Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: RCW2001

I have ONE question for those who claim this is not a capitulation to terrorism;

Since it is a FACT that President Bush has in past, comprimised on policies he has presented; Why do you NOT expect President Bush to water down through comprimise with vested interests, the conditions he uses in this latest Middle-East policy announcement ?


375 posted on 06/24/2002 2:10:19 PM PDT by pyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: pyx
Wow, that's really big....
380 posted on 06/24/2002 2:10:42 PM PDT by carton253
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 375 | View Replies ]

To: pyx
In response to your post 375, I do not equate passing a farm bill with the Middle East. Legislative compromises are governed by what the Congress wants and what can get passed.

Foreign policy is in the hands of the executive branch. Therefore he doesn't have to worry about Rats, or whether he has enough votes.

Apparently you see legislative compromise (which Reagan also believed in) as evil and "caving." I can't help you on that point...you just need to understand politics better.

I don't think the Taliban felt that President Bush compromised, and I imagine that the Palestinians are thinking long and hard.

441 posted on 06/24/2002 2:39:51 PM PDT by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 375 | View Replies ]

To: pyx
Are you calling me out? High noon? Guns or knives?
451 posted on 06/24/2002 2:44:27 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 375 | View Replies ]

To: pyx
Since it is a FACT that President Bush has in past, comprimised on policies he has presented; Why do you NOT expect President Bush to water down through comprimise with vested interests, the conditions he uses in this latest Middle-East policy announcement ?

This has everything to do with the Executive Branch/State Department, and little or nothing to do with working with the Legislative Branch of our government.

452 posted on 06/24/2002 2:44:40 PM PDT by AlGone2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 375 | View Replies ]

To: pyx
Leave it you to find a cloud in the silver lining
492 posted on 06/24/2002 3:04:58 PM PDT by MJY1288
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 375 | View Replies ]

To: pyx
Fine, I'll respond.

I don't agree that just because he has COMPROMISED on other legislation, there is any reason to believe he will now. That's YOUR premise.

(As an aside, can you name ONE national leader who asn't compromised?)

503 posted on 06/24/2002 3:09:36 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 375 | View Replies ]

To: pyx
I'll respond to your #375 with a question of my own: Since Ronald Reagan 'watered down' through compromising and made deals with the devil to fight the Contras and keep Latin America from falling like dominoes into Castro-style communism, was he wrong in doing so? Was preventing this threat worth it, or no? Or should Reagan have simply nuked Mecca, Havana, Panama, and Nicarauga?(That seems to be the knee-jerk answer around here for dealing with any country that fall short of our vision of a conservative/libertine/capital ist utopia.)
553 posted on 06/24/2002 3:35:54 PM PDT by Diddle E. Squat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 375 | View Replies ]

To: pyx; Howlin; Miss Marple
I have ONE question for those who claim this is not a capitulation to terrorism;

Since it is a FACT that President Bush has in past, comprimised on policies he has presented; Why do you NOT expect President Bush to water down through comprimise with vested interests, the conditions he uses in this latest Middle-East policy announcement?

No one can predict the future and what other people will or won't do but today, President Bush made the U.S. position regarding the Palestinian leadership clear - it has to go. I won't bother to retype the president's speech, you can read it again for yourself as you seem to have missed a lot.

Now, you can claim that as a politician, President Bush may change some aspects of the requirements he laid out today for U.S. support of a Palestinian state and castigate him all day for what he might do but most of us on FR, with the exception of the DU trolls and 24/7 Bushbashers, believe the simple requirements he put forth today will be held to. As was already pointed out, The President doesn't need to appease Democrats or anyone else with foreign policy positions.

My analysis is that this was a great speech that clearly laid out a 'path for peace'. I also fear that it will be ignored by most Palestinians. I seriously doubt the leadership of the Palestinians will change or that they will be able to stop the hard-core terrorists from continued suicide bombing of Israeli citizens. So be it. Israel will continue to defend itself. The door to real peace is open. Maybe things can change if there is hope and Bush offered that hope to the Palestinian people. Should they reject it, the onus is on them, not Israel, not the United States.

I don't see a lot of wiggle room for the Palestinians here. President Bush was forthright and clear in what is required but he made the point that ultimately, only the Palestinians and the Israelis can end the conflict. The Israelis have upheld every agreement they've made with the Palestinians. The reward was suicide bombings of innocent Israelis. Will this time be different? Well, the Palestinians are required to lose Arafat, form a new government and many other acts that have been foreign to them, up until now. That could change but if it doesn't Israel has the will and the power to destroy much of the terrorist organizations in their midst, and they will. Should the Palestinians 'choose death', as Bush so beautifully stated the truth, they will receive it and no help from the U.S.

You seem to desire to make President Bush a liar before the fact, based on former domestic policy switches. That's your option but this speech and what it laid out for peace was outstanding, no matter your reservations and asides and endless calls to 'answer' your loaded question. Why we need to respond to yet another anonymous Bushbasher is a mystery but in any case you've now been answered.

Of cousre I expect you to sneeringly disagree but at least stop those silly demands to 'ANSWER #375' as if you've discovered the President kissing Arafat and have pictures to prove it.

I must say the lame attempts to find something, anything, wrong with this speech or the Presidents position is sad on a conservative website but then, some folks seem to have a need for a Goldman every day of their lives. This is the wrong day to be bashing this good and reasonable President with snide comments but that never stopped the bashers in the past. After all, his name is Bush. That's about all it takes.

To the long-time G.W. supporters here, I thank you and join you when time and blood pressure allow. This is a good day for President Bush, the United States, Israel and possibly even the Palestinians. It's a bd day for Arafat.

I'm pleased.

559 posted on 06/24/2002 3:41:08 PM PDT by Jim Scott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 375 | View Replies ]

To: pyx
Because he basically put his entire foreign policy reputation on the line with this policy speech. He is heading into a G-8 summit with this in his pocket, and will basically say, this is the way it's going to be. But I do believe that this isn't just his idea. I firmly believe that he spoke with moderate Arab states ahead of time as well as Great Britain and Russia to let them know what was coming. If they had an objection, they had a week to let him know.

I don't believe this is capitulation anyhow. This is Israel's war. We are simply playing the role of 'trusted advisor' to Israel- just as they did to us after 9-11.

I will go on record (as I have before about the Mideast situation) that if Bush backtracks, it will be the third thing I have vehemently disagreed with him about. But I don't think that will happen.

831 posted on 06/24/2002 5:57:52 PM PDT by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 375 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson