Posted on 09/03/2006 10:03:43 AM PDT by meandog
GUADALAJARA--I'm wondering. Help me wonder. Either Georgie Bush is the minor, depressing, witless ferret I think he is, or I am. It has to be one or the other. If things don't start looking up pretty soon internationally, I'm going to be pretty sure which.
As best as I can tell, what the Maximum Cipher lacks, among an inexhaustible list of other things, is a hop toad's understanding of how people work. Here we have the explanation of just about everything he does. He's dealing with a world full of people, but has no idea what people are. He probably couldn't recognize one. So he doesn't take their predictable behavior into account.
Think about it. When he went braying into Iraq, he thought people would roll over, throw flowers, and have a democratic revolution. This would start a domino effect that would make all the other Muslim countries want to be democracies, too. They would climb over each other to be democracies. They would love us because democracies love each other. He just knew it.
This makes perfect sense if you have no flipping idea how human beings work.
(Excerpt) Read more at fredericksburg.com ...
Iraq is in the hands of the various and fractious War Lords - each little village is governed by such. President Bush and the Coalition should have outlawed the Ba'ath Party...they are trying like mad to get back into power...sort of like a Clinton thing............
Yes, because after WW2, Germany just POP! became a perfect Democracy.
Bush never said it would be easy--this guy is creating a paper tiger to demolish. What Bush is doing is holding the line--if this guy heard Bush say this would all be over in a couple of weeks, I wish he'd cite when Bush said so.
I seem to recall the President saying this would be a long, difficult road. This guy apparently needs to get his radio/TV repaired. When the "conservatives" start to whine that "I want it over NOW! I'm TIRED of this!" we are in trouble.
Bit over the line? That's like saying that Jeffery Dahlmer's dining habits were a bit over the line.
|
Har! I was just posting a comment which lifted inane quotes from this scumbag's article but it got overwhelming. The question is, why would you post the juvenile masturbations of a bitter old leftist who apparently nowadays can only write for.... whatever this Fredricksburg "free-lance" thing is?
NO...I thought it was kookery from some of the strident adjectives used to describe the president...but the article makes perfect sense to me. Bush has failed to delineate his plans for winning the WOT and has caused a great deal of the frustration felt by the country...Rick Santorium as much as said the same thing today in his senate debate on MTP.
Great callout on the writer's absurdity. But numbnuts like him tend to prefer hyperbole over history.
Saying we should never have went into Iraq because the people don't like force is just silly because Saddam was a force that killed thousands of their people and the people didn't lift a finger against him.
Why are you living in Mexico Fred? Maybe because you don't like your own country? What is you nationality?
He's just another liberal kook, and that after reading his unimpressive bio. He's just another lefty writer with RAT leanings.
No, it could be both. So far though, I'm leaning toward "it's you"
:D (just kidding)
But Fred is a kook. I wouldn't doubt he'd tell you that himself.
Yes, calling Bush that makes me not want to read him. And he still is not sure which one of them is the witless ferret. Perhaps it is the writer.
There we have it. The curiosity is quenched. Nobody has accused me of being a blind follower of President Bush, and I was having a hard time figuring out why this thread stayed up without without a barfer warning. All is clear now.
Here, the author is lying. From the beginning Bush has said the war would be a "long, tough slog".
As for the domino effect the Libyan domino fell rather quickly. But here the author once again is lying. Bush never promised that "all the other Muslim countries" would want to be democracies.
I mean, hell, I didn't get two paragraphs into this odiferous nonsense before the author started with the big lies.
You can do better than this Bush bashing meandog. Try harder!!!
I read the article. The author offers no solutions. Any four year old child can offer criticisms.
Come on bright boy, what would you have done?
Something like?
"There ARE no terrorists!"
"Terrorism is a police problem"
"If we give them what they want, maybe they will leave us alone"
Dog, you're absurd. The only issue I have with Bush regarding the WOT is that he hasn't properly labelled it as a war on Islamists. Other than that, he has done a pretty decent job, considering he has had to deal continually with opposition to the war that has emboldened the enemy. Bush is not just fighting al Qaeda - he is also fighting the ghosts of Vietnam that still plague our country - where a bunch of liberal asswipes turned military victory into political defeat. The same is happening here - and as long as the Dems continue to demand we pull a Vietnam in Iraq, our opponents will keep fighting - not in expectation of defeating us in Iraq, but of having our own friggin liberal idiots defeat us at home.
Pretty much because Qadaffi decided he could be richer and more stable as a sell out. Now, the guy we applauded Reagan for bombin is a darling of the West. Maybe we can change the phrase to "Our friends the Saudis and the Libyans".
Lebanon has moved towards democracy and splitting from Syrian influence.
...and right into Iranian influence. Vote Hizbullah, vote often.
Kuwait and Saudi Arabia have begun baby steps towards a more democratic society.
The Saudis are in the process of making it illegal for women to visit Muslim holy shrines. The more democracy they get, the more radical that place will become. (See HAMAS and Hizbullah for details) The Kuwaiti people are the second biggest jihadist fundraisers, right behind... "Our friends the Saudis (and Libyans)"
Kinda says it all about Fred Reed.
It should also be noted that Japan had no history of democracy and a decidedly non-Western majority religion based in part on worship of the Emperor.
Getting democracy there must have looked to be impossible in 1945. How, oh how, did we manage it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.