- Reaction score
- 9,200
- Points
- 1,260
Wow, I obviously wasn‘t paying attention to this thread...sorry Muskrat for leaving you on your own to try and keep the door to reality open.
Another Infanteer Quote Selection
September 11 was not merely an attack of terrorism per se - isolated and disgruntled individuals of a small clique mad at the state of their world, and so taking out their frustrations against the United States. Bin Laden is the ultimate representative of Islam‘s failure to come to grips with the dizzying and sometimes terrifying pace of globalization and the spread of popular Western culture. In that context September 11 must be seen as the opportunistic response of fundamentalists to funnel collective frustration against the US, which for most of the world represents the epitome of Westernism and modernism all in one.
There terrorists acted against America because of who we are, not what we did....
Victor Davis Hanson
Sounds like a war of ideas to me. Iraq and Afghanistan are parts of a larger conflict, one that represents a war that is being fought over ideals that are fundamental to Canada due to our shared cultural heritage with our Allies.
Can you explain with you dollar theory why else rich, educated Middle-Eastern men would willingly fly planes into buildings that symbolized the strength of Western culture.
Here is a little info on your hero.
A) You don‘t like Bush, but you‘d take a guy possessing catastrophic arrogance.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/671495.stm
B) You got to love a guy who can‘t even lie very well
Two months ago Democratic hopeful Wesley Clark declared in a debate that he has always been firmly against the current Iraq War.
"I‘ve been very consistent... I‘ve been against this war from the beginning," the former general said in Detroit on October 26.
"I was against it last summer, I was against it in the fall, I was against it in the winter, I was against it in the spring. And I‘m against it now."
But just six month prior in an op-ed in the LONDON TIMES Clark offered praise for the courage of President Bush‘s action.
"President Bush and Tony Blair should be proud of their resolve in the face of so much doubt," Clark wrote on April 10, 2003. "Can anything be more moving than the joyous throngs swarming the streets of Baghdad? Memories of the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the defeat of Milosevic in Belgrade flood back. Statues and images of Saddam are smashed and defiled."
MORE
Even the most ardent Clark supporter will question if Clark‘s current and past stand on the Iraq war -- is confusion or deception, after the DRUDGE REPORT reveals:
TWO WEEKS BEFORE CONGRESS PASSED THE IRAQ CONGRESSIONAL RESOLUTION WESLEY CLARK MADE THE CASE FOR WAR; TESTIFIED THAT SADDAM HAD ‘CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS‘
Less than 18 months ago, Wesley Clark offered his testimony before the Committee On Armed Services at the U.S. House Of Representatives.
"There‘s no requirement to have any doctrine here. I mean this is simply a longstanding right of the United States and other nations to take the actions they deem necessary in their self defense," Clark told Congress on September 26, 2002.
"Every president has deployed forces as necessary to take action. He‘s done so without multilateral support if necessary. He‘s done so in advance of conflict if necessary. In my experience, I was the commander of the European forces in NATO. When we took action in Kosovo, we did not have United Nations approval to do this and we did so in a way that was designed to preempt Serb ethnic cleansing and regional destabilization there. There were some people who didn‘ t agree with that decision. The United Nations was not able to agree to support it with a resolution."
Clark continued: "There‘s no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He‘s had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn‘t have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we."
More Clark: "And, I want to underscore that I think the United States should not categorize this action as preemptive. Preemptive and that doctrine has nothing whatsoever to do with this problem. As Richard Perle so eloquently pointed out, this is a problem that‘s longstanding. It‘s been a decade in the making. It needs to be dealt with and the clock is ticking on this."
Clark explained: "I think there‘s no question that, even though we may not have the evidence as Richard [Perle] says, that there have been such contacts [between Iraq and al Qaeda]. It‘ s normal. It‘s natural. These are a lot of bad actors in the same region together. They are going to bump into each other. They are going to exchange information. They‘re going to feel each other out and see whether there are opportunities to cooperate. That‘s inevitable in this region, and I think it‘s clear that regardless of whether or not such evidence is produced of these connections that Saddam Hussein is a threat."
C)...and he was relieved of duty due to ethical issues to boot...ya, you picked a winner here.
George W. Bush Richard Cheney Republican 50,459,624 47.87% 271 50.4%
Albert Gore Jr. Joseph Lieberman Democrat 51,003,238 48.38% 266 49.4%
Ralph Nader Winona LaDuke Green 2,882,985 2.74% 0 0.0%
Patrick Buchanan Ezola Foster Reform 449,120 0.43% 0 0.0%
Harry Browne Art Olivier Libertarian 384,440 0.36% 0 0.0%
Other - - 232,922 0.22% 1* 0.2%
Looks like a bunch of rednecks, eh? Look, Iowa voted for Gore. Get your **** straight before you start talking caca.
By the way, how many Canadians voted for Paul Martin?
--------------------
Second point, your right about the power politics...but is there anything wrong with the statement you made?
Well, thats a load of horse****; do you wish Saddam was still in power than? If you want to play the oil game, Jean Cretian‘s son-in-law was chairman of the largest oil conglamorate dealing with Hussein‘s regime, France‘s TotalFinaElf. So the only reason Canada DIDN‘T support our Allies was to appease our Prime Minister‘s buddies in the oil industry...how does that fit on your moral podium?
Well, its too bad that you think that. I have spoken to many US soldiers who have fought in Afghanistan and Iraq and feel perfectly comfortable with the morality of their actions.
Another Infanteer Quote Selection
September 11 was not merely an attack of terrorism per se - isolated and disgruntled individuals of a small clique mad at the state of their world, and so taking out their frustrations against the United States. Bin Laden is the ultimate representative of Islam‘s failure to come to grips with the dizzying and sometimes terrifying pace of globalization and the spread of popular Western culture. In that context September 11 must be seen as the opportunistic response of fundamentalists to funnel collective frustration against the US, which for most of the world represents the epitome of Westernism and modernism all in one.
There terrorists acted against America because of who we are, not what we did....
Victor Davis Hanson
Sounds like a war of ideas to me. Iraq and Afghanistan are parts of a larger conflict, one that represents a war that is being fought over ideals that are fundamental to Canada due to our shared cultural heritage with our Allies.
Can you explain with you dollar theory why else rich, educated Middle-Eastern men would willingly fly planes into buildings that symbolized the strength of Western culture.
I love it when people base their criticisms on the current US administration soley on personal attacks on George W Bush.
Here is a little info on your hero.
A) You don‘t like Bush, but you‘d take a guy possessing catastrophic arrogance.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/671495.stm
B) You got to love a guy who can‘t even lie very well
Two months ago Democratic hopeful Wesley Clark declared in a debate that he has always been firmly against the current Iraq War.
"I‘ve been very consistent... I‘ve been against this war from the beginning," the former general said in Detroit on October 26.
"I was against it last summer, I was against it in the fall, I was against it in the winter, I was against it in the spring. And I‘m against it now."
But just six month prior in an op-ed in the LONDON TIMES Clark offered praise for the courage of President Bush‘s action.
"President Bush and Tony Blair should be proud of their resolve in the face of so much doubt," Clark wrote on April 10, 2003. "Can anything be more moving than the joyous throngs swarming the streets of Baghdad? Memories of the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the defeat of Milosevic in Belgrade flood back. Statues and images of Saddam are smashed and defiled."
MORE
Even the most ardent Clark supporter will question if Clark‘s current and past stand on the Iraq war -- is confusion or deception, after the DRUDGE REPORT reveals:
TWO WEEKS BEFORE CONGRESS PASSED THE IRAQ CONGRESSIONAL RESOLUTION WESLEY CLARK MADE THE CASE FOR WAR; TESTIFIED THAT SADDAM HAD ‘CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS‘
Less than 18 months ago, Wesley Clark offered his testimony before the Committee On Armed Services at the U.S. House Of Representatives.
"There‘s no requirement to have any doctrine here. I mean this is simply a longstanding right of the United States and other nations to take the actions they deem necessary in their self defense," Clark told Congress on September 26, 2002.
"Every president has deployed forces as necessary to take action. He‘s done so without multilateral support if necessary. He‘s done so in advance of conflict if necessary. In my experience, I was the commander of the European forces in NATO. When we took action in Kosovo, we did not have United Nations approval to do this and we did so in a way that was designed to preempt Serb ethnic cleansing and regional destabilization there. There were some people who didn‘ t agree with that decision. The United Nations was not able to agree to support it with a resolution."
Clark continued: "There‘s no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He‘s had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn‘t have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we."
More Clark: "And, I want to underscore that I think the United States should not categorize this action as preemptive. Preemptive and that doctrine has nothing whatsoever to do with this problem. As Richard Perle so eloquently pointed out, this is a problem that‘s longstanding. It‘s been a decade in the making. It needs to be dealt with and the clock is ticking on this."
Clark explained: "I think there‘s no question that, even though we may not have the evidence as Richard [Perle] says, that there have been such contacts [between Iraq and al Qaeda]. It‘ s normal. It‘s natural. These are a lot of bad actors in the same region together. They are going to bump into each other. They are going to exchange information. They‘re going to feel each other out and see whether there are opportunities to cooperate. That‘s inevitable in this region, and I think it‘s clear that regardless of whether or not such evidence is produced of these connections that Saddam Hussein is a threat."
C)...and he was relieved of duty due to ethical issues to boot...ya, you picked a winner here.
Wow, a conspiracy theorist to boot...did someone steal your tin-foil hat?
2000 Presidential Election Results
George W. Bush Richard Cheney Republican 50,459,624 47.87% 271 50.4%
Albert Gore Jr. Joseph Lieberman Democrat 51,003,238 48.38% 266 49.4%
Ralph Nader Winona LaDuke Green 2,882,985 2.74% 0 0.0%
Patrick Buchanan Ezola Foster Reform 449,120 0.43% 0 0.0%
Harry Browne Art Olivier Libertarian 384,440 0.36% 0 0.0%
Other - - 232,922 0.22% 1* 0.2%
Looks like a bunch of rednecks, eh? Look, Iowa voted for Gore. Get your **** straight before you start talking caca.
By the way, how many Canadians voted for Paul Martin?
--------------------
You mean the same kind of democracy you live in as well? Try living in a cave in Afghanistan for a year, it‘ll probably wear down your cynacism a bit.
Yeah, that makes alot of sense. Did they get to watch Saddam‘s movies in class. The health care system was a bullet to the back of the head and a communal grave in the desert. If he was such a provider, why were Iraqi‘s celebrating the American troops overthrow of his regime.
Well, that was quite ambiguos. Tell me, Thomas Hobbes, what is so wrong with our current society that is grounded upon the ideas of capitalism, liberty, democracy, and the rule of law?
First point, never boil a problem down to one reason...you leave yourself open to flanking attacks. WMD was only one of the selling points of the war.
Second point, your right about the power politics...but is there anything wrong with the statement you made?
