Anyone remember the reaction to militarism following the debacle in Vietnam? The American public, and especially the next American Presidents wanted nothing to do with international conflicts, the military retreated from public view to lick its wounds, it was a full generation before we got significantly involved anywhere in the world again.So, Tim Egan, says, is the legacy of Bush's misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan: The Bush Burden He’s there in every corner of Congress where a microphone fronts a politician, there in Russia and the British Parliament and the Vatican. You may think George W. Bush is at home in his bathtub, painting pictures of his toenails, but in fact he’s the biggest presence in the debate over what to do in Syria.His legacy is paralysis, hypocrisy and uncertainty practiced in varying degrees by those who want to learn from history and those who deny it. Let’s grant some validity to the waffling, though none of it is coming from the architects of the worst global fiasco in a generation.Time should not soften what President George W. Bush, and his apologists, did in an eight-year war costing the United States more than a trillion dollars, 4,400 American soldiers dead and the displacement of two million Iraqis. The years should not gauze over how the world was conned into an awful conflict. History should hold him accountable for the current muddy debate over what to do in the face of a state-sanctioned mass killer. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/05/the-bush-bur...
Obama is up to his neck in his own doo-doo...and Goofy pulls the 'blame Bush' lame excuse for the current situation.Libs always 'divert' and 'hide' and 'look over here!' strategy when their "the ONE" is in such political hot water of his own making. Red lines...really...how many more lies do we have to listen to from Obama....well, I set it...well, no...it wasn't me!.it was the world!.....look over here...not me!..not me!.....Heck, even Pelosi and Reid are running as fast as they can away from this....You hear Hairy Reid say anything? other than muffle muffle mumble mumble?heh heht.
His [Bush's] legacy is paralysis, hypocrisy and uncertainty practiced in varying degrees by those who want to learn from history and those who deny it.Well there is certainty within the democratic senators in the Foreign Relations Committee. 7 out of 10* wish to become involve in this potential quagmire. No paralysis there, though one might question there learning from history.Mebbe we can learn about more recent ME involvement..say Libya? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/special-repor...I love the title of the article "We all thought Libya had moved on – it has, but into lawlessness and ruin" Libya has almost entirely stopped producing oil as the government loses control of much of the country to militia fighters. Libya has plunged unnoticed into its worst political and economic crisis since the defeat of Gaddafi two years ago. Government authority is disintegrating in all parts of the country putting in doubt claims by American, British and French politicians that Nato’s military action in Libya in 2011 was an outstanding example of a successful foreign military intervention which should be repeated in Syria.Libyans are increasingly at the mercy of militias which act outside the law. Popular protests against militiamen have been met with gunfire; 31 demonstrators were shot dead and many others wounded as they protested outside the barracks of “the Libyan Shield Brigade” in the eastern capital Benghazi in June.Though the Nato intervention against Gaddafi was justified as a humanitarian response to the threat that Gaddafi’s tanks would slaughter dissidents in Benghazi, the international community has ignored the escalating violence.Methinks our representative should be considering the potential blow back from a Syria intervention. It is not beneficial to become involved this religious sectarian conflict.This is a situation in which no option is not horrible. And the USA will be blame for whatever result happens there no matter what. Just as we are in Egypt.**Egypt & Libya occurred under Obama's watch. Hey mebbe we can hear a "frigging Obama" comment? Makes a nice change from the friggin Bush sentiments. Don't ya think?;>)*http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/09/04/wh...Who voted yes?: Committee Chairman Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) and Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) (by proxy — was absent due to the Jewish holiday), Benjamin Cardin (D-Md.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Christopher Coons (D-Del.), Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.). Ranking member Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Sens. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.).Who voted no?: Sens. Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Christopher Murphy (D-Conn.), James Risch (R-Idaho), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.)Who voted present?: Sen. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.).**http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jul/06/world/la-fg-egypt-an...As rival camps of Egyptians protest for and against the toppling of President Mohamed Morsi, there is a rare point of agreement: America is to blame.Anti-Americanism, which has long been an undercurrent here, is erupting again as Egyptians battle over the future of their country. Each side accuses the United States of backing the other and alleges conspiracies in which the Obama administration is secretly fostering dissent in an attempt to weaken Egypt.It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't quagmire in which the U.S. appears to have alienated both sides, underscoring waning American influence and credibility as it attempts to navigate the turmoil."It was part of the U.S. plot to support Morsi so that the people would turn against him," Fahmi said.Just a few miles away in Tahrir Square, anti-Morsi protesters insist the U.S. is on the ousted president's side, just as Washington supported Mubarak.
Time should not soften what President George W. Bush, and his apologists, did in an eight-year war costing the United States more than a trillion dollars, 4,400 American soldiers dead and the displacement of two million Iraqis.... History should hold him accountable for the current muddy debate over what to do in the face of a state-sanctioned mass killer. This sounded good until the last sentence because the evidence against Syria is identical to the evidence against Iraq. Both are based on lies and forgeries. Bottom line there is no evidence - and on the subject of evidence, Putin called Kerry a liar: Putin called Obama Secretary of State John Kerry a liar over Kerry's testimony this week before Congress....Speaking to his human rights council Wednesday, Putin said, "This was very unpleasant and surprising for me. We talk to them (the Americans), and we assume they are decent people, but he is lying and he knows that he is lying. This is sad."Putin has criticized Obama administration claims that Bashar Assad's government attacked the rebels with chemical weapons. http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2013/09/05/obama-kerry...We need to stay out of Syria. -=Ajax=-
Putin called Obama Secretary of State John Kerry a liarAre you claiming we should believe the ex head of the KGB rather than John Kerry?Let's think about this accusation.What's in it for Putin?What's in it for Kerry?What's in it for Obama?
Are you claiming we should believe the ex head of the KGB rather than John Kerry? Putin wants proof and Kerry has none. Therefore Putin has more credibility. But tell me, do you think we should be arming Al Quaeda terrorists to overthrow the Syrian government?We have no business in Syria and need to stay out. And who is going to pay for another useless war? Do we have sequestration for such useless wars?-=Ajax=-
You need to go back an study your history. What Putin wants is what the Russians have wanted since the 18th century. Continuous access to a warm weather port. It appears you accept as fact that we would be arming Al Queda but don't accept as fact that the Syrian government used the sarin.And you only answered part of my post. Why do you think Kerty is doing this? And if you agree with Putin that he is lying, why is he lying?What is in it for Obama?On this issue I side with the father of modern conservatism who said* All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing* http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Edmund_Burke
It appears you accept as fact that we would be arming Al Queda but don't accept as fact that the Syrian government used the sarin. Where is the proof that the Syrian government used sarin gas? Prove it. On this issue I side with the father of modern conservatism who said*All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing Like we did in Iraq? Where is the proof? And by the way, is Curveball back?-=Ajax=-
Where is the proof that the Syrian government used sarin gas? Prove it.LOL. Yes. Many of us come to this board for one simple reason. We live in the hope that teabagger trolls will challenge us to prove things to them that they don't want to believe.
Prove it.Gee shucks can't do it. sorry. THat is the issue right. What if i could prove it was Assas. Would you favor a military strike. But who do you THINK did it.Now THINK about this please. Use your brain.BTW were u against invading Iraq from 2001. I was. So I asked you a lot of questions. Do you care to answer any?And who is curveball?
And who is curveball?"Curveball" was a supposed Iraqi chemical engineer who defected and claimed that he'd worked on an Iraqi bioweapons program. The German and Biritsh intelligence services tried to tell the Bush Administration that this intel was false. They were right. Curveball turned out to be a failed chemical engineering student who worked for one of Saddam Hussein's sons at a TV production company and had a warrant out for his arrest on a charge of theft.Details:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curveball_(informant)
Thanks. Is there anyone analagous to curveball in this situation with the chemical weapons in Syria?
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |