Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Paq
even taking it as presented, yes, i want to go back to a time when terrorism was a nuisance and i didn't read about at least 15 american deaths a day from iraqi resistance...
now, i will say that i want the intelligence communities, spec ops, etc fighting the terrorists, fighting to keep the country safe, but i'd much rather have better security here and at the embasies, etc, wehre americans are than to randomly invade other countries....ok, not randomly, but still
sorry, it's 5 am...
|
1.) 37 months have passed since a signifigant terrorist attack was carried
out in the U.S.
2.) 32 months after the Dec. 7,1941 attack on Pearl Harbor, allied troops
liberated Paris (Aug., 1944).
3.) The Bush administration promised that every American would have a job
to do "in the war on terror".
4.) The Homeland Security Admin.'s "color coded" alerts have been discredited
by their vagueness, coincidental (at best) coordination with newsworthy
events that have the potential to cause negative opinion of the Bush
administration if the public was not distracted by a sudden, new terror
alert.
5.) Impact of the 9-11 Commission and Weapons Inspection reports that
all but eliminate Bush/Cheney's original justifications for invading Iraq.
6.) Bush's personal behavior; self described as the "war president", then
this year, as "the peace president", Bush's record setting pace of
vacation time during "his war", and campaigning full time when he is
not flying back to his Texas ranch. Avoidance of news conferences for
the last 6 months, and limiting his public appearances only to
"audiences pre-screened for loyalty", who offer only praise and softball
questions to Bush. (Except for the 2 debates, and we saw how they
went!)
All in all, the message about the gravity of the "war on terror" as it is projected by this administration to the American people, the remoteness of
the actual fighting of "the war", the passage of considerable time since we
were seriously attacked, and the distance that Bush and Cheney keep between themselves and their countrymen who are not partisan Republicans,
makes it obvious why Kerry could "dare" to downplay the hyping of the "war"
that the Bush administration has put so much effort into since 9-11. The
party conventions and the 3 debates reveal that the administration's message
to the people is "all fear, all of the time", while the democrats barely mentioned the "war on terror" at their convention, and emphasized in the debates that the judgment of Bush and Cheney and their domestic and foreign policies,as they relate to the "war on terror" seem seriously flawed
and short on an open dialogue on where we truly are in the "war", as well as
where Bush/Cheney intend to take us!