|
2 registered (wgander, captain150),
52
Guests and
1
Spider online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Unregistered users may only post in the handyman forum. If you register, you may post in any forum and use of CAPTCHA code is not required.
|
|
|
#445166 - 03/25/08 01:54 PM
Re: Cheney Blase about those killed in Iraq
[Re: FranS]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 07/30/04
Posts: 28022
Loc: South New Jersey
|
But ... as he likes to repeat ... the ordinary citizen nor the soldier are not on the lofty plane of intelligence of Bush and Cheney, so all should vote, but not about that.
_________________________
Friends tell people how to live past 60.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#445167 - 03/25/08 03:06 PM
Re: Cheney Blase about those killed in Iraq
[Re: HeatPro]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 01/21/02
Posts: 42126
|
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#445169 - 03/25/08 10:47 PM
Re: Cheney Blase about those killed in Iraq
[Re: EAP]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 01/04/03
Posts: 12239
Loc: Canada
|
Quote:
Quote:
Luckily those who think like you are a minority.... no offense eh? Frankly, you frighten me a little.
Not trying to be offensive to you either Daniel, however the feeling is mutual, albeit you take the opposite approach to viewing the conflict.
Some people think ignorance is bliss. History proves otherwise. (This is not an indictment upon you personally. But rather upon society as a whole.) You personally are a fine fellow! I respect your opinions though I do not always agree with them, yet sometimes I do (agree) depending on the situation.
It seems it is often the "minority" that have had the vision to lead the "majority" for whatever reason and their reasons are many for their ignorance to perceive the dangerousness of a particular situation. (I hasten to add that the opposite is often the case too - usually in other less civilized countries.)
Sure there are exceptions to the rule, but this (conflict) is NOT one of them. Vietnam may have been. There is NO comparison to the current conflict and Vietnam.
For example, most people in this country thought it wise and prudent to keep our servicemen out of the conflict that was beginning to boil over in Europe in the 1930s. In fact, Franklin Roosevelt campaigned (on the pledge) during the 1940 election that he would, in fact, keep the boys home and out of the "European" war.
Secretly, and rightly so, I might add (one of only a few points I agreed with - studying the situation) he franctically searched for many ways to get into that war. It was well before the 1940 presidential election.
Even after the JAPanese (- for you Fran ) warlords bombed Pearl Harbor, FDR knew instinctively (?) that the conflict in Europe was far more serious and needed addressing sooner than later, so they delayed (downplayed?) the war efforts in the Southern Pacific for a time. Whether that was the best move is subject to debate and a thorough study of both conflicts, however he knew that we could not immediately fight a two front war effectively. Hitler did not realize that himself. He tried to fight the Russians on the Eastern Front while prosecuting the conflict with England and France and other European countries in the West. That stupid move eventually led to his defeat. Thank goodness.
And yet after about "3" years into the conflict, American were growing weary of that World War. Of course it was a global sacrifice of nearly "everyone's" part. Many hoped and thought the war would be over by Christmas (1944).
It seems (it's) human nature at least among Americans the last 100 years (if not longer) to grow impatient. Some countries are in perpetual war. They probably wonder how we are so impatient when some of them have had to live entire lifetimes in degreeing states of terror.
As I have pointed out in this forum before, there is probably no one here who understands the war on terror as well as the President and other leaders with direct involvement in it. I don't, you don't. Even Cindy Sheehan does not for instance. I would venture to say that even the troops in the line of fire do not have the whole picture. But they most likely have a much better one than we do, taken individually and collectively.
To say hurtful things like 4000 soldiers lives were wasted is AKIN to those in the 1960s and early 1970s who spit on the soldiers returning home from the Vietnam Conflict. You are not saying that toward the soldier I'm sure, but the (mis)perception is there and your anger (?) is focused on the Bush administration that made the decision to go to war with the (best of - we must assume) intentions of trying to keep America and perhaps the world a better and safer place to live. We all have heard of terrorist attacks that have struck many places across the world. I am grateful that they have not struck your wonderful country like they did ours. And I hope they do not.
The fact remains though, that they have not successfully hit us in this country again since September 11, 2001.
Surely, that must mean something?
I think your anger may be misdirected toward the wrong persons. What about the likes of an Osama bin Laden? If only he were chastised like President Bush is on a regular basis here and elsewhere, maybe the man would've been deposed long ago.
One more historical note. President Truman left office in 1953, a disgraced man. Yet, today, many have come to realize that perhaps he was the right man at the right time for America. In fact, 1945 was categorized as "The Year of Decision", Many world and life-changing events took place that year. The Bomb, the end of both wars in Europe and the Pacific, The war crimes trials began, rebuilding Europe. The death of FDR. Truman had a lot to deal with. Many were critical for a long time over his policies. But did he succeed in making the world safer and better? I would concur with that. I don't think he (Truman) lived to see his "vindication" but he seemed to be OK with how he did things, after all the bucked stopped with "Give 'em hell Harry". Harry Truman was a very humble man and one with a lot of character. While he appeared to be a simple man, he was able to effectively deal with many complex issues of the times. Still, people of the time felt disdain for him. And it was not a few. George W. Bush seems to fit a similar bill. Will he follow a similar path in history?
And again, few (aka the minority) have the wisdom to clearly see the big picture. That is among the reasons why the wealthy are among the few for example. Because they are able to perceive and have the wisdom and inspiration the rest of us do not have to lead the world forward whether it is in peace, technology, human rights, law, or a whole host of other issues that affect humankind. It's true a few bad apples also create the chaos and mayhem the rest of us have to deal with. Unfortunately, that's the result of the fallen world we live in.
We can take comfort in those like the soldiers in the line of fire who sacrifice their time and some, their lives in order that the rest of us left behind can continue with ours. Sometimes I wonder if some are not visionaries in their own right. They certainly are the minority.
May God Bless all those who work to make the world a safer and better world in which to live.
Are you actually serious? Regarding the statement in bold, you should know better. It's statements like that which, I'm guessing, frighten Daniel. How many German people figured Hitler had the best of intentions at heart? Hell even if Hitler DID have the best of intentions, does that make what he did excusable? Think about what you said. Think about it. Don't assume a damn thing. Don't blindly trust your leaders. These aren't gods. Look at Bush critically. He deserves none of our forgiveness or mercy. And comparing Truman to Bush, asking if history will have the same to say about Bush is laughable. See the issue with Bush is he didn't only make a bad decision about Iraq, but he made bad (or stupid) decisions about dozens of other things. Teach the controversy? No child left behind act? Patriot act? No federal stem cell research funding? A creationist leading the most powerful country on earth? I could go on, but the guy is fantastically inept. I don't know what else to say.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#445170 - 03/25/08 11:10 PM
Re: Cheney Blase about those killed in Iraq
[Re: EAP]
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 02/23/02
Posts: 4960
|
Don't matter how small the big boys think the enemy are the weenies have already changed the law in their favor behind the big boys backs, & will not only fight on the battle field hand to hand, but will bleed the enemy taxpayer's $ in their home land. Sixteen billion dollars per month America pays to service the Iraq war jeez' the the United Nations budget is only ten/twelve billion dollars per year - Hello. You guys have been outwitted/conned by your own government/selves/law makers for forty + years' the good times come at someones cost, just like cheap Chinese tools or jap cars (jobs lost) products that are not made in the states. Their is no peace in Ireland after nearly forty/four hundred years of civil war its only a facade, don't rejoice when dub ya says the war on terrorism is being won - he's lying and you guys have swallowed the bait big time.
If its true (doubt it) what i heard on the BBC news to night why America went to war in Iraq, Osama will be found easily by his hysterical laughter.
Vietnam' French tried in 46 others' - America tried in 61 - Remember watching black & white TV film of Americans massacred by the enemy in their home land. A Vietnam soldier said - Look how big they are - and how small we are. Those Vietnam soldiers fought for their homeland - not for oil rights.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|