Dr. Goebbels, call your office

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Stephanie, Jul 17, 2006.

  1. Stephanie
    Offline

    Stephanie Diamond Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2004
    Messages:
    70,236
    Thanks Received:
    10,817
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +27,359
    In an obscene attempt to obtain political mileage, the Democrats are claiming that President Bush is responsible for the outbreak of war in the Middle East. Howard Dean claims that the war would not have occurred if the Democrats had been in power because the Dems would have worked the past six years to prevent it. And Sen. Dodd has made basically the same assertion. Meanwhile, Rep. Jane Harmon contends that the Bush administration is to blame for our poor to non-existent relations with Syria and Iran which, she says, prevent us from using diplomacy to end the crisis.

    Once again, the Democrats are taking partisan politics to a previously unknown low. No past opposition party has attempted to blame the outbreak of an Arab-Israeli war on the party in power. Unless I'm mistaken, the Repubicans didn't blame President Johnson for the war in 1967; the Dems didn't blame President Nixon for the war in 1973; nor did they blame President Reagan for the hostilities in Lebanon that occurred on his watch. Moreover, it is especially reprehensible for the Dems to be taking such a low road now, when unlike before, the U.S. is in the middle of essentially the same war as Israel -- the war on terrorism.

    The Harmon claim, that we could solve this crisis if only we had relations with Syria and Iran, is so naive as to require little discussion. Syria and Iran don't act criminally because we lack good relations with them; we lack good relations with them because they act criminally. The Democrats' belief that they could somehow talk Syria and Iran out of acting like extremist Islamic states bent on destroying Israel should alone disqualify the party from controlling, or even influencing, U.S. foreign policy.

    The Dean-Dodd claim that the Democrats, through their tireless efforts, would have prevented this war ignores the fact that the efforts that the Dems have (and would have) engaged in are not reasonably calculated to prevent war in the Middle East. Under President Clinton, the Dems attempted to push Israel into making territorial concessions. Indeed, the concession that led to Hezbollah's ability to strike deep into Israeli terrority with missiles and that emboldened Hezbollah to start a war with Israel(Israel's pull-out from Lebanon) occurred during the Clinton administration. This doesn't mean that the Democrats are to blame for the war. First, Israel had the option of not making territorial concessions. Second, the Bush administration too has encouraged Israel to "take risks for peace" -- our policy towards Israel contains bi-partisan flaws. Third, the blame in any case resides with Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran, not the U.S. But the fact remains that Clinton's policies for preventing war were profoundly misguided in ways that are material to the current crisis. Under these circumstances, it is disgraceful for the Dems to blame the war on President Bush.

    Remember, though, this is the party that brokered the deal that enabled North Korea to obtain nuclear weapons, yet now blames that regime's nuclear status on President Bush. In terms of the style of its propaganda, this is a party in which Joseph Goebbels would feel at home.
    http://www.powerlineblog.com/
     
  2. PsuedoGhost
    Offline

    PsuedoGhost Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2006
    Messages:
    206
    Thanks Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +15
    Cry more. You guys pulled this same BS when Clinton was in office.
     
  3. Hobbit
    Offline

    Hobbit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2004
    Messages:
    5,099
    Thanks Received:
    420
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Near Atlanta, GA
    Ratings:
    +421
    :link:
     
  4. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,537
    Thanks Received:
    8,161
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,153
    I dont remember anyone suggesting that if Republicans were in office that there would suddenly be peace in the middle east or that any war outbreak was Clintons fault. Perhaps you have some sources to back yourself up?
     
  5. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    There would be war in the Middle East with or without the US. That's what you get when you have different religious factions existing to hate and murder.

    What BS got pulled when Clinton was in office? That he ignored the Middle East as best as he possibly could? Hardly BS. More like fact.

    And I find it hillarious that it's you libs who continually have crocodile tears running down your cheeks and snot running out your nose whining and bitching about Bush, the so-called "religious right," and just generally anything that doesn't fall lockstep into left-wing mantra; yet, let a conservative complain once and she's "crying."

    Hypocrite.
     

Share This Page