Make Your Case - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-22-2002, 10:16 AM   #1
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 01:38 PM
Make Your Case

Many of you may be shocked to hear this, but my favorite President is President Kennedy.

President Kennedy made his case to the Amercian people during the Cuban Missle Crisis. He made a very clear case for the need for action. He prepared the citizenry for the days ahead. He led the country.

While I am very supportive of the UN Resolutions, if the President is to continue to say Iraq is in violations of the UN Resolution, he must make his case to the Amercian People. In my opinion, he HAS NOT done so. I sincerely hope he does so soon. It is looking more and more based on the news of day that the war is going to happen.

I for one would feel better about it if President Bush would pull a Kennedy sometime soon and present his case to the American people and the world. Given this administrations apparent fear of press conferences and addresses, I am worried the case will not be made.

Maybe I have the jitters over this, but based on what I am reading this morning February is not a good month to travel to the Middle east. To those of you with loved ones in the service, no matter what nationality, enjoy your holidays with them.

Peace to all.
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 12-22-2002, 11:13 AM   #2
Babyface
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5
Local Time: 06:38 PM
I don't think the President has done enough to communicate with the American people about Iraq. I did admire his actions in the days following September 11th, his speeches reassured people who were afraid, uncertain, apprehensive about the future. Now is another time of uncertainty and people are looking for reassurance and leadership. They're afraid, of what happens if America does go to war with Iraq, of what happens if she doesn't. The President needs to be offering some leadership, making the case for war if that's what he perceives as necessary, or at least ensuring that people are aware of what is happening in Iraq with regards to the UN weapons inspectors and UN resolutions.

Maybe it's partly because so much in politics is now reduced to "soundbites" but it seems that politicians don't communicate with the people enougn now. Maybe the criticisms that are sometimes made of the President, that he's not smart enough to take questions from reporters, or to give a press conference are true. But it's sad if a fear of the President mis-speaking or answering a question incorrectly mean that the people never have a real opportunity to hear their leader address the important issues of the day.
__________________

__________________
Pianogirl is offline  
Old 12-22-2002, 12:59 PM   #3
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 11:38 AM

J Eadgar Hoover by far
He had the sexiest underpants..

thank u


DB9
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 12-22-2002, 02:55 PM   #4
War Child
 
Cow of the Seas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Njosnavelin
Posts: 834
Local Time: 12:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
J Eadgar Hoover by far
He had the sexiest underpants..

thank u


DB9
weirdo.
__________________
those evil natured robots
theyre programed to destroy us
she gotta be strong to fight them
so shes taking lots of vitamins
cause she knows that
it be tragic
if those evil robots win
Cow of the Seas is offline  
Old 12-22-2002, 04:45 PM   #5
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,295
Local Time: 01:38 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
J Eadgar Hoover by far
He had the sexiest underpants..

thank u


DB9


*wishes there was a killfile option*
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 12-22-2002, 07:55 PM   #6
Refugee
 
bonoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Edmonton, Canada- Charlestown, Ireland
Posts: 1,398
Local Time: 11:38 AM
I totally agree with you Dread. Bush would be in such a better postion if he had convehed to us what is to fear. If he laid all of what he can on the table i think his support home based and abroad would sky rocket. I dont know of too many people around this board that really honestly think Iraq isnt a threat. But they wanna see and hear the evidence. The real evidence. Maybe they will have that sort of evidence once the UN inspectors are done. I fully support a war againist Iraq if it is for the right reasons. Saddam is a killer and a dictator of the worst kind. I would rank him up there with Hitler (though not as bad, noone can be that bad!).

He might just be waiting for the right time. Doing it over ht e holidays isnt the right time, he wouldnt get as much coverage and people arnt as intrested during holidays. If he were to wait till early january and give a great speech then he would have the support of the world and the full support of his people.

On another note about speechs. When is the last time anyone has seen a great from the heart speech, you know the one you remember for life? I can say the one at ground zero when Bush was around the ruble and the workers were there listening and he said that thing about them hears us. Dont know the exact wording but it gave me chills for weeks and still does. I really cant remember Clinton giving one of the same magnitude. I do think they should let Bush speak more often. He might jumble his words but he does seem to be speaking from the heart, and that is usually where the best speeches come from.
__________________
bonoman is offline  
Old 12-22-2002, 08:02 PM   #7
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 01:38 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by bonoman
I totally agree with you Dread. Bush would be in such a better postion if he had convehed to us what is to fear. If he laid all of what he can on the table i think his support home based and abroad would sky rocket. I dont know of too many people around this board that really honestly think Iraq isnt a threat. But they wanna see and hear the evidence. The real evidence. Maybe they will have that sort of evidence once the UN inspectors are done. I fully support a war againist Iraq if it is for the right reasons. Saddam is a killer and a dictator of the worst kind. I would rank him up there with Hitler (though not as bad, noone can be that bad!).

He might just be waiting for the right time. Doing it over ht e holidays isnt the right time, he wouldnt get as much coverage and people arnt as intrested during holidays. If he were to wait till early january and give a great speech then he would have the support of the world and the full support of his people.

On another note about speechs. When is the last time anyone has seen a great from the heart speech, you know the one you remember for life? I can say the one at ground zero when Bush was around the ruble and the workers were there listening and he said that thing about them hears us. Dont know the exact wording but it gave me chills for weeks and still does. I really cant remember Clinton giving one of the same magnitude. I do think they should let Bush speak more often. He might jumble his words but he does seem to be speaking from the heart, and that is usually where the best speeches come from.
Nice post Bonoman!

I am afraid that the UN is not going to back force against Iraq. It does not appear based on the Chief Inspectors statements that they have much to go on.

I am also afraid, that the President is going to proceed with War without the UN. I am not saying I would not support it, however, he needs to make his case to us. Maybe you are right, the holidays are not the right time.

We are weeks away, and I truly believe the clock is ticking for February. As a Republican, I hope the president makes his case if the UN does not support the use of force.

Peace
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 12-22-2002, 09:21 PM   #8
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
U2Bama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gulf Coast State of Mine
Posts: 3,405
Local Time: 12:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Cow of the Seas


weirdo.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
__________________
U2Bama is offline  
Old 12-23-2002, 03:04 AM   #9
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 06:38 PM
"Make Your Case"

This is what Saddam has to do and has failed to do for nearly 12 years now. Saddam signed a ceacefire agreement in March 1991 that makes it incumbent on him to give up and destroy all his weapons of mass destruction and to prove that he has done so, 100%. When Saddam signed this document, US military forces were only 150 miles south of Baghdad. There was nothing in the UN ceacefire agreement of March 1991 that said the USA or a US president 12 years in the future had to prove anything in regards to Saddams weapons of mass destruction.

There was nothing in any UN resolution or the ceacefire agreement that said or implied that Saddam could wait 12 years to comply with these conditions. It is up to Saddam to give up the weapons he has or if he no longer has them to prove that he destroyed them. Saddam must be disarmed peacefully or if that does not work, through military force.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 12-23-2002, 04:22 AM   #10
Refugee
 
bonoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Edmonton, Canada- Charlestown, Ireland
Posts: 1,398
Local Time: 11:38 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


Nice post Bonoman!

I am afraid that the UN is not going to back force against Iraq. It does not appear based on the Chief Inspectors statements that they have much to go on.

I am also afraid, that the President is going to proceed with War without the UN. I am not saying I would not support it, however, he needs to make his case to us. Maybe you are right, the holidays are not the right time.

We are weeks away, and I truly believe the clock is ticking for February. As a Republican, I hope the president makes his case if the UN does not support the use of force.

Peace
thank you Dread!

I do think that the UN should back the US because Iraq has not complied with the resolutions. An all out war isnt in the best intrests of the rest of the world, not with the economy as it is now. Sometimes money speaks louder then reality. If my country had the reasourses to actually make a difference in the war then i might be more out spoken! but sadly my country is militraly weak but our word alone can change minds. The more countries that jump on board the less chance of countries saying NO to war. Really the only people(and as in people i say soliders) that this is going to affect is the US and UK. The rest of the world, sadly, see this as another thing to oppose the US on, which has become the fashionable thing to do.

As much as some would like me to go againist all things US that is not the case. I am for a war on Iraq if it is for reasons not only benifical of the opposeing country, which i dont see hear.
__________________
bonoman is offline  
Old 12-23-2002, 06:34 AM   #11
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 01:38 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
"Make Your Case"

This is what Saddam has to do and has failed to do for nearly 12 years now. Saddam signed a ceacefire agreement in March 1991 that makes it incumbent on him to give up and destroy all his weapons of mass destruction and to prove that he has done so, 100%. When Saddam signed this document, US military forces were only 150 miles south of Baghdad. There was nothing in the UN ceacefire agreement of March 1991 that said the USA or a US president 12 years in the future had to prove anything in regards to Saddams weapons of mass destruction.

There was nothing in any UN resolution or the ceacefire agreement that said or implied that Saddam could wait 12 years to comply with these conditions. It is up to Saddam to give up the weapons he has or if he no longer has them to prove that he destroyed them. Saddam must be disarmed peacefully or if that does not work, through military force.

Sting,

Nice post. ALL things we have said before. My point, is that President Bush, must convince AMERICA it is necessary. Frankly, I find very few people who are convinced that force there is necessary. We may have the legal right to use the force based on signatures on paper.

However, before the use of force is used, this President needs to make his case and quite honestly, showing up on TV holding up a piece of paper is not going to cut it with a majority of the people. If the man has clear cut proof, he needs to show it, explain it, and convince the people that this is necessary. Especially, if the Chief inspector from the UN is not currently agreeing with the Bush take on things.

I think it is clear, I would be willing to support it, from all of my other posts. I just feel that something is missing here, and quite honestly, it is the leadership piece. We may not have that type of President that can communiccate to us the way others have.

President Kennedy did a kick ass job making his case and it is time for the President to lead.

Peace
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 12-23-2002, 08:21 PM   #12
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 06:38 PM
Dread,

President Kennedy's job of proving missiles were in Cuba was easy compared to what were talking about with Iraq, and also different in the sense that its never been incumbent on the USA or the United Nations to prove ANYTHING! Thats Iraq's job. I remind you that a Balistic Missile launcher can be up to 10 to 15 meters long and several meters wide. In addition, fuel and support vehicles are often stationed nearby. All of this was very visible from the air and the Soviets did little to hide these weapons.

Chemical and Biological weapons are much easier to conceal. If the USA were to lay all of its evidence on the table, 1. Our sources of information could be compromised 2. Iraq will see this evidence, realize what we know and don't know, and move to cover everything up, then destroy what ever means we had to know the info in the first place. That may include movement of the material to a new location that we don't seem to know about based on the evidence we present, thereby effectively concealing it from the rest of the world. It may include the murder of as many as as 1,000 Iraqi soldiers, security, workers, or more, just to kill the 5 or 10 people who may be giving us the information. This is a classic Saddam tactic and has occured numberous times throughout his administration.

Most Americans I know do believe it is necessary to disarm Iraq. Most Americans supported the 1991 Gulf War and the resolutions that followed. I don't recall any Americans voicing opposition to the March 1991 ceacefire agreement that required Iraq to give up and prove that it had given up its weapons of mass destruction.

Bush got the world to vote 15-0 in the security council to disarm Iraq. That was an amazing feat considering the opposition that Bush had to overcome. By and large, opinion polls have shown for the past year, strong support for disarming Iraq with military force if need be.

A better question to ask is how many Americans believe Saddam is honest? How many Americans believe that Saddam's word can be trusted? Saddam claims that he has no weapons, but has yet to prove that is so?

Honestly, the only proof the President needs to show, is the fact that Iraq claims to have destroyed weapons A, B, C, and D that we knew that they had in 1998 when the inspectors left, but refuses to show any evidence of their destruction.

I would be against showing any evidence that would compromise any of our intelligence gathering capabilities in Iraq. Doing that would simply produce the result I described above.

The UN ceacefire agreement is not just some piece of paper. This was a lawful agreement signed by Saddam in March 1991 when US forces were only 150 miles from Baghdad. These agreements and resolutions were passed under chapter 7 rules of the United Nations, the first time resolutions had been passed under chapter 7 since the Korean War. If violations of lawfully passed agreements are laws are excused with "its just a piece of paper" what reason does anyone have to obey any law or agreement anywhere.

Lets not repeat the mistakes of the Europeans when they failed to enforce the agreements and treaties of World War I and simply watched as Hitler re-armed and started retaking land. Many people then made the same excuse that it wasn't "necessary" to do something. 50 million people died in World War II. Whats the point in passing resolutions under chapter 7 resolutions if we do not intend to inforce them? Whats the point in a ceacefire agreement if we don't intend to enforce its conditions? Is it in the best interest of the USA and the United Nations to let Saddam violate 16 United Nations resolutions passed under chapter 7 rules? Is it in the best interest of the world to let Saddam be armed with Weapons of Mass Destruction?

If the American people must be convinced of something, they must be convinced that Saddam no longer has WMD. Until it is proven by Saddam that he no longer has WMD, it must be assumed by all Americans that he does.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 12-24-2002, 12:19 AM   #13
Refugee
 
bonoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Edmonton, Canada- Charlestown, Ireland
Posts: 1,398
Local Time: 11:38 AM
So we all agree. Except myself and Dread think its neccesary to try to convince as many as people in America first! Sting all of what you said we agree with. But sting you must relize not all of America see it that way. They see the resolutions and they see the WMD, i just think they want proff. And if that proof isnt able to be released then i think they should say that. We would understand! The berdon(sp) of proof is on Iraq to prove they destoryed the weapons, but the proof Bush must show is that they havent meet their side of the agreement. I just think if a little of what they know is released people will rally behind them even stronger.
__________________
bonoman is offline  
Old 12-24-2002, 01:01 AM   #14
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 06:38 PM
Thing is, Iraq has already shown they have not met their side of the agreement. They are still in violation of 16 UN resolutions. Bush will never be able to convince everyone of what is necessary, but his poll numbers at this point are slightly better than his fathers 12 years ago in regards to the possible action about to be taken.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 12-24-2002, 07:54 AM   #15
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 01:38 PM
Sting,

I truly believe that if any of the violations are such that he can make a case to the people there are no problems with getting the support of the American people. You and I may recognize the UN Resolutions as being important and more than just a piece of paper, but others might not see that in the same light.

I think it IS more than a piece of paper. I also know, that if someone is speeding (a violation of the law) we do not use a missle on their car. The people, whose children, wives, husbands, grandchildren, ect.... who will be sent off to fight, deserve to have the case made. It needs to be made forcefully by our leader. Not Ari Flescher! Not Donald Rumsfeld! Not Colin Powell! The case needs to be made by the President.

Peace
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com