To: SJackson
I'm not too keen on the Zionist conspiracy stuff your accusing me of because I disagree with you. Hadn't counted heads at the cabinet level either like you have. It never occurred to me. Nor do I particularly care for Buchanan's brownshirt politics.
I do care about crappy analysis that sends this country to fight wars on false premises from analysts stirring up hysteria and fear. To follow their logic we will be at war with out end. Their book and analysis deserves to be trashed.
Unfortunately, it became policy and we went to war in Iraq. Furthermore, evidence that there were leaks to foreign powers if not a mole in the intel loop in their offices and within the decision cycle in the Pentagon with these same folks doesn't help things either.
22 posted on
08/30/2004 5:55:21 PM PDT by
Ranger
To: Ranger
Well, if you disagree with the war you should focus your disagreement on the policy makers at the top, not ... unelected wonks and wierdos [who we let] take control?. There's an election coming up, and if you watch the convention this week I think you'll see GWB happy to take responsibility for his policies. You can vote for him, you can vote for Kerry, I suspect with GWB you'll largely get what you vote for. Pat, of course, will be busy hunting Zionists.
23 posted on
08/30/2004 6:03:51 PM PDT by
SJackson
(Pat Buchanan, “The Skunk at the Garden Party”, Michael Medved on Pat at the Republican Convention)
To: Ranger
after 9-11, the entire power structure of the middle east must be tipped. iraq was the weakest leg of the stool in place after the action in Afghanistan - it was the next logical place to go.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson