Quote:
Originally posted by Cloud9
This guy sums it up for me more eloquently than I can in my current state of anger...
|
If "eloquent" is considered a condescending attack, this guy is no better than Rush Limbaugh and his daily attack on all the "Libs."
How can you condemn the role of one brutal totalitarian Arab regime in fostering terrorism but ignore the more obvious role of another such regime? Saudi Arabia's historic relationship to Islamist terrorism is far more clear-cut than Iraq's. Families of 9/11 victims have filed suit against the Saudis based on long and deep ties with terrorists, yet these ties don't seem to rouse you to indignation, much less corrective military action. Do you not find it noteworthy that 15 of 19 of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis? Can you assure us that strong Bush family business ties to Saudi Arabia don't have anything to do with this willful blindness? [/QUOTE]
First off, if anyone thinks this war is about Bush and Cheney's business partnerships or a personal vendetta to get the men that tried to kill Bush's father, take a minute and honestly ask yourself if Congress, the House, Colin Powell, Karl Rove, Condaleeza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, Tom Ridge and the Office of Homeland Security, the CIA, FBI, and any and all other people and organizations this has gone through who know more about this than we do, would have stopped this? Would Colin Powell honestly go toe to toe with the UN so Dick Cheney can keep his business interests in tact?
Why do you challenge "axis of evil" countries that constitute weak threats while accommodating the strong ones? North Korea has long been a grave danger to its neighbors. Yet you work to avoid antagonizing that country's leadership, while hastening to war against Iraq. Could this be because you believe that you can attack Iraq with some hope of success but are afraid of the consequences if you take on North Korea? What does this say about your ability to defend our country and our friends around the world against real threats to our security? [/QUOTE]
How many times should our country change gears and focus on a new problem? Look how long it's taken to build up momentum to achieve military action against Iraq. Should we simply just walk away and start all over with North Korea? I will agree that North Korea is a threat, but to keep leap-frogging between Iraq and North Korea not only kills the momentum of this action, it also kills the American's resolve to accomplish the task at hand.
How can you decry the threat of Iraq to our energy supply, yet advocate domestic policies that threaten that same energy supply? Your administration encourages waste of fuel on a scale unequaled in human history. Americans make up about 4.5 percent of world population, but use 25 percent of the world's energy. Despite the availability of a wide range of more efficient, cleaner burning technologies, the U.S. accounts for about 25 percent of carbon dioxide emissions causing global warming. At the same time, the United States refuses to sign treaties adopted by most other major nations to counteract global warming. You even oppose sensible steps to improve the gas mileage of the cars Americans drive, including monstrously gas-guzzling SUVs. [/QUOTE]
The finger should be pointed to every president over the past twenty years for this one. I don't defend Bush and his abscence of pushing alternative fuels. But I don't feel it's fair to blame him solely when there has been hardly any movement in the field in a national scale under any other president.
How can you insist that your goal is to introduce democracy into the lives of Iraqis while you move steadily to erode democracy in the United States? Even some conservative Republican legislators now consider your Patriot Act a terrible and dangerous mistake. Broadly expanded wiretap and surveillance provisions and a new proposal to check the criminal record and credit histories of passengers before they board planes don't sound very democratic. [/QUOTE]
I would be interested to see his stance on the Homeland Security Act a year ago when the fear was new and the images of the attack were still fresh in everyone's mind.
How can you criticize Iraq for its weaponry without explaining the role of the United States as one of that country's chief arms suppliers and ardent associate in its war with Iran? This make-and-break cycle is surely good for the defense industry, but what is the cost for the rest of us?
Why does the United States move to punish only some violators of U.N. resolutions? You cite Iraqi noncompliance as cause for war, yet you do nothing about the main violators of U.N. resolutions -- Morocco, Israel and Turkey, all of which are our close strategic allies. [/QUOTE]
How many fronts in a war are we expected to fight at once? Let us not forget the ongoing War Against Terror which is in need of American military support and now the numerous forces facing a deadline in Iraq.