rjpieces
Posts: 6849
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:58 am

The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Fri May 26, 2006 11:55 pm

http://www.aei.org/publications/filter.all,pubID.24452/pub_detail.asp

Last week, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced resumption of full U.S. diplomatic relations with Libya, citing Tripoli's renunciation of terrorism and intelligence cooperation. This ends a quarter-century diplomatic freeze. It also marks an effective end to the Bush doctrine.

At his second inauguration, President Bush declared: "The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world."

Since that soaring pronouncement, the Bush administration has watched Egypt abrogate elections, ignored the collapse of the so-called Cedar Revolution in Lebanon and abandoned imprisoned Chinese dissidents; now Washington is mulling a peace treaty with Stalinist North Korea.

The rhetoric of democracy, it turns out, comes more easily than its implementation.
"Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon"
 
AerospaceFan
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sat May 27, 2006 12:01 am

Quoting RJpieces (Thread starter):
Since that soaring pronouncement, the Bush administration has watched Egypt abrogate elections, ignored the collapse of the so-called Cedar Revolution in Lebanon and abandoned imprisoned Chinese dissidents; now Washington is mulling a peace treaty with Stalinist North Korea.

I think you make an interesting point. Let's not forget that Russia appears to have become more authoritarian, as well.

Also, Latin America has become more and more leftist, which some may deem at counter-purposes to the freedom of which the President has spoken.

However, on the positive side of the ledger, from a purely governmental standpoint, are Afghanistan and Iraq, both of whose governments are, in theory, more democratic than those they replaced.
What's fair is fair.
 
TedTAce
Posts: 9098
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 12:31 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sat May 27, 2006 1:23 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 1):
Afghanistan and Iraq, both of whose governments are, in theory, more democratic than those they replaced.

Don't forget Palestine is a democracy now  Wink
This space intentionally left blank
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sat May 27, 2006 2:17 am

Quoting RJpieces (Thread starter):
The rhetoric of democracy, it turns out, comes more easily than its implementation.

So what do you propose?
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
AA777
Posts: 2358
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 7:07 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sat May 27, 2006 2:38 am

This is what you get when you start mucking around thinking you can decide to make the world into whatever you want. Bush has found that he does not have limitless power. Everything is easier said than done. The Iraqis would be welcoming us into the streets, right?

-AA777
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8101
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sat May 27, 2006 2:53 am

To me, "Bush Doctrine" = preemptive military action on any target in any country. And I don't think that has ended - despite overwhelming public opinion and indeed the complete and grisly failure of the US to achieve it's goals in Afganistan and Iraq, the administration is gunning for Iran. I personally am astounded how little effect these factors have had on the Bush admin. You would think the hideous failures in Afganistan and Iraq, not to mention the worldwide unpopularity of the US as a result, would have put the brakes on their twisted ambitions, but it almost seems to spur them on. These people really don't give a shit. Remarkable.

(RJPieces, as though you or the Bushistas could care less about the freedom of any non-Americans, with the obvious exception of Israel. Come on - the US has supported undemocratic regimes in the ME for decades, to safeguard Israel and get mega cheap oil. Who cares about the Egyptians, living under a horrific dictatorship? That horrific dictatorship gets $6b a year from the US in return for a peace treaty with Israel, making Egypt the second biggest recipient of US aid behind you-know-who. So the idea that the Bush admin ever cared about freedom anywhere is absurd. The "Cedar Revolution"? Give me a break. If Syria would back down from it's pro-Palestinian principles and give US corporations access to it's resources and markets, the US would give it stacks of cash and Lebanese sovereignty on a plate, the freedom of it's people be damned.)
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
cfalk
Posts: 10221
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2000 6:38 pm

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sat May 27, 2006 3:03 am

Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 5):
To me, "Bush Doctrine" = preemptive military action on any target in any country. And I don't think that has ended - despite overwhelming public opinion and indeed the complete and grisly failure of the US to achieve it's goals in Afganistan and Iraq, the administration is gunning for Iran. I personally am astounded how little effect these factors have had on the Bush admin. You would think the hideous failures in Afganistan and Iraq, not to mention the worldwide unpopularity of the US as a result, would have put the brakes on their twisted ambitions, but it almost seems to spur them on. These people really don't give a shit. Remarkable.

(RJPieces, as though you or the Bushistas could care less about the freedom of any non-Americans, with the obvious exception of Israel. Come on - the US has supported undemocratic regimes in the ME for decades, to safeguard Israel and get mega cheap oil. Who cares about the Egyptians, living under a horrific dictatorship? That horrific dictatorship gets $6b a year from the US in return for a peace treaty with Israel, making Egypt the second biggest recipient of US aid behind you-know-who. So the idea that the Bush admin ever cared about freedom anywhere is absurd. The "Cedar Revolution"? Give me a break. If Syria would back down from it's pro-Palestinian principles and give US corporations access to it's resources and markets, the US would give it stacks of cash and Lebanese sovereignty on a plate, the freedom of it's people be damned.)

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE!?!
The only thing you should feel when shooting a terrorist: Recoil.
 
CastleIsland
Posts: 3212
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 1:40 pm

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sat May 27, 2006 3:15 am

Quoting Pope (Reply 3):
So what do you propose?



Quoting Cfalk (Reply 6):
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE!?!

Using your logic, I should do your job, you should do mine, and RJPieces or Cedarjet should be PotUS. It's not Reese's responsibility to have an alternative.
"People don't do what they believe in, they just do what's most convenient, then they repent." - Dylan
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8101
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sat May 27, 2006 3:20 am

I propose a regime in DC that either (a) fights to protect the freedom of people everywhere, so bye bye US aid to Egypt, bye bye to US protection of the Saudi royal family, bye bye US aid to Israel unless they immediately withdraw from the West Bank and hand over their nukes and WMDs etc etc, sort out Iran, N Korea, Algeria, Syria, god knows where else (it's a long list) - not by killing tens of thousands of civilians in those countries but by talking to the leaders and working out why they behave the way they do and enforcing a solution with incentives; no more torture flights, no more Guantanamo Bay, no more "Patriot" Act, no more military strikes against civilians... or (b) keeping the hell out of everyone else's business - no aid to anyone, no military action against anyone.

It's the hypocrasy that is so damaging, claiming to show an interest in "freedom" with words then doing the opposite with actions. If Bush & Co said, "We're invading Iraq cos Saddam is threatening to do oil deals in Euros, and we need an alternative to Saudi oil cos the Saudis just attacked us, and it's in Israel's interest," I think it would have been better cos everyone's worked all that stuff out anyway, so in addition to attacking Iraq for dodgy reasons (the ones I've just listed), everyone also knows the Bushistas to be liars. At least telling the truth about their motivations would take one thing (liars / hypocrites) off the charge sheet.

(CFalk, please don't be so rude; you will notice I am not quoting you then saying "Blah blah blah", or shouting.)

Next.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
slider
Posts: 6806
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sat May 27, 2006 4:08 am

The ultimate irony and, I believe historical footnote, to the "Bush Doctrine" will always be that he went to fight for liberty and freedom on the other side of the planet while neglecting liberty in his own country.

That's it in a nutshell.

We fight in Iraq, we won't so much as put up a fight for our borders, language, culture or sovereignty.

I wonder who the next Edward Gibbon is who is chronicling this for history.
 
Derico
Posts: 4209
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 1999 9:14 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sat May 27, 2006 4:14 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 1):
Also, Latin America has become more and more leftist, which some may deem at counter-purposes to the freedom of which the President has spoken.

I'm not a leftist (I'm a liberalist). Meaning free markets, people educating and helping themselves, a moderate limited safety net when people fall on hard times not of their doing, civil rights for everyone from religious extremists to atheists to poligamists.

I would have to disagree that voting 'left' means lesser freedoms. Of course to like minded people to Bush that may seem so, then again, it probably is so when the US left wins in elections too.

Besides Chavez and Morales, I would not worry about curtailing of freedoms in Chile, Brazil, etc.
My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8101
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sat May 27, 2006 5:00 am

I must agree with Derico - I didn't earlier cos there were other points I wanted to make but I did notice our friend Aerospace Fan associate leftism with a curtailment of freedom and that really is rather specious.

Canada, France, Greece, Brazil are all "leftist" and could be classed as "socialist", and I would consider them all to be more free than the US, the ultimate bastion of right wing policies. Even the UK after two decades of right wing rule by Thatcher and her less well known successor John Major has a national health service entirely paid for by the central treasury, and other defining characteristics of left wing nations - and I would consider us to be more free than the US.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
Mir
Posts: 19093
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sat May 27, 2006 5:07 am

Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 8):
I propose a regime in DC that either (a) fights to protect the freedom of people everywhere, so bye bye US aid to Egypt, bye bye to US protection of the Saudi royal family, bye bye US aid to Israel unless they immediately withdraw from the West Bank and hand over their nukes and WMDs etc etc, sort out Iran, N Korea, Algeria, Syria, god knows where else (it's a long list) - not by killing tens of thousands of civilians in those countries but by talking to the leaders and working out why they behave the way they do and enforcing a solution with incentives; no more torture flights, no more Guantanamo Bay, no more "Patriot" Act, no more military strikes against civilians... or (b) keeping the hell out of everyone else's business - no aid to anyone, no military action against anyone.

The first of those options is idealistic, but impractical. Not just for the US, but for any country. International politics is a messy game, and sometimes you have to accept the lesser of two evils.

The second of thoe options would be disastrous for the world. US aid is relied upon in many places. Pulling out of everywhere just so that we can be equally unkind to everyone makes no sense.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sat May 27, 2006 5:35 am

Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 8):
I propose a regime in DC that either (a) fights to protect the freedom of people everywhere, so bye bye US aid to Egypt, bye bye to US protection of the Saudi royal family, bye bye US aid to Israel unless they immediately withdraw from the West Bank and hand over their nukes and WMDs etc etc, sort out Iran, N Korea, Algeria, Syria, god knows where else (it's a long list) - not by killing tens of thousands of civilians in those countries but by talking to the leaders and working out why they behave the way they do and enforcing a solution with incentives; no more torture flights, no more Guantanamo Bay, no more "Patriot" Act, no more military strikes against civilians... or (b) keeping the hell out of everyone else's business - no aid to anyone, no military action against anyone.

I don't know how either of those advances US interest or advances the peace and security of the world. To me those are the first two measures (and in that order) by which we should evaluate US policy.

Politics is the art of the possible. For that reason there will always be US foreign aid to Israel. The pro-Israel lobby is simply that strong and powerful within the US political establishment. Get a copy of Hedrick Smith's the POWER GAME. It's an excellent book about the role of money in politics with a particular focus on AIPAC.

Going out and picking a fight with N Korea is a sucker move. NK is a regionalized threat. Yeah they could launch a bunch of weapons to Japan and South Korea but until they get an ICBM, they're really not a threat to us. They've got absolutely no ability to sustain offensive warfare operations so an invasion of SK would simply be an act of desparation by the regime. Sitting them out is the best way to go. By the way if NK gets too out of hand, the Chinese will simply slap them silly. PRC is not going to allow NK to think it's the big swinging d*ck of the region if they act in any way that is contrary to Beijing's interest.

The only way I see NK and PRC cooperating is if China decided that it was going to take back Taiwan. In exchange for NK diverting US attention by a conventional war on the Korean penninsula while China invade Taiwan, China might throw them some support but even that's a huge stretch.

As long as oil is king, the US will protect the Saudi Royal family. That's just reality.

And as for Algeria and Syria... well we've got enough real problem to focus on instead of worrying about little piss ants like these two countries.
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
slider
Posts: 6806
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sat May 27, 2006 6:32 am

Quoting Pope (Reply 13):
Going out and picking a fight with N Korea is a sucker move. NK is a regionalized threat. Yeah they could launch a bunch of weapons to Japan and South Korea but until they get an ICBM, they're really not a threat to us. They've got absolutely no ability to sustain offensive warfare operations so an invasion of SK would simply be an act of desparation by the regime. Sitting them out is the best way to go.

Actually, by that rationale, wouldn't it make perfect sense to withdraw our troops from SK? We won't be a tripwire for such a "regional" threat if that's how you want to characterize it.

We'll sit this out out and let SK, Japan and the region handle it.
 
User avatar
jetjack74
Posts: 6580
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 6:35 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sat May 27, 2006 6:54 am

I would hardly call this opinion a deathnail to the Bush Doctrine. Mostly the reason of why things have transpired the way they have, is becuase other things, from the CIA leak scandal, the high oil prices, to the Git'mo detainee "scandal"(if you can call it one) that have diverted the attenion and the resources. The Bush Doctrine is still alive and well in the standoff with Iran over the nuclear enrichment.

Quoting TedTAce (Reply 2):
Don't forget Palestine is a democracy now

Well, they were given free elections, and they voted for a terrorist organisation. Irony?

Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 8):
sort out Iran, N Korea, Algeria, Syria, god knows where else (it's a long list)

And how would you propose doing that?

Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 8):
not by killing tens of thousands of civilians in those countries but by talking to the leaders and working out why they behave the way they do and enforcing a solution with incentives;

Talking to these leaders, through dialogue, and diplomacy? What a load of garbage. Have you not been watching the events unfolding with Iran? They were offered incentives by France, Germany, and Britain in which they turned it all down. All this while calling for the destruction of Israel, suggesting special clothing for non-muslims in Iran, and lying about their pursuit of nuclear technology. Talking is really showing that it works. When Iran says it wants to talk, it means they're stalling. Talk is cheap.
Made from jets!
 
TedTAce
Posts: 9098
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 12:31 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sat May 27, 2006 7:24 am

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 15):
Well, they were given free elections, and they voted for a terrorist organisation. Irony?

Either that or a vast right wing conspiracy...  Wink
This space intentionally left blank
 
comorin
Posts: 3857
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 5:52 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sat May 27, 2006 8:14 am

I'm a little confused by the statement "Palestine is a democracy". I know that elections were held in the occupied Territories, that there is a Palestinian Authority, but is Palestine a country yet? Isn't that for the Israelis to decide?
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8101
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sat May 27, 2006 8:04 pm

Quoting Comorin (Reply 17):
is Palestine a country yet? Isn't that for the Israelis to decide?

I suppose you're right in a way. Shows how little the US cares about freedom though, America's #1 ally / client state holding a whole nation (Palestine) under brutal occupation.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
PSA727
Posts: 845
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 7:49 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sun May 28, 2006 11:26 am

Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 8):
not by killing tens of thousands of civilians in those countries but by talking to the leaders and working out why they behave the way they do and enforcing a solution with incentives;

O.K., let me get this correct...

Americans are killing tens of thousands of civilians? And they are also
responsible for the killing of American soldiers, too? Or are you referring
to the insurgents killing they're fellow countrymen, as well as American
soldiers?

Just want to know...
fly high, pay low...Germanwings!
 
cairo
Posts: 889
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 2:41 pm

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sun May 28, 2006 3:31 pm

RJ, you're quite right that the president was full of rhetoric that doesn't match up with his actions. BUT, the role of a politician in modern America is to get elected and stay elected, not to effect good policies or policies that match their own words. Rhetoric gets votes. Actual policy and actions now, apparently, are less important.

You are of course bringing this up because you constantly seek to hijack US policy to protect Israel, and therefore you are upset that a potential threat to Israel, Libya, has a rising stock in Washington. I assume Michael Ledeen and Thomas Friedman or some other figure in the constellation of rabid pro-Israel commentators has put this story in your mind? But, anyway, you're right to point out the hypocrisy.

Cairo
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8101
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sun May 28, 2006 5:59 pm

Quoting PSA727 (Reply 19):
O.K., let me get this correct... Americans are killing tens of thousands of civilians?

Yes. 100,000 in Iraq, god knows how many in Afganistan.

Quoting PSA727 (Reply 19):
And they are also responsible for the killing of American soldiers, too?

Well, I guess the American taxpayer is responsible for the 3,000+ American combat deaths, yes - it's not as though anyone's doing anything meaningful to get them out of harm's way, where they were placed without an honest and justifiable reason. But you know what I mean.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
rjpieces
Posts: 6849
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:58 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Sun May 28, 2006 11:53 pm

Quoting Cairo (Reply 20):
You are of course bringing this up because you constantly seek to hijack US policy to protect Israel, and therefore you are upset that a potential threat to Israel, Libya, has a rising stock in Washington.

LOL, you have really lost it. Libya a threat to Israel? Libya's a little piss country that isn't a threat to anyone, especially not Israel. I object to their "rising stock" because 270 people (189 of whom were AMERICAN) died in the Pan Am 103 attack.

You wonder why Arabs have a negative stereotype in the United States. Throwing out conspiracy theories all the time doesn't help one be viewed as rational.

Quoting Cairo (Reply 20):
I assume Michael Ledeen and Thomas Friedman or some other figure in the constellation of rabid pro-Israel commentators

Michael Ledeen and Thomas Friedman in the same sentence. They have little to nothing in common other than being Jewish, but hey, I was never one to understand the minds of people who rant and rave about Jews.

Quoting Cairo (Reply 20):
has put this story in your mind? But, anyway, you're right to point out the hypocrisy.

Umm, isn't a more logical, simple, and correct explanation that I was browsing the AEI website and found the article MYSELF? But conspiracy theories are alive and well in the Arab world I see. I think they are directly proportional to the lack of progress in the Arab world.
"Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon"
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Mon May 29, 2006 12:10 am

Quoting Pope (Reply 3):
Quoting RJpieces (Thread starter):
The rhetoric of democracy, it turns out, comes more easily than its implementation.

So what do you propose?

Voting out the GOP from power in '06 an '08 is a start.
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
Gilligan
Posts: 1993
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 12:15 pm

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Mon May 29, 2006 1:16 am

Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 18):
Shows how little the US cares about freedom though, America's #1 ally / client state holding a whole nation (Palestine) under brutal occupation.

1947 UN passes resolution 181 laying out the borders of Israel and Palestine. 1948 Syria, TransJordan, Eygpt, and the Palestinians attack Israel with the intent on destroying it. Part or all of them have done so 3 more times since then and the Palestinians have been running a non stop terrorist war since then. So tell me, if Ireland had attacked N. Ireland as many times and the IRA were blowing themselves up on busses and in other public places in Britian with regularity, you're telling me the Queen herself wouldn't be telling Blair to start putting the screws to the N. Ireland population?

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 23):
Voting out the GOP from power in '06 an '08 is a start.

Not that I disagree with you but do you really think all that much will change? I frankly gave up on political parties years ago and have focused on the candidate, even more so now. The sad part is that everyone thinks that the other areas represenative is the problem, not their own. I don't think either party really has the countries best interests in mind, just their own protection of power.

As to the Bush doctrine, I think 9/11 showed that we can either fight them here or fight them there, it's all up to us. No matter where though, we will have to fight them to maintain our way of life.

Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 8):
but by talking to the leaders and working out why they behave the way they do and enforcing a solution with incentives;

Talk all you want but if you're not carrying a big ass stick and show that you are prepared to use it, it's for nothing. Time has proven over and over again that these types only respond to, and only respect one thing, the use of naked brutal force.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
legend500
Posts: 141
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Tue May 30, 2006 4:11 am

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 24):
1947 UN passes resolution 181 laying out the borders of Israel and Palestine. 1948 Syria, TransJordan, Eygpt, and the Palestinians attack Israel with the intent on destroying it. Part or all of them have done so 3 more times since then and the Palestinians have been running a non stop terrorist war since then.

The Palestinians who were already in the area had no say in regards to the UN resolution, and didn't even recognize the UN's legitimacy. It's therefore understandable that they attempt to regain that which was lost through any means neccessary, up to and inclusive of attacks creating collateral damage. They're simply defending their country, and trying to regain their independence. Anyone in any country would do the same if in such a situation.

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 24):
Queen herself wouldn't be telling Blair to start putting the screws to the N. Ireland population?

The Queen has no legislative or policy-making role. Therefore, she would not be doing what you describe.

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 24):
As to the Bush doctrine, I think 9/11 showed that we can either fight them here or fight them there, it's all up to us. No matter where though, we will have to fight them to maintain our way of life.

NO, we don't have to fight these bogeymen at all. 9/11, horrible as it was, is a minor event in the history of the country, and had no lasting effect. Our own "war on terrorism" has actually caused more damage to our way of life then terrorists could ever hope to accomplish (NSA wiretapping, unlimited expansion of the executive). Terrorists are less of a threat to the US than Global warming, aids, urban violence and lightning, yet there is no "war on global warming", no "war on disease", no "war on crime" and no "war on lightning". Terrorism is just a dreamed-up bogeyman which is only effective if the terrorists goad a country into fighting itself. Congrats, looking at the actions of the Bush admin in the US, the terrorists have already won.

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 24):
Talk all you want but if you're not carrying a big ass stick and show that you are prepared to use it, it's for nothing. Time has proven over and over again that these types only respond to, and only respect one thing, the use of naked brutal force.

Entirely true. However, the US is a democracy, and is thus incapable of using the stick. The US could solve every problem it has in the world tomorrow, if it was able to institute conscription and a limited nuclear offensive doctrine. This, however, is impossible in a democracy, so the US doesn't really have a credible "big stick", and is incapable of deploying "brute force".

As to the subject: Bush should ensure democracy in his own country before he goes off giving it to others.
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Tue May 30, 2006 4:49 am

Quoting Legend500 (Reply 25):
NO, we don't have to fight these bogeymen at all. 9/11, horrible as it was, is a minor event in the history of the country, and had no lasting effect.

I have to strongly disagree with that statement. It was an even that rivaled Pearl Harbor, in both scope and how it shook this nation up. It will be seen as a watershed event in the histor of our nation, sure as Gettysburg, Pearl Harbor, and JFK's assassination were.

And it has had long-term consequences on this nation. It has set us into two wars-one clearly justified, one not justified at all based on events of 9/11; it has upped security in this nation to levels hardly ever seen; it has allowed a paranoia and fear to still permeate many in this society, not seen since "The Red Scare"; it has shaken our alliances and friendships, and stretched our military.

All these are long-term consequences, and they have cause some fundamentals in the way Americans see themselves and the world in general.
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
rolfen
Posts: 1539
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:03 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Tue May 30, 2006 5:02 am

Quoting RJpieces (Thread starter):
ignored the collapse of the so-called Cedar Revolution in Lebanon

What collapse, we did kick out the syrians  Smile
Ok the rest was not pretty, we did not find ourselves any better off corruption-wise, some of the best public men were lost in car bombs and we havent even heard of any suspects yet.

Ugly, yeah, but the image of 1 million lebanese going down to demonstrate out of patriotism for their country stays in our mind.

And now we know that the real ennemy was not syria, but the feudal system that runs the country. Dont worry, they think they have it under control, but their time is coming  Smile
rolf
 
soyuzavia
Posts: 589
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 7:21 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Tue May 30, 2006 5:06 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 1):
Let's not forget that Russia appears to have become more authoritarian, as well.

What an absolute load of RUBBISH. Stop reading from the Cheney handbook. This is the arseclown who accuses Putin of using energy as a tool to bully its neighbours. Well fuck me dead, Putin's not the one who invaded a sovereign nation for energy sources under the auspices of terror haha. Putin is 100% correct in his Comrade Wolf assertion

Russia is becoming anything but authoritarian. What Russia is becoming is INDEPENDENT.

Meaning gone are the Yeltsin Wild Wild West days where the Russian people were raped and pillaged by the oligarchs, with the entire West standing by and cheering from the sidelines. Putin is ensuring that the Russian people won't be buttf***ed by so-called Western interests in the future.

This is evident by the recent meeting in Sochi between Putin and high ranking reps from the EU, in which the EU laid their list of (energy) demands on the table, and Putin stood firm and rejected all of them outright - the EU then turns around and calls the meeting a 'success' HAHA.

Putin is enjoying +70% electorate approval ratings (without having an attack on home soil to boost them) - ratings which Bush and cronies could only dream about.
 
Gilligan
Posts: 1993
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 12:15 pm

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Tue May 30, 2006 6:09 am

Quoting Legend500 (Reply 25):
The Palestinians who were already in the area had no say in regards to the UN resolution, and didn't even recognize the UN's legitimacy.

But now they do as they regularly call on Israel to obey UN resolution this or that. If you are going to press for the acceptance of one resolution you have to recognize them all.

Quoting Legend500 (Reply 25):
They're simply defending their country, and trying to regain their independence.

Could you please tell me when, exactly, was the last time that "Palestine" was a free and independent country.

Quoting Legend500 (Reply 25):
The Queen has no legislative or policy-making role.

No kidding. dopey 

Quoting Legend500 (Reply 25):
Therefore, she would not be doing what you describe.

My understanding of the Monarchy is that it is prohibited from public display of any stated political objective but that does not mean that she doesn't have the PM's ear and that any self respecting PM is not going to at least listen to her views on any given subject.

Quoting Legend500 (Reply 25):
NO, we don't have to fight these bogeymen at all. 9/11, horrible as it was, is a minor event in the history of the country, and had no lasting effect

Refresh my memory, how many airlines have filed for BK since 9/11?

Quoting Legend500 (Reply 25):
Terrorism is just a dreamed-up bogeyman which is only effective if the terrorists goad a country into fighting itself. Congrats, looking at the actions of the Bush admin in the US, the terrorists have already won.

If you really believe that then you haven't been many places in this world.

Quoting Legend500 (Reply 25):
This, however, is impossible in a democracy, so the US doesn't really have a credible "big stick", and is incapable of deploying "brute force".



OK, ANC, easy does it, take deep breaths, remember it's just a picture and you can't be hitting the firing button, or the traverse arm. biggrin 


















These are big sticks. Two of the three can deliver nuclear weapons but at the current time there is no need too. None of them require conscription at this point either. So the U.S. does have several very credible "big sticks" from which to choose and is completely capable of deploying "brute force" as seen below.



Quoting Legend500 (Reply 25):
As to the subject: Bush should ensure democracy in his own country before he goes off giving it to others.

Please name a right, listed in the Constitution or subsequent Bill of Rights that you have lost since 9/11. Please be specific.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, and a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
legend500
Posts: 141
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Tue May 30, 2006 5:03 pm

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 29):

But now they do as they regularly call on Israel to obey UN resolution this or that. If you are going to press for the acceptance of one resolution you have to recognize them all.

Agreed. I didn't say it had to make sense, but that's how it's seen in the region. Everyone wants everyone else to abide by UN resolutions the other side wouldn't dream of going along with.

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 29):
Could you please tell me when, exactly, was the last time that "Palestine" was a free and independent country.

According to people in the region, it is currently so. You wouldn't seriously contend that Germany is only 16 years old? (Germany was under official allied occupation until October 3, 1990.)

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 29):

My understanding of the Monarchy is that it is prohibited from public display of any stated political objective but that does not mean that she doesn't have the PM's ear and that any self respecting PM is not going to at least listen to her views on any given subject.

Correct. We agree that the Monarch holds no official consultative role.

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 29):
Refresh my memory, how many airlines have filed for BK since 9/11?

Corporate bankruptcies are not major events in the life of a nation.

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 29):
If you really believe that then you haven't been many places in this world.

I'm using terrorism in the ambiguated Americanized sense. I lived in London for some time, and i'd say the same things about the 7/7 attacks.

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 29):
So the U.S. does have several very credible "big sticks" from which to choose and is completely capable of deploying "brute force" as seen below.

Pretty pictures. Will, an intregal part of the "big stick", is not measured in the tools of war. Show me pictures of a nuked Pyongyang and a Tehran under occupation. Show me pictures of American casualties coming home by the tens of thousands. Then maybe the US will have gained a credible deterrent. Since both countries can thumb their nose at the US, it's pretty clear they have correctly deduced that they have nothing to fear from understandably risk-averse, if photogenic, American milirtary.

Quoting Gilligan (Reply 29):
Please name a right, listed in the Constitution or subsequent Bill of Rights that you have lost since 9/11. Please be specific.

FIRST AMENDMENT:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," Anti-gay marriage laws which are religiously based constitute the establishment of religion.
"or abridging the freedom of speech" If I wanted to, I can't protest at a funeral. And in Washington, I can't protest on the Inaguration Parade route. And I can't see Janet Jackson's boob on TV.
"or of the press" If I leak information about a government domestic spying program, and do not wish to state my sources, I can be thrown in jail (Judith Miller)
"or the right of the people peaceably to assemble," See the Inaguration example above.
"and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." If the government spies on me or classifies me as a travel risk, there is no way to dispute such a claim.

SECOND AMENDMENT:
"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." I can't bring a gun on any mode of transport, or into a government facility. Bush has not done away with many Clinon-era gun control laws.

THIRD AMENDMENT:
"No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law." The US military, through NSA spying, can now quarter itself digitally on my hard drive in my home without my approval or knowlege. A state of war has not been declared.

FOURTH AMENDMENT:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated," I'm not secure, the government can search me at will without reasonable cause (person), they can search my house without a warrant (houses & effects), and my personal documents and library records can also be searched without a warrant (papers). Any suspicion at all is now sufficient to do the above, thanks to PATRIOT.
"and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation," According to the administration, they don't even need a warrant, much less a sworn one.

FIFTH AMENDMENT:
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury," Warrantless (and hence Grand-Jury-less) wiretapping.
"nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;" PATRIOT deprives all Americans, even you, of due process. I can't get married.
"nor shall private property be taken for public use," I didn't see the Administration working to overrule the Supreme Court on the New London decision.

SIXTH AMENDMENT:
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense." I can now be tried by secretive Intelligence courts in sealed proceedings with secret witnesses and ineffectual counsel. In fact anyone can, if there is the slightest hint of "sympathy with terrorists".

SEVENTH AMENDMENT:
"in suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved," The administration now wants to put limits on what a jury can do in medical malpractice cases, circumventing the right of trial by jury.

EIGHTH AMENDMENT:
"nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." The administration continues to support the excecution of minors and of innocent people.

NINTH AMENDMENT:
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." This includes all rights not written here (such as a right to privacy or a right to liberty) but still implied. Bush has trampled those sorts of rights.

TENTH AMENDMENT:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." The administration violates this one every day, by deciding at what age minors can drink through bribery, Deploying state-controlled national guard without state approval, and forcing questionable initiatives such as No Child Left Behind on states if they want any education funding.

Did I get them all, or would you like me to continue with the declaration of independence?
 
rjpieces
Posts: 6849
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:58 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Tue May 30, 2006 10:26 pm

Legend, are you joking????? I don't think one thing you said was correct.

Quoting Legend500 (Reply 30):
If I wanted to, I can't protest at a funeral. And in Washington, I can't protest on the Inaguration Parade route. And I can't see Janet Jackson's boob on TV.

The government passing a law blocking fringe elements from protesting at the funerals of soldiers KIA does not constitute the end of democracy. You can't protest on the Inauguration Parade route?! Were you even there? Because I was there the entire day and saw literally thousands of protestors. And as far as I remember, everyone saw Janet Jackson's boob.

Quoting Legend500 (Reply 30):
Anti-gay marriage laws which are religiously based constitute the establishment of religion.

Last time I checked there was gay marriage or close to the equivalent in Mass, Conneticut, Vermont, and California. And if the Supreme Court ever rules on the Defense of Marriage Act, states like Alabama will likely have to accept the state law of Mass., etc. Again, democracy alive and well.

Quoting Legend500 (Reply 30):
If I leak information about a government domestic spying program, and do not wish to state my sources, I can be thrown in jail (Judith Miller)

Judith Miller being jailed has NOTHING to do with this.

Quoting Legend500 (Reply 30):
See the Inaguration example above

See above.

Quoting Legend500 (Reply 30):
I can't bring a gun on any mode of transport, or into a government facility. Bush has not done away with many Clinon-era gun control laws.

HAHA, I love how you attack the United States from the left and right....

Quoting Legend500 (Reply 30):
Any suspicion at all is now sufficient to do the above, thanks to PATRIOT.

Do you even know what the Patriot Act allows? Or is this just the Michael Moore reflex in you?

Quoting Legend500 (Reply 30):
PATRIOT deprives all Americans, even you, of due process. I can't get married.

Patriot Act doesn't allow you to get married?
"Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon"
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Wed May 31, 2006 12:53 am

Quoting Legend500 (Reply 30):
Pretty pictures. Will, an intregal part of the "big stick", is not measured in the tools of war. Show me pictures of a nuked Pyongyang and a Tehran under occupation. Show me pictures of American casualties coming home by the tens of thousands. Then maybe the US will have gained a credible deterrent. Since both countries can thumb their nose at the US, it's pretty clear they have correctly deduced that they have nothing to fear from understandably risk-averse, if photogenic, American milirtary.

Political issues aside the USA has the airpower to attack any enemy anywhere in the world on very short notice. If we wanted to we could have air supremecy in Iran in about 2 days and overfly at will. We could cut thier ports , highways and rail roads in about a week. The country would be in complete chaos and essentialy crippled. The first phase would be a massive stategic campaign follwed by tacitical operations that would devistate thier infrastructure. On the ground the invasion would have to be different than Iraq. A more aggresive occupation would be required , forget the free the people routine. The ground forces would have to Crush any opposition and any supporting population. The US could ,if they had the will to do it occupy Iran and destroy it completely.

"Will" is the issue , not the tools to do it. You make a point when you imply that the US is to weak to attack our enemies. The primary reason for this is political alone.
You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
 
soyuzavia
Posts: 589
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 7:21 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Wed May 31, 2006 2:59 am

The US could ,if they had the will to do it occupy Iran and destroy it completely.

Please, the US couldn't fight its way out of a paper bag, and that is on a good day. Without the assistance of other nations, the US is nothing but a toothless tiger. And some day in the future, maybe not tomorrow, maybe not next week, but some day in the future, this will be the case, as nations around the world realise it is not in their national interest to be supporting a state which has followed and will continue to follow an aggressive and violent, some say terroristic, foreign policy.
 
AGM100
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 2:16 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Wed May 31, 2006 4:01 am

Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 33):
Please, the US couldn't fight its way out of a paper bag, and that is on a good day. Without the assistance of other nations, the US is nothing but a toothless tiger.

My post was not to promote that we attack Iran, just a statement that if we had the will to do it we could. If the people of the US were completely dedicated and supportive of the idea to destroy another country we could do it. Not saying that it would be easy , but the US posseses the technology and the manufacturing capability to deliver a overwhelming attack and sustain a campaign.
You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
 
dvk
Posts: 1017
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2000 12:18 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Wed May 31, 2006 5:06 am

Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 18):
holding a whole nation (Palestine) under brutal occupation.

You sound as though you think the Palestinians are completely innocent victims here. You're kidding, aren't you?
I'm not dumb. I just have a command of thoroughly useless information.
 
slider
Posts: 6806
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Wed May 31, 2006 5:35 am

Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 33):
Please, the US couldn't fight its way out of a paper bag, and that is on a good day. Without the assistance of other nations, the US is nothing but a toothless tiger.

Offtopic, but this may be the most idiotic statement uttered in this joint in a long time. And that's weighing a LOT of idiotic statements.
 
legend500
Posts: 141
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Wed May 31, 2006 5:42 am

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 31):
The government passing a law blocking fringe elements from protesting at the funerals of soldiers KIA does not constitute the end of democracy.

No, it in itself is not, and I'm not claming that it is. However, it is a further restriction of the freedom of speech, and any loss of freedom is a net loss to our country.

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 31):
You can't protest on the Inauguration Parade route?! Were you even there? Because I was there the entire day and saw literally thousands of protestors.

Yes, I was. As you undoubtedly recall, the protesters were blocking several access gates because the federal government decided that they did not have the right to peaceably assemble on the parade route or anywhere close to it, where their protest would be most effective. Again, small losses of freedom add up, and it is a net negative.

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 31):
And as far as I remember, everyone saw Janet Jackson's boob.

And then the television company (ABC?) was fined for it. Again, the federal government restricted liberty, this time of a corporation, to show what it wanted to. More liberties lost.

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 31):
Last time I checked there was gay marriage or close to the equivalent in Mass, Conneticut, Vermont, and California.

Anything less than full equality under the law is a restriction of personal liberty. That leaves one state, and even there, you can't file a joint 1040 because the Bush government won't let you have the freedom to define your own personal arrangements. More lost liberty.

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 31):
HAHA, I love how you attack the United States from the left and right....

The administration has really gone that far off kilter. That and libertarians like me find no problem doing so.

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 31):
Do you even know what the Patriot Act allows? Or is this just the Michael Moore reflex in you?

Precisely, what the Patriot Act allows is far more important than just the text of the document. I'm glad we agree on this. Now, do you see why this administration is so misguided, or is it just the Michael Savage reflex in you preventing you from seeing that? Also, Michael Moore is another person pushing for restrictions on liberty which any clean-thinking American would reject out of hand. Certainly no friend of mine.

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 31):
Patriot Act doesn't allow you to get married?

Two seperate examples

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 32):
Political issues aside

Impossible to seperate it...

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 32):
"Will" is the issue , not the tools to do it. You make a point when you imply that the US is to weak to attack our enemies. The primary reason for this is political alone.

 checkmark  Well and truly said.
 
soyuzavia
Posts: 589
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 7:21 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Wed May 31, 2006 2:06 pm

Quoting Slider (Reply 36):
Offtopic, but this may be the most idiotic statement uttered in this joint in a long time. And that's weighing a LOT of idiotic statements.

Really? What I stated is pure, unadultered FACT!

Without US military bases in Europe, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Kyrgyzstan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Diego Garcia, Turkey, Bahrain, UAE, etc, how can one honestly think that the US could fight a war as it so often has. Fact is, it couldn't.

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 34):

My post was not to promote that we attack Iran, just a statement that if we had the will to do it we could. If the people of the US were completely dedicated and supportive of the idea to destroy another country we could do it. Not saying that it would be easy , but the US posseses the technology and the manufacturing capability to deliver a overwhelming attack and sustain a campaign.

Fair enough. But so do countries such as China, Russia, etc. All it takes is a couple of nukes, and game over. All the nuclear states need is the will to use their nukes. But again, without the co-operation of other nations, the US would not be in the position of being able to attack any far off nation, much less to be able to sustain any sizeable campaign.
 
clipperhawaii
Posts: 1943
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 1999 3:35 pm

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Wed May 31, 2006 2:48 pm

Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 33):
Please, the US couldn't fight its way out of a paper bag, and that is on a good day. Without the assistance of other nations, the US is nothing but a toothless tiger. And some day in the future, maybe not tomorrow, maybe not next week, but some day in the future, this will be the case, as nations around the world realise it is not in their national interest to be supporting a state which has followed and will continue to follow an aggressive and violent, some say terroristic, foreign policy.

LOL

Toothless tiger huh? Tell that to all the dead Al-Qaeda terrorists and the other burned, holed, or otherwise stiff terrorists that lay dead on the ground across the Middle East and the rest of the world. Rooooaaaarrrrr like the tiger. LOL

Trust me, our best interest is often YOUR best interest. Thus the reason governments have such strong relations with the U.S. They need us as much as we need them. Don't flatter yourself into thinking (or is it wishing?) for "nations around the world realize it is not in their national interest to be supporting a state which has ....blah blah blah."

If the U.S. is such the super power (that you correctly claim it is) that can't "fight its way out of a paper bag", what does that say about the rest of the countries that can't seem to rise to the super power level? Answer? Not much, and thus a giant hole in you paper bag statement. Propaganda trash. Nothing but propaganda trash.

Anyone have the lid for the trash can so we can keep the propaganda from smelling so bad?

Man it smells!


LOL
"You Can't Beat The Experience"
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Wed May 31, 2006 3:01 pm

Quoting Legend500 (Reply 37):
That and libertarians like me find no problem doing so.

Well, this certainly explains a hell of a lot . . . .

Welcome to LewRockwellisaNumbnut's world . . . .

You and MD-90 ought to get together and share recipes or something.

Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 33):

Please, the US couldn't fight its way out of a paper bag, and that is on a good day. Without the assistance of other nations, the US is nothing but a toothless tiger.

 rotfl  rotfl  rotfl 

Nonsense . . . . so much nonsense in fact, it doesn't deserve a reply . . .
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
AerospaceFan
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Wed May 31, 2006 3:06 pm

I don't understand Soyuzavia's approach in this or the matter of whether Russian has become more authoritarian, the latter of which manifested to me when I briefly glanced at at the thread containing his response to my message in which I asserted the same. (Regarding Putin's authoritarianism, which Soyuzavia appears to deny based on his view and apparent defense that Russia was merely declining to take a pro-U.S. line, Soyuz requested in his message that I stop taking the "Cheney" position, evidently failing to acknowledge that critical analyses of Russia's policy have occurred within non-U.S. Western countries as well. See, e.g., a recent description of European unease at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1774031,00.html.)

There should be little doubt to anyone that the United States is militarily pre-eminent in the world today. Although I have criticized America's weakness in another thread, this criticism arises from our inability to strike through the Gordian Knot consisting of national and international obligations, largely self-imposed, that prevents it from using its power. The U.S. is weak only because of the restrictions we place upon ourselves, and the failure of leadership on the part of some at the top of our government.

Should push come to shove, if there is one country in the world today that could defeat most of the rest of the world combined, that country would be the United States of America. Admittedly, any victory would be pyrrhic, since the rest of the world could also inflict severe damage to the United States. But it is a gross mistake, in my view, to believe that the inherent strength of the United States does not exist merely because it is not exemplified in the implementation of our policies today.

[Edited 2006-05-31 08:23:46]
What's fair is fair.
 
L410Turbolet
Posts: 5433
Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 9:12 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Wed May 31, 2006 3:51 pm

Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 28):
Russia is becoming anything but authoritarian.

 rotfl   rotfl   rotfl 

Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 33):
as nations around the world realise it is not in their national interest to be supporting a state which has followed and will continue to follow an aggressive and violent, some say terroristic, foreign policy.

I kinda lostt you Russo... are you talking about Russia now? If you indeed are, I guess we already realized that.


Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 28):
Putin of using energy as a tool to bully its neighbours.

Is he not? This "traditional tool" of enforcing Russian foreign policy goes way back to early 1990s when Gorbatschev tried to "convince" Lithuania not to break awa from the USSR by turning off its gas/oil pipelines. More recent cases of Ukraine and Gorgia are notoriously well known.
 
QANTAS077
Posts: 5175
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 5:08 pm

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Wed May 31, 2006 4:29 pm

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 34):
the US posseses the technology and the manufacturing capability to deliver a overwhelming attack and sustain a campaign.

all that technology and they can't beat a bunch of half ass mountain boys...so much for the mighty US military machine. they devestated Iraq in early 2003, Texas Bush rocked up in his swish uniform saying mission accomplished and praising US muscle, technology and troops when in reality the war has only just begun. so much for muscle and might eh?

Quoting Clipperhawaii (Reply 39):
Tell that to all the dead Al-Qaeda terrorists and the other burned, holed, or otherwise stiff terrorists that lay dead on the ground across the Middle East and the rest of the world. Rooooaaaarrrrr like the tiger. LOL

tell that the to the men who are still free that knocked down the twin towers...more terrorists roaming the earth now then the ones allied forces have killed. US administration has achieved sweet fark all in it's 5 year long battle against terror, only constant is that innocent people are still dying. well done, i take my hat off to you all!

Quoting RJpieces (Reply 22):
I object to their "rising stock" because 270 people (189 of whom were AMERICAN) died in the Pan Am 103 attack.

You wonder why Arabs have a negative stereotype in the United States. Throwing out conspiracy theories all the time doesn't help one be viewed as rational.

and you wonder why the Arab world thinks "conspiracy" when it comes to the USA, they didn't even release the full facts of the USS Vincennes incident which was seen as the catalyst for the destruction of PA 103. fact is that the boat was in Iranian waters when it fired it's missiles at Iran Air, yet they couldn't admit it publicly, nobody was bought to any real justice...yet PA 103 they bend over backwards to exhume a justice that is seen fit to those victims. Are Iranian lives any less precious then those on PA 103? i think not. US agreed to pay $61 million compensation yet claimed no wrongdoing, gave no apology and awarded crew medals for heroic achievement. stinks to high hell if you ask me!

[Edited 2006-05-31 09:35:45]

[Edited 2006-05-31 09:45:31]
 
soyuzavia
Posts: 589
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 7:21 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Wed May 31, 2006 4:51 pm

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 40):
Nonsense . . . . so much nonsense in fact, it doesn't deserve a reply . . .

Nonsense is the fact that you refuse to recognise what I say is fact. How the hell does anyone think the US could have invaded Iraq without having bases in the Middle East and Europe. What is the other option. Send 100 Hercs in from the US and have its troops paratroop into Iraq. Another few hundred Hercs to drop in the military hardware. Or perhaps you could tell your troops to start swimming from New York harbour several months before the invasion begins.

The rest of the world has a lot to answer for in being so vocal against US action such as in Iraq, yet not having the balls, or the brains, to kick the US military off their soil from which they begin, and continue, their wars from.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 41):
Regarding Putin's authoritarianism, which Soyuzavia appears to deny based on his view and apparent defense that Russia was merely declining to take a pro-U.S. line, Soyuz requested in his message that I stop taking the "Cheney" position, evidently failing to acknowledge that critical analyses of Russia's policy have occurred within non-U.S. Western countries as well. See, e.g., a recent description of European unease at

Well of course the Europeans are critical. They are part and parcel of the part of the world that wanted to see a weak Russia after the fall of the Soviet state. And up until 2000 (when Putin was elected) this was the case. Putin in a short 6 years has strengthened not only the Russian State, but also industry and economy. Russian debt has almost been eliminated.

People such as Cheney (and co.) have the nerve to castigate Putin for his using energy as a 'weapon' against neighbours haha. Use Ukraine as the prime example. It is well within Ukraine's right to pursue whatever foreign policy they want. But it isn't that simple. Ukraine is akin to the spoilt brat who publicly abused his parents, telling them that he wants nothing more to do with them, leave me the hell alone, etc, etc, yet still expects his parents to support him financially. If it were my kid, I would have told them to f' off completely and go support themself. To Putin's credit he didn't do this, but instead made Ukraine pay their way without their financial support. What's so wrong with that? Any American or European country/company would have done the SAME thing!!!!

The rest of Europe, whilst concerned at what happened in Ukraine, weren't so much worried about Ukraine (if at all), but were worried about their own necks. At no stage has Putin threatened western European gas supplies, as they are paying market price already, and the bills are paid. The western Europeans however do want access to the Russian energy sector. If Yeltsinism was alive and kicking in Russia (which thankfully is not), they (as well as the US) would already have complete control of the industry, and the Russians would still be inherently poor and misdone by as they were under Yeltsin. The state coffers would be empty, and Russian government would simply be a branch of corporate interests as it is in so-called democracies.

Gazprom would be a subsidiary of BP. Lukoil would be a subsidiary of Exxon. Alrosa would be a subsidiary of Rio Tinto. Rosneft would be a subsidiary of Shell. Severstal would be a subsidiary of BHP. etc. etc. etc

Instead we now see strong companies. Such as Gazprom, which in 2 short years has gone from the 80th-odd largest company in the world to the 2nd largest. (If anyone wants a hot stock tip, get yourself as many Gazprom shares as you can when they list).

And now the west is struggling to come to the realisation that they are out in the cold. And they have no one but themselves to blame, in no small part for actively undermining the State since the early 1990s.

For all of those who are critical of Putin, whom I consider to be one of the few true Statemen out there, take a look at his annual address to the Federal Assembly from early May. Have a good read of it, and take in what he has said, because fact is, very few of you have the faintest idea on how the modern Russia operates, but instead, like Cheney and Co, just bitch, moan, whine, cry and fling shit from the sidelines.
 
soyuzavia
Posts: 589
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 7:21 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Wed May 31, 2006 4:58 pm

Quoting Clipperhawaii (Reply 39):
Toothless tiger huh? Tell that to all the dead Al-Qaeda terrorists and the other burned, holed, or otherwise stiff terrorists that lay dead on the ground across the Middle East and the rest of the world. Rooooaaaarrrrr like the tiger. LOL

And what about all endless number of terrorists which have been created since because of a direct result of your own country's, let's call it an 'active', foreign policy.

Quoting Clipperhawaii (Reply 39):

If the U.S. is such the super power (that you correctly claim it is) that can't "fight its way out of a paper bag", what does that say about the rest of the countries that can't seem to rise to the super power level? Answer? Not much, and thus a giant hole in you paper bag statement. Propaganda trash. Nothing but propaganda trash.

Or more like perhaps the rest of the world doesn't have the big dick syndrome. Or more like pretending to have a big dick, but when it comes to showing it, it is nothing more than a shrivelled frankfurt.

And no, my nation's best interests are not YOUR nation's best interests. My best interests are what is best for not only my own country, but what is also best for the world community at large. American best interests, as evidenced by its own foreign policy over the last decade, is its own, with little to no interest as to what is good for the rest of the world.

As a world community we have already ridded ourselves of one overbearing superpower, which yes the USSR was, and it is only a matter of time before the other superpower is ridded to (although it is more likely it will self implode, rather than from outside influences).
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Wed May 31, 2006 5:16 pm

Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 44):
Nonsense is the fact that you refuse to recognise what I say is fact.

What you say is bullshit . . . . plain, unadulterated, simple bullshit. No response required.

Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 45):
And what about all endless number of terrorists which have been created since because of a direct result of your own country's, let's call it an 'active', foreign policy.

  

You don't for a small instant believe they were terrorists anyway????

  

Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 45):
frankfurt

Frankfurt is a city in Germany . . . frankfurter is a sausage . . . or if a Proper noun, a founder of the ACLU.

You sure you're not still a Party Member?

[Edited 2006-05-31 10:16:59]
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
QANTAS077
Posts: 5175
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 5:08 pm

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Wed May 31, 2006 6:27 pm

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 46):
You don't for a small instant believe they were terrorists anyway????

where's the proof to say they were/are? you think the mujahadein in Iraq where terrorists before this war? i'd like to see the proof of that. fact is, mujahadein are flocking to Iraq and taking up arms and bombs to take on the US military. Those people are from countries like yours and mine, from decent backgrounds and educated yet they are now willing to take their lives for a cause they believe in.

the young men that set off bombs in London last year weren't from a terrorist background, there was nothing to tip authorities off that they should have been watched. more often then not they are being infiltrated by islamist sites which highlight the situation in Iraq and they want to join the likes of Al Zarqawi.

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2006/s1628055.htm

have a read of the above.
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Wed May 31, 2006 6:37 pm

Nope, Mujahedein are certainly not terrorists.

But don't be so narrow visioned my friend.

Do you think Al-Queda just popped up since 9/11?

DO you think Hezbollah or Hamas was formed to beat up on the US?

Expand your definition and list of terrorists a bit . . .

Edit: Copied from another post of mine in another thread:

Are you and Soyuz going to try to convince me (the balance of the A-Netters) that these terrorist organizations weren't around pre-Iraq war, and that the US caused it all?

Therein lies the bullshit in his post . . . . there were terrorists a long, long time ago . . . and the US most certainly isn't the genesis for them all . . .

As far as the US State Department is concerned:
Abu Nidal Organization (ANO) (International)
Abu Sayyaf Group (Philippines)
Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade (Palestine)
Ansar al-Islam (Iraq, Kurdistan)
Armed Islamic Group (GIA) (Algeria)
Asbat al-Ansar
Aum Shinrikyo (Japan)
Basque Fatherland and Liberty (ETA) (Spain, France)
Communist Party of the Philippines/New People's Army (CPP/NPA) (Philippines)
Continuity Irish Republican Army (Northern Ireland)
Gama'a al-Islamiyya (Translates: Islamic Group) (Egypt)
HAMAS (Islamic Resistance Movement) (Palestine)
Harakat ul-Mujahidin (HUM) (Kashmir)
Hizballah (Translates: Party of God) (Lebanon)
Islamic Jihad Group
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) (Uzbekistan)
Jaish-e-Mohammed (JEM) (Translates: Army of Mohammed) (Kashmir)
Jemaah Islamiya organization (JI) (South East Asia)
al-Jihad (Egyptian Islamic Jihad) (Egypt)
Kahane Chai (Kach) (Israel)
Kongra-Gel (KGK, formerly Kurdistan Workers' Party, PKK, KADEK) (Kurdistan)
Lashkar-e-Tayyiba (LT) (Army of the Righteous) (Kashmir)
Lashkar i Jhangvi (Pakistan)
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) (Sri Lanka)
Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) (Libya)
Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group (GICM) (Morocco)
Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK) (Iran)
National Liberation Army (ELN) (Colombia)
Palestine Liberation Front (PLF) (Palestine)
Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) (Palestine)
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) (Palestine)
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command (PFLP-GC) (Palestine)
al-Qa’ida (Global)
Real IRA (Northern Ireland)
Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) (Colombia)
Revolutionary Nuclei (formerly ELA) (Greece)
Revolutionary Organization 17 November (Greece)
Revolutionary People's Liberation Party/Front (DHKP/C) (Turkey)
Salafist Group for Call and Combat (GSPC) (Algeria)
Shining Path (Sendero Luminoso, SL) (Peru)
Tanzim Qa'idat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn (QJBR) (al-Qaida in Iraq) (formerly Jama'at al-Tawhid wa'al-Jihad, JTJ, al-Zarqawi Network) (Iraq)
United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC) (Colombia)



And so says the UK:

Abu Nidal Organization (ANO) (International)
Abu Sayyaf Group (Philippines)
Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade (Palestine)
Ansar al-Islam (Iraq, Kurdistan)
Armed Islamic Group (GIA) (Algeria)
Asbat al-Ansar
Aum Shinrikyo (Japan)
Basque Fatherland and Liberty (ETA) (Spain, France)
Communist Party of the Philippines/New People's Army (CPP/NPA) (Philippines)
Continuity Irish Republican Army (Northern Ireland)
Gama'a al-Islamiyya (Translates: Islamic Group) (Egypt)
HAMAS (Islamic Resistance Movement) (Palestine)
Harakat ul-Mujahidin (HUM) (Kashmir)
Hizballah (Translates: Party of God) (Lebanon)
Islamic Jihad Group
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) (Uzbekistan)
Jaish-e-Mohammed (JEM) (Translates: Army of Mohammed) (Kashmir)
Jemaah Islamiya organization (JI) (South East Asia)
al-Jihad (Egyptian Islamic Jihad) (Egypt)
Kahane Chai (Kach) (Israel)
Kongra-Gel (KGK, formerly Kurdistan Workers' Party, PKK, KADEK) (Kurdistan)
Lashkar-e-Tayyiba (LT) (Army of the Righteous) (Kashmir)
Lashkar i Jhangvi (Pakistan)
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) (Sri Lanka)
Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) (Libya)
Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group (GICM) (Morocco)
Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK) (Iran)
National Liberation Army (ELN) (Colombia)
Palestine Liberation Front (PLF) (Palestine)
Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) (Palestine)
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) (Palestine)
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command (PFLP-GC) (Palestine)
al-Qa’ida (Global)
Real IRA (Northern Ireland)
Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) (Colombia)
Revolutionary Nuclei (formerly ELA) (Greece)
Revolutionary Organization 17 November (Greece)
Revolutionary People's Liberation Party/Front (DHKP/C) (Turkey)
Salafist Group for Call and Combat (GSPC) (Algeria)
Shining Path (Sendero Luminoso, SL) (Peru)
Tanzim Qa'idat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn (QJBR) (al-Qaida in Iraq) (formerly Jama'at al-Tawhid wa'al-Jihad, JTJ, al-Zarqawi Network) (Iraq)
United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC) (Colombia)

[Edited 2006-05-31 11:41:39]
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
L410Turbolet
Posts: 5433
Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 9:12 am

RE: The End Of The Bush Doctrine

Wed May 31, 2006 7:06 pm

Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 44):
Russian debt has almost been eliminated.

Wonderful. So now they can finally repay in cash what they owe to almost everzbody since the times of the USSR.

Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 45):
And no, my nation's best interests are not YOUR nation's best interests

Just for the record "your" country is which one? Australia? Russia? North Korea?

Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 44):
For all of those who are critical of Putin, whom I consider to be one of the few true Statemen out there

Now, THAT's what I call a surprise...  Yeah sure

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: fr8mech, speedygonzales and 13 guests