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

To: baseball_fan; Rodney King
Okay. Never mind the tyrannies in spotty little states in Africa. Those cases are so hard as to make very bad law. A foreign policy that insists on the hygiene of the Central African Republic may be asking too much.

But what about China? Is it U.S. policy to importune Chinese dissidents “to start on this journey of progress and justice”? How will we manifest our readiness to “walk at [their] side”?

China, so massive, is maybe too massive a challenge for our liberationist policy, even as the Central African Republic is too exiguous. Then what about Saudi Arabia? Here is a country embedded in oppression. Does President Bush really intend to make a point of this? Where? At the U.N.? At the Organization of African Unity? Will we refuse to buy Saudi oil?

These paragraphs, not the goofy grammar lesson, are the important part of Buckley's article. That is, the President is promising something that we have absolutely no intention of taking concrete, consistent action to implement. My own reaction is that the speech was wildly inconsistent with Pres. Bush's statement in interviews last week that he will not increase the size of the Army.

63 posted on 01/21/2005 1:07:11 PM PST by Stingray51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Stingray51

Agreed. No expansion of the Army and Marines...not to mention the time and $$$ it takes to train and equip them.

Does this speech not promise something that W has no intention of delivering? And is that not precisely what his father encouraged, by egging on the Kurds and the Shiites to overthrow their "leader", sodamnm?


254 posted on 01/21/2005 4:01:03 PM PST by meema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | 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