uttery uninterested in the rest of the field. Plus the sheer entertainment of value of watching Bush or Cheney in debates with Clark will be well-worth the price of admission, though it'll no doubt be a long and ugly fight. All the same, I don't think anyone (repub or dem) can repair all damage the Bush weevils have wrought.

Paul Krugman , writing for the NY Times, has perhaps telescoped the coming election fight best:

"The deficit is about to go above half a trillion dollars, the economy is still losing jobs, the triumph in Iraq has turned to dust and ashes, and Mr. Bush's poll numbers are at or below their pre-9/11 levels. Nor can the members of this administration simply lose like gentlemen. For one thing, that's not how they operate. Furthermore, everything suggests that there are major scandals -involving energy policy, environmental policy,Iraq contracts and cooked intelligence -that would burst into the light of day if the current management lost its grip on power. So these people must win, at any cost. The result, clearly, will be an ugly, bitter campaign - probably the nastiest of modern American history. Four months ago it seemed that the 2004 campaign would be all slow-mo films of Mr. Bush in his flight suit. But at this point, it's likely to be pictures of Howard Dean or Wesley Clark that morph into Saddam Hussein. And Donald Rumsfeld has already rolled out the stab-in-the-back argument: if you criticize the administration, you're lending aid and comfort to the enemy. This political ugliness will take its toll on policy, too. The administration's infallibility complex -its inability to admit ever making a mistake -will get even worse. And I disagree with those who think the administration can claim infallibility even while practicing policy flexibility: on major issues, such as taxes or Iraq, any sensible policy would too obviously be an implicit admission that previous policies had failed. In other words, if you thought the last two years were bad, just wait: it's about to get worse. A lot worse."

-N
_________________________
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that
we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."-- Theodore Roosevelt

Top
#852870 - 09/13/03 12:24 PM Re: Bush again?
gryphon Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/09/01
Posts: 11678
Loc: Okemos, MI
I think Bush will cruise in fairly comfortably. Prolly.
_________________________
"If we lose freedom here, there's no place to escape to."
MSU - the university of Michigan!
Wheels

Top
#852871 - 09/13/03 12:25 PM Re: Bush again?
John Andrew Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/24/03
Posts: 3041
Loc: Southern California
 Quote:
Originally posted by Larry:
John Andrews wrote: If the people of Afganistan want/allow the Taliban to take over again,that is their decision. We have no right to impose a governmental structure on them. Our job is to find a way to deal with whatever threat they may pose for us. [/b]


My God, man, do you think the people in Afghanistan *wanted* that? Do you think the Taliban put it up for a vote, and the people made a decision?[/b]
No, when the US installed the Taliban in power in Afganistan, the US did not seek a vote of the people. But then, we have not sought their vote this time either.

The Afgani society is run on a warlord-basis, not unlike the princes in Medieval Europe. Each warlord controls a certain section of the country. They gain their authority through basic rough and tumble power struggles, as well as localized, primitive military battles. Each warlord gives fealty to whomever will support him at any given time.

I would not want to live in such a society, but it seems to have worked for centuries for Afganistan. Whether the US or any other power thinks this is the way to run a country is not pertinent. It was not pertinent when the Soviets decided the way Afganistan was moving was a threat to them -- so they invaded -- it was not pertinent when the US installed the Taliban. It was not pertinent when the US overthrew the Taliban and installed the current government.

The Afgani people, just like the Iraqi people and all other countries, will work things out for themselves in whatever way they choose to work it out. They do not need the US telling them what to do, imposing a government to our liking or even saying that the way they should decide how to run their country is through elections.

The only thing the US should be doing is making sure it is safe and secure. It should not be overthrowing governments, installing new ones and imposing a political structure on other countries.
_________________________
You can be disappointed, but you cannot walk away. This fight has just begun. Senator John Edwards

Top
#852872 - 09/13/03 04:29 PM Re: Bush again?
kathyk Offline
6000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/19/03
Posts: 6971
Loc: Maine
Rah, rah, JA. THis is my response to the lastest on the Benedict thread too, since these two thread are currently meandering around each other.

Virtually every time the US has unilaterally tried to impose its will on a sovereign nation, the results have been disastrous: Vietnam, Iran, Nicaragua, Chile, El Salvador, Indonesia, Afghanistan (supporting the Taliban!) and Iraq (we helped the Brits oust the first post-colonial democracy and later directly helped Sadam rise to power). There are too many to list. And it's always been for selfish interests, not because we want to make a better world (remember all the conservatives who were so up and arms when when the military was posing to deploy to the Balkans). Don't people learn? I don't know why anyone thinks Iraq will be different. It's a country ripe for civil war - a coutry that was created by the Brits when they dismantled that part of their empire. (I can just picture some general looking at a map, "Hmmm - let's see, we'll take the Sunnis', the Kurds' and the Shiites' regions, put 'em all together and call it Iraq" - brilliant! ) As a horrific a despot as Sadam was (is - I should say), he managed to hold the country together. Perhaps, such an artificially created country could only be held together by a despot. Perhaps a civil war will be necessary to sort it all out. But, for God's sakes, it shouldn't be us trying to sort it out, and it damn well wouldn't haven been if not for the fact (as Ari said) it's sitting on a sea of oil. For goodness sakes, when Kuwait, the one country that was truly threatened by Iraq adamently opposed this war, shouldn't that have served as a clue to anyone wondering how a big a threat Iraq really was? The longer we are there, the more they will hate us, the more the rest of the ARab world will hate us, the more their very reason for hating us is underscored (we invade and rape their holy lands). The fact is Iraq sits on something like 40% of the world's oil reserves and controls the export of some 80% (my statistics may be wrong, but I believe it's something like that). So, like big bullies, there we are, stomping on and killing anyone who dares threaten our unsatiable, gluttonous thirst for crude.

Top
#852873 - 09/13/03 04:42 PM Re: Bush again?
Virginia_dup1 Offline
Full Member

Registered: 06/25/03
Posts: 147
Loc: Virginia
Yeah, you're right KathyK, we asked for it on 9/11. If we would just stop wanting oil and stay out of everyone's way, the world would love us. The world hates us because we thrive when they don't. They can't admit that our system of government is, dare I say, better. The Arabic culture died centuries ago and they have to blame someone for their miseries... along comes the US. Perfect, a country built on indivdual freedoms... we can't have that. They will keep targeting us until they drive us under... do you not get that? The UN does not have our back.

Do you really think they'd leave us alone if we left them alone. You simply don't get it. We are the world's scapegoat. That's why France, Germany, and the UN constantly undermine us. Kyoto, puuullleeease. That is an economic disaster waiting to happen. But the whole world is behind it so it must be right.

Top
#852874 - 09/13/03 04:47 PM Re: Bush again?
JBryan Offline
9000 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/19/02
Posts: 9798
Loc: Oklahoma City
We installed the Taliban in Afghanistan? Not exactly. We helped the Afghans kick the Russians out of Afghanistan. The Taliban came into power with no help from us. They overthrew a government that we were much more in favor of. The Taliban was a creation born of foreign influence all right but it was not us. It was more the creation of Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda. You are rewriting history a little bit here.
_________________________
Better to light one small candle than to curse the %&#$@#! darkness.

Top
#852875 - 09/13/03 05:05 PM Re: Bush again?
kathyk Offline
6000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/19/03
Posts: 6971
Loc: Maine
Virginia said:
 Quote:
Do you really think they'd leave us alone if we left them alone.
At this point no. I think we're totally entrenched in the mess. However, if we could truly leave them alone, as in staying out of the Arab peninsula completely (And I realize this is not possible, if for no other reason than the fact the Israel would implode without our support), they would have no more fuel for the hatred and no justification for jihad.


JBryan, there is a lot of evidence out there to support the allegation that the US covertly supported the Taliban in the interests of removing the Soviet threat from another strategic oil post.

Top
#852876 - 09/13/03 05:21 PM Re: Bush again?
JBryan Offline
9000 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/19/02
Posts: 9798
Loc: Oklahoma City
Kathyk,

The Taliban did not even exist when the Russians were in Afghanistan. We had nothing to do with their creation and would have had no interest in a bunch of lunatics like that running the country. The poeple we supported were the Mujahadeen some of which went on to become part of the Taliban (one of them was Osama bin Laden) and others went on to become the opposition to the Taliban but we have never supported the Taliban. Also, since when is Afghanistan a strategic oil post? They have no oil.
_________________________
Better to light one small candle than to curse the %&#$@#! darkness.

Top
#852877 - 09/13/03 06:05 PM Re: Bush again?
John Andrew Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/24/03
Posts: 3041
Loc: Southern California
 Quote:
Originally posted by Virginia:
Yeah, you're right KathyK, we asked for it on 9/11. [/b]
You are again falling for the propoganda the Bush Administration is putting out. There is no connection, and no one has been able to make the connction, between Iraq and 9/11. If the Bush Administration really wanted to invade and occupy a country that was involved, we would be occupying Saudi Arabia right now -- not Iraq. The fact we are not belies everything the Administration says about this being a direct reaction to 9/11.

You are also, again, assuming that the only response to 9/11 was a unilaterialist, militaristic one -- requiring full scale war and occupation of other countries. This is a massive leap of logic that is not justified.

Do you truly believe, Mr. Virginia, that the extremist policies of the Bush Administration was the ONLY way for us to respond to a terrorist attack to make us secure?

Surely you don't think there were/are no other options.
_________________________
You can be disappointed, but you cannot walk away. This fight has just begun. Senator John Edwards

Top
#852878 - 09/13/03 06:12 PM Re: Bush again?
John Andrew Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/24/03
Posts: 3041
Loc: Southern California
 Quote:
Originally posted by JBryan:
Kathyk,

The Taliban did not even exist when the Russians were in Afghanistan. We had nothing to do with their creation and would have had no interest in a bunch of lunatics like that running the country. The poeple we supported were the Mujahadeen some of which went on to become part of the Taliban (one of them was Osama bin Laden) and others went on to become the opposition to the Taliban but we have never supported the Taliban. Also, since when is Afghanistan a strategic oil post? They have no oil. [/b]
JBryan

I think you had better do a little homework on the history of US overt and covert involvement in Afganistan during and after the Soviet invasion.

Second, no, Afganistan does not have a lot of oil. But they are a country through which we have wanted oil pipelines constructed -- for which Bush Administration negotiations with the Taliban broke off in August, 2001.

And what was one of the first foreign contracts given after the US supported government was installed (with a President who used to work for an American oil company -- a President we forced on them in the last hours of the conference to establish the new government after it was clear the Afgani leaders wanted someone else)? Why, it was a contract to build the pipe line the Bush Administration was negotiating for!

Coincidence? I think not. Especially since once the contract was negotiated and signed, we stopped hunting Osama Bin Laden and turned all of our attention to Iraq.
_________________________
You can be disappointed, but you cannot walk away. This fight has just begun. Senator John Edwards

Top
#852879 - 09/13/03 06:33 PM Re: Bush again?
John Andrew Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/24/03
Posts: 3041
Loc: Southern California
 Quote:
Originally posted by kathyk:

Virtually every time the US has unilaterally tried to impose its will on a sovereign nation, the results have been disastrous: Vietnam, Iran, Nicaragua, Chile, El Salvador, Indonesia, Afghanistan (supporting the Taliban!) and Iraq (we helped the Brits oust the first post-colonial democracy and later directly helped Sadam rise to power). There are too many to list. And it's always been for selfish interests, not because we want to make a better world (remember all the conservatives who were so up and arms when when the military was posing to deploy to the Balkans). Don't people learn? I don't know why anyone thinks Iraq will be different. [/b]
Kathy

One of the few truisms is that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

We will find the same result this time and we probably won't learn from this anymore than we learned from the others.
_________________________
You can be disappointed, but you cannot walk away. This fight has just begun. Senator John Edwards

Top
#852880 - 09/13/03 06:44 PM Re: Bush again?
JBryan Offline
9000 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/19/02
Posts: 9798
Loc: Oklahoma City
JA,

I think it is you that had better do your homework. I gave you the facts now you tell me where they are wrong. Assigning homework is no substitute for supporting your thesis with fact. When was it that we supposedly helped the Taliban? It sure wasn't when they were taking over the country because we were in support of the government then in control.

The matter of the pipeline is entirely superfluous to the topic at hand but, since you brought it up so what? I am amazed at some of the things you people will work up into some kind of conspiracy. I see...a pipeline. Might be a good thing for a country on its knees economically.
_________________________
Better to light one small candle than to curse the %&#$@#! darkness.

Top
#852881 - 09/13/03 06:54 PM Re: Bush again?
John Andrew Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/24/03
Posts: 3041
Loc: Southern California
 Quote:
Originally posted by JBryan:

I see...a pipeline. Might be a good thing for a country on its knees economically. [/b]
To be honest, I think our economy needs more than just a pipeline in Afganistan to get us off our knees.
_________________________
You can be disappointed, but you cannot walk away. This fight has just begun. Senator John Edwards

Top
#852882 - 09/13/03 07:01 PM Re: Bush again?
EHpianist Offline
1000 Post Club Member

Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 1703
Loc: NY-Madrid-Newfoundland (rhymes...
Democracy cannot be imposed on a country from the outside. The country's citizens need to demand it for themselves as a majority, it has to grow organically from the inside, otherwise it will never work.

 Quote:
Originally posted by Virginia:
Yeah, you're right KathyK, we asked for it on 9/11...The world hates us because we thrive when they don't. They can't admit that our system of government is, dare I say, better. The Arabic culture died centuries ago and they have to blame someone for their miseries... along comes the US. Perfect, a country built on indivdual freedoms... we can't have that. [/b]
Oh, please! You think that the reason the Arab world hated us enough to lead up to 9/11 was because of *envy*, because we are a successful form of government and they're jealous? If you actually looked at the historical trail and not at the US propaganda you would see that the human conflict stems from the fact that for the last 50 years the US has been intervening in the Arab world's governments, their politics, pitting one side against another, propping up the leader of the day, and then dumping them when no longer in our interests and letting the citizens and the countries rot with the consequences. *That* creates hatred, not a "my government is better than yours" argument.

Elena
http://www.concertpianist.com
_________________________
Schnabel's advie to Horowitz: "When a piece gets difficult, make faces."

Top
#852883 - 09/13/03 07:29 PM Re: Bush again?
JBryan Offline
9000 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/19/02
Posts: 9798
Loc: Oklahoma City
 Quote:
Originally posted by John Andrew:
 Quote:
Originally posted by JBryan:

I see...a pipeline. Might be a good thing for a country on its knees economically. [/b]
To be honest, I think our economy needs more than just a pipeline in Afganistan to get us off our knees. [/b]
I was referring to the Afghan economy. I would not describe our economy as being on its knees.
_________________________
Better to light one small candle than to curse the %&#$@#! darkness.

Top
#852884 - 09/13/03 08:33 PM Re: Bush again?
jkeene Offline
500 Post Club Member

Registered: 07/08/03
Posts: 701
Loc: Central Florida
 Quote:
Originally posted by John Andrew:
No, when the US installed the Taliban in power in Afganistan, the US did not seek a vote of the people. But then, we have not sought their vote this time either.

The Afgani society is run on a warlord-basis, not unlike the princes in Medieval Europe. Each warlord controls a certain section of the country. They gain their authority through basic rough and tumble power struggles, as well as localized, primitive military battles. Each warlord gives fealty to whomever will support him at any given time.

I would not want to live in such a society, but it seems to have worked for centuries for Afganistan.
...
[/b]
John,

Here are two links on the timeline of the Taliban, one from
World Press and one from CNN .

Neither one supports your claim that the US installed the Taliban. We may be guilty of not having fully accurate foresight, backing Hekmatyer instead of Massoud, and definitely guilty of pulling out too soon, but laying the dead dog of "installing the Taliban" at the US feet is preposterous.

Moving on to the implication that warlords are the natural way of things in Afghanistan, well, smallpox, polio and malaria are natural too. Wiping them out is a good thing to do, even more so when they start to spread beyond their original point of infection.

As to us picking the form of a country's government, I care not whether a constitutional monarchy or a dictatorship attacks us. It's not the form, it's the behavior.

However, some forms have been shown by history to strongly correlate with certain behaviors. Providing assistance to Iraq in avoiding an initial installation of an undesirable form is only the right thing to do. After pulling them out of the frying pan, the fire is not high on the list of desirable next steps.

Jeff

Top
#852885 - 09/13/03 09:22 PM Re: Bush again?
kathyk Offline
6000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/19/03
Posts: 6971
Loc: Maine
I couldn't have said it better myself.

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0708-08.htm

Top
#852886 - 09/13/03 10:20 PM Re: Bush again?
John Andrew Offline
3000 Post Club Member

Registered: 05/24/03
Posts: 3041
Loc: Southern California
 Quote:
Originally posted by jkeene:
[John,

Here are two links on the timeline of the Taliban, one from
World Press and one from CNN .

Neither one supports your claim that the US installed the Taliban. We may be guilty of not having fully accurate foresight, backing Hekmatyer instead of Massoud, and definitely guilty of pulling out too soon, but laying the dead dog of "installing the Taliban" at the US feet is preposterous.

Moving on to the implication that warlords are the natural way of things in Afghanistan, well, smallpox, polio and malaria are natural too. Wiping them out is a good thing to do, even more so when they start to spread beyond their original point of infection.

As to us picking the form of a country's government, I care not whether a constitutional monarchy or a dictatorship attacks us. It's not the form, it's the behavior.

However, some forms have been shown by history to strongly correlate with certain behaviors. Providing assistance to Iraq in avoiding an initial installation of an undesirable form is only the right thing to do. After pulling them out of the frying pan, the fire is not high on the list of desirable next steps.

Jeff [/b]
Jeff

Actually, the time lines prove nothing about anything other than to give dates.

On the rest of your comment, are you really arguing that the US has the right to invade and occupy a country because its form of government is a type that sometimes is a threat to other countries? Are there not a lot of dictatorships -- even truly brutal ones -- which do not threaten their neighbors or the world? Of course there are.

To use your line of reasoning that because some brutal dictators are international threats we are therefore justified to go after any of them is a stretch I am not prepared to make.

You statement that we should assist the Iraqi's in not installing an undesireable form of government is really kind of arrogant. Who is to decide what is a desireable form. The Iraqi's or the US?

I would opt for the Iraqi's and I would opt to allow them to set up any form they develop through whatever mechanisms they decide to use -- even if we do not approve of the mechanism or that form of government is one we think is undesireable.

I would also argue the US need not be the one to help them through this process. We can turn everything over to the UN and let them help.

France has proposed the creation of a provisional government by next month, a constitution by the end of the year and elections next Spring. The US says no.

Why not? Why don't we say OK but we will need UN troops in large numbers by the time of the elections, with their introduction beginning with the establishment of the provisional government, and we intend to pull out in equal numbers to the arrival of the UN troops?

What is wrong with this? We would be able to begin withdrawal within a few months and be out of the quagmire within a year -- indeed, in time for Mr. Bush's reelection campaign.
_________________________
You can be disappointed, but you cannot walk away. This fight has just begun. Senator John Edwards

Top
#852887 - 09/14/03 08:48 PM Re: Bush again?
Virginia_dup1 Offline
Full Member

Registered: 06/25/03
Posts: 147
Loc: Virginia
JA - I don't think youíre stupid but quite naive. France wants to help now? And you want to give the keys to country to them after we did all the heavy lifting? What planet are you from? Were you observing their antics while we trying to get Saddam to come clean?

The UN? They'd be deciding the color of the drapes in their meeting rooms for the next 6 months... but reporting good progress on a frequent basis.

I know you think France is really smart and sophisticated but I've got news for you... they let children die in front of them and they did nothing... nothing. Maybe I'm not as well rounded as you, you probably know all the wines of the world but I do know that letting France back into this issue rewards bad behavior. This was not a matter of disagreement... they actively worked to undermine us. We put our people in harms way and I will jump right off the Bush band wagon (at 70 mph if need be) if they let them near Iraq. You want to see all your fallacious issues regarding the Bush admin come true? France will nose dive this opportunity quicker than you can say "we surrender".

Top
#852888 - 09/14/03 09:01 PM Re: Bush again?
Renauda Offline
5000 Post Club Member

Registered: 04/16/02
Posts: 5066
 Quote:
Originally posted by John Andrew:

If the people of Afganistan want/allow the Taliban to take over again,that is their decision. We have no right to impose a governmental structure on them. Our job is to find a way to deal with whatever threat they may pose for us.

If the people of Iraq want an Iran style Shiite government, it is not up to us to say no. We have no right to. Our responsibility is to ourselves, to ensure our security from any threat they may be for us.

[/b]
If the people of either country end up with a return to Taliban tyranny or a tyranny of meddlesome Mullahs you had better believe that our security and well being are at stake. You can be rest assured that power will have been usurped. Either way the those countries will pose a threat to every Western, and for that matter every Developing nation, in the world in an effort to throw us all back into the Middle Ages.

Do we have right to interfere or impose? You bet we do and yes, we will have to overcome this ridiculous notion that fanatics of this sort can ever be responsible members of the global community.
_________________________
"The older the fiddle, the sweeter the music"~ Augustus McCrae

Top
#852889 - 09/14/03 11:03 PM Re: Bush again?
kathyk Offline
6000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/19/03
Posts: 6971
Loc: Maine
Has anyone here ever heard of the concept of self-determination?

Top
#852890 - 09/14/03 11:25 PM Re: Bush again?
JBryan Offline
9000 Post Club Member

Registered: 01/19/02
Posts: 9798
Loc: Oklahoma City
I'm sure it is a concept with which everyone here is familiar. It is certainly something neither the Afghans nor the Iraqis had before we arrived on the scene. Hopefully, that is something we can leave them with.
_________________________
Better to light one small candle than to curse the %&#$@#! darkness.

Top
#852891 - 09/15/03 12:18 AM Re: Bush again?
Renauda Offline
5000 Post Club Member

Registered: 04/16/02
Posts: 5066
 Quote:
Originally posted by kathyk:
Has anyone here ever heard of the concept of self-determination? [/b]
The people of Afghanistan and Iraq stand a much better chance at self-determination now under occupation than they ever would under Taliban or clerical tyrants of any sort.
_________________________
"The older the fiddle, the sweeter the music"~ Augustus McCrae

Top
#852892 - 09/15/03 12:27 AM Re: Bush again?
gryphon Offline
Yikes! 10000 Post Club Member

Registered: 08/09/01
Posts: 11678
Loc: Okemos, MI
JA, the best thing I can say to you now is even Dick Gephardt says the French are idiots for their proposals. Of course, he also says that France is France, they're just ignorant and arrogant that way, but in the end they are still our frinds so we have to play hard ball with them and tell them "no" but still keep them on board.

Now why we need them on board in the first place he didn't explain.
_________________________
"If we lose freedom here, there's no place to escape to."
MSU - the university of Michigan!
Wheels

Top
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >

What's Hot!!
HOW TO POST PICTURES on the Piano Forums
-------------------
Sharing is Caring!
About the Buttons
-------------------
Forums Rules & Help
-------------------
ADVERTISE
on Piano World

The world's most popular piano web site.
-------------------
PIANO BOOKS
Interesting books about the piano, pianists, piano history, biographies, memoirs and more!
(ad) HAILUN Pianos
Hailun Pianos - Click for More
ad (Casio)
Celviano by Casio Rebate
Ad (Seiler/Knabe)
Knabe Pianos
Sheet Music
(PW is an affiliate)
Sheet Music Plus Featured Sale
(125ad) Dampp Chaser
Dampp Chaser Piano Life Saver
(ad) Lindeblad Piano
Lindeblad Piano Restoration
New Topics - Multiple Forums
Question on Dampp Chaser installation
by electone2007
Today at 02:56 AM
Help to choose between upright Yamaha JU109 & Ritmuller110r2
by yurana
Today at 02:01 AM
I've got it! Who remembers that Steinway O project?
by TwoSnowflakes
Today at 01:29 AM
A study of the practice behaviors of effective pianists
by lyricmudra
Yesterday at 10:37 PM
Ease of play - Yamaha p35 or p105
by DeadPoets
Yesterday at 10:37 PM
Who's Online
63 registered (barbaram, AZNpiano, adrpiano, AtomicBond, Baroque Style, beet31425, 11 invisible), 1072 Guests and 19 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
76399 Members
42 Forums
157943 Topics
2319488 Posts

Max Online: 15252 @ 03/21/10 11:39 PM
(ads by Google)

Visit our online store for gifts for music lovers

 
Help keep the forums up and running with a donation, any amount is appreciated!
Or by becoming a Subscribing member! Thank-you.
Donate   Subscribe
 
Our Piano Related Classified Ads
|
Dealers | Tuners | Lessons | Movers | Restorations | Pianos For Sale | Sell Your Piano |

Advertise on Piano World
| Subscribe | Piano World | PianoSupplies.com | Advertise on Piano World | Donate | Link to Us | Classifieds |
| |Contact | Privacy | Legal | About Us | Site Map | Free Newsletter | Press Room |


copyright 1997 - 2014 Piano World ® all rights reserved
No part of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission