Republican Strategy?

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally Posted by BeyGon

The Clintons were in office eight years and didn't do anything, how long was GW in before the attack?

As far as trying, it seems we have spent a lot of lives, money, time trying.

hmmm. 8 years? the Cole was bombed in October of 2000. Don't you think when Bush took over in January of 2001, only 3 months later, that he'd want to bring those who attacked the Cole to justice?

Do you think Bush took the bombing of the Cole to be a credible threat? What was his response?

[BeyGon]

Originally Posted by Shaun 84 Targa

hmmm. 8 years? the Cole was bombed in October of 2000. Don't you think when Bush took over in January of 2001, only 3 months later, that he'd want to bring those who attacked the Cole to justice?

Do you think Bush took the bombing of the Cole to be a credible threat? What was his response?

What was the Clinton's response? I guess he didn't think it was a big deal. GW was in office three months later, hit the decks running boys, use all that information the Clintons gave you and go after them. If the Clintons couldn't/wouldn't do anything in eight years, what is GW to do three months later? Even with all the time it took to go to Iraq, they still didn't get correct information.

[dtw]

Didja get the fuel console? Didja like it?

Just for you Shaun:

[Shaun @ Tru6]

LOL! hi Dave,

thanks, I deserve it! haven't opened the box yet, arrived Wednesday I think, thank you. tomorrow will be my first day back on the car and it's the first thing to do on the bench. Can't wait to get to work again.

Have your stuff packed up, will go out tomorrow. will let you know on the console.

[Rearden]

Originally Posted by techweenie

Wow, you're a regular fount of disinformation. Berger took copies of notes on 'after action reports' on the millenium bombing threat. The 911 Commission noted that nothing of interest to them had been taken.

Read what you wrote and let the absurdity sink in. Why would somebody risk so much (even though he did get the sweetheart deal of the century) doing something so ghastly without having an extremely important reason for doing it. The 9/11 Commission doesn't know what it never learned. To say it was of no interest is ludicrous. Partisan hack, extraordinaire.

[Moneyguy1]

Republican strategy:

Same as now...slash and burn. Leave nothing of use to the enemy. Sounds defeatist and traitorous to me........If it does not fit the PERSONAL agendas, it can be ignored and derided, despite the popular desires. The rules are for others and do not apply to us.

Think that's partisan?

Not in the least. Based on observation. Both parties at times have engaged in such approaches, and always these approaches do NOT serve the people for whom these clowns work (or they are supposed to).

Flame away guys......show me your partisan logic. Both sides chime in. I find it interesting. Show the consistency of the curent and previous administration; how cautious and measured they have been in their approach to international policy; how they have handled both international and domestic crises, just for a start. WHile you are at it, also prove allegations that your "opposition" would have performed any worse, rather than just wishing that to be the truth. Show me the difference between the two major parties in concise, easy to follow FACTUAL analyses as to how the two differ in response to spending, national defense and that old bug-a-boo "TERROR".

[RoninLB]

Rep Pres strategy will be the war issue and framing the Dem's as tax poachers.

also the Pres winner will probably drag along some congressional race wins?



I watch Newt for Rep policy waiting to happen.

I watch Hillary and Bill as the best politicians alive.



And I think much of Rudy's policy is being shaped strongly by his election chief Steve Forbes [Forbes mag] ?

And jockeying for a primary win is an appeal to the party base.
The primary's winners have to capture independents to be President imo.



btw.. Iraq is probably the 21st Century's N Korea no matter who is Pres? The Cold War morphed into new clothes but it's still the majors, US, Russia, China, at odds over world events.

[tabs]

Originally Posted by RoninLB

I watch Hillary and Bill as the best politicians alive


? The Cold War morphed into new clothes but it's still the majors, US, Russia, China, at odds over world events.

The above 2 statements are fallacious.

1. Bill Clinton has applied the pathology of a used car saleman to politics, and no matter how good it sounds and looks it is still a clunker.

2. The ONLY 500 lb Gorrilla in the room is the USA. Russia imploded partly because it ran out of money and is a mere shadow of its former self. China is on the come economically, they are trying desperatley to develope themselves for internal reasons rather than external power politics. China is a very subtle player that will pull the strings from behind the scenes rather than direct confrontation.

[tabs]

The embodiment of the American Empire is Economic Globalization. The enemy of that embodiment is not China, India nor Russia. The enemy is the countervailing idea that Gods law trumps secular economic globalization.

[techweenie]

Originally Posted by tabs

The above 2 statements are fallacious.

1. Bill Clinton has applied the pathology of a used car saleman to politics, and no matter how good it sounds and looks it is still a clunker.

2. The ONLY 500 lb Gorrilla in the room is the USA. Russia imploded partly because it ran out of money and is a mere shadow of its former self. China is on the come economically, they are trying desperatley to develope themselves for internal reasons rather than external power politics. China is a very subtle player that will pull the strings from behind the scenes rather than direct confrontation.

Well, I think that if China was the 'behind the scenes' player you think it is, there would be no reason for the massive military buildup going on there.

And the old notion about trying to be a 'gorilla' of any type is not relevant in a world where a guy in a cave with a few thousand followers can effect change and damage as happened on 9/11 and in the laws of our nation thereafter.

[tabs]

There was a common assesment of the Clinton WH, that it was being run like it was in permament campaign mode. That because thats the only thing Bill knew how to do, he had no idea as how to keep the the vehicle he just sold to the American people running.

[tabs]

Originally Posted by techweenie

Well, I think that if China was the 'behind the scenes' player you think it is, there would be no reason for the massive military buildup going on there.

And the old notion about trying to be a 'gorilla' of any type is not relevant in a world where a guy in a cave with a few thousand followers can effect change and damage as happened on 9/11 and in the laws of our nation thereafter.

Part of the reason nations have large standing armys is that it provides internal security employment to the unemployed both in the military and defense industry. China is trying to modernize itself and to do that they have to have credibilty militarily. One reason is that with a modern military they can not be bullied around by a powerfull nation with a large military.

Your second point was made mute by my previous statement, which I reiterate.

"The embodiment of the American Empire is Economic Globalization. The enemy of that embodiment is not China, India nor Russia. The enemy is the countervailing idea that Gods law trumps secular economic globalization. "

[tabs]

Originally Posted by Shaun 84 Targa

all happened on Clinton's watch, absolutely. And Clinton totally failed in taking out Bin Laden. So it makes you wonder why Bush didn't take charge and get the job done as one of the first things on the checklist when he took office. After all, there was a guy running around blowing up American interests. Don't you think Bush should have succeeded where Clinton failed? Or at least tried?




Wensleydale?

This is a, all is well and good criticism of Bush from the perspective of hindsight. However the reality on the ground in the administration doesn't jive with the criticism. Administrations have to get organized and up and running. It takes time to work out the bugs in the system before it operates with some kind of functionality. There were other things that were priority things that sucked up time and energy, for instance getting your appointees approved for their jobs. Unfortunately the issue of Bin Laden was way down the list, only in hindsight, Bush shulda known better.

[techweenie]

Originally Posted by tabs

Part of the reason nations have large standing armys is that it provides internal security employment to the unemployed both in the military and defense industry. China is trying to modernize itself and to do that they have to have credibilty militarily. One reason is that with a modern military they can not be bullied around by a powerfull nation with a large military.

Your second point was made mute by my previous statement, which I reiterate.

"The embodiment of the American Empire is Economic Globalization. The enemy of that embodiment is not China, India nor Russia. The enemy is the countervailing idea that Gods law trumps secular economic globalization. "

Tabs, I'm less concerned about China's "large standing army" than I am their naval buildup. There is no possible 'internal security' dividend from a naval buildup.

It's 'moot' not 'mute.' However, your statement did not make mine moot, unless your opinion now is absolute, objective truth.

I stand by my claim that a minor figure with a few thousand followers triggered damage to the US -- and the founding concepts of the nation -- more than any superpower ever did.

[tabs]

Originally Posted by techweenie

Tabs, I'm less concerned about China's "large standing army" than I am their naval buildup. There is no possible 'internal security' dividend from a naval buildup.
.' However, your statement did not make mine moot, unless your opinion now is absolute, objective truth.

I stand by my claim that a minor figure with a few thousand followers triggered damage to the US -- and the founding concepts of the nation -- more than any superpower ever did.

You were not specific about what type of military buildup you were talking about.

What I say may not be absolute but it is objective rather than wishfull thinking to suit ones prejudices.

I don't see where your last statement and mine are at odds, yours just becomes superfluous.

[MRM]

There is no Republican plan. The only Republican plan since 1999 has been "Do anything to get Bush elected, then do anything to get him re-elected." Now that his second term is coming to an end the party leaders are like deer in the headlights and have no idea where to go from here.

Seriously, there has been no overriding ideology for the Republicans during the Bush years, other than to take their turn feeding at the public trough. The sentiment seems to be that it's our turn now and we're going to get what was denied to us for the 40 year of Democratic controlled Congress, FDR, Truman LBJ, Clinton, etc. I've said it before, Bush is the Republican LBJ - all power, money, and cynicism, no real beleifs. Without an overriding ideology there is ne reason to exist. Reagan had Morning in America, Clinton had the Economy, Bush was supposed to return us to Reagan-era international prestige and domestic prosperity. Instead he's done for Conservative what Carter did for the term liberal.

I voted for him twice, and would still vote for him over Gore or Kerry, but that doesn't mean that I'm blind to the fact that his presidency has been a horrible failure and will be a drag on Republicans for a generation. Committee to Re-elect Hillary in 2012, brought to you by Bush-Cheney '04.

[MRM]

Whenever I agree with Tabs I have to go back and read again to see where I went wrong. I hate to say I see few flaws in his logic here. His writing style is even shaping up.

Mute and moot are irritating, but not substantive. The sign of an uneducated mind (or just careless) perhaps, but not an unintelligent one.

[john70t]

"Diebold chief executive Wally O'Dell has been a major fund-raiser for President Bush."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3169706.stm

Who needs strategy? Election fraud is so much easier.

"On November 17th, 2005, an anonymous Wikipedia user deleted 15 paragraphs from an article on e-voting machine-vendor Diebold, excising an entire section critical of the company's machines... ....In this case, the changes came from an IP address reserved for the corporate offices of Diebold itself."
http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/08/wiki_tracker

[BeyGon]

"Who needs strategy? Election fraud is so much easier."

All we need to do is look at the Democrats and the Indian Reservations, and maybe Chicago.

[RoninLB]

conservatives will not be happy no matter what Rep runs. I was listening to an opinion leader today, not Newt, say the Rep party has tilted too far left and called Congress and Bush big gov't country club republicans.





this is a Newt vid

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sN9cqtJTvF4)