Cycloptichorn wrote:Brandon9000 wrote:Cyclops, I responded on page 154 to your post, if you'd care to continue. I apologize for the delay, but between keeping my family happy and a few other unexpetcted events of the day, I've been pretty busy.
Thanks, don't worry about the delay. Let me review and I'll move forward.
IIRC, you wanted more specific instances of failings of Bush than the generalities I presented?
I'll go ahead and narrow it down: the 'Bush Doctrine' is a lie. His words about promoting Democracy in the ME are completely hollow. He has had critical words about how past administrations tolerated repressive regimes, the same regimes he now counts as allies. We don't put any pressure at all on Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, to be democracies. His words have been hollow from day one.
I'll respond more with links later.
Let me also say that I believe there exists a dichotomy that you may not agree with me on, and that's this: I don't believe that internet arguments are 'personal.' You, the real-life person, are most likely Brandon, not Brandon9000. When we attack each other (A2Ker's in general) the vast majority of the time we are discussing and/or attacking the constructed personalities that we all have created here.
So, my comments about you are based upon my judgment of some of the things you have written here - and that's it. To me, that isn't personal; I know that I get carried away and snap off comments, everyone does here, that aren't necessarily reflective of my persona. So please don't be personally offended when I criticize you - it is a criticism of how I perceive your persona online to be, and not of the actual 'you.'
If this distinction doesn't exist in the minds of others - something which I have always assumed - then I would be happy to discuss whether there even is a distinction or not.
Cycloptichorn
An interesting peek at the 3 dimensional human behind the nickname no matter what happens after this. It's sometimes very interesting what happens when you appeal to someone's better nature.
As for the Bush Doctrine, my understanding is that it involves pre-emption of inchoate deadly threats and also treats accessories to terrorism as terrorists. I guess I don't know which part of it you think is a lie. You also refer to the claim of the promotion of democracy in the Middle East, and the simultaneous criticism of repression in the abstract, but toleration of it in allies. Certainly promotion of democracy anywhere, anytime would be a good thing. I am not sure how to prove either that Bush has tried to do it or that he has not. At least Iraq is a democracy now, although it's of no value in the middle of a quagmire of terrorism and civil war. As for tolerating bad government in allies, it's pretty generally recognized that you have to make friends with entities you don't like much in the high stakes world of foreign policy. Presidents have been doing this at least since the end of World War 2. Perhaps more could be done to pressure our friends into less repression. In his second innaugural address, the president said:
Quote:Democratic reformers facing repression, prison, or exile can know: America sees you for who you are: the future leaders of your free country.
The rulers of outlaw regimes can know that we still believe as Abraham Lincoln did: "Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves; and, under the rule of a just God, cannot long retain it."
The leaders of governments with long habits of control need to know: To serve your people you must learn to trust them. Start on this journey of progress and justice, and America will walk at your side.
At least this should show that his heart's in the right place. Anyway, none of this would seem to rise to the level of a disgrace to the presidency.
