What do you think of our current President?

[freebird]

Originally Posted by renrich

FB if you do not see the war against Islamic Extremism through the same lens as I do and probably as Bush and Blair do, then there is nothing to be gained by continuing the debate.

Well it may surpise you Ren, by I am more "hawkish" than most of your Republicans. Us debating is like the WWII debate between King {Pacific first} and the British {Europe first}. Did they agree that both governments of Nazi Germany & Imperial Japan were dangerous and needed to be eliminated? Absolutely !!! Do you and I agree that fanatical Muslim terrorists are an extreme danger and need to be eliminated? Absolutely!!

But as soon as we start talking about just exactly how that is to be done, that is where we have some sharp differences. {Just as they did in WWII} For me, I am very sad that Bush & co. have bungled the Iraq war so badly {IMO} that it will probably now result in the loss of the White house, & both houses of congress to some "Black liberation" Marxist acolyte.

As I said earlier, if Bush & co. had made a realistic plan for Iraq they could have wrapped it up over 4 years ago. If it were me I would have probably then have "taken out" Iran right away, there is no point in letting this fester. To allow a nuclear armed Iran with a radical nut-job in power is just asking for disaster. Israel might very well start hostilities anyways, it would be much better to have the initiative than to be playing catch-up if this all blows up.

Originally Posted by renrich

I don't believe that logic supports a position that Bush, Blair, Powell, Rice or even Clinton lied about WMDs or their motives for invading Iraq.

I think it is clear that the nuclear aspect of the WMD's was exaggerated, and that was the reason given that you couldn't wait any longer to invade Iraq, which didn't allow France & Germany on board.

Now for my personal opinion, if Bush had just said he was eliminating a nasty brutal dictator, I would not have had a problem with it.

Originally Posted by renrich

I can't furnish irrefutable proof for that statement. Neither can you for your position. Time will tell as to whether the decisions made since 9-11 were correct.

[renrich]

Good grief, FB, you must be having hallucinations. To criticise Bush for not "taking out Iran" or for not saying we need to take out Saddam as the motive for the Iraq invasion strikes me as being absolutely unrealistic. I know you enjoy speculating about "what ifs" and that is all well and good on this forum. Bush would have had no chance with either of those propositions with the US congress or with public opinion in the US. The media here in the US would have crucified him and his administration if he had proposed that.

[freebird]

Originally Posted by renrich

Good grief, FB, you must be having hallucinations. To criticise Bush for not "taking out Iran" or for not saying we need to take out Saddam as the motive for the Iraq invasion strikes me as being absolutely unrealistic. I know you enjoy speculating about "what ifs" and that is all well and good on this forum. Bush would have had no chance with either of those propositions with the US congress or with public opinion in the US. The media here in the US would have crucified him and his administration if he had proposed that.

No Ren, you misunderstood me, I'm not critical of him for that, I understand that the US public {or Canadian for that matter!} would not go for it. Sad to say.

I was only saying that I personally would not have a problem if he had done that, I think right now Iran is a cancer and should be dealt with.

My disappointment with the Bush administration is the lack of planning and slow response to the setbacks in Iraq. They ignored sound military advice and gambled that they could pull off a miricle in Iraq. Now they seem to have "fouled the nest" for conservatives, and looks like the left will win the white house and increase its margin in Congress. That will be the best indication of Bush's legacy I think.

[renrich]

OK, I see your point now. I agree somewhat. You know, to a certain extent this is an academic exercise for you. It is not for me.In my lifetime I have seen a drift to the left which seems unstoppable and which has eroded the values and the character of the US. What in large part made this country great was a willingness of it's people to take risks, to take responsibility and stand on their own two feet. We seem now to want immunisation against all risk with cradle to the grave security and I am not talking about security against foreign enemies. We can have that but we will give up more and more opportunity, individualism, freedom and liberty. The greatest evil in our society is the media, especially the electronic media which mostly venerates and panders to pop culture, hedonism, trivialities and the sense that the left has the correct answers to all human foibles. If Hussein Obama is elected president, our silly voters will have elected a person with few qualifications for the job. If elected, it will be because of a guilty conscience among some about oppression of blacks or because he has "charisma" or represents "change" what ever that is, not because he has shown leadership or wisdom or good character or judgment. No question that the GOP is caught in a "perfect storm" composed of shortsighted unhappiness with the Iraq War, high gas prices and a down turn in the economy, all exacerbated by the constant exaggeration, sensationalising and downright lying of the media. The odd fact is that the economy did not begin it's slide along with the big increase in fuel prices until the dems took over congress but Bush gets all the blame. The fact is that the previous president and the dems in congress should take some of the blame for the gas prices because of their legislation against domestic drilling. Another fact is that, though mistakes were made, the Iraq situation seems to be stabilising, there have been no more terrorism events in the US and a vicious dictator is no longer around. If Iraq turns out to be a success and a friendly muslim country in the middle east, we will have Bush to thank. I believe that Bush and Blair were having nightmares about a nuclear device being set off in one of our cities and that a collateral benefit of invading Iraq would be that a stable democracy of sorts in that country would be a start in bringing that part of the world into the 21st century. I do not share your concern about Iran. If they get a nuclear capability, Israel will handle it and the US congress can go to hell. What a government, Hussein Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Durbin and Kennedy. I wish Texas had never joined the union!

[freebird]

Originally Posted by renrich

OK, I see your point now. I agree somewhat. You know, to a certain extent this is an academic exercise for you. It is not for me.

Well we are talking about your President here! If the subject was the "socialist creep" in Canada it would be a more direct worry to me than you...

Originally Posted by renrich

In my lifetime I have seen a drift to the left which seems unstoppable and which has eroded the values and the character of the US.

I agree with you exactly on this one. That's part of what is frustrating in my mind about Bush. His intractibility on Iraq has pushed the wingnuts into power, and ultimatly probably undo all he had tried to acomplish in Iraq. After pulling the plug and throwing Iraq into chaos, Obama will then neatly put the blame onto Bush.

Originally Posted by renrich

If Hussein Obama is elected president, our silly voters will have elected a person with few qualifications for the job.

true enough. Sorry to say that I feel that way about Bush too, it was supposed to be the veteran Cheany & Rumsfeld that would keep an eye on things, and dropped the ball. I feel that the neo-cons have destroyed conservative electability with their ill-advised plans.

Originally Posted by renrich

If elected, it will be because of a guilty conscience among some about oppression of blacks or because he has "charisma" or represents "change" what ever that is, not because he has shown leadership or wisdom or good character or judgment. No question that the GOP is caught in a "perfect storm" composed of shortsighted unhappiness with the Iraq War, high gas prices and a down turn in the economy.

Thats what bothers me. Bush & co. should have realized that the Iraq war was such a drain on electability, and been more willing to compromise. His being stubborn and holding out on Iraq has just handed the Congress to the far left.

His vision for Iraq is not worth the damage to the USA. IMO {4 or 8 years of Obama appointing judges, congress making all kinds of wacky laws etc etc.}

Originally Posted by renrich

The fact is that the previous president and the dems in congress should take some of the blame for the gas prices because of their legislation against domestic drilling.

Totally correct. It's too bad that McCain was on the wrong side of ANWAR, otherwise they might get some traction on that issue in Nov.

Originally Posted by renrich

Another fact is that, though mistakes were made, the Iraq situation seems to be stabilising, there have been no more terrorism events in the US and a vicious dictator is no longer around. If Iraq turns out to be a success and a friendly muslim country in the middle east, we will have Bush to thank.

It will be a miracle if it does, and my hat will be off to Bush. More likely that Obama will hastily "pull the plug" undo everything acomplished, and then blame Bush.

Originally Posted by renrich

I do not share your concern about Iran. If they get a nuclear capability, Israel will handle it and the US congress can go to hell!

I don't see how the US can avoid involvement if there is a full attack by Israel, anything less than a full attack will not eliminate Iranian nukes.

[starling]

does v.p cheyney take over when pres bush has his annual endiscopy,to check out his pollips,he is afterall under general anasthetic,i believe.lee.

[freebird]

Originally Posted by starling

does v.p cheyney take over when pres bush has his annual endiscopy,to check out his pollips,he is afterall under general anasthetic,i believe.lee.

He is probably not going to anounce it, like Haig - "I am in control, here, at the white house" That one ruffled a few feathers.

Hey Lee, what is the theme coming from Whitehall? Is Gordon Brown still on board with Blair's support for Iraq? Or is he trying to distance himself from Blair/Bush & Iraq?

[renrich]

FB, it does not seem you have a problem with the invasion, liberation of Iraq and the removal of Saddam but rather the execution of same. Also you mention the stubborness of Bush. That all sounds like "monday morning quarterbacking" to me. No wartime leader of any nation fails to make mistakes. We can always second guess leaders but the final outcome is all that really matters and all of our hindsight is worth exactly nothing especially when it is this close in time to the event and mostly uninformed. As you say, Hussein if elected may undo all the good work but as I said before, you should ask yourself where we would be today if Gore had been elected instead of Bush. I shiver to consider what that prospect might have meant.

[Arsenal VG-33]

freebird - Your post on this thread (#784) struck me as very interesting, but I unfortunately must go to work. I will reply to this later, so stay tuned!

[freebird]

Originally Posted by Arsenal VG-33

freebird - Your post on this thread (#784) struck me as very interesting, but I unfortunately must go to work. I will reply to this later, so stay tuned!

Oops what did I say?

I guess you are referring to North Africa. {or my criticism of Churchill?}
Anyways I'll wait for your reply

Originally Posted by renrich

FB, it does not seem you have a problem with the invasion, liberation of Iraq and the removal of Saddam but rather the execution of same.

Ren I am an unrepentant "interventionalist", I have never understood the theory that tyrants commiting genocide on their people is an "internal matter" and should not be disturbed. You want to depose Mugabe? No Problem. Kim Jon Ill? Fine! The Junta's in Sudan or Burma? Go for it.

It just seems so sad to waste so much $$$, US soldiers lives & seriously damage the conservative movement in America for a "nation building" experiment that most serious analysts predicted cannot succeed.

Originally Posted by renrich

Also you mention the stubborness of Bush. That all sounds like "monday morning quarterbacking" to me. No wartime leader of any nation fails to make mistakes.

True, but very few let the problem fester for years while in denial that there was a problem.

Most good commanders will quickly re-adjust strategy when the original plan is not working

Originally Posted by renrich

We can always second guess leaders but the final outcome is all that really matters and all of our hindsight is worth exactly nothing especially when it is this close in time to the event and mostly uninformed. As you say, Hussein if elected may undo all the good work but as I said before, you should ask yourself where we would be today if Gore had been elected instead of Bush. I shiver to consider what that prospect might have meant.

To be honest I don't think Gore {or Hillary} would be as bad as Obama

[starling]

dear fb,p.m brown is a left of blair.i like the bloke personally,but i reckon his speech writers should work harder.on p.m,s questions each week,he just seems boring.i just hope that w#nker cameron fails,new labour have served my country well imho.yours,lee.

[renrich]

FB, I agree about Gore or Hillarita versus Hussein. I believe that the dem's nominee along with his wife is a racist and a Marxist. If you pay attention to the ravings in his church, one has to come to the conclusion that he subscribes to the same ideology as the preacher and the congregation. If he is elected we are going to have the same type of "leader" as some of the African nations such as Mugabe or other Marxists tempered somewhat by our system and by his experience growing up in the US. Couple that with his callowness and idealism and our foreign policy initiatives can be in a world of hurt. Canada better look to it's arms. The only hope is that if he is elected, he will be like Carter and such a FU that he only lasts one term. Come to think of it, he reminds me in some ways of Carter. I knew a lot of strong Christians that thought Carter was wonderful because of his faith and was going to lead us to "the promised land" Turned out, he had not much common sense.

[Njaco]

I think both of you guys are aguing from the same side of the fence. And the one point is that the more we go down the road the more I seem to feel the neo-cons have totally destroyed the conservative party.

But I don't think Olabama will get in.

[freebird]

Originally Posted by Njaco

I think both of you guys are aguing from the same side of the fence.

Pretty much, I can understand what Ren is saying, it looks like you guys are heading for a disaster {if Hussein gets in}

Originally Posted by Njaco

And the one point is that the more we go down the road the more I seem to feel the neo-cons have totally destroyed the conservative party.

That is my feeling too. The scary part is that because of this, there might be enough "amnesty" backers in the Congress to legalize all of the illegal's, after 4 years of riding the liberal gravy train it's going to be even harder for a real conservative to get in next time.

12 million more new voters happy to give thanks for the "wealth re-distribution" by voting in even more socialists.....

Originally Posted by Njaco

But I don't think Olabama will get in.

Sorry to say that it might only just be because there are still enough "rednecks" who won't vote for a black man....

[renrich]

I think FB and I are on the same side of the fence except for the issue of how the Iraq war was handled. However, I don't believe the war in Iraq is going to be the salient factor in the coming election. If it were I think McCain would be a winner. The "economy" is going to be the issue which may get Hussein elected, just as it got Clinton elected in 92(along with the idiot Perot)