Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
LOL...in his first campaign, when did Bush address the Iraq issue?
|
Do you really need me to make the case? Are you saying that Bush on the Iraq issue took you by surprise? Did you not know the people who worked closely with Bush and what their views were? Did you ever listen to him talk about foreign affairs?
Quote:
|
I thought Bush ran on a foreign policy of no nation-building and fulfilling Reagan's "stars wars" vision.
|
The nation building issue came up after the invasion. don't you remember that was the whole issue about his administration failing to plan. That was the issue with Chaney's comment about being greeted as liberators. That was Powel's comment about "you break it, you fix it". I had mixed feeling about the occupation or "nation building", but in the end I think it was the right thing to do. The "star wars" vision is still actually a part of what Obama is dealing with. Reagan's vision has lead to technology that helped during the first Gulf War and is giving Obama the opportunity to implement "mobile" missile defense as opposed to "fixed location" missile defense to make Russia more comfortable and still provide some defense in eastern Europe.
Quote:
Terrorism and making Iraq the "central front on the war on terror" was an after-thought that took hold only after 9/11
Revisionist history is your idea of honesty?
|
Like I wrote earlier, some of you had your heads up your..., and now you say I am revising history. So, you think Bush's 2002 state of the union address when he first used the term "axis of evil" was something that he just dreamed up after 9/11?
---------- Post added at 03:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:34 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Dunedan
'Fraid I must agree with DC here, mate. I was watching Bush very closely during the run-up to 9/11, because I had high hopes for (but little faith in) his campeign promises in regards to education funding, and because I was seriously concerned about his China-baiting. Terrorism only popped onto his radar post-9/11, and it later came out that he completely ignored not only Clinton-era wonks telling him Usama bin Laden might be a problem, but even specific intel from the Mossad about possible dates and targets connected to Arab flight-school students in south Florida. Terrorism was never even discussed by Mr. Bush except to point out that Mr. Gore's tax plan would require hiring "1500 new IRA agents" during a debate.
I remember thinking that I'd much rather deal with the IRA than the IRS.
|
Chaney was Sec. of Defense during the Gulf War under Bush 1. Afterward he said this:
Quote:
|
We're always going to have to be involved [in the Middle East. Maybe it's part of our national character, you know we like to have these problems nice and neatly wrapped up, put a ribbon around it. You deploy a force, you win the war and the problem goes away and it doesn't work that way in the Middle East it never has and isn't likely to in my lifetime.
|
Dick Cheney - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
When a person makes a comment like that what does it mean to you. Chaney was a hawk in terms of US involvement in the ME. You did not know that?
{added}
I started looking on the internet for some of Bush's comment on Iraq during the 2000 campaign, here is one I found without much effort;
Quote:
Here are some words that were spoken during the 2000 Presidential and VP debates by Bush and Cheney.
George Bush:
The coalition against Saddam has fallen apart or it's unraveling, let's put it that way. The sanctions are being violated. We don't know whether he's developing weapons of mass destruction. He better not be or there's going to be a consequence should I be the president. But it's important to have credibility and credibility is formed by being strong with your friends and resoluting your determination. One of the reasons why I think it's important for this nation to develop an anti-ballistic missile system that we can share with our allies in the Middle East if need be to keep the peace is to be able to say to the Saddam Husseins of the world or the Iranians, don't dare threaten our friends.
MODERATOR: Saddam Hussein, you mean, get him out of there?
BUSH: I would like to, of course, and I presume this administration would as well. We don't know - there are no inspectors now in Iraq, the coalition that was in place isn't as strong as it used to be. He is a danger. We don't want him fishing in troubled waters in the Middle East. And it's going to be hard, it's going to be important to rebuild that coalition to keep the pressure on him.
|
This from Chaney:
Quote:
Dick Cheney:
I also think it's unfortunate we find ourselves in a position where we don't know for sure what might be transpiring inside Iraq. I certainly hope he's not regenerating that kind of capability, but if he were, if in fact Saddam Hussein were taking steps to try to rebuild nuclear capability or weapons of mass destruction, you would have to give very serious consideration to military action to - to stop that activity. I don't think you can afford to have a man like Saddam Hussein with nuclear weapons in the Middle East.
|
http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...te.html?cat=37
When a guy says something like the above, what does it mean to you folks?