Getting your priorities right

[V]

Bush is famous for his dramatic landing aboard an aircraft carrier a few weeks after the invasion of Iraq, and his delivery of a congratulatory speech to the troops with a large banner reading, "Mission Accomplished", posted prominently behind him. For those who die on the streets of Baghdad daily, and have two hours of electrical service, these words must ring hollow.

In another case of "mission accomplished" as it was defined by the Bush administration, Afghanistan, NATO forces are just now, eight years later, launching an attack to soften up Taliban defenses around the second largest Afghan city of Kandahar with the aim of taking the city. Wasn't this war supposedly won, back in 2002?

Words became a substitute for accomplishment, in that era, with "ownership society" being code for "mortgaged to the hilt"; "it's your money" being code for tax giveaways; and, "mission accomplished" a cheap substitute for victory.
_________________________

Iraq remains very vulnerable.

Iran sent it's forces into the country in the last few days. Iran said its Revolutionary Guard had crossed the border and attacked a group it said was responsible for a bombing in Iran: they said their forces had killed 30 people on the territory of Iraq, and the operation was not over yet.

Through the years I've wondered what kind of mess we'd find ourselves in if Iran decided to send its million man army into Iraq. Pulling back, and out, might be the only realistic option open to us.

Getting rid of Sadaam left Iraq far more vulnerable to conquest by Iran than it ever was before, I'm afraid.
________________________

[twinimini]

Originally Posted by V

Words became a substitute for accomplishment, in that era, with "ownership society" being code for "mortgaged to the hilt"; "it's your money" being code for tax giveaways; and, "mission accomplished" a cheap substitute for victory.

V, you forgot hope and change which has become despair and corruption!

[V]

twini, what do you think about Gov Christie, of N.J., is he the "real deal"? I've seen some things that gave me "hope", but I can't tell if he's just a bag of wind, or not.

Gov Bloomberg seems more solid. He is a man of accomplishment who might make the country a good leader, if he decides to run for President in two more years. I'd be willing to give him a shot at untying the Gordian Knot.

[twinimini]

I've seen some of the interviews of Christie and he does seem like a guy who wants to finally change the mess that has become NJ government. As for Bloomberg, I just see another arrogant NYC rich guy who doesn't realize that there is a world beyond Central Park that is totally different than his city union supported government.

We have a situation in Upstate NY where the Seneca Nation of Indians has been selling cigarettes and gas to non-Indians without state taxes. The state is trying to put those taxes on the Senecas even though the Senecas have the right to not collect the taxes according to treaties signed over 200 years ago. Bloomberg's reaction was that Patterson (NY governor) should saddle up and take his six shooter up to Upstate to tame the Indians. How's that for racial stereotyping? The Senecas have threatened to close the NY Thruway which runs through the Seneca Reservation. This could even get violent and good old Bloomberg wants to "shoot 'em up."

I think the only guy who can possibly change NY is Carl Paladino. He's a crusty Buffalo lawyer who's running against Prince Andrew Cuomo. Cuomo's father was governor several decades ago. He was so hated Upstate that when we finally unloaded him he lost every county north of NY City other than Albany, the state capital. Yet Cuomo will probably win because he has the backing of all the civil service employees unions. Ironic because this guy was Housing Secretary when the whole housing crisis got started. He helped to screw up a whole nation, imagine what he can do with our little state of NY!

[V]

As for Bloomberg, I just see another arrogant NYC rich guy....

If competent, then still better than an arrogant, incompetent Texas rich guy.

[Life_N_Cancun]

Originally Posted by V

If competent, then still better than an arrogant, incompetent Texas rich guy.

OK now... let's leave Ross Perot out of this...

[V]

Thanks to the Bush Administrations' taking its eye off the ball following 9-11, we are left living with this-

Al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden threatens in a new audio tape to kill French citizens to avenge their country's support for the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan and a new law that will ban face-covering Muslim veils.

In the tape posted on Al-Jazeera's website, bin Laden said France was aiding the Americans in the killing of Muslim women and children in an apparent reference to the war in Afghanistan. He said the kidnapping of five French citizens in the African nation of Niger last month was a reaction to what he called France's oppression of Muslims.

"How can it be right that you participate in the occupation of our lands, support the Americans in the killing of our women and children and yet want to live in peace?" said bin Laden, addressing the French.

"It is a simple equation: As you kill, you will be killed. As you capture, you will be captured. And as you threaten our security, your security will be threatened."

[twinimini]

Sorry V, but I really think you are way off on this one. If you remember right there was an attempted bombing of the World Trade Center years before 9-11 and years before George W. Bush. The Islamic nutcases have been looking for an excuse to hate anyone who has freedom, who treats women as something other than property, and who doesn't want to return to the 10th century. Before Iraq and Afghanistan, there was the excuse of American support for Israel and before that it was revenge for the Crusades and on and on. You can blame Bush for lots of things and I would agree, but not on this one.

And I would have to commend the French for standing up to the terrorists with their ruling on the face covering. Sorry, but if poor Said and Mohammed can't take seeing a woman's face then they can stay in the desert and sleep with their goats.

[V]

Hi, twini, seems like you focused on what Osama said, rather than caught my point, which was that we should have stayed focused on him, and finished the job we started in Afghanistan: had we done that, we perhaps wouldn't have to be living with OBL's threats, plottings and attacks, as we are today, almost ten years since he and his group destroyed the World Trade Centers. The time, money, men, material and attention required for the invasion and occupation of Iraq made the job of capturing OBL, and stabilizing Afghanistan, far less likely to happen.

[twinimini]

Originally Posted by V

Hi, twini, seems like you focused on what Osama said, rather than caught my point, which was that we should have stayed focused on him, and finished the job we started in Afghanistan: had we done that, we perhaps wouldn't have to be living with OBL's threats, plottings and attacks, as we are today, almost ten years since he and his group destroyed the World Trade Centers. The time, money, men, material and attention required for the invasion and occupation of Iraq made the job of capturing OBL, and stabilizing Afghanistan, far less likely to happen.

Sorry V, I did miss your point. I was reading what Osama said rather than what you were referring to. When you look at Afghanistan it really is amazing to think that over history noone was able to conquer that land going all the way back to Alexander the Great and up to the Brits, the Russians and now us. Did you ever wonder how Ronald Reagan would have handled the situation? My thought he would have kept rather quiet until they found Bin Laden and then he would have taken him out in a very noisy fashion.

[Brewster]

I think the Italian President from New Jersey had the best solution for Bin Laden....lol

[LemonHead]

Originally Posted by V

Zack, those resolutions the President sought certainly do provide a type of legal/political cover for the acts, but I'm more concerned about the reality than the appearance of things: what happened was perhaps the greatest error of judgment in U.S. history, yet no one has been held accountable for it, so far as I know.

As for the evidence being spurious, no one disputes that, not even the President. Our investigation on the territory of Iraq, following the invasion, proved conclusively that it was.

Clearly, US History is not your best subject.