| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Tom Friedman's Free Advice to the G.O.P | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 23 2003, 05:51 PM (898 Views) | |
| Wichita | Oct 23 2003, 10:17 PM Post #16 |
|
The Adminstrator wRench
|
A number of posts back I asked who was Tom Friedman and why should I care what his opinion is. Is he a candidate for political office? More importantly, is he a candidate for President of the United States? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| benetil | Oct 23 2003, 10:21 PM Post #17 |
|
Unregistered
|
Oh, sorry. I thought you were just slamming him and me
.Tom Friedman is just a columnist/author. He specializes in Mideast issues. I happen to think that he's fantastic. He's much too smart to run for a political office. |
| | Quote | ^ | |
| Wichita | Oct 23 2003, 10:24 PM Post #18 |
|
The Adminstrator wRench
|
So I repeat the my point. No one has provided a better alternative. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| benetil | Oct 23 2003, 10:30 PM Post #19 |
|
Unregistered
|
Well, Wichita, we have to do something different. As much as some of us might want to pretend that everything is just fine, everything is not fine. And if we just keep doing what we're doing, we're going to keep getting what we've been getting. I think it is reasonable to look to the President for some leadership as far as alternatives go. I think a good place to start would be to fire the current Secretary of Defense. Another piece of advice that I would have for President Bush is to pay more attention to Secretary of State Colin Powell. |
| | Quote | ^ | |
| Wichita | Oct 23 2003, 10:34 PM Post #20 |
|
The Adminstrator wRench
|
And my point throughout this thread has been ... Why are you continuing to do precisely what you claim in this quote you don't want? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| benetil | Oct 23 2003, 10:37 PM Post #21 |
|
Unregistered
|
Your point is well taken. My point is that it is criminal for President Bush to continue on the path that he - HE - has put us on. |
| | Quote | ^ | |
| Wichita | Oct 23 2003, 10:43 PM Post #22 |
|
The Adminstrator wRench
|
If you feel that way, why aren't you doing something about it? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| captain_proton_au | Oct 23 2003, 10:47 PM Post #23 |
![]()
A Robot in Disguise
![]()
|
But it is a media war. As an outside observer I think the US governement is handling it Ok. Did anyone really believe that the rebuilding of Iraq was going to be a walk in the park, It is a HUGE undertaking at enormous cost to the americans. The invasion of Iraq will only become a disaster if public opinion sways in america and the goverment is forced to pull back. The basic idea is sound, Democrasize Iraq and hope that in some way that will spread to the rest of that region. If the american public sticks with the government transforming Iraq will be a success, if they dont It will be a failure, in much the same way as Vietnam and South Korea. Thats why the government is focused on the medias treatment of this situation, as it is the key to their success. I find the international reaction has been interesting:- Australia whole-heartedly supported the move because most of our illegal immigrants were coming from Iraq and Afghanistan. Most of the governments in Asia now support America as they are worried about the increasing cost of combating terrorrism. Russia while officially frowning on the move, havent involoved themselves much, Putin is in moscow having a little giggle to himself..'Go and knock yourselves out' . China also hasnt said much cos it takes the heat of North Korea , so they can build up an arsenal and strike later. So that only really leaves France and Germany to voice their opinions, both of which are really only worried at how this may affect their 'backyards' . Both former superpowers religated to international obscurity and both with huge economic and unemployment issues to worry about rather than th international scene, they can talk up all they want but will never act on it. So that leave the middle east, while most of them hate america, they will never be able to agree with each other on how to do anything about it. So really , the outcome of americas international actions rests solely in the hands of american voters. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| benetil | Oct 23 2003, 10:55 PM Post #24 |
|
Unregistered
|
Wichita: I think I'm doing what any responsible citizen who disagrees with his government's position does. I'm voicing my disapproval (not just here on this board) and I'm demanding change. While I don't know exactly what the right thing to do is, I'm becoming more and more certain that what we're doing in Iraq right now isn't working. Time for change. |
| | Quote | ^ | |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Oct 23 2003, 11:09 PM Post #25 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
Oh puhleeze... don't give me this. You aren't voicing disapproval, you are giving a negative knee-jerk commentary. You aren't demanding change, except that you disapprove of this administration simply because they are Republican. You would be wrong if you think what we are doing in Iraq is wrong. Stop reading the FU**ING New York Times and start doing a little INDEPENDENT research. I have friends in the theater (the Iraqi theater, not acting) and you'd be amazed at what your buddies in the "mainstream" media do NOT report. For example: First of all, three quarters of the Iraqi people WANT the United States and its troops there. Unfortunately, fifteen percent of those same people surveyed are still afraid that Saddam might come back, so they refrained from comment. We are doing great things there. Power distribution is back to pre-war levels, infrastructure is being repaired, SCHOOLS ARE OPENING IN AREAS WHERE THEY NEVER EXISTED BEFORE. Baghdad is bustling with business. There is no quagmire. You are being fed what we used to call "agitprop" (short for agitation propaganda). Worse, you WANT to hear that bad things are happening. It pervades all of your posts on the topic and the administration. You were the same way about the economy, too. I WISH YOU COULD BE HONEST AND ADMIT IT. Time for a change, my a$$. Things are going a lot better than you think, and will continue to improve. As for Donald Rumsfeld, thank GOD for a SecDef with balls. Hell, thank God for Donald Rumsfeld. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Wichita | Oct 23 2003, 11:10 PM Post #26 |
|
The Adminstrator wRench
|
Benetil, I just came through a project where any number of people spent a great deal of energy voicing their disapproval and demanding change. While we spent a great deal of time reading the material they provided and considering their point of view, we discovered they were generally "too busy" to review what we gave them. Nonetheless they continued to argue that what we suggested wouldn't work - despite admitting never having even read about what we were suggesting. Instead of spending time insulting the intelligence of those who agree with the Iraq policy, why not spend the same time finding a candidate who actually has a PLAN to resolve the situation and who CAN WIN an election? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Oct 23 2003, 11:12 PM Post #27 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
Criminal? Name the statute. C'mon... if he has done ANYTHING criminal, let's here what it is. WORDS MEAN THINGS. Admit it, you don't care about the troops... you're just angry that things are improving for the people of Iraq, and by extension for George W. Bush. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| benetil | Oct 23 2003, 11:56 PM Post #28 |
|
Unregistered
|
Admiralbill_gomec: what President Bush is doing is a crime in the context of a senseless act. The definition of the word crime encompasses more than just a meaning of unlawful activity - common usage of the word crime also permits this usage. I know that words mean things. I try to be fairly careful and I think I have as good a grasp of the English language as most. The crime (senseless act) that President Bush is committing is placing American soldiers in a peace keeping/nation building situation while the enemy systematically snipes and picks them off. And while the troops are being murdered two or three at a time, our President stoically stays the course - pretends that our troops have completed the "major combat" phase of the war - and complains that the press is ignoring the positive aspects of the situation. I do care about the troops. I do hope for a safe and peaceful Iraq. I don't care for President Bush's policies - but I don't wish for him or my nation to fail. |
| | Quote | ^ | |
| Dandandat | Oct 24 2003, 12:16 AM Post #29 |
|
Time to put something here
|
Two or three at a time? I’m sorry for the dead, but like I said before this is a major accomplishment in this war, not a major problem. Not many other wars have been less bloody. Also as Wichita has asked countless times (and you keep dogging) what should be done if Bush is committing a senseless crime/(act)? Now before you say "I don’t know I just think we need to do something else" lets take a look at what you have said. "Bush is committing a senseless crime(act)". Right? If his actions are Senseless and words do mean something, then why don’t you (or others) have a better plan? You do have some sense right? Even a little bit of sense would be better then senseless right? So since you do have some sense and Bush is senseless (which you seem to think its obviously true) then you should have no problem coming up with an alternate solution to the problem. So please answer Wichita’s question if Bush's plan is wrong.. no.. senseless then what is the correct plan? What should we be doing instead? If you cant quickly come up with an alternate plan, then Bush’s plans can not be senseless (unless you are willing to admit you are senseless, then it would all fit, are you willing?) I believe Bill is correct it is you that has a problem with being loyal to your party lines not Bush supporters by default. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| benetil | Oct 24 2003, 06:28 AM Post #30 |
|
Unregistered
|
Interesting. There was a time when I supported some of President Bush's "war on terror" policies - mostly out of patriotism. I still think that the USA had to do something where Iraq was concerned. But my tolerance of the Bush administration's performance in Iraq has run out. The situation on the ground in Iraq is deteriorating into a more dangerous, disorganized mess. It looks like I'm the only one on this thread who wants to see a change in how President Bush is handling the current phase of the operation in Iraq, but I know I'm not the only American who feels that way. I also know that I'm not the only American who thinks that Donald Rumsfeld's "snowflakes" are just a desperate PR venture. |
| | Quote | ^ | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic » |


and me


2:14 PM Jul 11