Preserved Topic: Just something to wet your pallets. (Page 1 of 1)

In 1999, the United Nations, composed primarily of European countries, Japan, China, Iran, Lebanon, Tunisia, Libya, India, and Pakistan, created a "Coalition Against Terror." There was no rhetoric as the U.S. keeps whining about presently, as it was just the drafted document making a coalition. Actual stances on issues would be decided later.

America was asked to join. They didn't. The UN went forward, the U.S. vetoed it.

On September 11, 2001, the U.S. was attacked by people it now says were "flagged" as being suspicious. Bush proceeded with the drama of a "war on terrorism," and Europe begrudgingly opened up the old file from 1999.

Anybody with the false notion that Bush did anything more than say the fancy words "war on terrorism," when in fact he just went along with an idea posed 2 years ago, please share your thoughts. o.o I'm having a difficult time seeing Bush's "greatness."

[list=*]*This useless waste of space brought to you by, Lemming! 'That aint all fuzz, baby.''[/list]

Perhaps you can't see his "greatness" because whether he's "great" or not is inapplicable. What's important is that he does the best job he can possibly do while he's in charge.

I don't want to misunderstand so could you explain what exactly is your point? Are you saying we really don't oppose terrorism because we didn't join?

I think what hippielemming is saying is (and please correct me if I am mistaken) Bush is not great because he is simply regurgatating an old idea - that being, the war on terrorism. It wasn't his idea originally, so he is simply plagarising (how do you spell that word?!?).
Foolish, of course.

First of all, Bush's greatness has nothing to do with what he SAYS, but about what he DOES.
Secondly, Reagan announced in 1980 that HIS primary foriegn policy objective was to fight terrorism.
Thirdly, terrorism (state sponsored and otherwise) has long been a target of the left.

Many leaders, for many years, have declared (in words) some sort of 'war' or other action against terrorism. Many times it was proaghanda for other ideals.

Bush's greatness will rely on what he does.
Is 'terrorism' going to be the propaghanda in front of a foriegn policy difficult to pursue otherwise?
Will the hideous label 'terrorism' be placed only on official bad guys?
Will Bush go after terrorists, even if they have been traditionally allies?

These are the things that will determine Bush's greatness or not. Not what he is saying, or even who said it before...

mobrul

"What he does will determine his greatness", right on the money, that.

I think 9/11 has certainly opened the door to quite a few actions that could not have been imagined before, politically. We knew about the terrorist threat for years and anyone with eyes knew something like 9/11 was a forgone conclusion, it was only a matter of timing. The American public would never have supported what we are doing now in our "war on terror" before 9/11.

I do believe the label will only be applied to official bad guys. That is not to say that our bad guys won't become official bad guys in future, a la Noriega.

I don't think we will go after our bad guys in the same way we're taking out al Qaeda. In fact, if there was a way to negotiate with al Qaeda, we wouldn't be bombing Afghanistan right now. Some bad guys *must* be destroyed, while with others there is hope for a less violent solution.

Everyone hates the fact that we support the "evil" Jews, right? Well, we also support the "evil" Arabs in Turkey. Why? Because they are the only two democracies in the entire Middle East and it is in our strategic interest to have their support. Will will not declare them part of the "axis of evil" because there are other ways of pushing for reform in their case.

Evil Jews?
Evil Arabs?
Tsk tsk tsk

Evil governments.
Evil institutions.

It's not an issue of Jews, Arabs, Christians, Italians or any other such racial, ethnic or religious groups.
It's a problem with institutions of oppression, institutions of ill-gotten and unneeded authority.

Mostly, though, you're right on.
Of course, standing up for 'democracy' only has meaning if one really is standing up for democracy...not some rhetoric that sounds good in a 30 sec sound bite or a 1 line quote in the NYT.

quote:

---

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.
-Rev. Dr. MLK Jr.

---

Part of being the world's superpower includes critique of your friends as well as your enemies. It's that whole "log in your eye, chip in your neighbor's eye" thing.

mobrul

Powell has taken a lot of heat lately for criticizing Israel.

I know we're talking about governments and institutions but my "evil Jews evil Arabs" comment was intended for those who do see things through their hatred of certain ethnicities. It was not directed at any specific members here. It's just that I get extremely upset at hearing people's views on Israel clearly being driven by their either love or hate for the Jews.

Examples: Some Christian groups believe that the nation of Israel can do no wrong and they believe very strongly that "he who blesses Israel will be blessed and visa versa". Therefore, they turn a blind eye to any atrocities Israel commits, or are very reluctant to criticize.

On the other hand, there are more than a few anti-semites, here and abroad, who think all problems in the area would be solved easily if we just abandoned Israel completely, which of course would result in a bloodbath. But they would just say they had no right to be there in the first place, BFD.

Dammit, quit wetting my pallet already, I hate waking up wet.

I wish there was a 'two thumbs up' slimy...

mobrul

Well you wouldn't wake up wet if wet was 'whet.'

i can't help but wonder about how this all would be going, if Gore had won his *many* recounts.

Slimies don't have any appendages so the thumb thing is "right out".

It is my opinion that Gore would have been struggling his way through and doing an adequate job. Members of Gore's own campaign have remarked since 9/11 that it was probably a good thing Bush won. That speaks volumes.

bad guys?!?

~grins~

where are the good guys?