When Cheney Was Rational


Elphaba
 Share

Recommended Posts

Cheney used to be a rational man. Then he wasn't.

I wonder why only 146 American casualties were all George H.W. was willing to take in '91, but 3700+ (and that could be a large plus) and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians are no problem for George W. today.

Quagmire indeed.

Elphaba

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class='quotemain'>

Seems to me this thread will only rehash everything that was posted on another thread.

you are exactly correct Pam.......

I just wanted everyone to have a chance to see Cheney when he actually made some sense. It doesn't happen often, so I thought you might enjoy it.

I suspect this thread will die a quick death. That is, unless Pale, you decide to throw out comments about the Slickster....you know how I just can't help myself when you do that! :P

Elphaba

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

Seems to me this thread will only rehash everything that was posted on another thread.

you are exactly correct Pam.......

I just wanted everyone to have a chance to see Cheney when he actually made some sense. It doesn't happen often, so I thought you might enjoy it.

I suspect this thread will die a quick death. That is, unless Pale, you decide to throw out comments about the Slickster....you know how I just can't help myself when you do that! :P

Elphaba

actually.....I was thinking of all the comments I could make about Al Gore....the problem is....I can't think of anything he ever said that made sense..... :hmmm: ....... :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

Seems to me this thread will only rehash everything that was posted on another thread.

you are exactly correct Pam.......

I just wanted everyone to have a chance to see Cheney when he actually made some sense. It doesn't happen often, so I thought you might enjoy it.

I suspect this thread will die a quick death. That is, unless Pale, you decide to throw out comments about the Slickster....you know how I just can't help myself when you do that! :P

Elphaba

actually.....I was thinking of all the comments I could make about Al Gore....the problem is....I can't think of anything he ever said that made sense..... :hmmm: ....... :P

Good sidestep Pale! :P

Elphie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

Seems to me this thread will only rehash everything that was posted on another thread.

you are exactly correct Pam.......

I just wanted everyone to have a chance to see Cheney when he actually made some sense. It doesn't happen often, so I thought you might enjoy it.

I suspect this thread will die a quick death. That is, unless Pale, you decide to throw out comments about the Slickster....you know how I just can't help myself when you do that! :P

Elphaba

actually.....I was thinking of all the comments I could make about Al Gore....the problem is....I can't think of anything he ever said that made sense..... :hmmm: ....... :P

Good sidestep Pale! :P

Elphie

:hmmm: ....sidestep???....... :hmmm: ...the truth.... :wow:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

Seems to me this thread will only rehash everything that was posted on another thread.

you are exactly correct Pam.......

I just wanted everyone to have a chance to see Cheney when he actually made some sense. It doesn't happen often, so I thought you might enjoy it.

I suspect this thread will die a quick death. That is, unless Pale, you decide to throw out comments about the Slickster....you know how I just can't help myself when you do that! :P

Elphaba

actually.....I was thinking of all the comments I could make about Al Gore....the problem is....I can't think of anything he ever said that made sense..... :hmmm: ....... :P

Good sidestep Pale! :P

Elphie

:hmmm: ....sidestep???....... :hmmm: ...the truth.... :wow:

The truth, huh. Hmmmmm. :hmmm:

Elphie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I define it as someone who periodically starts new threads beating the same drum to the same beat every time. Here's a thought: why not just start a new thread called 'why I hate conservatives', and you can just add to it as you see fit instead of starting a new thread every time you find an article deriding conservatives or conservative values? That way I can skip just one thread when it pops up instead of wading through 4 or 5 simultaneously with the same rants in them. Sorry, I just get tired of reading you saying the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I define it as someone who periodically starts new threads beating the same drum to the same beat every time. Here's a thought: why not just start a new thread called 'why I hate conservatives', and you can just add to it as you see fit instead of starting a new thread every time you find an article deriding conservatives or conservative values? That way I can skip just one thread when it pops up instead of wading through 4 or 5 simultaneously with the same rants in them. Sorry, I just get tired of reading you saying the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.

Here's a thought. My name is Elphaba. In the future if you see a post written by Elphaba, don't read it.

Elphaba

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe we should have elected Madeline Albright to the presidency. That woman said the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children due to the sanctions imposed on Iraq in the Clinton years was something she could live with.

Could you show reference where she said this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class='quotemain'>

Maybe we should have elected Madeline Albright to the presidency. That woman said the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children due to the sanctions imposed on Iraq in the Clinton years was something she could live with.

Could you show reference where she said this?

Pam,

Look in my post below.

Elphaba

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

Maybe we should have elected Madeline Albright to the presidency. That woman said the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children due to the sanctions imposed on Iraq in the Clinton years was something she could live with.

Could you show reference where she said this?

Pam,

Look in my post below.

Elphaba

What post below?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe we should have elected Madeline Albright to the presidency. That woman said the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children due to the sanctions imposed on Iraq in the Clinton years was something she could live with.

First, the first two and a half years of the sanctions were imposed during the Bush 41 years and then continued through the Clinton years, so spread the blame where it belongs.

Second, I don’t understand your comment. If it’s directed at me, why in the world would I want someone who said such a thing as president?

Actually this is what happened. Lesley Stahl, on 60 minutes, regarding U.S. sanctions against Iraq, said to Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: “We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it”?

Secretary Albright: “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it.”

What a horrible thing to say. In fact, her reply “was a terrible mistake, hasty, clumsy and wrong. Nothing matters more than the lives of innocent people.” Guess who said that? The very same Secretary Albright.

In her autobiography she wrote:

“I must have been crazy; I should have answered the question by reframing it and pointing out the inherent flaws in the premise behind it. Saddam Hussein could have prevented any child from suffering by simply meeting his obligations. Instead, I said the following: 'I think that this is a very hard choice, but the price, we think, the price is worth it.”

“As soon as I had spoken, I wished for the power to freeze time and take back those words. My reply had been a terrible mistake, hasty, clumsy and wrong. Nothing matters more than the lives of innocent people. I had fallen into a trap and said something that I simply did not mean. That was no one's fault but my own. There are many times in everyone's life when the mouth works faster than the brain; there was no more regrettable example in my own career than this ill-considered response to Lesley Stahl.”

I am not excusing Secretary Albright’s gaffe; nor does she. However, she at least is able to recognize when she says something heinous. I wish President Bush could do the same.

Perhaps the Op-Ed piece, written by an Army specialist, four sergeants, and two staff sergeants stationed in Iraq will finally catch his eye and force him to see reality.

The New York Times

Sunday, August 19, 2007

The War as We Saw It

By BUDDHIKA JAYAMAHA, WESLEY D. SMITH, JEREMY ROEBUCK, OMAR MORA, EDWARD SANDMEIER, YANCE T. GRAY and JEREMY A. MURPHY

“VIEWED from Iraq at the tail end of a 15-month deployment, the political debate in Washington is indeed surreal. Counterinsurgency is, by definition, a competition between insurgents and counterinsurgents for the control and support of a population. To believe that Americans, with an occupying force that long ago outlived its reluctant welcome, can win over a recalcitrant local population and win this counterinsurgency is far-fetched. As responsible infantrymen and noncommissioned officers with the 82nd Airborne Division soon heading back home, we are skeptical of recent press coverage portraying the conflict as increasingly manageable and feel it has neglected the mounting civil, political and social unrest we see every day. (Obviously, these are our personal views and should not be seen as official within our chain of command.)

“The claim that we are increasingly in control of the battlefields in Iraq is an assessment arrived at through a flawed, American-centered framework. Yes, we are militarily superior, but our successes are offset by failures elsewhere. What soldiers call the “battle space” remains the same, with changes only at the margins. It is crowded with actors who do not fit neatly into boxes: Sunni extremists, Al Qaeda terrorists, Shiite militiamen, criminals and armed tribes. This situation is made more complex by the questionable loyalties and Janus-faced role of the Iraqi police and Iraqi Army, which have been trained and armed at United States taxpayers’ expense.

<snip>

“Similarly, Sunnis, who have been underrepresented in the new Iraqi armed forces, now find themselves forming militias, sometimes with our tacit support. Sunnis recognize that the best guarantee they may have against Shiite militias and the Shiite-dominated government is to form their own armed bands. We arm them to aid in our fight against Al Qaeda. (emphasis mine)

<snip>

“At the same time, the most important front in the counterinsurgency, improving basic social and economic conditions, is the one on which we have failed most miserably. Two million Iraqis are in refugee camps in bordering countries. Close to two million more are internally displaced and now fill many urban slums. Cities lack regular electricity, telephone services and sanitation. “Lucky” Iraqis live in gated communities barricaded with concrete blast walls that provide them with a sense of communal claustrophobia rather than any sense of security we would consider normal. (emphasis mine)

“In a lawless environment where men with guns rule the streets, engaging in the banalities of life has become a death-defying act. Four years into our occupation, we have failed on every promise, while we have substituted Baath Party tyranny with a tyranny of Islamist, militia and criminal violence. When the primary preoccupation of average Iraqis is when and how they are likely to be killed, we can hardly feel smug as we hand out care packages. As an Iraqi man told us a few days ago with deep resignation, “We need security, not free food.”

<snip>

---------------------------------------------

I have written of these very things so many times you’re all sick of me. But now you’re hearing it from troops on the ground. And just as I have said, to quote John Doe, “over and over and over” again, the Sunnis and the Shiite are ancient enemies and are never going to come together just because we want them to. This is evidenced by the sentence from the editorial: “Sunnis recognize that the best guarantee they may have against Shiite militias and the Shiite-dominated government is to form their own armed bands.”

And I will continue to say it over and over and over again. The Sunnis and the Shiites will never, ever come together and create a workable government. It is not going to happen, especially as long as we are an occupying force. Even if we leave I don't see it happening.

But don't just listen to me. Listen to the men who are actually there! Listen to the myriad of overwhelming and unsolvable problems created by this unwarranted and hideous war of Bush’s making.

As for Secretary Albright, her remark was heinous, but at least she recognized it as such. If I were to hear President Bush acknowledge the obvious and admit his war was heinous, I’d punch a hole in my wall.

Elphaba

New York Times Op Ed

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

Maybe we should have elected Madeline Albright to the presidency. That woman said the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children due to the sanctions imposed on Iraq in the Clinton years was something she could live with.

Could you show reference where she said this?

Pam,

Look in my post below.

Elphaba

What post below?

It's there now. The story of Madeleine Albright is at the top of the post.

Elphaba

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then I will take what she said with a grain of salt. How many politicians, how many of us have said things that we wish we could take back the moment we said them? Did we mean them when we said them? Probably not. I know I have opened mouth insert foot many times. But I can't take back what was said. For politicians, everything they say is recorded. This was unfortunate for her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glad to see a non biased Op Ed piece was found in the NY Times. I am sure if I had the time I could find a group of soldiers who would write about all the good that they have done there too, I have read them but don't really have the time and interest to do so. So I guess as far as this thread they don't exist. :)

Ben Raines

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Elphaba we will never agree on this subject. I will repeat what I said in an earlier post. This thread is just rehashing the same things over and over that have already been discussed in other threads. Still won't change my opinion of the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glad to see a non biased Op Ed piece was found in the NY Times. I am sure if I had the time I could find a group of soldiers who would write about all the good that they have done there too, I have read them but don't really have the time and interest to do so. So I guess as far as this thread they don't exist. :)

Ben Raines

Ben, why do you think the soldiers wrote the editorial?

Also, it is a red herring to say groups of soldiers who would write about all the good they do don't exist because of this thread. If they exist, they exist and this thread doesn't negate that.

In fact, I would truly love to see anything they've written or that has been written about them. If you have any links I would be glad to read them. I really mean that.

Elphaba

Elphaba we will never agree on this subject. I will repeat what I said in an earlier post. This thread is just rehashing the same things over and over that have already been discussed in other threads. Still won't change my opinion of the situation.

Hi Pam,

I am fine with you, or anyone else, not agreeing with me. I always have been. What does bother me is that I don't believe anyone looks at the evidence I present. If you don't, then you're not really disagreeing with me because you don't know what I'm saying, other than in the largest sense that I'm against the war. But you don't know why I'm against the war. If you read the evidence I presented, you might be surprised. But, of course, it's your decision, and I respect that.

However, I think this time it is different, because I'm not the one writing the information. Soldiers who have just spent 15 months in Iraq are the ones writing it. As much as I would love to think you value my writing skills, I'm under no illusions you're going to actually read what I write.

But don't you feel compelled to read what the soldiers wrote? They're actually there and see what's really happening. Don't you trust them to know the truth? Aren't you interested in their perspective, knowing they are the ones who see the reality of what happens day in and day out? Who else would know what really is going on? It's not you, and it's not me, and it's not the government. It's the troops.

It's your decision and I, of course, will say no more about it other than I respect whatever you choose to do.

Elphaba

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share