Bush Needs To Give A Speech

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by preemptingyou03, Apr 11, 2004.

  1. preemptingyou03
    Offline

    preemptingyou03 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2004
    Messages:
    369
    Thanks Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +4
    With growing anti-Americanism and growing appeasement, Bush must make a speech to the UN, or he must call a huge Summit, and give a speech to the world. He has to get our message out to these appeasers.

    The appeasement and internationalization movement views the threat of terrorism as such: if everyone works together, terrorists can be captured easier, (although they are being captured on a terrific scale anyway, because we are working together), and if everyone tries to understand the terrorists, we may understand their cause... and if we ourselves reform, we may end their hatred. If we work together, we won't step on anyone's toes and the whole world will love us, rather than fear us. This is the way to confront terrorism.

    Such a view is dead wrong. Yes, it is important to work with other nations. We will fight this war with every bit of intelligence and law enforcement available. All nations must support us, on that front of the War on Terror. But when we wish to confront regimes with a military invasion, we do not need the overwhelming approval of nations.

    We must remove the sources of terrorism and their regimes. There's no reason why Libya should be in charge of the Human Rights Watch in the UN.

    The UN must act.

    Bush has to stop pussy footing. Bush must come out, on worldwide TV, and defend his case against Iraq. He must lay out what other nations thought. He must come out and show the world he didn't lie.

    He's hated because he's a religious man, not a secular man. And he's hated because he's a capitalist, not a socialist. We must come out and tell the EU, the UN, and all other organizations, that we will strike first and we will strike alone if we must.

    We must lay out the strategy worldwide for the War on Terror, whether they like it or hate it.

    What can he say, realistically? We need to drop flyers all over the Middle East stating our cause and case. We need to win the propaganda war.
     
  2. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
  3. preemptingyou03
    Offline

    preemptingyou03 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2004
    Messages:
    369
    Thanks Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +4
    The Iraqi army thing needs to be dealt with. There's no questioning that.

    But as for the 9/11 thing... come on. Please don't play politics with that. It was known al-Qaeda wanted to attack us. They did! Five times under Clinton! They declared war on us. They attacked our targets, interests, and even our battleships. They attacked the WTC, and then one of the main plotters, Abdul Yassin, was given shelter in Baghdad for a decade. (But Saddam didn't support terrorism, according to Dems).

    Clinton and Bush made mistakes. Clinton made more, but we're willing to let that go. Bush had eight months, Bubba had eight years. Bush wasn't offered OBL several times, like Clinton. Under Clinton, Saddam violated 16 resolutions and we lobbed a few cruise missiles. Under Bush, Saddam violated just one resolution, Resolution 1441, and we Shocked and Awed the world.

    In regards to Bush's handeling as a war president... do you think there is a dictator out there... or a terrorist... on the planet... that wants Bush to win the election? Honestly.
     
  4. NewGuy
    Offline

    NewGuy Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    So is preemptingyou03 with his leading questions, and tunnel vision approach only to try and stuff words into your mouth when you try to talk to him.

    :whip:
     
  5. preemptingyou03
    Offline

    preemptingyou03 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2004
    Messages:
    369
    Thanks Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +4
    Now back to the topic... how can Bush address the world? What can we do? He needs to explain himself on the WMD so people understand everyone thought he had them. He needs to explain that rogue states shouldn't be considered as real nations until they play nice.

    There's only a handful of countries that support terrorism. If they are removed, and replaced by decent governments, in addition to the entire world using police action and intelligence to dismantle cells and plots and terror networks... terrorism will take a huge step backward.

    I'm starting to beat my own drums of war... the media isn't talking about it, but you know it is in Rumsfeld's mind... all the way to Tehran.

    If the Iranians continue to oppose the UN and Atomic inspectors, and if they continue to fund Hezbollah and Hamas, and if they continue to persue nuclear bombs, and if they continue to shelter al-Qaeda leaders such as Saif al-Adel, and if they continue to hurt their people, and try to mess up the future of Iraq...

    Why can't we strike? Because world opinion may "not like" us? Come on. They hate us already. Because we'll "create" terrorists? (As if the threat of terrorism could get any higher after 9/12).
     
  6. jimnyc
    Offline

    jimnyc ...

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    10,113
    Thanks Received:
    244
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    New York
    Ratings:
    +246
    How is he in a hole because of this? The only problem I see is that the liberal media is capitalizing on it. That memo was worthless as far as 9/11 was concerned.
     
  7. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    let me rephrase that then. He's in a hole (yes, by the media) and he doesn't help himself any by letting the linked issues come out like they are (yes, most likely the media again).

    What bush needs to do now is increase the number of troops in iraq and afghanistan. He needs a big press of offensive operations to quell the insurgency in iraq. I can't believe I'm going to say this, but for a short time only the marines need to go on a militia killing spree. It needs to be known that these militia are attempting to destroy the very freedom that the people just received.

    No smoking gun has been found for 9/11 at this point, for his sake he'd better hope there isn't one hiding around.
     
  8. jimnyc
    Offline

    jimnyc ...

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    10,113
    Thanks Received:
    244
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    New York
    Ratings:
    +246
    Agreed. But I would go as far as to say the entire nation is in a hole and the media isn't doing any justice by playing politics.

    Absolutely! I've been saying for months now that the military needs to stay on the offensive. Every time they revert to being proactive and defensive they are taking hits. Get rid of the bad eggs, get their government started, start the rebuilding effort and get the hell out. After that it's up to the Iraqi's whether or not they want to embrace freedom and democracy.
     
  9. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    No, they're not, but this could also be looked at as full circle or karma. The bush admin played fast and loose with the wording of the reasons for the iraq war and had a majority of americans not only thinking that hussein was responsible for 9/11 but that he was close to detonating a nuke within the US.

    Vagueness of scope and definition, no matter how well intentioned, will always reap the worst of consequences.
     
  10. jimnyc
    Offline

    jimnyc ...

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    10,113
    Thanks Received:
    244
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    New York
    Ratings:
    +246
    This I'll have to disagree with. I've never heard or read anything that would have lead me to believe Saddam was responsible or that he was an imminent threat within our borders. Sure, people believe that and will hear what they want, but those words simply weren't spoken by Bush or his administration.

    I myself thought Iraq was responsible for 9/11 for a short while until the facts came out about Bin Laden. Since then I have seen them as 2 seperate enemies that need to be hunted down as part of an integral part of the war on terrorism.
     

Share This Page