.:.:.:.:
RTTP
.
Mobile
:.:.:.:.
[
<--back
] [
Home
][
Pics
][
News
][
Ads
][
Events
][
Forum
][
Band
][
Search
]
full forum
|
bottom
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
]
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
]
Reply
[
login
]
SPAM Filter:
re-type this
(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
you are quoting a heck of a lot there.
[QUOTE]blah blah blah[/QUOTE] to reply to ShadowSD.
Please remove excess text as not to re-post tons
message
[QUOTE="ShadowSD:1011513"]The bottom line is one's view on occupation. One on extreme end you have those in the government who are fundamentally for it so the world can be Exxon's bitch - neocons - like Bush, Cheney, McCain, Romney, Lieberman, Palin - just about every Republican in office but Ron Paul, really. On the other end, you have anti-neocons, people who believe that foreign occupation is inherently self-destructive and wrong; amazingly, despite the fact that this point of view is common sense, not to mention the view of Washington and Jefferson, we have very few people in government that fit this category - fortunately, by some incredible stroke of luck, our President is one of them. He wants the philosophy of neoconservativism disembowled and destroyed in the long-term, as evidenced by these parts of the speech last night, COMPLETELY unprecedented in history for a US President to say: "The people of Afghanistan have endured violence for decades. They have been confronted with occupation – by the Soviet Union, and then by foreign al Qaeda fighters who used Afghan land for their own purposes. So tonight, I want the Afghan people to understand – America seeks an end to this era of war and suffering. [B]We have no interest in occupying your country[/B]. We will support efforts by the Afghan government to open the door to those Taliban who abandon violence and respect the human rights of their fellow citizens. And we will seek a partnership with Afghanistan grounded in mutual respect – to isolate those who destroy; to strengthen those who build; to hasten the day when our troops will leave; and to forge a lasting friendship in which America is your partner, [B]and never your patron[/B]." But that was just the beginning, at the end he came back to the topic, and it became the crescendo of his speech: "Our union was founded in resistance to oppression. [B]We do not seek to occupy other nations. We will not claim another nation’s resources or target other peoples because their faith or ethnicity is different from ours.[/B] What we have fought for – and what we continue to fight for – is a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if other peoples’ children and grandchildren can live in freedom and access opportunity." Bush would NEVER have used the word occupation to describe anything the US or its allies might do; indeed, I can't think of a modern US President that would speak in those terms, let alone take a stand against them. Speeches to the military are usually jingoistic and full of slogans, and making a point of saying this to a military audience on national television is a clear attempt to argue neoconservatism out of the bones of our institutions almost by force of will and common sense. People who think this guy is a neocon are not paying attention.[/QUOTE]
top
[
Vers. 0.12
][ 0.004 secs/8 queries][
refresh
][