Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

guy44 · 10-31-2004, 11:13 PM

Ustwo, we keep running into each other.

OK, so the situation is that Iran and N. Korea have substantially advanced their respective nuclear weapons programs in the time that Bush has been president, and done so publicly for Bush's last 2 years.

Bush didn't do anything about it, a position I think we are all in agreement on. You posited that you believe that Bush has refrained from taking action in order to further his personal political ambitions.

You also believe that Kerry wouldn't do anything as long as it would further his political ambitions (how not doing anything about N. Korea and Iran helps Kerry politically should he become president remains unexplained, but nonetheless I will grant you this unsubstantiated claim for the sake of argument.)

Only one of these men has had the opportunity to engage in actions towards either N. Korea or Iran while president: Bush. He has, without a doubt, done nothing. Yet you say you are MORE CONFIDENT that Kerry would do nothing if placed in the same situation, despite the fact that he has never, in fact, had the opportunity to do nothing.

You may be right that Kerry will do nothing. However, only Bush has proven that he will do nothing.

That, Ustwo, is the real difference between the two men. I will take the man more likely to fail than the one proven to have failed every time.

10-31-2004, 11:13 PM	#15 (permalink)
guy44 Somnabulist Location: corner of No and Where	Ustwo, we keep running into each other. OK, so the situation is that Iran and N. Korea have substantially advanced their respective nuclear weapons programs in the time that Bush has been president, and done so publicly for Bush's last 2 years. Bush didn't do anything about it, a position I think we are all in agreement on. You posited that you believe that Bush has refrained from taking action in order to further his personal political ambitions. You also believe that Kerry wouldn't do anything as long as it would further his political ambitions (how not doing anything about N. Korea and Iran helps Kerry politically should he become president remains unexplained, but nonetheless I will grant you this unsubstantiated claim for the sake of argument.) Only one of these men has had the opportunity to engage in actions towards either N. Korea or Iran while president: Bush. He has, without a doubt, done nothing. Yet you say you are MORE CONFIDENT that Kerry would do nothing if placed in the same situation, despite the fact that he has never, in fact, had the opportunity to do nothing. You may be right that Kerry will do nothing. However, only Bush has proven that he will do nothing. That, Ustwo, is the real difference between the two men. I will take the man more likely to fail than the one proven to have failed every time. __________________ "You have reached Ritual Sacrifice. For goats press one, or say 'goats.'"