A foreign policy we should have followed:

[WI wide body]

On Oct. 11, 2000 in Winston-Salem, NC one of the major presidential candidates made the following statement. If it had been followed, our nation would be immeasurably better off right now. It was:

"I think what we need to do is convince people who live in the lands they live in to build the nations. Maybe I'm missing something here. I mean, we're going to have kind of a nation building core from America? Absolutely not. Our military is meant to fight and win war. That's what it's meant to do. And when it gets overextended, morale drops."

Hmmm.......................I wonder who said that?

[idontknow]

Blame Bush?

[MRM]

Give him a break. He's from Milwaukee. It's kind of a national pass time in the southeastern part of the state. Especially on slow days when the Pack gets killed.

[Rick Lee]

This thread's title should be: "Who was really on the grassy knoll".

[WI wide body]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

This thread's title should be: "Who was really on the grassy knoll".

Hmmmm.....I guess that I didn't realize what a grievous and wanton sin it was to quote the exact words (actually a volte-face) of a public figure.

Please accept my most sincere apologies.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by WI wide body

Hmmmm.....I guess that I didn't realize what a grievous and wanton sin it was to quote the exact words (actually a volte-face) of a public figure.

Please accept my most sincere apologies.

It's not a sin, it's just a waste of bandwidth. Just dig up all the other Bush-bashing threads here and add your comments to them instead of taking a quote way out of context, made way before 9/11 and then acting like Bush was lying when he said what he said. Better yet, dig up some Clinton-bashing threads and add some of his famous whoppers to them too.

[Moneyguy1]

What is this fixation on "Bush bashing"?

What, in the way of foreign/domestic programs have worked out as expected?

Granted, all leaders make mistakes, but most actually learn from them.

And I am NOT "bashing Bush", just his form of management.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

It's not a sin, it's just a waste of bandwidth. Just dig up all the other Bush-bashing threads here and add your comments to them instead of taking a quote way out of context, made way before 9/11 and then acting like Bush was lying when he said what he said. Better yet, dig up some Clinton-bashing threads and add some of his famous whoppers to them too.

I agree. If he was so bad...they would not have to quote him out-of-context. The previous administration's nation-building in Haiti that he was referring to has nothing in common with stabilizing the middle east after years of war.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by fintstone

I agree. If he was so bad...they would not have to quote him out-of-context. The previous administration's nation-building in Haiti that he was referring to has nothing in common with stabilizing the middle east after years of war.

And since it's Xmas, I'm reminded of Clinton's promise to have troops home from Bosnia by Xmas 1997 and they're still there.

[WI wide body]

Originally Posted by fintstone

I agree. If he was so bad...they would not have to quote him out-of-context. The previous administration's nation-building in Haiti that he was referring to has nothing in common with stabilizing the middle east after years of war.

You are a truly stupid person finstone. An ignorant person can we can forgive, since they mostly have no info or knowledge. But a stupid person usually does have some bits of info but they simply cannot seem to process it correctly. That is one of my complaints about Mr. Bush. He also is often stupid!

Now, do tell me how I quoted "him out of context" as you said? Just to be clear, so that you do not try to weasel out of it later, you did type that and those are your words, correct?

Oh yes, I do know your next line..."well you made the quote so you prove it"...right? So here you go:

This was the intro fintstone, so that you know the players:

MODERATOR: Let's welcome the candidates, Governor Bush and Vice President Gore. Good evening, from Wake Chapel at Wake Forest University at Winston-Salem, North Carolina. I'm Jim Lehrer of the News Hour on PBS. Welcome to this second election 2000 debate between the Republican candidate for president, George W. Bush of Texas, and the Democratic candidate, Vice President Al Gore. These debates are sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates. The format and the rules are those negotiated by representatives of the two campaigns. Only the subjects tonight and the questions are mine. The format tonight is that of a conversation. The only prevailing rule is that no single response can ever, ever exceed two minutes. The prevailing rule for the audience here in the hall is as always, absolute quiet, please. Good evening, Governor Bush, Vice President Gore. The end of our 90 minutes last week in Boston, the total time each of you took was virtually the same. Let's see if we can do the same tonight, or come close. Governor Bush, the first question goes to you. One of you is about to be elected the leader of the single-most powerful nation in the world, economically, financially, militarily, diplomatically, you name it. Have you formed any guiding principles for exercising this enormous power?


And this was the question that led to the quote: (if you have difficulty locating the quote...I will assist you)

MODERATOR: The use of the military, there -- some people are now suggesting that if you don't want to use the military to maintain the peace, to do the civil thing, is it time to consider a civil force of some kind that comes in after the military that builds nations or all of that? Is that on your radar screen?

BUSH: I don't think so. I think what we need to do is convince people who live in the lands they live in to build the nations. Maybe I'm missing something here. I mean, we're going to have kind of a nation building core from America? Absolutely not. Our military is meant to fight and win war. That's what it's meant to do. And when it gets overextended, morale drops. I strongly believe we need to have a military presence in the peninsula, not only to keep the peace in the peninsula, but to keep regional stability. And I strongly believe we need to keep a presence in NATO, but I'm going to be judicious as to how to use the military. It needs to be in our vital interest, the mission needs to be clear, and the extra strategy obvious.

Now fin, exactly.....what part was taken out of context?????

You are simply full of ***** that Gov. Bush was talking about "The previous administration's nation-building in Haiti that he was referring to..." when he made that statement...unless you can change the text of the debate. Haiti was mentioned about 10 questions prior and then it was by Jim Lehrer as a one word question to Al Gore.

Is that clear enough for you my dolt friend?

[Rick Lee]

WI wide body, who are you and what have you done to Rodeo?

[lendaddy]

Originally Posted by WI wide body

wanton

The soup?

[WI wide body]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

WI wide body, who are you and what have you done to Rodeo?

Rick,

I have no clue what you are talking about. I can give you a short summary of who I am and my somewhat interesting life if you really want to know. But bringing up obscure terms like "Rodeo" makes you seem a bit strange to me.

Please advise.

[WI wide body]

Originally Posted by Rick Lee

WI wide body, who are you and what have you done to Rodeo?

Or............................was that your not so clever attempt to avoid trying to address the fact that you got yourself boxed up with the goofball post by finstone.

[WI wide body]

Originally Posted by lendaddy

The soup?

Nah, "soup" has 4 letters. If you check closely...the noun after "wanton" has only 3 letters.

[lendaddy]

Is "sin" Chinese for "with meat", sorta like "con carne"?

[Rick Lee]

Rodeo was our resident Bush-hating troll a while back. He disappeared after a while, probably on his doctor's advice. You sound a lot like him.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by WI wide body

....

You are simply full of ***** that Gov. Bush was talking about "The previous administration's nation-building in Haiti that he was referring to..." when he made that statement...unless you can change the text of the debate. Haiti was mentioned about 10 questions prior and then it was by Jim Lehrer as a one word question to Al Gore.

Is that clear enough for you my dolt friend?

So which do you think he was referring to in Oct 2000...the war in Afghanistan in Oct 2001, the second Gulf War in March 2003 or Clinton's 1999 folly in Haiti?

Of course you took it out of context. Even Gore was knew he was talking about Haiti and his response was about Haiti.

Just back-up or go forward a couple of sentences in the debate:

GOV. BUSH: -- about what the vice president said. I think one of the lessons in between World War I and World War II is we let our military atrophy. And we can't do that. We've got to rebuild our military.

But one of the problems we have in the military is we're in a lot of places around the world. And I mentioned one, and that's the Balkans. I'd very much like to get our troops out of there. I recognize we can't do it now, nor do I advocate an immediate withdrawal. That would be an abrogation of our agreement with NATO No one is suggesting that. But I think it ought to be one of our priorities to work with our European friends to convince them to put troops on the ground. And there is an example. Haiti is another example.

Now, there are some places where I think -- you know, I supported the administration in Colombia. I think it's important for us to be training Colombians in that part of the world. Our hemisphere is in our interest, to have -- to have a peaceful Colombia. But -- sorry --

The dangers of nation-building
MR. LEHRER: I was just -- the use of the military. There's been -- some people are now suggesting that if you don't want to use the military to maintain the peace, to do the civil thing, is it time to consider a civil force of some kind, that comes in after the military, that builds nations or all of that? Is that -- is that on your radar screen?

GOV. BUSH: Well -- I don't think so. I think what we need to do is convince people who live in the lands they live in to build the nations. Maybe I'm missing something here. I mean, we're going to have kind of a nation-building corps from America? Absolutely not. Our military is meant to fight and win war; that's what it's meant to do. And when it gets overextended, morale drops.

And I'm not -- I strongly believe we need to have a military presence in the Korea peninsula, not only to keep the peace on the peninsula, but to keep regional stability. And I strongly believe we need to keep a presence in NATO But I'm going to be judicious as to how to use the military. It needs to be in our vital interest, the mission needs to be clear, and the exit strategy obvious.

VICE PRESIDENT GORE: I don't disagree with that. And I certainly don't disagree that we ought to That's what we did in Haiti There are no more than a handful of American military personnel in Haiti now. And the Haitians have their problems, but we gave them a chance to restore democracy. And that's really about all we can do. But if you have a situation like that right in our backyard, with chaos about to break out and the flotillas forming to come across the water, and all kinds of violence there, right in one of our neighboring countries there, then I think that we did the right thing there.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by WI wide body

Hmmmm.....I guess that I didn't realize what a grievous and wanton sin it was to quote the exact words (actually a volte-face) of a public figure.

Please accept my most sincere apologies.

Some exact quote...even Bush knows that "corps" is not spelled "core"

[WI wide body]

[QUOTE=fintstone;3663152]So which do you think he was referring to in Oct 2000...the war in Afghanistan in Oct 2001, the second Gulf War in March 2003 or Clinton's 1999 folly in Haiti?

"Of course you took it out of context. Even Gore was knew he was talking about Haiti and his response was about Haiti."


fintstone, you are either incredibly stupid or you have a case of clinical mendacity. Do you actually believe that you are clever enough to use bull***** and semantics to avoid taking responsibility for your totally incorrect statement? Hint: you are not.

Here is what IMMEDIATELY preceded (thats means right in front of it) Gov. Bush's statement:

MODERATOR: Haiti.

GORE: Yes.

MODERATOR: And then Kosovo.

GORE: Yes.

MODERATOR: We talked about that. Want me to do it with you? Lebanon.

BUSH: Make a couple comments.

MODERATOR: Sure, absolutely, sure. Somalia.

BUSH: Started off as a humanitarian mission and it changed into a nation-building mission, and that's where the mission went wrong. The mission was changed. And as a result, our nation paid a price. And so I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building. I think our troops ought to be used to fight and win war. I think our troops ought to be used to help overthrow the dictator when it's in our best interests. But in this case it was a nation-building exercise, and same with Haiti. I wouldn't have supported either.

MODERATOR: What about Lebanon?

BUSH: Yes.

MODERATOR: Grenada.

BUSH: Yes.

MODERATOR: Panama?

BUSH: Yes. Some of them I've got a conflict of interest on, if you know what I mean.

MODERATOR: I do, I do. The Persian Gulf, obviously. And Bosnia. And you have already talked about Kosovo. But the reverse side of the question, Governor, that Vice President Gore mentioned, 600,000 people died in Rwanda in 1994. There was no U.S. intervention, no intervention from the outside world. Was that a mistake not to intervene?

BUSH: I think the administration did the right thing in that case. I do. It was a horrible situation, no one liked to see it on our TV screens, but it's a case where we need to make sure we have an early warning system in place in places where there could be ethnic cleansing and genocide the way we saw it there in Rwanda. And that's a case where we need to use our influence to have countries in Africa come together and help deal with the situation. The administration, seem like we're having a great love for us tonight, but the administration made the right decision on training Nigerian troops for situations just such as this in Rwanda, and so I thought they made the right decision not to send U.S. troops into Rwanda.

MODERATOR: Do you have any second thoughts on that, based on what you said a moment ago about genocide?

GORE: I'd like to come back to the question of nation building, but let me address the question directly, first. Fine. We did, actually, send troops into Rwanda to help with the humanitarian relief measures. My wife Tipper, who is here, actually went on a military plane with General Sholicatchvieli on one of those flights. But I think in retrospect we were too late getting in there. We could have saved more lives if we had acted earlier. But I do not think that it was an example of a conflict where we should have put our troops in to try to separate the parties for this reason, Jim. One of the criteria that I think is important in deciding when and if we should ever get involved around the world is whether or not our national security interest is involved, if we can really make the difference with military forces. We tried everything else. If we have allies in the Balkans we have allies, NATO, ready, willing and able to go and carry a big part of the burden. In Africa we did not. Now, we have tried -- our countries tried to create an Africa crisis response team there, and we've met some resistance. We have had some luck with Nigeria, but in Sierra Leon, and now that Nigeria has become a democracy, and we hope it stays that way, then maybe we can build on that. But because we had no allies and because it was very unclear that we could actually accomplish what we would want to accomplish about putting military forces there, I think it was the right thing not to jump in, as heartbreaking as it was, but I think we should have come in much quicker with the humanitarian mission.

MODERATOR: So what would you say, Governor, that somebody would say hey wait a minute, why not Africa, I mean why the Middle East, why the Balkans, but not Africa, when 600,000 people's lives are at risk?

BUSH: Well, I understand, and Africa is important. And we've got to do a lot of work in Africa to promote democracy and trade, and there are some -- Vice President mentioned Nigeria is a fledgling democracy. We have to work with Nigeria. That's an important continent. But there's got to be priorities, and Middle East is a priority for a lot of reasons, as is Europe and the Far East, our own hemisphere. And those are my four top priorities should I be the president, not to say we won't be engaged nor work hard to get other nations to come together to prevent atrocity. I thought the best example of a way to handle the situation was East Timor when we provided logistical support to the Australians, support that only we can provide. I thought that was a good model. But we can't be all things to all people in the world, Jim. And I think that's where maybe the vice president and I begin to have some differences. I'm worried about overcommitting our military around the world. I want to be judicious in its use. You mentioned Haiti. I wouldn't have sent troops to Haiti. I didn't think it was a mission worthwhile. It was a nation building mission, and it was not very successful. It cost us billions, a couple billions of dollars, and I'm not so sure democracy is any better off in Haiti than it was before.

MODERATOR: Vice President Gore, do you agree with the governor's views on nation building, the use of military, our military, for nation building as he described and defined it?

GORE: I don't think we agree on that. I would certainly also be judicious in evaluating any potential use of American troops overseas. I think we have to be very reticent about that. But look, Jim, the world is changing so rapidly. The way I see it, the world is getting much closer together. Like it or not, we are now -- the United States is now the natural leader of the world. All these other countries are looking to us. Now, just because we cannot be involved everywhere, and shouldn't be, doesn't mean that we should shy away from going in anywhere. Now, both of us are kind of, I guess, stating the other's position in a maximalist extreme way, but I think there is a difference here. This idea of nation building is kind of a pejorative phrase, but think about the great conflict of the past century, World War II. During the years between World War I and World War II, a great lesson was learned by our military leaders and the people of the United States. The lesson was that in the aftermath of World War I, we kind of turned our backs and left them to their own devices and they brewed up a lot of trouble that quickly became World War II. And acting upon that lesson in the aftermath of our great victory in World War II, we laid down the Marshall Plan, President Truman did. We got intimately involved in building NATO and other structures there. We still have lots of troops in Europe. And what did we do in the late '40's and '50's and '60's? We were nation building. And it was economic. But it was also military. And the confidence that those countries recovering from the wounds of war had by having troops there. We had civil administrators come in to set up their ways of building their towns back.

MODERATOR: You said in the Boston debate, Governor, on this issue of nation building, that the United States military is overextended now. Where is it overextended? Where are there U.S. military that you would bring home if you become president?

BUSH: First let me just say one comment about what the vice president said. I think one of the lessons in between World War I and World War II is we let our military atrophy. And we can't do that. We've got to rebuild our military. But one of the problems we have in the military is we're in a lot of places around the world. And I mentioned one, and that's the Balkans. I would very much like to get our troops out of there. I recognize we can't do it now, nor do I advocate an immediate withdrawal. That would be an abrogation of our agreement with NATO. No one is suggesting that. But I think it ought to be one of our priorities to work with our European friends to convince them to put troops on the ground. And there is an example. Haiti is another example. Now there are some places where I think -- you know, I've supported the administration in Columbia. I think it's important for us to be training Columbians in that part of the world. The hemisphere is in our interest to have a peaceful Columbia. But --

MODERATOR: The use of the military, there -- some people are now suggesting that if you don't want to use the military to maintain the peace, to do the civil thing, is it time to consider a civil force of some kind that comes in after the military that builds nations or all of that? Is that on your radar screen?

Now fintstone, at this point is when Gov. Bush made his statement. There is no person with a double digit IQ who would pretend that Bush was simply talking about Haiti. And insinuating that YOU,of all people, know in your infinite wisdom what Gore might have been thinking is........well......fin-like.

What color is the sky in that strange little world in which you must dwell?