Bush's latest claim

iamthewalrus109 · 10-12-2004, 08:59 AM

It seems now John Kerry's recent interview with the New York times is now Bush's latest fodder in a pre-election push to win votes. Kerry's out of context quote on likening terrorism with prostitution and other more "minor" crimes, when in it's lower form, is Bush's latest broken record theme. If Kerry's smart he'll bring up George Bush's admition of almost a month ago where he said we could never win against terrorism, it's a tactic, which was quickly spun by Scott McClellan and retracted by Bush a day later. I think Kerry is right, it should be reduced to what it was pre-9/11. It's not terrorism, it's the international forces that use it to thwart globalist giants like the US and mulit-national corporations, largely represented by the US. The fact remains that before the first Gulf war, this really wasn't an issue. Placing US troops in the middle East, supporting and creating CIA trained cadres in Afganistan to fight the Soviets, sustained military supply lines to Israel, all hinging on foriegn dependence on oil has landed us here. Now with a crusade going on in Iraq there is now a true reason for terrorism to flourish. To deal with terrorists you remove the motivation, not create new ones, it's just that simple. If you create new motivations then there must be a harsher response to the threat, a true 0 tolerance level. If you want to keep current economic and social condtions the same, those which embolden the terrorists, then you must fully escalate the offensive.

-Walrus

Happy Monkey · 10-12-2004, 09:51 AM

Apparently, Bush is not working to bring terrorism down to the nuicance level. Lovely. I know I'm looking forward to an eternal war.

Undertoad · 10-12-2004, 11:22 AM

W.'s "unwinnable" and Kerry's "nuisance level" are pretty much identical statements about the War on Terror.

Both sides parsed the various statements as they needed to campaign on them.

Both sides pretty much agree on the scope and nature of the problem.

iamthewalrus109 · 10-12-2004, 11:42 AM

I would like to say that they're the same, but GW is now back to saying we can win it. His point is far less articulate and he has flip-flopped on this one. I think it would be nice to identify the real issue and deal with it. Not call the country to arms in a farcsical war on terror, the enemy doesn't exist. It's an ingenious way to moblilize people's fear. It gets away from the general view of the war on terror, and abstration used to defeat percieved enemies. If Bush truly admitted to the idea of tactic, then he would have to ID and go after the true enemies, and that's much more difficult.

-Walrus

10-12-2004, 12:07 PM

I've been talking to a lot of our enlisted army guys since I've been canvassing for the Kerry campaign. Many of them are P.O.'d about the "now you see them, now you don't" WMD's and the fact that we are not going after Bin Laden. "You want me to go put my life on the line, at least be honest about your reasons for sending me off to war," said one. I talked to another man who said he'd always voted Republican up till now. He's a private building contracter, runs his own business. He's also in the Reserves and last year got called up on only 24 hour's notice. He lost all his bids and the jobs he'd been working on, and when he got home he lost the tax deductions on some expensive machinery he'd bought for his business because he hadn't used them for his livelyhood last year. He said, "I don't mind sacrificing for my country - that's why I signed on for the reserves in the first place, but when I get sent off somewhere on a fool's errand at great personal cost, it makes me damned angry. This whole terrorism thing/Patriot Act is destroying the country from within, not without."

Happy Monkey · 10-12-2004, 11:41 AM

I thought Bush's "unwinnable" was a rare moment of honesty. He immediately retracted it.

We'll see if Kerry wilts under the criticism of his quote, or defends it using, say a quote from General Brent Scowcroft:

Quote:

Can we win the war on terrorism? Yes, I think we can, in the sense that we can win the war on organized crime. There is going to be no peace treaty on the battleship Missouri in the war on terrorism, but we can break its back so that it is only a horrible nuisance and not a paralyzing influence on our societies.

General Brent Scowcroft
Bush 41 National Security Advisor
Bush 43 appointee to the Forum for International Security
"9/11 a Year On" conference, Sept. 2002
http://www.usip.org/events/2002/america/scowcroft.html

TheSnake · 10-12-2004, 01:49 PM

"Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded with patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader, and gladly so."
- Julius Caesar -

Clodfobble · 10-12-2004, 02:14 PM

Just nitpicking here, isn't that actually Shakespeare writing a line for Julius Caesar?

Elspode · 10-12-2004, 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

Just nitpicking here, isn't that actually Shakespeare writing a line for Julius Caesar?

Dubya should be so lucky to have such a speech writer.

TheSnake · 10-12-2004, 02:44 PM

Yes, I guess that was misleading, but nevertheless, I think it's a interesting statement for what is now happening.

iamthewalrus109 · 10-12-2004, 03:14 PM

I think that quote greatly sums up our current predicament well.

slang · 10-12-2004, 05:44 PM

The back and forth commentary is nice and all, but you are overlooking the obvious.

Once everyone on the planet is dead, there will be no terrorism.

Thought for sure you guys would "get that". O'well.

10-12-2004, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slang

The back and forth commentary is nice and all, but you are overlooking the obvious.

Once everyone on the planet is dead, there will be no terrorism.

Though for sure you guys would "get that". O'well.

And which country has the greatest arsenal of WMD of all, and which has a penchant for undeclared wars against other nations?

xoxoxoBruce · 10-12-2004, 06:48 PM

And a madman with his finger on the button?
Is Cheney a madman?

alphageek31337 · 10-13-2004, 12:59 AM

I only have to ask you, who in the history of the world, has ever used a nuclear weapon in wartime?

10-12-2004, 08:59 AM	#1
iamthewalrus109 High Propagandist Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 111	Bush's latest claim It seems now John Kerry's recent interview with the New York times is now Bush's latest fodder in a pre-election push to win votes. Kerry's out of context quote on likening terrorism with prostitution and other more "minor" crimes, when in it's lower form, is Bush's latest broken record theme. If Kerry's smart he'll bring up George Bush's admition of almost a month ago where he said we could never win against terrorism, it's a tactic, which was quickly spun by Scott McClellan and retracted by Bush a day later. I think Kerry is right, it should be reduced to what it was pre-9/11. It's not terrorism, it's the international forces that use it to thwart globalist giants like the US and mulit-national corporations, largely represented by the US. The fact remains that before the first Gulf war, this really wasn't an issue. Placing US troops in the middle East, supporting and creating CIA trained cadres in Afganistan to fight the Soviets, sustained military supply lines to Israel, all hinging on foriegn dependence on oil has landed us here. Now with a crusade going on in Iraq there is now a true reason for terrorism to flourish. To deal with terrorists you remove the motivation, not create new ones, it's just that simple. If you create new motivations then there must be a harsher response to the threat, a true 0 tolerance level. If you want to keep current economic and social condtions the same, those which embolden the terrorists, then you must fully escalate the offensive. -Walrus

10-12-2004, 09:51 AM	#2
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	Apparently, Bush is not working to bring terrorism down to the nuicance level. Lovely. I know I'm looking forward to an eternal war. __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

10-12-2004, 11:42 AM	#4
iamthewalrus109 High Propagandist Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 111	Unwinnable and nuisance level I would like to say that they're the same, but GW is now back to saying we can win it. His point is far less articulate and he has flip-flopped on this one. I think it would be nice to identify the real issue and deal with it. Not call the country to arms in a farcsical war on terror, the enemy doesn't exist. It's an ingenious way to moblilize people's fear. It gets away from the general view of the war on terror, and abstration used to defeat percieved enemies. If Bush truly admitted to the idea of tactic, then he would have to ID and go after the true enemies, and that's much more difficult. -Walrus

10-12-2004, 03:14 PM	#11
iamthewalrus109 High Propagandist Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 111	Very apropro I think that quote greatly sums up our current predicament well.

10-12-2004, 05:44 PM	#12
slang St Petersburg, Florida Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 3,423	The back and forth commentary is nice and all, but you are overlooking the obvious. Once everyone on the planet is dead, there will be no terrorism. Thought for sure you guys would "get that". O'well. Last edited by slang; 10-12-2004 at 05:54 PM.

10-12-2004, 11:22 AM	#3
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	W.'s "unwinnable" and Kerry's "nuisance level" are pretty much identical statements about the War on Terror. Both sides parsed the various statements as they needed to campaign on them. Both sides pretty much agree on the scope and nature of the problem.

10-12-2004, 12:07 PM	#5
marichiko Guest Posts: n/a	I've been talking to a lot of our enlisted army guys since I've been canvassing for the Kerry campaign. Many of them are P.O.'d about the "now you see them, now you don't" WMD's and the fact that we are not going after Bin Laden. "You want me to go put my life on the line, at least be honest about your reasons for sending me off to war," said one. I talked to another man who said he'd always voted Republican up till now. He's a private building contracter, runs his own business. He's also in the Reserves and last year got called up on only 24 hour's notice. He lost all his bids and the jobs he'd been working on, and when he got home he lost the tax deductions on some expensive machinery he'd bought for his business because he hadn't used them for his livelyhood last year. He said, "I don't mind sacrificing for my country - that's why I signed on for the reserves in the first place, but when I get sent off somewhere on a fool's errand at great personal cost, it makes me damned angry. This whole terrorism thing/Patriot Act is destroying the country from within, not without."

10-12-2004, 01:49 PM	#7
TheSnake Resident President Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 83	"Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded with patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader, and gladly so." - Julius Caesar -

10-12-2004, 02:14 PM	#8
Clodfobble UNDER CONDITIONAL MITIGATION Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 20,012	Just nitpicking here, isn't that actually Shakespeare writing a line for Julius Caesar?

10-12-2004, 02:44 PM	#10
TheSnake Resident President Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 83	Yes, I guess that was misleading, but nevertheless, I think it's a interesting statement for what is now happening.

10-12-2004, 06:48 PM	#14
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	And a madman with his finger on the button? Is Cheney a madman? __________________ The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.

10-13-2004, 12:59 AM	#15
alphageek31337 Enemy Combatant/Evildoer Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Posts: 263	I only have to ask you, who in the history of the world, has ever used a nuclear weapon in wartime? __________________ The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself. ---Friedrich Nietzsche

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)