All of us, every single man, woman, and child on the face of the Earth were born with the same unalienable rights; to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And, if the governments of the world can't get that through their thick skulls, then, regime change will be necessary.
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Ladies And Gentlemen, Al Gore
Al Gore shows off his moral authority for all the world to see.
The one thing that strikes me about this video is that Al Gore used to be sane. I wonder what happened.
2 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Of course, there is no big difference between Iraq in 1992 and 2002. Or between the situation where we were fighting Iraq with a degree of international approval and cooperation that dwarfs the "Coalition of the Willing." Not to mention that Gore is pointing out the degree to which the elder Bush helped to arm Iraq during AND after Iraq's war with Iran. Also, when opposing younger Bush's push for war in 2002 and 2003, Gore didn't base his argument on whether Iraq had or was seeking WMDs, but on the fact that the war was not garnering international support and a unilateral action would most likely damage our credibility around the world as well as increase the danger of further terrorist acts (not to mention that beating Sadam would be the easy part, the hard part being dealing with the ruins and internal conflict afterwards). He also objected to Bush pushing the vote just before midterm election to help pressure Congress into war. What he called for at the time was an open, honest debate. He called for Bush to show us the evidence of WMDs and the implied link between Iraq and 911. Surely you agree that if we, as a nation, had taken the time to look at the situation soberly we would be on better footing now.
Hi Anonymous, Thanks for the decency with which you are addressing your argument to me.
I think Gore was right in 92. I think Clinton was right in 98 when he made the case that Saddam was a threat because of his WMD capacity. I think Bush was right to argue thusly in 2002. The consensus of the intelligence world (France, UK, USA, Germany) was that Saddam had WMD capacity.
Turns out we were all probably wrong, unless, perhaps, he moved them to Syria, as is often alleged.
Yes, I agree, our prosecution of the war in Iraq is a mess, and has rsulted in an increase in worldwide terrorism. Muslims hate us now more than ever.
That is the normal course of events for a war, though.
The Germans hated America more in 1943 than they did in 1939.
Here's where we have gone wrong in our prosecution of the war in Iraq, if you want my opinion. America created the blueprint for the dismantling of nations in the grip of evil ideologies, and the reassembling of those nations under the principles of Democracy. We accomplished great things in Japan, Germany, and in the American South.
However, the first thing we did in all three of those wars was to absolutely obliterate our enemy and cause him to fear us so badly that he completely lost the will to fight. Then we went in, occupied their countries, and rewrote their laws and, in the case of Japan, their state religion.
That is what we should have done in Iraq. Sharia should have been banned. Instead, it is part of the Iraqi national constitution.
2 comments:
Of course, there is no big difference between Iraq in 1992 and 2002. Or between the situation where we were fighting Iraq with a degree of international approval and cooperation that dwarfs the "Coalition of the Willing." Not to mention that Gore is pointing out the degree to which the elder Bush helped to arm Iraq during AND after Iraq's war with Iran. Also, when opposing younger Bush's push for war in 2002 and 2003, Gore didn't base his argument on whether Iraq had or was seeking WMDs, but on the fact that the war was not garnering international support and a unilateral action would most likely damage our credibility around the world as well as increase the danger of further terrorist acts (not to mention that beating Sadam would be the easy part, the hard part being dealing with the ruins and internal conflict afterwards). He also objected to Bush pushing the vote just before midterm election to help pressure Congress into war. What he called for at the time was an open, honest debate. He called for Bush to show us the evidence of WMDs and the implied link between Iraq and 911. Surely you agree that if we, as a nation, had taken the time to look at the situation soberly we would be on better footing now.
Guess what, Gore was right.
Hi Anonymous,
Thanks for the decency with which you are addressing your argument to me.
I think Gore was right in 92. I think Clinton was right in 98 when he made the case that Saddam was a threat because of his WMD capacity. I think Bush was right to argue thusly in 2002. The consensus of the intelligence world (France, UK, USA, Germany) was that Saddam had WMD capacity.
Turns out we were all probably wrong, unless, perhaps, he moved them to Syria, as is often alleged.
Yes, I agree, our prosecution of the war in Iraq is a mess, and has rsulted in an increase in worldwide terrorism. Muslims hate us now more than ever.
That is the normal course of events for a war, though.
The Germans hated America more in 1943 than they did in 1939.
Here's where we have gone wrong in our prosecution of the war in Iraq, if you want my opinion. America created the blueprint for the dismantling of nations in the grip of evil ideologies, and the reassembling of those nations under the principles of Democracy. We accomplished great things in Japan, Germany, and in the American South.
However, the first thing we did in all three of those wars was to absolutely obliterate our enemy and cause him to fear us so badly that he completely lost the will to fight. Then we went in, occupied their countries, and rewrote their laws and, in the case of Japan, their state religion.
That is what we should have done in Iraq. Sharia should have been banned. Instead, it is part of the Iraqi national constitution.
Post a Comment