Posted on 03/11/2005 6:32:41 PM PST by Sola Veritas
Rice pointedly declined to rule out running for president in 2008 on Friday during an hour-long interview with reporters at WASHINGTON TIMES, top sources tell DRUDGE. Rice gave her most detailed explanation of a 'mildly pro-choice' stance on abortion, she would not want the government 'forcing its views' on abortion... She explained that she is libertarian on the issue, adding: 'I have been concerned about a government role'... Developing late Friday for Saturday cycles... MORE...
"Sorry, you're the one inventing facts. Please give me a single cite where Bush or Cheney or Rumsfeld or Powell publicly suggested invading Iraq, before Sept 11, 2001. It was the hit on the World Trade Center that they claimed to be responding to, when they invaded Iraq -- yet Osama is the one who did that. And if you're so concerned about the WOT, why aren't you concerned that we haven't caught Osama, who is the most lethal terrorist ever to hit America?"
"THE BUSH DOCTRINE -- that is to say, if you feed a terrorist, if you clothe a terrorist, if you harbor a terrorist, you are a terrorist!!!"
'Nuff said, in my opinion! SADDAM FED, CLOTHED, HARBORED AND MOST IMPORTANTLY "WAS" (past tense) A TERRORIST! And that doctrine was why we invaded Iraq. Sounds like you're slowly sipping the DU kool-aid??? Maybe it is unwittingly, but may be time to hire a food-tester
Maybe, but it was OSAMA who hit the US and killed 3000 people in New York City. What kind of "war on terror" turns its attention from capturing or killing the arch-terrorist (Osama) and destroying his army of fiends (Al Quada)?
Exactly so. Churchillbuff is the Neville Chamberlain of Free Republic.
IMO, he's a paid opinion shaper. He NEVER supports the administration or the war on terror. Never.
The book for which Jim Robinson wrote the foreward, Hillary's Secret War, makes it clear how opinion shapers are paid by the left to come to sites like Free Republic and try to shape opionions and set conservatives against each other.
As an aside, Iraq supported Al Qaeda financially, militarily through weapons training and hid the 1993 WTC bombers for years.
This is a link of hundreds of articles that show how Iraq and Al Qaeda worked together for years. Even the Clinton administration, when it obtained a federal indictment against Osama bin Laden, mentioned the terrorist's connections to Iraq.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1327993/posts
Read some of the links here and you might want to re-think your position.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1327993/posts
No one has turned their attention away from OBL.
You so constantly demean our military that I'm not surprised you think they aren't capable of doing two things at once.
I do, partially agree with your point... But, all in due time! Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, N. Korea will be dealt with. We don't have all of the facts though, we are posters on a Free Republic Forum. How the hell do you know that Iran and Saudi Arabia were bigger sponsors of terror?? How do you know? What if direct communications between Osama and Saddam come to light?? Some say that is already been shown... would that still make Iran and Saudi Arabia bigger supporters???
I've exchanged with you in the past a few times we frankly agree quite a bit so please know taht this is not an attack at all, but just thought exchange....
dave
Saudi Arabia was/is not on the list of state sponsors of terrorism. We don't invade states just because their nationals are involved in terrorist acts. The shoe bomber was a citizen of the UK. Saudi Arabia has been a victim of AQ terrorist acts, not the state sponsor of them.
Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism, but it has not invaded two of its neighbors. Iraq was a more immediate threat. Moreover, Iran is not as easy a target. It is a vast country of 1.5 million km (four times bigger than Iraq) with over 66 million people (almost three times Iraq). There is no doubt that we will have to make some hard decisions on Iran and its nascent nuclear program. Being next door with a sizeable military capability gives us more options.
Bush's advisors are neo-cons. His doctrine is the neo-con doctrine. Irag as a base from which we can project power was always a keystone of that doctrine.
Rather simplistic explanation of a complicated problem. 9/11 was the catalyst that forced us to deal with global terrorism, which cannot exist without state sponsorship. It there had been no 9/11, there would not have been an invasion of Iraq, neocon recommendations to the contrary.
The Neo-con bible (and I am in agreement with the philosophy) calls for a sea-change in the ME as the only way to ensure peace for coming generations. The map had to change. We had to have a base from which to impact the region without asking permission or undergoing a six month build-up. In essence, we needed Iraq. 9.11 provided the public pretext but Wolfowitz (whom I have met a few times) and company were never reticent about it even before the attacks.
Iran will not be invaded. Bush told them twice...get your act together (revolt) and we will stand with you. Syria is playing a game with us in Lebanon but the rules have changed now that there are US Marines on their Eastern border. NK is a PacRim problem, not a US problem. China, Japan, Taiwan, ROK all have a greater stake in that game than we do.
My only fear about the Neo policy is that we will not have achieved enough before somebody new lives at 1600.
Ditto that! Everything you said.
_______________________________________
Saudi money sponsors madrases world wide where wahaabism is taught. That includes schools right here. They are very much a state sponsor of terror but one that is for a number of reasons off limits for now.
-----------------------------------
"Rather simplistic explanation of a complicated problem"
___________________________________
No kidding. Do you want (or need) a thesis on the Neo Con philosophy? I assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that most here at least grasp the basics.
Gee, did I say that?
It is a waste of time to discuss the WOT with one who has not an inkling about the NeoCon agenda. Have a nice day.
Listen, I was of the same mind set as Ms. Rice, just about 5 years ago. Don't give up on her, yet!
She says that she prays all the time. She says that her faith is very important to her. If she is listening to God, He will steer her in the right direction.
Like I did, she sees late term abortions as wrong, she sees parental consent as important...if she continues to inform herself, she can not help but finally come to the same conclusion that I did; that all abortion is a horrific crime--on the woman and her children.
Pray. Never stop.
Exactly.
Dr. Rice and the president are evangelical Christians. And yet, there are posters on this very thread who think they must be murderers, evil and fascists because of their stance on abortion.
I've never heard anything so ridiculous in my life, but that's just how people are. Pray for them.
I believe some (R)'s desire to make the GOP into a pro-abortion party. Such people will never have my support.
Neither the President nor Secretary Rice would fall into the 'evengelical' category by most folks' definition.
They both attend mainline liberal churches.
I just love the way y'all try and redefine words. It's a wonder to behold.
Mine neither.
Oh, brother. Riiiight.
So the president is a liar when he describes himself as an evangelical Christian. Gee...who to believe? You or the president? snort
Agreed.
Well, at least the President is pro-life, and has kept the GOP pro-life.
That's the number one reason I support him.
I'm not always happy with his actions on policy or on personnel, but he's a good man.
I think Secretary Rice is a good person, too. She has much to recommend her.
But being pro-choice automatically excludes her from being on a presidential ticket.
And believe me, it isn't just me who thinks that.
I'm glad she has clearly said she has no plans to run. It would be very costly to her personally.
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.