To: John Jorsett
"Those inside George W. Bush's White House believed that the atrocity demanded a forceful response"
So why was one not forthcoming?
3 posted on
10/24/2004 7:41:51 AM PDT by
KantianBurke
(Am back but just for a short while)
To: KantianBurke
So why was one not forthcoming?The touchy-feely crowd won the day.
The Iraqi insurgents are going to get clobbered
BIG TIME
after Nov. 2, whoever wins the election.
To: KantianBurke
"So why was one not forthcoming?"
Because we have an opposition dedicated to itself and not the interests of the country or individual Americans and which will use any even inevitable difficulty or reversal to their advantage, regardless of its effects.
8 posted on
10/24/2004 7:46:00 AM PDT by
jim macomber
(Author: "Bargained for Exchange", "Art & Part", "A Grave Breach" http://www.jamesmacomber.com)
To: KantianBurke
Those inside George W. Bush's White House believed that the atrocity demanded a forceful response"
So why was one not forthcoming?
You apparently have not been paying attention if you think this. There is a HUGE difference between a "Forceful response" and "mindless revenge" or "counter atrocity"
23 posted on
10/24/2004 8:02:35 AM PDT by
MNJohnnie
(Vote Bush 2004-We cannot survive a 9-10 President in a 9-11 World)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson