A scolding from Miss Rice

WorldNetDaily ^ | June 27, 2005 | Patrick J. Buchanan

[Willie Green]

Mr. Buchanan is irrelevant except to the unfortunate few who care about him.

Blessed are you when people hate you, and when they exclude and insult you, and denounce your name as evil on account of the Son of Man.

Rejoice and leap for joy on that day! Behold, your reward will be great in heaven. For their ancestors treated the prophets in the same way.

Luke 6:22~23

[iconoclast]

What a whacked view they have. Saddam committing 1.5 million plus murders over 35 years, nerve-gassing 40,000 Kurds in his own country, and torture-murdering citizens in torture chambers all over the country for the sheer pleasure of it is the kind of "stability" that they want?

Our whacked out view for a couple hundred years was that, beyond diplomatic pressure, SUCH was none of our damned business!

How long do you think it will take us to get around to Zimbabwe?

[photodawg]

How about when we installed and supported Saddam to stabilize Iraq. Supporting a minority dictator to keep Shiites out of power. We pursued stability at the expense of democracy since they struck oil over there. Her admission was not hypocritical, it was truthful. Even the presidents father, a president I voted for, and respected greatly, stopped short of toppling Saddam....in the interests of stability.
Aftermath of desert storm showed us that dictatorships only bring quiet, never stability. 911 showed us that our "friends" over there were really only using us to maintain power, while they worked with radical islam to destroy us. We are now reaping what our policies have sown. That is not a blame America statement, it is an honest assessment of why we are now moving in a more honorable, and productive path. It also is an "in your face" expression that any ruler, dictator, sheik, shah, or mullah is not our friend, and will be looked at as impediments to democracy and freedom. Now if that sounds too pure, off-putting, and irritating, so be it. Welcome to the new world, post 911. It has also been pointed out that Ms. rice's most controversial part of her speech was the opening...."Ladies and Gentlemen" again morally superior, off-putting, and pretty damn irritating to a bunch of harem holding Muslims.

[ZULU]

Well, its what we SHOULD be doing.

And supporting these Arab dictators has been counterproductive. They spawn radical groups with their brutal and savage techniques.

History has proven that democracies are less likely to engage in aggressive foreign military policies than dictatorships and Rice well ennunciated that position in her speech.

She's our best crack at defeating Hillery. Especially if teamed with Allen or Tancredo.

[iconoclast]

History has proven that democracies are less likely to engage in aggressive foreign military policies than dictatorships and Rice well ennunciated that position in her speech.

Unadulterated Koolaid.

Post WW I Germany was a democracy.

By contrast, our new best friend (and Bin Laden control center) is the undisturbed Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

[sirthomasthemore]

Iconoclast,

Please understand, I respect your libertarian views, as often expressed by Pat.

However, I respectfully disagree with each and every point in your argument, other than that there were ancillary reasons to go into Iraq beyond terrorism.

However, your post has too many points to respond to in one reply, and it would be a disservice to your arguments to try.

If you wish to take one point at a time, and expound on that one point, I will gladly give you an alternative view point.

Regards


Clean your muskets and sharpen your pitchforks and get ready to ride to the sound of the guns.(KELO) :o}-

Dems, hello??? We could get out of Vietnam; we can’t GET OUT of terrorism.

[ZULU]

"Unadulterated Koolaid.

Post WW I Germany was a democracy."

You are the Koolaid dispenser here iconoclast.

"Democratic" Germany didn't start WW2. Hitler had buried the Weimar Republic before he began his push for Lebensraum.

If anything, most Democracies are TOO peaceful. They are almost pacifistic. Read some history.

[Luddite Patent Counsel]

We are now reaping what our policies have sown.

No, we are now reaping what abandoning our policies have sown. Petty dictators, kept on a sufficiently short leash, are infinitely preferable to elected governments like the mullocracy in Iran. Or France, for that matter.

[roses of sharon]

Been there, face to face.

[Eagles6]

Oh, so there were no links to al-queda and other islamic terrorist groups, no wmds or programs, no firing on coalition aircraft, no links to WTC1 or OKC and saddam lived up to the ceasefire agreement and didn't attempt to kill 2 presidents and the u.n. wasn't allowing iraq to rearm in violation of sanctions.

Democracy? We can civilize them or kill them. We're trying the civilization thing first, we always have the other option open.

[Eagles6]

p.s. Since iraq was just a peaceful country minding it's own business ,I guess we should have invaded canada or mexico. They have oil too and they're a lot closer.

[iconoclast]

If you wish to take one point at a time, and expound on that one point, I will gladly give you an alternative view point.

You take 'em one at at time ... I will do my best to reply as time and duties permit.

[iconoclast]

"Democratic" Germany didn't start WW2. Hitler had buried the Weimar Republic before he began his push for Lebensraum.

And you think once/if we manage to install a puppet regime it's gonna stay that way?

That's where the Koolaid comes in ZULU.

[iconoclast]

I hope that means you're helping.

[iconoclast]

Oh, so there were no links to al-queda and other islamic terrorist groups, no wmds or programs, no firing on coalition aircraft, no links to WTC1 or OKC and saddam lived up to the ceasefire agreement and didn't attempt to kill 2 presidents and the u.n. wasn't allowing iraq to rearm in violation of sanctions.

Are you some kind of Rip Van Winkle?

Not even the Fox News talking heads make these ludicrous claims anymore as to the cause of this debacle.

Stop embarrassing yourself.

[iconoclast]

,I guess we should have invaded canada or mexico. They have oil too and they're a lot closer.

Had it been just about crude oil, you'd be absolutely correct.

But mull this acronym over for a while .... O.I.L.

1) O is for oil.
2) I is for Israel (the defense thereof)
3) L is for logistics ... i.e. our new cites for defense bases in the ME to replace those in Saudi Arabia that we crawled away from with our tails between our legs!

Bush was sold a bill of goods (not difficult considering) that all this could be accomplished with a little cakewalk war and off he went!

I think I shall never forget/forgive his declaring victory in his little airman's suit!

[roses of sharon]

OMG, "hope" and "helping" all in one sentence? Losing your touch?

Or just "talking down"?

[ChildOfThe60s]

Pre-Ayahtolla Iran was a pretty stable place.

Only on the surface. It was a powder keg for years. And the Shah was a butcher in his own right. His secret police [Savak]were.
I don't know that we had many options in the middle east at the time because our policy was guided by cold war realities and the encroachment of the USSR in the region.
But don't kid yourself regarding Iranian stability under the Shah. It was an illusion for many years before 1979.

[iconoclast]

How 'bout a meds break?

Your replies are becoming more and more confusing.

[Luddite Patent Counsel]

The Shah's problems started in the mid 70's, when he declared himself "emperor" and usurped the authority of the mullahs (or at least made them think he was going to) in religious matters. That's when SAVAK became really oppressive. Throughout the 50's and 60's, there was relative stability.