| Author | Message | ||
     ae35unit Citizen Username: Ae35unit Post Number: 150 Registered: 2-2006  |
As a nation, we have lost our moral authority to step between Israel and her foes. Bill Clinton could do it. He could say OK guys, knock it off and count to ten. George Bush can only make meaningless statements about holding Syria to account. This makes a situation in the Mideast more dangerous. To our GOP-TFM friends, is a weaker America what you want? Enabling Bush = A Weaker America Wake up. Grow up. | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 982 Registered: 4-2006 |
Yes, Bill Clinton had Yasser Arafat, the old and now room temperature (or less) terrorist leader to the Whitehouse more times than any legitimate head of state. Um... and what peace agreement did Bill exactly achieve when in office with dear Yasser? Hey, what about Somalia, Bosnia, etc? Yes, wake up. But know your history. | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 5749 Registered: 8-2003 |
Right. Yassar -- I want you to count to ten before you launch another attack on Israel. Then walk away from the peace deal that would save my legacy. | ||
| sbenois Supporter Username: Sbenois Post Number: 15288 Registered: 10-2001  |
Maybe it was the agreement to get North Korea to stop their nuclear program. | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 987 Registered: 4-2006 |
Bring back Maddie Albright ! | ||
| ae35unit Citizen Username: Ae35unit Post Number: 152 Registered: 2-2006 |
An amazing response from the GOP-TPM crowd, and nothing remotely coherent among said responses. the war against "terra" as waged by the current administration has hurt us badly, but somehow I don't think Fact and Southerner are in fact ...us. | ||
| Michael Citizen Username: Michael Post Number: 835 Registered: 1-2002 |
I just don't think your basic premise, merits the effort of a response. | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 990 Registered: 4-2006 |
Bring back "Jimmah" Carter, too ! | ||
| ae35unit Citizen Username: Ae35unit Post Number: 153 Registered: 2-2006 |
Michael- I'm curious as to why not. Our ability to intervene, especially in that part of the world in a diplomatic way is gone apparently. Seriously, who is going to take the current administration seriously if they were to call for calm? LONDON (AP)--U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair and his Canadian counterpart, Stephen Harper, Friday called for an international effort to quell renewed violence in the Middle East. Our fearless leader is conspicuously absent. Who would take him seriously? | ||
| Robert Livingston Citizen Username: Rob_livingston Post Number: 1981 Registered: 7-2004  |
ae35unit: You are absolutely correct. Bush has reduced this country to an international joke with no authority. It's terribly sad that the head-in-the-sand Bush supporters either don't care or are too stupid to notice. Even if Bush were to do something -- anything, really -- does any smart person in this country or anyone abroad have any confidence in his ability or motives? | ||
| ae35unit Citizen Username: Ae35unit Post Number: 154 Registered: 2-2006 |
Gee, I wonder why...... NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--Sen. John McCain said Friday that engagement by U.S. President George W. Bush in the Middle East may not do much to diffuse the current crisis. "I'm not exactly sure whether the United States' active intervention would achieve anything at this particular time," McCain said when asked on Cable News Network if Bush should be more personally engaged in the Middle East. | ||
| Hoops Citizen Username: Hoops Post Number: 1661 Registered: 10-2004  |
Hal is 100% right. We lost our moral authority at Abu Ghraib and at Guantanemo. We lost it in Iraq where we instituted policies that benefit contractors over the people we supposedly liberated. We lost it in our policies of building permanent bases over rebuilding the infrastructure we destroyed. We have no moral authority. We only look out for #1 now. | ||
| Robert Livingston Citizen Username: Rob_livingston Post Number: 1984 Registered: 7-2004 |
"We only look out for #1 now." And not even that. Bush looks out for himself and his cronies and corporate interests. Which is why it's shocking to me that ordinary people like Southerner defend him so strongly. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 5305 Registered: 9-2001  |
"...We have no moral authority." Bullll Shitttt!!!! IMHO, and with no thanks to the far left, the larger concern is how many Americans might lose their backbone to fight the war... Thank God for President Bush, all us ordinary people like Southerner, and the courage of our “All Volunteer Armed Forces”. | ||
| Innisowen Citizen Username: Innisowen Post Number: 2106 Registered: 3-2004 |
Whether we like President Bush or not, this country still has the "heft" to move entities and countries to the negotiating table to try to pound out solutions. President Bush will not be at that table, nor would any other national leader, unless a time of inexorable crisis is reached. In the meantime, the structure is full of capable emissaries, ambassadors, and negotiators who do the job until national leaders troop in with their entourage to participate in signing the treaties and the agreements. It's just as well that Bush is irrelevant in these proceedings, and irrelevant he is, but no more than Harper, Blair, or others. | ||
| tom Citizen Username: Tom Post Number: 5266 Registered: 5-2001 |
America still has moral authority, but it's not because of Bush, it's despite Bush. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 5307 Registered: 9-2001 |
...whatever! America will do what it must, and it must stay strong in the face of all the hate and the weakness to fight it in the world. | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 5751 Registered: 8-2003 |
Not that I agree with the premise, but if the US lost it's moral authority, who picked it up? Venezuela? Spain? France? the UN? | ||
| Eats Shoots & Leaves Citizen Username: Mfpark Post Number: 3503 Registered: 9-2001  |
Unit: I am no fan of Bush and his admin, as you probably know. But the US alone cannot step in and solve this problem. Clinton could not have done it, either. This is a regional conflict which is playing out through the Palestinian and Lebanese disarray, and only an international effort for a regional solution will work. Could Bush pull this together? Doubtful. He does not have the skill nor the gravitas to do it. And as stated above, I doubt the Muslim world could afford to trust him after Iraq and Gitmo. Could Clinton have done it? Less doubtful, but beside the point, because he ain't gonna be president again, although if Hilary wins we may see another Clinton try. Further, as pointed out above, he really did little in the Middle East except to play nice with both sides. Who else could do it? Blair is so weakened that they are putting a mirror to his lips to see if he is still breathing. Putin has no legitimacy between his hypocritical criticism of Israel (while he simultaneously assassinates Chechen leaders) and his flaky foreing policy moves. France and Germany have no real policy presence in the Middle East and tons of credibility problems with Israel. China has no say in the Middle East, at least as of yet. Who's running Canada these days? No one can seem to remember his name or what he looks like. Can we look to the UN for leadership? Ha! And I say this as a former strong supporter of the UN. No one has the moral authority or credibility to solve this problem. That is why Israel is doing what it is doing--filling the vaccuum and wiping Hezbollah off the map in Southern Lebanon, and showing the Arab world that it still has a strong and capable military counterpunch. If Israel did not do this, then the rockets would continue and even escalate, and kidnappings would continue, and everything would escalate. | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 3674 Registered: 3-2004  |
Eats: You really think that Israel is "wiping Hezbollah off the map?" Really? Bombs never stop political entities. They never have, and they never will. | ||
| Innisowen Citizen Username: Innisowen Post Number: 2107 Registered: 3-2004 |
Yes, AJC, and we'll be "faster than a speeding bullet, more powerful than a locomotive, and able to leap tall buildings in a single bound"... Just don't try to do it with a military structure that is beyond overstretched by ham-fisted adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention "missile rattling" in North Korea, and, surprise-surprise, more agita than we need in Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Iran. Or with the 899 newly installed National Guard Troops (out of a promised 6,000) along our border with Mexico. It's time AJC donned his uniform again. (Mine still fits me like a glove, medals and all). | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 696 Registered: 1-2006 |
Yeah, Hirohito and Hitler agree. jd | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 697 Registered: 1-2006 |
That was for tulip, who should stop tip-toeing through the tulips. jd | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 5309 Registered: 9-2001 |
...mine is a little tight, but I'm ready and willing to be refitted as soon as they raise the age about twenty-five more years or so!  | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 5752 Registered: 8-2003 |
The idea that the US has "lost all moral authority" because of Gitmo and/or Abu Ghraib where investigations and punishments actually happened and that the morally authoritative Syria or Iran might be able reign in and talk to the pleasant and rights-respecting entities of Hezbollah, Hamas and the Palestinians is foolish. Is the US perfect? No. Neither is democracy. But it's the best game in town and there's not another country with the size and influence that plays it better than the US. We had all sorts of moral authority I suppose during the days of Clinton which produced what, exactly? | ||
| ae35unit Citizen Username: Ae35unit Post Number: 155 Registered: 2-2006 |
ESL- Just to clarify, I'm not saying the U.S. could solve the current problem. I'm not saying that Clinton could've solved anything either, it's just that, as I said earlier, who in the current administration has the sort of sobriety and gravitas that would allow the U.S. to make a statement that wouldn't be considered a joke or more hypocrisy? AJC- I understand your passion. I'm as passionate about the way that we've hamstrung ourselves in a fight against our enemies by deploying our forces at great cost and strategic irresponsibility as you could ever be. These guys (and gals) who sent us to Iraq are the same bunch who have identified popcorn stands and flea markets in Tennessee as terror targets above, say, the Empire State Building. It eludes me how someone can blindly follow a bunch of unelected flim flam artists who are selling the country down the river and who are actively trying to dismantle the constitution instead of defending this country. | ||
| Innisowen Citizen Username: Innisowen Post Number: 2108 Registered: 3-2004 |
The "moral authority," as you call it, of the Clinton years, resided in the titillated curiosity of prurient Republican Congressional closet masturbators and one obsessed independent counsel who racked up a $43mm investigative bill. It was a laughing stock the world over. | ||
| tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 4479 Registered: 12-2001  |
"Moral authority" and a few bucks will get you a cup a coffee at Starbucks. I suppose the ideal of moral authority might have some value somewhere in the world, but in international relations, economic and military power are what count. We have authority in the Middle East because Israel is very sensitive to what the United States says and does. The idea that we have a lot of moral authority as a nation is nice for navel-gazing Americans to discuss, but I don't know that the rest of the world really cares. | ||
| Southerner Citizen Username: Southerner Post Number: 1272 Registered: 2-2004 |
Come on. The premise that American lost its "moral authority" is just the latest MOL attempt for losing Democrats to look in the mirror and not barf. When you've lost as badly as this current crop of Democrats you have only two choices - 1)accept that something is wrong in your philosophy or 2)find every reason to believe you are right even though you are continually rejected. We all know where most of you stand. I just can't wait to see the responses after you lose once again. It can't top Gore's concession, but it will be fun all the same. | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 1001 Registered: 4-2006 |
The boys must have gotten the latest "talking points" e-mails from Nancy Pelosi. If you want real moral authority why not run "Jimmah" Carter in 2008?  | ||
| Eats Shoots & Leaves Citizen Username: Mfpark Post Number: 3506 Registered: 9-2001 |
Southerner: You are in danger of becoming totally irrelevant. No, actually, you have crossed that line. Unit: I agree with you, but felt that you were needlessly partisan. We will not be able to take the lead as a nation that we should until we start electing real leaders. I don't see any such leading lights on the horizon for either party, and certainly don't see any other nations taking the lead. Perhaps what Israel is doing now will force someone to stand tall. I would be more than happy if Bush did it, but I doubt it. But I do give him credit for not abandoning Israel. Tulip: Yes, in general you are correct, but since Israel does not have any political means to thwart Hezbollah, crushing it militarily will at least stop its progression as an active and hostile threat to Israel. It also benefits the US by giving Iran a black eye and reducing its influence in the region for a while. Israel is doing our dirty work for us. The rest of the world does not seem to give a rat's rear that Hezbollah, and increasingly Hamas, are pawns being manipulated by Iran (via Syria), so Israel has little to no political leverage to exert. Israel has been backed into a corner and chose to come out fighting. However cynically you might see Sharon's actions, giving up Gaza and drawing his own borders was the only real, substantive, on the ground fact that has transpired in the Middle East in a long time. The Palestinians had a chance to run with it, to show the world that they could refute expectations and set up a model state in the Arab world. Even with the economic hardships of Israel controlling so much of the economy, they could have triumphed--it would have been a big FU to Israel and all the other doubters who said the Palestinians could not control themselves. Even with the election of Hamas to power, the path to peace was there. Hamas was the only entity that could have controlled most of Palestinian civil society, cleaned up the corruption, got the buses and trains running on time (so to speak). That is the reason most Palestinians voted for Hamas, according to opnions polls I saw. But instead precious resources went to secure rockets and guns, and Hamas could not or would not control its own militant wing. It is interesting to note that when Israel was formed in 1948, it was immediately boycotted and isolated by the rest of the world (except the US), and also actively attacked by all its Arab neighbors. Yet, Israel decided to dig deep inside and built a marvelous economy and democracy based on its own resources. Its own terrorists were reintegrated into society. Everyone was a soldier, and everyone was a worker, all at once. They discovered novel methods of irrigation and industry, which becaume the drivers of a strong economy. It was a huge source of national pride, and a big FU to the rest of the world. The Palestinians need to take a lesson from that--imagine what that would do to the Arab autocrats in the Middle East if they were to succeed? | ||
| tulip Citizen Username: Braveheart Post Number: 3675 Registered: 3-2004 |
See, I think there's a big difference between Hamas being able to vs. wanting to control its radical wing. It's like the difference between a terrorist and a soldier. Because a political faction cannot contol those in the militant, terrorist, bomb-addicted sector which may, or may not be directly linked to the political core of the faction, doesn't mean it shouldn't have the leeway to try to be inherently political and even in a leadership position. In other words, don't blame the leaders for what the militants do. Otherwise, we'd look at Irgun and say it is Israel, and we know it is not. | ||
| notehead Supporter Username: Notehead Post Number: 3572 Registered: 5-2001  |
Southerner, I have an itch just where my inner thighs meet. Would you mind helping me out? | ||
| Wendy Supporter Username: Wendy Post Number: 2735 Registered: 5-2001 |
notehead -  . And here I thought I walked the best tight rope between insults and suspension! | ||
| Southerner Citizen Username: Southerner Post Number: 1273 Registered: 2-2004 |
ESL, This entire board is irrelevant, and I most certainly am irrelevent!! Please don't tell me you look to this board for enlightenment. If so you must be extremely disappointed. I've stated dozens of times why I come to this board and it sure isn't to become educated on political issues. Notey, Nice line. And if given a true opportunity to scratch I would take it, but you probably wouldn't enjoy it. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 701 Registered: 1-2006 |
Tupip: here is a site where you can see what the terrorists and their minions do and approve of: http://www.kerenmalki.org/ jd | ||
| Wendy Supporter Username: Wendy Post Number: 2736 Registered: 5-2001 |
Funny, based on the sum total of all of your postings here, I wouldn't think you would be classified as educable. | ||
| Robert Livingston Citizen Username: Rob_livingston Post Number: 1986 Registered: 7-2004 |
Southerner: We all know why you come to this board. Because you grow weary of listening to Dueling Banjos played by your kinfolk. Because it's something to do between eating that flattened raccoon and brushing your tooth. Anyway, can any of you Bush lovers out there explain to me while all of a sudden we're afraid to do anything in regard to Iran, the Middle East, or North Korea. All of a sudden Bush cares about world opinion, about getting a consensus among nations? Perhaps he is too chickenshit to do anything because he's effed up everything else he's touched so badly. | ||
| Eats Shoots & Leaves Citizen Username: Mfpark Post Number: 3507 Registered: 9-2001 |
Tulip: The Irgun has not been active in Israel for over 50 years. When Israel became a state, the Irgun agreed to rejoin civil society and cease its terrorism. You must hold Hamas and Hezbollah responsible for terrorists acting in their name. Otherwise, how do you negotiate with their political wings? Even in Ireland, the political wing of the IRA marginalized and largely defanged the militant wing before substantive peace talks could ensue. I see absolutely no practical disavowal of the militant wing by the political wings of Hamas and Hezbollah (let alone the hand-wringing hypocrites of Fatah), therefore I assume that they support the violence and terrorism. There are plenty of moves that Hamas and Hezbollah can make to build confidence that they want to act like statesmen, even if their militant wings continue to act with no restraint. I sometimes like what you say on MOL, but in this case, I think your reasoning is specious. | ||
| Robert Livingston Citizen Username: Rob_livingston Post Number: 1987 Registered: 7-2004 |
"and it sure isn't to become educated on political issues." No kidding! There's the understatement of the year! |
