Posted on 02/01/2008 5:45:40 PM PST by Maelstorm
After years of failed diplomacy and limited military pressure to restrain Saddam Hussein, President Bush made the difficult decision to liberate Iraq. Those who criticize that decision would have us believe that the choice was between a status quo that was well enough left alone and war. But there was no status quo to be left alone.
The years of keeping Saddam in a box were coming to a close. The international consensus that he be kept isolated and unarmed had eroded to the point that many critics of military action had decided the time had come again to do business with Saddam, despite his near daily attacks on our pilots, and his refusal, until his last day in power, to allow the unrestricted inspection of his arsenal. Our choice wasn’t between a benign status quo and the bloodshed of war.
It was between war and a graver threat. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. Not our critics abroad. Not our political opponents.
And certainly not a disingenuous film maker who would have us believe that Saddam’s Iraq was an oasis of peace when in fact it was a place of indescribable cruelty, torture chambers, mass graves and prisons that destroyed the lives of the small children held inside their walls.
Whether or not Saddam possessed the terrible weapons he once had and used, freed from international pressure and the threat of military action, he would have acquired them again.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanrhetoric.com ...
Broken record?
Thanks. Very informative.
Hoorah! I guess I’ll hve to get have to take a course. Or maybe buy my first “... for dummies” book.
Border security = national security
How can we send young men and women to war, and leave our country so vulnerable to terrorism because of our porous borders, Senator McCain?
To the contrary, I think that this whole “hold your nose” idea is just flat cheating ourselves.
The premise here is although McCain has proven to be liberal on a myriad of issues during his Senate, I should vote for him because he isnt as liberal as Hillary.
The first problem with this is that I believe liberalism, in small or large doses, doesnt work. Ever. So do I really want a slow poisoning via McCain versus a sudden, dramatic bad experience with Hil or Barry?
Isnt this like boiling a frog in water. If you throw him in the cauldron when it is boiling, he will feel the pain and jump out. If I put him in and gradually turn up the heat, he will cook to death because the change gradually will cook him. If people are confronted with liberalism full blast, they will reject it, because the ideas are so bad they cant stand on their own. But, if McCain feeds them a little liberalism now and then, over time, we may tolerate it in the spirit of “at least its not the Democrats”.
The other problem is that this McCain/Hillary choice is sold under a false premise...that is, that if I just swallow my pride once, and vote for McCain, then Hillary is vanquished and it only costs me one term with a guy I dont like.
BUT...If I vote for him once, I am automatically commiting to vote for him TWICE, because if he wins then he will also be the nominee in 2012 as the sitting President. Is 8 years of McCain “soft Liberalism” worth it? Lets say I conclude it is....what if he picks a bad VP, such as Huck or Lindsey Graham. They would be the sitting VP of a two term President, and thus would be VERY likely to get the nomination in 2016...so now we are talking about 12 years of non conservative soft soap liberalism. 3 elections where we have NO CHANCE to vote for a conservative because the Democrats are running someone worse. Is it worth that?
The Dems will ALWAYS be worse. I dont want the lesser of two evils, I want one GREAT President. We are never going to get there if we keep voting out of fear of the other side. I dont want to go through a Jimmy Carter type experience, but sometimes it may take that to make the great unwashed realize how badly we need a Ronald Reagan.
Hey, sidebar question to anyone who knows....I am a new guy, how long until FR stops “screening” when I post? Just wondering because the lag takes a while sometimes.....
Or, maybe not a nuke, but just a dirty bomb which will displace a million or so?
If they spent as much money on New Orleans as they did, and as much as they did on New York, do you think they aren't going to on a ruined city?
When I was in High School, the last budget of Eisenhour was 80 billion. 40 Billion was for defense and 40 billion for everything else.
It is a matter of setting priorities. People have gone back to sleep. Polititions respond to the newspaper polls, no to what is really important.
When the next whatever happens, it will be blamed on Bush.
Everything is "Bushes Fault". McCain undercut him on a lot.
We should reward him for that? NOT
I should worry huh, I am from Wyoming. They won't do it here.
I’m tired of being told how to vote. I’m tired of hysterical freepers vanities. I’m tired of being told if I don’t vote for a persons candidate that I’m a lousy communist, socialist loving stinking traitor.
Do you know you can simply drive (or walk) anywhere across the vast Canadian border? What do you suggest we do about that?
This Forum gets really busy when there is political activity.
It slows down because so many are trying to post at the same time.
And it really has nothing to do with who I vote for.:-)
“Do you know you can simply drive (or walk) anywhere across the vast Canadian border? What do you suggest we do about that?”
How would I know. I’m not part of Homeland Security. What would YOU do?
To the south we need a double fence with border patrol in-between because we have countless illegals and drug smugglers coming through, and the doubled fenced worked in San Diego, so let’s extend it from CA tru TX.
But to the North, it might be different, because we don’t have 12 - 20 million crossing the Canadian border, including drug traffickers. How would YOU secure the Canadian borders?
And do you have a point here?
Well said. I can’t believe the spoiled little babies here on FR. The cnservatives lost. Let’s at least have the satisfaction of defeating HRC.
So the plot and plan is to BULLLLLY people with fear of Hillry, of allllll things McCain’s best friend.
Bullshit.
American freedom is a BIRTHRIGHT, and I, and many like me that have served their country in the military, have earned it as well.
I say...
Anyone who would use their vote to RUIN their own party, the Republican party, from the INSIDE OUT (a much more serious and longer term disaster than 4 years of any blithering-idiot democrat run of power) is the real traitor and fool.
I don't vote for liberals and erratic nutcases, whether they have a "D" OR an "R" after their names...
Period.
Okay, so when I hit “post” and get the message that my comment has been submitted for review, everyone gets that?
My point is that, if your real concern is security, why focus so much on the Mexican border to the exclusion of the Canadian border? I think it would be very difficult to secure the Canadian border, so closing the Mexican border isn’t going to do much good from the security perspective. They’ll just pick Canada instead, as many actual and would-be terrorists have already. My guess is that its not really about security, though, for most maniacal anti-immigration types...
Are you the one with the loving looks picture McCain is giving Hillary? It is needed on this thread. Thank you in advance.
Oh, I thought you and Ann Coulter loved Hillary ... so why shouldn’t McCain, too?
I never wrote any legislation to fund her presidential run so NO not even Ann Coulter nor I love Hillary as much as her vodka drinking best friend McCain. I can't speak for Ann, but I do prefer when possible the real thing not faux imitations..... Thank you for asking though.
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.