quote:

I also think that former Illinois senator Dan Rostenkowski killed O.J. Simpson’s wife and then framed him for the murder to deflect attention to his improprieties.Saps

You too???

A big part of the problem is the polarization between the parties and the use of generalizations to classify libs and conservatives (as I just did in my above post). I’m not enamored of Bush, but I think he is media-assaulted for everything that he does. I think every President after this will be as well (regardless of being Dem or Rep). Right now, there is quite a lack of respect for the office of President itself. Neither Clinton nor Bush have helped that, but I’ll give Clinton his kudos for his savvy and his ability to carry himself in a "presidential" manner, which is important in our media driven society.

You’re right- we are in a rut with this war, and who knows how we get out. You certainly can’t install a democracy. It’s a process of acculturation and understanding, and a fairly long one at that. You have to have the ideological infrastructure to support it initially. That’s why China has been taking such a long time in it’s transition, among other reasons. Hell, Russia wanted a capitalist driven society and they are still struggling with it.

Always did get a kick out of the idea that Clinton attacked Osama because of the Lewinsky thing.

I also think that former Illinois senator Dan Rostenkowski killed O.J. Simpson’s wife and then framed him for the murder to deflect attention to his improprieties.

Saps

Saps,
thanks for the thoughtful response. I obviously don’t agree but a pleasant argument is good for all. When Jimmy Carter was in, Iran was our enemy. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". We used Saddam and even supplied some of the tools he used on his own people, much as we supplied Osama with RPG’s when he was attacking the Soviets. Yes I was paying attention back then. I didn’t think much of Clinton, but when his regime had the transition to the current one, he had his people impress upon the Bushies that Osama and Al-Qaeda was the gravest threat to America. Their warnings were waved off. I’m not clear where the "Liberals" waited for the first punch. When Clinton attacked Osama he was widely criticized by the neo-Cons (now in power) that it was to take the newspaper attention off of Monica. "Wag The Dog" ring a bell? Regardless, we all want to fight terrorism and Osama was the figurehead terrorist leader so I still hope he can join his brothers in hell (and sooner more than later). Ciao,
Mike

this gives me hope that che still lives!!!!!
at least che was honest.
when i was much younger there were 2 books i carried and those gave the navy a bit of a problem
moa’s little red book
and
che’s book on guerrilla warfare
made sense to me the other side had them.
but lay is scum and i have only called one other man that in my life. the pity is he bred and passed his defective genes along further polluting the human gene pool.

quote:

Originally posted by MilwFoodlovers

Saddam’s murderous ways never were mentioned when he was
a) a friend of America in general and
b) a friend of Rumsfeld in particular along with GHB.
No, it seems that happened only after no WMD (just take a minute and reflect on those words) were found.
Is he worse than Muammar Gaddafi? Kim Jong-Il? Robert Mugabe? Charles Taylor? The military junta leaders of Myanmar? Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? Islam Karimov? Saparmurat Niyazov?
Is it your contention that America must shed the blood of its young ridding the world of evil leaders? or just those whose country have oil deposits?
I mentioned to my friends several years ago when George started his saber rattling (and how when we all knew he was going to attack Iraq, didn’t they have armored vests and armored vehicles for our boys and girls in uniform-absolutely unforgivable) that Saddam , bad as he was, was the only thing holding that country together ala Tito. I said they’ll be such a mess if he’s removed, we’ll come to regret it. That is why GW’s father had stopped the battle.

I suppose that we can play pretend or spin things anyway we want by a few well placed words here and there.

First off, there were diplomatic relations between Iraq and the U.S.
between 1980 and 1988, but it was for obvious strategic reasons and I would hardly consider them a "friend", much in the way that we would consider China a friend. As anyone knows, although a country may not entirely support another’s ideologies, they can establish relationships. Bill Clinton was instrumental in reestablishing ties with China, despite egregious human rights violations, a total disdain for intellectual property rights, patents, and trademarks, and gross neglect of the environment (i.e. industrial chemical dumping, etc.).

Second, Rumsfeld was Reagan’s Middle East envoy to the Middle East and met with Hussein a total of two times in ’83 and ’84. I haven’t had the time to really research that relationship, but I sincerely doubt they were "friends" and your inference as such is only to sow seeds of conspiracy.

Let’s also keep in mind that Carter was a supporter of Iraq’s decision to enter Iran and even aided the cause by the prior arms embargo on Iran.

As far as your comment on the timing of the knowledge of Saddam’s anti-humane activity, it wasn’t after the lack of finding WMD’s. It was well-known in the 90’s as he used mustard gas against his own people, as well as other atrocities. I can’t speak for the 80’s. Frankly, I wasn’t paying that close attention and don’t remember. Do you?

quote:

Is it your contention that America must shed the blood of its young ridding the world of evil leaders? or just those whose country have oil deposits?

In regards to your second question, I don’t think anyone has seen the oil flowing in from Iraq yet, and I haven’t seen a track record of the U.S. attacking oil rich countries, so everyone can make all the allegations that they want but frankly I don’t know- nor does anyone else except for those making the decisions.

Your first question is a lot more sensible. The liberal sensibility is to sit back and wait for the first punch. Unfortunately, in this day and age, sitting back and waiting for the first punch could end up in the deaths of millions. The liberal approach of cutting back on defense spending and eroding our intellectual and mechanical defense capital and platforms while potential enemies strenghten theirs is foolhardy at the least.

On the other hand, attempting ,25,218271.065,1,14827,208.37.193.138
218334,218271,218271,2006-07-17 04:24:57,RE: Kenneth Lay”

Saddam’s murderous ways never were mentioned when he was
a) a friend of America in general and
b) a friend of Rumsfeld in particular along with GHB.
No, it seems that happened only after no WMD (just take a minute and reflect on those words) were found.
Is he worse than Muammar Gaddafi? Kim Jong-Il? Robert Mugabe? Charles Taylor? The military junta leaders of Myanmar? Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? Islam Karimov? Saparmurat Niyazov?
Is it your contention that America must shed the blood of its young ridding the world of evil leaders? or just those whose country have oil deposits?
I mentioned to my friends several years ago when George started his saber rattling (and how when we all knew he was going to attack Iraq, didn’t they have armored vests and armored vehicles for our boys and girls in uniform-absolutely unforgivable) that Saddam , bad as he was, was the only thing holding that country together ala Tito. I said they’ll be such a mess if he’s removed, we’ll come to regret it. That is why GW’s father had stopped the battle.

Somehow it escapes me how Saddam’s murderous regime should be used to excuse the murderous mess Bush , Cheney, Rice, and Rumsfeld have created in that poor country.

Cheers, John

quote:

Originally posted by Tedbear

quote:

Originally posted by Parses6

WTF! are we really getting nostalgic about 10% unemployment, 12% annual inflation, 20% lending rates to buy a house, prime rate of 21.5%, gas lines, communism spreading the globe, hostages in Iran and a bewildered fool in the White House??? Don’t you people remember the late 1970’s??? Jimmy Carter was a pathetic leader.
As bad as you think things are now, unemployment is 4.6%, inflation 2.5%, mortgage rates 6% and prime rate of 5.25% is a whole lot better than the Jimmy Carter years.

And I’m sure that the families of the thousands of people who have been killed, wounded, crippled and maimed as a result of our misadventure in the Middle East are comforted by those observations.

Are you talking about all of the ciizens that were murdered when Saddam was in control?

quote:

Originally posted by seafarer john

Standard gear stowed in lifeboats (at least up ’till 1958 the last year I sailed) was a can of "sea oil". The oil was to be used to knock the whitecaps and flying spume off the waves- "calming troubled waters". I never saw it in use, so cant vouch for its effectiveness, but it was carried in lifeboats for many many years so must have had some effect.That was along side the keg of rum, right? Ah! the days of iron men and wooden ships. Chow Jim

Cheers, John

As far as the Oil/Middle East/USA situation, has anybody read Robert Baer’s books "Sleeping With the Devil" and "See No Evil"? Another piece of the puzzle! (I get into more trouble like this . . .)[:I][:D]

And gas has tripled+ at the pump since 2000. And as goes gas, so goes everything transported by it. It’s the uncountable moral decline that hurts everyone the most, though. I’m not talking about the Christian Right version; just simple human-to-human decency and courtesy that I miss. Jimmy Carter is our only living political representative of this.

quote:

Originally posted by Parses6

WTF! are we really getting nostalgic about 10% unemployment, 12% annual inflation, 20% lending rates to buy a house, prime rate of 21.5%, gas lines, communism spreading the globe, hostages in Iran and a bewildered fool in the White House??? Don’t you people remember the late 1970’s??? Jimmy Carter was a pathetic leader.
As bad as you think things are now, unemployment is 4.6%, inflation 2.5%, mortgage rates 6% and prime rate of 5.25% is a whole lot better than the Jimmy Carter years.

Standard gear stowed in lifeboats (at least up ’till 1958 the last year I sailed) was a can of "sea oil". The oil was to be used to knock the whitecaps and flying spume off the waves- "calming troubled waters". I never saw it in use, so cant vouch for its effectiveness, but it was carried in lifeboats for many many years so must have had some effect.

Cheers, John

These are some definitions that I found for my apparently obscure phrase, "pouring oil on troubled waters":

To calm a disturbance:  His ideas caused real dissension within the party at first, but he poured oil on troubled waters in last night s speech.

! In ancient times, oil was often poured on ocean waves to calm turbulence, a practice that would be denounced today.

So, as you can see, I was referring to Fieldthistle’s frequent role of calming heated discussions on this board.

My apologys with the refrence to the former President, a person who I truly admire. He along with Mr. Lay surrounded themselves with bad advisors was what I was making refrence to. President Carter was the only President that ever called me on Christmas to wish me and my family Happy Holidays. Thank you Mr. President,he said call me Jimmy please. Chow Jim