Posted on 09/27/2001 9:09:59 AM PDT by ex-snook
You admit that "war on terrorism" hasn't been America's priority and that it's possible for a civilized country to have its interests furthered by looking the other way or supporting "freedom fighters". It would be highly unreasonable to expect American enemies to be very sympathetic about the events of 9/11, especially if those were bombed by America, and make it a pre-text for a war.
The official position of a government matters little, because the terrorists are often supported by rich individuals or through semi-official channels. The Saudis have done much more for the cause of jihad than a (relatively?) secular Saddam. Saddam could have been an American friend just like many other dictators in history.
How's the saying go, "Those who are your friends will become your enemies"?
When you stand up and demand that someone elses sons and daughters die for your cause you have become their enemy.
We should have killed Saddam Hussein when we had the chance but I think there was some rule about killing Heads of State at the time. America obeys the Rules and other countries don't! Are we foolish, yes, honorable, yes. Perhaps these subjects should be election discussions.
I think Bush has made it clear to the world that he is making the Rules now from his Rule Book. He doesn't want a NATO or a UN Force, he is keeping it Americans dying for America. When the Israelis decide to keep it Israelis dying for Israel I will understand them better.
I hope Bush doesn't start to whine when his enemies go to the UN for support.
Who is Noam Chomsky? I've read the 1st few sentences of his/her articles and it was all garbage! Is Chomsky a cousin of Linwinsky, Levy, maybe Dershowitz or Maher?
How can you make such an analogy? Associating Pat with the 'amen' corner people who lack the 'amen', is vicious and I don't know why I engage in shadow boxing with you .
Nothing Pat says is respected any more, except by those that supported him.
Give the man a prize. His intellectual prowess is truly something to behold. What analysis, what delivery...a work of deep insightful thinking.
The same, of course, with that place, Washington: it can change policy under pressure from Washington and begin cooperating with Washington. To a degree.
And getting Milosovic out of that ridiculous world court and restitution for the damage done by bombing Serbia. Eventually, the last administration, including the cabinet have to answer for their 'terrorism' in the Balkans.
The goal of going after the terrorists is not an itemized action plan. Agreeing with a policy is not the same as underwriting just any insane plan with an ostensibly the same goal.
Re Buchanan - the gang of 41 war mongers do not like Buchanan because Pat is for America first, last and only.
Re: military service of the gang of 41 war mongers - Now that's a interesting point. Makes you wonder how many of them wore the uniform in a risk situation.
Anyone know a reference to who these 41 were?
The Saudis are dependent on the US and are cooperating to some extent, but there is always a limit to what you can ask them. Can you make them eradicate financial support of jihads in the Balkans and Causasus by private persons? I wouldn't be so sure. The relationship between the Saudis and Americans is hardly alike to the one between Israelis and Palestinians, so a comparison is invalid.
New York City used to be the safest place for a Jew to live. But Ariel Sharon has seen to that.
Huh, yes, like Pat did during the last election. Give us all a break here. I still remember his actions during the crisis in that long ago (it seems) era. Buchanan has no more concern for this great country than your typical, run of the mill leftist does. Come to think of it, Pat and his Patsies are leftists, so it makes sense.
Please stop it. No one who's posted here for some time, and who supported the President during the last election is going to fall for this crap. I admit I've become a Libertarian supporter since the last election because I want some changes in some domestic policy issues. That's over now. Now is the time to rally around the flag and the government.
It's obvious that you're attempting to use this article as an insidious means to divide those of us who support the coming war, and interject Buchanan's views into the debate. You want to try and limit the government's mobility during the coming war, by limiting the war aims from the start.
I believe the government needs to have a free hand to pursue the war at will. We will see where it leads us. Buchanan doesn't understand the situation, as several posts above this one aptly point out. Also, Buchanan is, in my view, anti-Israel, our only true friend in the region.
If the war quickly widens, as I think it will, then we must pursue it there. The neos are right in that regard. The mistake we made with Saddam was knocking him down, and then allowing him to get back up to fight another day. We've learned something since that day. Pat obviously hasn't. He would knock down bin Laden, and then not deal with the fundamental problem.
Making that ultimatum to a country being bombed by the US is silly and unreasonable. Only if there is an evidence of Saddam being involved in those attacks, a retaliation would be justified, WITH OR WITHOUT any cooperation. Saddam can be relied on to continue to defy America, and neocons know it.
Buchanan is pointing out un-American interests in the neocon position and you are free to point out why a total war in Middle East is in the American interests.
I don't see any evidence of Buchanan adjusting his views to be just the opposite to the neocons', like you suggest may be true. What I see is a consistent position in both camps. The neocons' warmongering was predicted to happen right after the bombing. The motive is an important part of any analysis.
Do you think they are more prepared to see their sons, husbands, and fathers dying in our own cities?
More Americans are going to die, Either/Or, regardless of what we do. If we fail to eradicate the threat, our losses may well be measured in the millions.
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.