Subject:
|
Re: You Can Lead A Horse To Water....
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 13 Mar 2003 19:54:01 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
216 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> As the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
> It is time for all of the anti-war crowd that are "sitting on the fence"
> because there isn't enough "evidence" or are waiting for a "smoking gun" to
> come clean. They are against the war because they are *anti-Bush*. They
> haven't gotten over the fact that Bush won ("stole";-) the election, and so
> their objectivity over the Saddam crisis is MIA. They are like a petulant
> child who hasn't gotten their way, the fact is that NO AMOUNT of evidence will
> be sufficient to change their minds, and so they are exposed for the dishonest
> frauds and political hacks that they are.
Dubya's daddy was a weasel when it came to supporting foreign dictatorships.
He was against all the communist dictatorships being overthown in eastern
europe (because he feared the anarchy that he supposed would follow) and
then amusingly tried to claim some kind of credit years later for helping
cause the overthrows. So it isn't surprising that he thought Saddam was his
kind of dictator: one he could work with. Surprise, surprise.
But I will give Bush the Senior some credit: after the invasion of Kuwait
with him sitting there with egg on his face, he was very skillful in raising
an alliance and garnering world opinion. And something else: he knew the
limitation of his mandate. The time to take out Saddam was then, but he
understood that he would do better by forgoeing that. World opinion wasn't
ready for him to go that far, deserved as it may have been. Part of it was
suspicion of old colonial problems, part of it was short-sightedness, and a
whole host of reasons. But at a certain point, continuing on against Iraq
would do more harm than good.
Dubya is basically saying his dad was an idiot for stopping. Weighed
against that, Dubya has less of a mandate to take out Saddam than his father
did, and less of a cause. He hasn't established any relationship between
Saddam and Al Qaeda, nor is Saddam threatening anyone with war at the
moment, much less actively engaged in an invasion. He is threatening to
invade because Saddam is "violating" a UN mandate, but wants to do it
outside of the auspices of the UN. Dubya is singularly incompetent. He is
trashing American influence for no good reason, destroying whatever trust we
had with Middle-Eastern countries, he is creating the very atmosphere for
increased Al Qaeda recruitment, in fact.
Saying the anti-war crowd is out to get Bush for stealing the election in
cahoots with his brother is just another case of you demonizing those that
you oppose. If such was the case, why did Bush get so much support in his
actions in Afghanistan?
In regards to Iraq, Dubya has left himself no face-saving way out, so he
blunders on in the most embarrasing fashion possible. His motivation is
suspicious, his claims unsupported, and his manner arrogantly offensive.
This is an unmitigated disaster.
-->Bruce<--
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | You Can Lead A Horse To Water....
|
| As the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. It is time for all of the anti-war crowd that are "sitting on the fence" because there isn't enough "evidence" or are waiting for a "smoking gun" to come clean. They are (...) (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
64 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
