Pres. Bush's Address

I didn't get that at all. I don't see World World III because 1.) It's 99% of the world against one faction and 2.) This isn't going to be just a bunch of ground assaults. This is going to be political, in the dirt, shady stuff. Did you hear the part of the speech where he said a big part of what he is going to do is cut off the funding of the terrorist and turn them against each other one by one? You missed the point of the statement "He who attacks on the nation, attacks all". What he meant by that was, the world is united, you attack one country you attack us all. It's a warning to the terrorist that you attack one country, there is going to be more of them swarming down on your @sses! I can see it being possible for WWIII if the United States were fighting Russia, or China, but they're allies. It's the world against terrorist and a renegade Taliban, and probably Suddam Hussein. And Suddam knows what the U.S. did to him.

 

I'm pretty sure his address is 1600 Pennsylvania Ave...... Oh, you meant something else.

 

One thing I'll say about WWIII is that our coalition is extremely loose at the moment. In addition, there is no reason to believe Islamic nations will simply accept all our attacks.

I still think we are a LONG way off from another world war, but it is reason to be somewhat concerned.

 

I'm concerned about terrorist retaliation in this country. Bush's wrathful speech was direct and reassuring, but I fear he may be provoking any terrorist cells in the U.S. to strike again (if it wasn't already part of their plan). I know I'm just being paranoid, but it's hard living in NYC nowadays. Everything makes me flinch. I'm already thinking about hightailing it outta here for the weekend as it is...

All in all, though, I liked Bush's speech. He was forceful, yet eloquent. Vengeful but compassionate. Reassuring but honest. His point about waging a war on terrorism, not Islam should have been more detailed, however. Also, he really should've stressed the idea that Arabs, Indians, and other Americans of Middle Eastern heritage are not our enemy. He only spoke for 10 seconds about the hardships these people are enduring in this time of crisis. He should have expanded this point a bit. Besides these 2 minor squabbles, I believe Bush did a good job. Best... speech... ever...

Boy, Giuliani and Pataki sure got a long ovation...

 

The difference is that there are no equal powers if it does turn into a World War.

The key is to keep all the world powers on our side, and we can just bully the smaller nations that support terrorism into helping us whipe it out.

What I got out of his speech was that a lot of this is going to be behind the scenes stuff, covert....the public won't know.

It could be al ong hall, but I liked what I heard, and to see Tony Blair here supporting it...

OUTSTANDING !!

DaDakota

 

That is not what got us into WWI. American civilians had to be attacked by Germany at least twice before we finally got involved. The Germans attacked two cruise ships, the first carrying mostly Americans, and the second carrying mostly civilian Europeans and some Americans. Both instances involved then-president Woodrow Wilson issuing a strong statement about the matter to Germany, and Germany promised not to attack civilian cruise ships anymore, a promise they did not live up too. THEN we got into WWI, but only because Germany kept attacking civilian ships carrying Americans.

There were other circumstances, such as our European allies finally admitting the dire straights they were in because of the war, but we stayed out of it until the very end, and if Germany had not killed or at least quit killing Americans earlier on, we would most likely have stayed out completely.

 

Robert-
If it takes a war tto protect our citizens, then so be it. The terrorists came into our land and attacked civilians not a military base.
Screw the Taliban, if they want to protect these b@stards then so be it. They are a repressing government which will be totally destroyed in short time.
If any other country decides that protecting and funding terrorists is ok, then so be it.
It is the governments responsibility to protect it's citizens. The Taliban is not doing that. They want a war by protecting these peices of crap who they knew before hand were doing terrorists acts all across the world.
Ii is now up to thwe citizens of Afganistan. They can either overthrow the Taliban or stand behind it.
Believe me we will help the groups who help us, just like the groups in Afganistan who are trying to overthrow the Taliban.
If other Muslim nations, or nations in general, want to stand up to us so be it. We are fighting for something that I (and most of our citizens) see as right and just. I think Freedom and Safety are worth fighting for.

 

It sounded like the taliban. Very arrogant. We can't lose god is on our side.

We will take on any nation that defies us. You're with us or agin us. Very Clint Eastwood like.

Looked like a campaign speech.

Let's hope the military operation goes well and gets rid of some terrorist cells for a while, as no mention of any other plans. Hoping to hold the old status quo of getting cheap oil and being the world's policeman, whether they like it or not.

Let's also hope they don't spawn some more monsters like a new taliban like Pakistan.

Created a cabinet position. Now that's impressive. They created a cabinet postion for the drug war, too. Hasn't effected the drug smugglers.

 

I thought the speach was firm, well delivered (suprisingly) and had all the appropriate content. The things I didn;t like in particular:-

a) directly condemning the Taliban and the way they treat women. Whike I don't support the way they treat women, a lot of the Arab and Islamic Countries we are hoping to keep on our side do.
b) We have all been praying for the victims, in English, Hebrew and Arabic. No Spanish??. I know it was focused on the problem at hand, but no need to alienate a domestic minority

To me, the crucially important part of this whole isuue is not doing anything to galvanize Islam and Arabs against the USA. Obviously there is vast negative sentiment towards the USA in these communities already, and if anything could lead us to WWIII, that would be it. I think the administration is taking mostly the right steps to prevent this, but they must tread carefully.

 

glynch -- I believe God is for us too. Sorry if that's arrogant. Sorry if you think that's Bin Ladenish. But what we're fighting here is absolutely evil. Screw the "it's all in your perspective" argument. These folks target civilians. They call for the deaths of women and children in our country. God, throughout history, has opened up masses of cans of whoop ass on those who act in this fashion. Those who follow peaceful principles of a God (whether Christian, Jew or Muslim) are called to defend ourselves in such situations. I'm sorry, but God is not on the side of Bin Laden here...check out Romans Ch. 13 if you're interested.

short of saying, "we're going to let this action go unchecked" Bush could not have said anything that would have satisfied you. Numerous polls indicate that over 90% of the American public felt favorably about it. Roughly 5-8% were unsure. You fall in the remaining 2-5%. We're all idiots...you're clearly the smart one!! Stick with it!!! When's the next flight to Canada?? You've already shown your colors here....no need to post in the future....we all know you completely disapprove of the President and this country. Save yourself the trouble.

 

Not to be picky here, but I've yet to see any of these poles in which more than 2000 people were asked to respond. While you're right that 90% is pretty overwhelming, so is 4 out of 5 dentists... I'm not arguing that Bush doesn't have American support on this, but basing your conclusions on CNN/USAtoday/etc. poles cannot tell really prove a point convincingly. Just my 2 cents

 

Fair enough kpsta....but the fact that all of these polls are coming up with pretty much the same numbers is fairly convincing. I too am a critic to polls...but I think the sentiment of the public is pretty clear on this one. When Jeff says he liked a George W. speech, that's all you need to know!

 

How many times do I have to say I am for bringing Bin Laden for justice as long as we use as little force as possible.

A much harder decision for me, since I'm a near pacifist, then some of you have supported: the Vietnam War, the invasion of Grenada, the invasion of Panama, the invasion of Iraq and every other war a president has decided to fight.

 

I heard on KPFT that 72% of Europeans are for a limited police action to bring Bin Laden if captured to trial in the Hague and are against the US expanding the mission to the whole middle east and other parts of the world.

I know, they don't count, they're not Americans.

But it is this type of go it alone arrogance that leads to such dislike of American foreign policy around the world-- even by our allies.

Why is it so hard to understand that an arrogant foreign policy that alienates the whole world can lead eventually to attacks on American propery and citizens?

I know, you'll say now is not the time for this. The same argument was used to try to quiet dissent during the Vietnam War

 

Jeff is a pacifist too...how come his posts don't come off with the disdain for this country the way yours do??

You say if the world dislikes the way we carry this out, we could suffer property and human damage...you mean like the ones we've already suffered?? The ones were sure to suffer again from an irrational enemy?? I'm much more afraid of doing nothing than I am of doing something. The Roman Empire crumbled as the people became apathetic to the barbarians who ultimately tore apart civilization. At first it hit the fringes of their empire...they ignored it (much like we ignored the attacks on embassies around the world for years). Then it became too close...they couldn't stop it. Civlization died and the world was a damn dark place for a very long time (thanks to some Irish monks who preserved all they could!!!) There are analogies there for us to learn from. Don't let the enemy get any stronger.

Comparing this mission with the Vietnam War is nothing short of laughable. Our civilians were attacked on our own soil. If you won't fight now, you never will. If you're not resolute with those who are resolved against you, you will die. This is not a fantasyland where the bad guys ultimately say, "you know what..we were wrong all along...let's just be friends...can't we all just get along?" That reasoning doesn't work with people who are resolved to kill women and children. You have to respond with force..with whatever force is necessary, to bring these guys down.

Peace is achieved through order. That's the lesson of history (ask the Romans!). Many have died and will die to secure the peace that we crave. The only ones here who aren't working for peace are those who would bring about terror through the targeting of civilians. The Bible says that to whom much is given, much is expected. Much is expected of this country (which is truly blessed) to bring about a sense of order from this situation. As Bush said last night, "we found our moment..we've found our mission." This has been our mission in years past (particularly during WWII and immediately after) and it's our mission today. Make no mistake...the free world is depending on us to lead this mission. If we fail we fail not just for us, but also for them.

 

Have you been following the support of NATO, the E.U. as well as the arrests in Germany, Brussells, Mexico, etc. of suspected terrorists? How are we alienating the world? How are we displaying a "go it alone" attitude? The European Union has come to our aid, England and France have expressed unlimited support and even military aid.

 

Originally posted by MadMax:

I agree with everything you said except this MadMax -- people who don't understand that now is not the time to waffle and shoot with beebee guns are not welcome in Canada either.

This war is not about revenge - it is about destroying the infrastructure that could launch a much deadlier biological or nuclear attack on America. Preventing this is the job of our newest Cabinet member.

What is significant about this is not the position - but the budget dollars that it represents. Comparing it to the role Michael Douglas had in Traffic is silly - while the war on drugs may not be winnable, every positive action taken by our new Cabinet member may save human lives.

 

Maybe if we would have just ignored him, Hitler would have gone away.

 

I know its a very, very minor aspect of Bush's historical speech last night, but ...
how come Canada was not mentioned in his long long list of countires and peoples that have supported America? There's no doubt that we have stood by you guys for centuries now on most issues, even though our governments have had disagreements in the past.

Did he not mention Canada because of our close proximity to the U.S, he didn't consider us as 'foreign'?

Azim da Dream