A Honest And Responsible Debate Here At Home (bush)? Hmmmmm

[The Straight Story]

A Honest And Responsible Debate Here At Home

America Must Debate Its Differences Honestly. There is a vigorous debate about the war in Iraq, and the President welcomes this debate. But this debate must be conducted responsibly when American troops are risking their lives overseas. There is a difference between honest critics who question the way the war is being prosecuted, and partisan critics who claim that we acted in Iraq because of oil, because of Israel, or because the American people were misled.

In A Time Of War, We Have A Responsibility To Show That Whatever Our Political Differences At Home, Our Nation Is United And Determined To Prevail. We have a responsibility to the men and women in uniform who deserve to know that support will be with them in good days and bad. We will settle for nothing less than complete victory. Support for the mission in Iraq should not be a partisan matter. Some of our finest men and women have given their lives in freedom's cause, and we will not waver, or weaken, or back down from the cause they served.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/01/20060110.html

[magellan]

1. Another of Bush**'s straw men

"I encourage debate on the War in Iraq...but be careful what you say and remember, we're still going to do it my way."

[Sydnie]

6. Yeah like that photo-op meeting with the former Sec of States?

You remember ... where he gave them all about 30 seconds to speak after he bloviated in their general direction for the majority of the meeting. Anybody heard anything from Albright since that meeting? Anyone? Bueller ... Bueller? I thought not. Wonder which bunker he has her buried under.

[ThoughtCriminal]

2. Allows for now debate on WHY

only HOW.

Well Fearless Leader, you screwed up both.

[NanceGreggs]

3. Hey, his words, not mine ...

"We have a responsibility to the men and women in uniform who deserve to know that support will be with them in good days and bad."

Yeah, 'help' as in body armour in the field, and full medical benefits; psychological as well as physical help when they come home with broken minds, broken bodies.

Seems to me this Administration isn't fulfilling their responsibility to the men and women in uniform through good days, or bad.

I don't know where we even begin to right the wrongs being done to the military and the vets - but ceasing to use them as backdrops in photo-ops, or as a political talking point instead of as people, might be a start.

But hey, that's just me ...

[autorank]

4. Oh, now he's doing an imitation of Rick Flair, Wrestling bad guy...

...cowering in the corner when the tables are turned, begging for mercy, with no intention of every fighting fair.

They break all the rules, all the time. They can never be trusted...who are they, the NEOCONS and the Republicans who support them.

It's all a big benefit for the defense industry. it's good for arms production to have perpetual war, especially when you're starting them all over the world.

Reasonable debate, sure; reasonable ... I'm stunned.

Exccllent post. Recommended.

[The Straight Story]

7. bush is just driving me nuts of late

it all seems so circular, and the biggest benefits to date have been he and his cronies/buddies.

I think the truth of it is they see iraq and iran as strategic for oil and other reasons - I am ok with that in some ways, if they would just friggin admit it (and I don't mean ok with the war, just the ideal of securing oil and strategic locations - that makes more sense than the reasons he gave).

Saddam was a threat, so is Iran. Clinton believed it, bush does, and from the crap coming out of Iran they sure sound like the kind of folk who want to kick our asses.

BUT - A threat must be evaulated and scaled. The response was not needed. There are many ways to deal with a threat, killing thousands of innocent people to get the few in power that were a threat does not seem like the best way to go about it all.

China is a threat, but most it's people are just avg joes like us. No need for a war - and we have not went to war with them. We have not looked at the root causes and how to change them - saddam and crew were not wanting to blow up Nigeria or Brazil, wonder why?

We are not hated for our freedoms, people in f'ing iraq don't care about what you and I do here at home. People hate those that attack them in some form, or screw with them in some way.

I don't like what those jackasses did on 9/11, it was WRONG, period. I don't care why they hated us, killing thousands of innocent people did not help their cause a bit. Just like killing thousands of innocent people in iraq won't help ours.

I saw we put the leaders of these dumb ass countries into a fighting ring and let em duke it out. I ain't fighting no war for some asshole who wants something - they can fight a war themselves.

[Mythsaje]

9. Hell, if YOU were Iran, wouldn't you want to kick our asses?

Not that they could unless we go and piss on 'em.

Let's look back a few years, before Bush's "Axis of Evil" speech. The Democratic movement was moving forward at a pretty good clip, with the hard-liners backed into a corner and the moderate folks pretty much standing aside. Then, having been named as a potential target, the hardliners were able to rouse a lot more support.

Bush SCREWED the poor kids in Iran who were already fighting for what we say we want there. If his intention was to intimidate the countries he named, it's funny how it DIDN'T FUCKING WORK.

[The Straight Story]

10. And it is sad really

How many there will pay the ultimate cost for this (and their) regimes desires.

To me the bible is right on with all this - an end times brought about by mankind's evil desires - the few destroying the many for their own, selfish, desires.

As we get smarter and make better weapons, we also get more paranoid about other countries. This leads, sadly, to war.

Science, perhaps, is a greater desrtoyer of lives than religion....

[Mythsaje]

11. Maybe if we stopped picking leaders

who revert to primitive teeth baring and chest thumping as their chosen form of diplomacy we'd do better. Why in the hell does anyone think arrogance is a leadership quality?

[autorank]

13. I nominate you for Condi's job: "A threat must be evaluated and scaled. "

What a concept: look at the situation, determine it's risks and the relative
benefits of different levels of response. Then evaluate those responses based
on their outcomes. I know exactly what you're talking about. Lots of others
do also, people who think critically, people who have actually lead organizations.
It's pretty basic.

Unfortunately, the * administration cannot think in a sequential or focused fashion

We are ruled by screw balls. It's like * has assumed the persona of an evil, malefic
"Lucy" (from "I Love Lucy"). Mistake after mistake, all compounding and cascading
downward at an ever accelerating pace.

Impeachment now.

[Kerrytravelers]

5. WHOEVER YELLS THE LOUDEST WINS IN THEIR DEBATES!

IT'S ONLY A DEBATE ON VOLUME, NOT SUBSTANCE. HERE! LET'S ALL YELL SO WE CAN PRACTICE OUR DEBATING SKILLS.

I'M RIGHT! YOU'RE UNPATRIOTIC! YOU HATE AMERICA! WHY DO YOU HATE OUR TROOPS? WHY ARE YOU PART OF THE BLAME AMERICA FIRST CROWD? WHY DO YOU NOT SUPPORT OUR TROOPS? WHY DO YOU CHEER FOR THE TALIBAN AND FOR AL QUAIDA? DO YOU REALLY THINK THE WORLD IS SAFER WITH SADDAM HUSSEIN IN POWER? WHY DO YOU THINK AMERICA DESERVED TO BE ATTACKED ON9-11? HAVE YOU FORGOTTEN 9-11? NEVER FORGET 9-11! 9-11! 9-11! WHY ARE YOU DESTROYING OUR COUNTRY? THE FOUNDING FATHERS WERE CHRISTIANS! CHRISTIANS- I SAY- CHRISTIANS! CHRISTIANS! CHRISTIANS! ACTIVISTS JUDGES ARE TEARING APART THE RIGHTS OF CHRISTIANS! GLORY GLORY HALLELUJAH!

[LynnTheDem]

8. Cept we are in Iraq coz of OIL, ISRAEL and LIES.

So what's yer "point" this time bush, you MFer.

[The Magistrate]

12. If The Pissant In the Oval Ofice Would Stop Lying, Sir

Then an honest debate could be had....

Unfortunately, his mendacity is congenital.