BostonAnne
Refugee
Boston01 said:The problem with Kerry is that he can say anything he wants. the fundamental problem is that the last 30 years of his career suggest alternate behavior to what he portrays now.
Please explain.
Boston01 said:The problem with Kerry is that he can say anything he wants. the fundamental problem is that the last 30 years of his career suggest alternate behavior to what he portrays now.
Boston01 said:The problem with Kerry is that he can say anything he wants. the fundamental problem is that the last 30 years of his career suggest alternate behavior to what he portrays now.
A_Wanderer said:No way, the "temperature " of the 1990's was an abysmal failure - attemptimg to turn the heat down (so to speak) would be planting the seeds for an even greater attack. The actions may be different but if you go after terrorism in the same limp way you will fail, no matter what the specific deeds.
Liberty will not end terrorism any more than happiness will end nuclear bombs - what it will do is eliminate the vicious ideology of Islamism the same way that all totallitarian ideologys are buried when people can live free, safe and open lives.
As for Iraq its very obvious - Its all about the OIL!!!!!!!
I really tire of these stupid insinuations that Kerry is going to simply roll over and let terrorists have their way with us.
I can understand your frustration. i would feel the same if my canidate was a weak as yoursBlah blah blah blah blah...
For example, where a whole swarm of ants can act in a coordinated manner and overwhelm animals much larger than themselves, just a few ants are easily be squashed. If we fight terrorism
No.So really what you're saying then, diamond and wanderer, is that the war on terror will never end. That we must always live under an orange alert, or a yellow alert
That's what were doing.Lets say that we manage to weaken terrorists to the point that they are incapable of attacking us to any great degree.
Then at that point, terrorism will be a nuisance.
That's what were doing.It means that once we quash the main force of terrorism,
terrorism is no longer a daily threat,
1) That is your opiniondiamond said:
Under Kerry it seems the terrorists are more likely to flourish and prosper.
The majority of the general public in our country agree that Bush is a stronger leader against terrorism.
That's what were doing.
That's the ultimate goal.
That's what were doing.
Correct.
A_Wanderer said:Reality based community?
In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn't like about Bush's former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House's displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn't fully comprehend -- but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.
The aide said that guys like me were ''in what we call the reality-based community,'' which he defined as people who ''believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.'' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ''That's not the way the world really works anymore,'' he continued. ''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.''
Diemen said:2) The majority of the general public is easily swayed
Diemen said:
1) That is your opinion
Ah, so then you do agree with Kerry's statement that we should get to the point where terrorism is a nuisance. Nice to know we could reach an agreement.
Not really, I think GW has earned how the public perceives him as someone fighting terror and that while Kerry has earned his reputation.
Yes and we do agree that one day in the future the terrorists will be relegated to pests we differ on the method is all.
db9
You speak as if the public is in unanimous support of Bush, which obviously isn't the case otherwise the presidential race wouldn't be so close (and vice versa for the public's perception of Kerry). But if by public, you also include those that think the Bush administration has made huge errors, then yes, he has earned that perception.diamond said:I think GW has earned how the public perceives him
A_Wanderer said:it is not enough to say that we should be more sensitive in this war and not isolate those important dictators and buerocrats at the UN when it comes to fighting terrorism. It requires decisive use of both soft and hard power even when it is unpopular. You should not compromise the fight for want to be loved by your enemy.
Diemen said:
You speak as if the public is in unanimous support of Bush, which obviously isn't the case otherwise the presidential race wouldn't be so close (and vice versa for the public's perception of Kerry). But if by public, you also include those that think the Bush administration has made huge errors, then yes, he has earned that perception.
A_Wanderer said:by opening up a new front Bush has diverted resources from the terrorist organizations and has forced them to fight somewhere else