Dear Mr. Wolf,
I found today's article in the London Times (11/3/04) very naive. Your conclusion is that Bush must be creative in Iraq? Its nice that you give him the opportunity when last week he and the American people were militant imperialists in your article.
Anyway, this week you're hiding behind Fukuyama for legitimacy suggesting creativity is the answer to Iraq, a problem that you apparently don't vaguely understand. You compare our nation building in Germany and Japan to Vietnam without explaining the huge difference. In Germany we bombed them into submission. On D-day when a crucial little French town called Caen near the Normandy Coast was occupied by the Nazis we leveled the town and killed all who occupied it, including the French. And the French were our allies! In Japan we nuked them twice until they submitted totally
In Vietnam we sought out and killed only enemy soldiers, mostly with small arms fire, and only during battle, but let them hide anywhere they chose the rest of the time. This is a huge difference; an obvious difference. Needless to say left wing antiwar liberals were in charge of Vietnam.
Iraq can be like Germany or Vietnam. Right now Bush is fighting it like Vietnam to minimize enemy causalities, even at the expense of our own, and because he is influenced by the liberals who to a large extent like easy wars, if they are necessary at all. In the end he may have to fight a real war to win. He could start by demanding a total surrender from Fallujah in return for not removing it and its residents from the face of the earth. He might have made the point very sufficiently on a smaller scale last year by killing Al-Sadir and his army when they were defiantly hiding in their Mosque.
Whatever happens, assuming we even elect to stay in Iraq, it will not be creativity that brings peace to the blood thirsty fascists in Iraq. It will be real war or the threat of it, assuming liberals like you are not able to get in the way. comments: bje1000@aol.com
11.03.2004
LOVING BUSH DESPITE 31 mistakes.....
1) Bush might have learned to speak fluent English
2) he might have listened to Clinton about terrorism during the transition
3) he might have fired the Secretary of Defense and National Security Advisor when it turned out there was no defense or security
4) he might have encouraged rather than resisted the 9/11 commission
5) he might have described the terrorists at more length than merely as: evil ones or bad folks
6) he might not have lied about Iraq
7) he might have verified the intelligence about Iraq
8) he might have shot looters on sight
9) he might have destroyed more Iraqi weaponry
10) he might have hired the Iraqi army with a pay raise instead of firing them
11) he might have seen Sadam as a secular stabilizing force in the region
12) he might have viewed Iraq as a war; not an insurgency
13) he might have more gracefully bowed out of Kyoto
14) he might not have referred to Europe as" old Europe" no matter what the truth
15) he might have been awake for the 2nd debate
16) he might have found a more graceful way to cut taxes for the rich
17) rather than ignore Israel he might have forced a fair peace on them
18) he might understand Osama Bin Laden rather than treat him like the devil or a cartoon bad guy
19) he might not have said, " bring it on" as if he wanted alienate all the women on earth and half the girlymen
20) he might have sealed the borders
21) he might have inspected containers and below deck airline cargo
22) he might have saved the Swift Boat scandal for the end
23) he might have scheduled the debates earlier to cover up a probable defeat from a slick ivy league lawyer
24) he might have more overtly funded "no child left behind "
25) he might have promoted Shinseki into a closet
26) he might have killed Al Sadir
27) he might have found a way to encourage the intellectual base by coupling tax cuts with smaller gov't
28) he might have more aggressively looked for Soviet era nukes
29)he might have created another CIA to create a bureaucracy busting competition to kill terrorists
30) he might have made the Patriot Act more effective yet less a threat to civil liberties
31) he might have allowed the law of supply and demand to apply to flu vaccine
But, all things considered you have to love Bush with the hope he will take a moment now to learn from his mistakes and on the theory that the only thing worse than an incompetent Republican is a Democrat. After all, Bush did take an economy from a Clinton era recession; magnified by corporate scandals, 9/11, and 2 wars, and now has it growing at 3.7%. You can't beat that! Sure, the environment and other things may have suffered but during war it's either or.
The Democrats would have expanded gov't bureaucracies at the expense of individual liberty and the economy, and probably have been cowardly in battle.
Bush handled 9/11 brilliantly, attacked Afghanistan in true American style so that now women run for President instead of being beaten in the street for accidentally exposing a little skin. Iraq is still a botched but evolving war. How bad can it be, though, in a post 9/11, terrorist saturated world, when you take out a guy with a terrorist history, 500,000 mass graves to his credit; who is threatening the world's oil supply, and with whom you were already at war anyway?
All we can really say is: "we love you Mr. President; the next four have to be even better." comments: bje1000@aol.com
2) he might have listened to Clinton about terrorism during the transition
3) he might have fired the Secretary of Defense and National Security Advisor when it turned out there was no defense or security
4) he might have encouraged rather than resisted the 9/11 commission
5) he might have described the terrorists at more length than merely as: evil ones or bad folks
6) he might not have lied about Iraq
7) he might have verified the intelligence about Iraq
8) he might have shot looters on sight
9) he might have destroyed more Iraqi weaponry
10) he might have hired the Iraqi army with a pay raise instead of firing them
11) he might have seen Sadam as a secular stabilizing force in the region
12) he might have viewed Iraq as a war; not an insurgency
13) he might have more gracefully bowed out of Kyoto
14) he might not have referred to Europe as" old Europe" no matter what the truth
15) he might have been awake for the 2nd debate
16) he might have found a more graceful way to cut taxes for the rich
17) rather than ignore Israel he might have forced a fair peace on them
18) he might understand Osama Bin Laden rather than treat him like the devil or a cartoon bad guy
19) he might not have said, " bring it on" as if he wanted alienate all the women on earth and half the girlymen
20) he might have sealed the borders
21) he might have inspected containers and below deck airline cargo
22) he might have saved the Swift Boat scandal for the end
23) he might have scheduled the debates earlier to cover up a probable defeat from a slick ivy league lawyer
24) he might have more overtly funded "no child left behind "
25) he might have promoted Shinseki into a closet
26) he might have killed Al Sadir
27) he might have found a way to encourage the intellectual base by coupling tax cuts with smaller gov't
28) he might have more aggressively looked for Soviet era nukes
29)he might have created another CIA to create a bureaucracy busting competition to kill terrorists
30) he might have made the Patriot Act more effective yet less a threat to civil liberties
31) he might have allowed the law of supply and demand to apply to flu vaccine
But, all things considered you have to love Bush with the hope he will take a moment now to learn from his mistakes and on the theory that the only thing worse than an incompetent Republican is a Democrat. After all, Bush did take an economy from a Clinton era recession; magnified by corporate scandals, 9/11, and 2 wars, and now has it growing at 3.7%. You can't beat that! Sure, the environment and other things may have suffered but during war it's either or.
The Democrats would have expanded gov't bureaucracies at the expense of individual liberty and the economy, and probably have been cowardly in battle.
Bush handled 9/11 brilliantly, attacked Afghanistan in true American style so that now women run for President instead of being beaten in the street for accidentally exposing a little skin. Iraq is still a botched but evolving war. How bad can it be, though, in a post 9/11, terrorist saturated world, when you take out a guy with a terrorist history, 500,000 mass graves to his credit; who is threatening the world's oil supply, and with whom you were already at war anyway?
All we can really say is: "we love you Mr. President; the next four have to be even better." comments: bje1000@aol.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)