I would take the use of force very seriously

Discussion in 'Politics' started by nycflasher, Sep 26, 2004.

  1. nycflasher
    Offline

    nycflasher Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    Messages:
    3,078
    Thanks Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    CT
    Ratings:
    +14
    “I--I would take the use of force very seriously. I would be guarded in my approach. I don't think we can be all things to all people in the world. I think we've got to be very careful when we commit our troops. The vice president [Al Gore] and I have a disagreement about the use of troops. He believes in nation building. I--I would be very careful about using our troops as nation builders. I believe the role of the military is to fight and win war and, therefore, prevent war from happening in the first place. And so I take my--I take my--my responsibility seriously.” --October 3, 2000
     
  2. 5stringJeff
    Offline

    5stringJeff Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,990
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Ratings:
    +540
    The context of this quote was missions like Bosnia and Kosovo, in which NATO committed troops not for the purpose of fighting, but for the sole purpose of peacekeeping. I'm assuming that you are making a comparison to Iraq. In Iraq, one of the theaters of the War on Terrorism, we first defeated Saddam's regime, then we worked to stabilize the country while the new Iraqi government could get on its feet. And, in case you haven't been watching the news lately, there is plenty of fighting still occuring in Iraq. So your whole argument (which you didn't really even make, but inferred) is invalid.
     
  3. Jimmyeatworld
    Offline

    Jimmyeatworld Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,239
    Thanks Received:
    223
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Location:
    America
    Ratings:
    +223
    And this is suppose to prove...what? That he didn't take it seriously? I think it is obvious that he took it very seriously. You keep listening to people like John Kerry using phrases like "he rushed to war", when the fact of the matter is this was the longest build up to war in our history.

    Here are a few more quotes you might be interested in.

    December 9, 1999 during a debate in New Hampshire, Gov. George W. Bush said, "If I found in any way, shape or form that he was developing weapons of mass destruction, I'd take 'em out. I'm surprised he's still there."

    February 11, 2000 while campaigning in South Carolina, Bush said, "If we catch them developing weapons of mass destruction, there won't be any weapons of mass destruction left in Iraq -- if I'm the Commander-in-Chief."

    October 11, 2000 during a debate at Wake Forest University in North Carolina, Bush said, ""We don't know whether he's developing weapons of mass destruction. He better not be, or there's going to be a consequence -- should I be the President."

    February 22, 2001, President Bush declares, "The Secretary of State is going to go listen to our allies as to how best to effect a policy, the primary goal of which will be to say to Saddam Hussein: we won't tolerate you developing weapons of mass destruction, and we expect you to leave your neighbors alone."

    So, while "nation building" may not have been on the agenda for President Bush, it's quite clear what his intent was with Saddam's Iraq concerning WMD's. After the 9/11 attack, it became apparent that we could no longer sit back and wait when a threat was present. With Saddam thumbing his nose at the idea of inspectors, as well as everything else, the decision to go into Iraq was finally made. This is something that he said he would do long before he became President, long before George Tenant made his slam dunk claim, and long before any number of reasons rose to go in.
     
  4. theim
    Offline

    theim Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,628
    Thanks Received:
    234
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Ratings:
    +234
    You remind me of some Hollywood liberals in that you seem to not understand that 9/11 was more than just a really big terrorist attack, it was a history-changing moment, which merited a whole new, proactive approach to terror.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Flasher, I know that you were close to ground zero. Did 9/11 change some of your thinking? Guess what, it did GW too.
     

Share This Page