Friday, August 03, 2007
Worst Congress Ever: Part XXXVII
At 3% approval rating on how they have handled the war in Iraq. That makes Bush's meager 24% rating look great.
I guess that 3% are the people that John Murtha and his cronies are speaking to when they begin spouting their blather. BTW - for being such a heavy critic, Murtha sure made sure there were plenty of defense dollars earmarked for his special friends.
Speaking of blather, Barack Obama sure made some ignorant and scary statements concerning the war on terror.
Unfortunately, a Republican presidential hopeful, who doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hell, chose to make even more outrageous remarks.
There are certain aspects of the criticisms against how we are fighting the war on terror to which I agree. First, it should be abundantly obvious that we cannot militarily attack whomever and/or where ever we wish. We cannot spread our military throughout the Middle East or else where. To suggest this and to potentially alienate allies, weak or strong, is irresponsible.
I guess that 3% are the people that John Murtha and his cronies are speaking to when they begin spouting their blather. BTW - for being such a heavy critic, Murtha sure made sure there were plenty of defense dollars earmarked for his special friends.
Speaking of blather, Barack Obama sure made some ignorant and scary statements concerning the war on terror.
"If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will," Obama said, referring to reports that Al-Qaeda had regrouped in Pakistani tribal areas bordering Afghanistan.I wonder what our left wing friends think of this. Certainly doesn't sound like a good plan to extract the U.S. out of the quagmire of war in the Middle East.
"I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges, but let me make this clear: there are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again."
Pakistani Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam told AFP she would not comment as Obama was not president, but added: "These are serious matters and should not be used for point-scoring. Political candidates and commentators should show responsibility."
Unfortunately, a Republican presidential hopeful, who doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hell, chose to make even more outrageous remarks.
Another presidential hopeful, Colorado Republican Tom Tancredo, also came under criticism Friday by a Pakistani official after saying that the best way to deter a nuclear terrorist attack on the United States would be to threaten to retaliate by bombing the holiest Islamic sites of Mecca and Medina.We've had acceptable cooperation from Pakistan in the fight against terrorism so far. We don't need members of the worst Congress in history destroying what relationship we have with Pakistan.
Tancredo spoke at a town hall meeting in Osceola, Iowa on Tuesday.
In Washington, the State Department disavowed Tancredo's remarks, which some diplomats fear could damage U.S. ties with the Muslim world and hurt efforts to counter Islamist extremism.
"It is absolutely outrageous and reprehensible for anyone to suggest attacks on holy sites, whether they are Muslim, Christian, Jewish or those of any other religion," deputy spokesman Tom Casey told reporters, adding that the comments were "absolutely crazy."
In Pakistan's national assembly on Friday, Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Sher Afgan said he would open debate next week on recent American criticism of Pakistan, including Tancredo's remarks.
There are certain aspects of the criticisms against how we are fighting the war on terror to which I agree. First, it should be abundantly obvious that we cannot militarily attack whomever and/or where ever we wish. We cannot spread our military throughout the Middle East or else where. To suggest this and to potentially alienate allies, weak or strong, is irresponsible.
Comments:
<< Home
Well, I disagree with you that Pakistan has given us "acceptable cooperation" in this thing so far (I would choose the term 'walked the razor thin wire between US invasion and internal revolt with moderate success,' but that's just the ol' cynicism talking; I still think they are the most potentially dangerous nation on Earth.), but saying we will invade nations without permission or whoever they are reminds me too much of a certain Republican President who's grip on reality I personally find shaky.
Why the two leading Democratic candidates for President chose to enter into this rhetorical cu-de-sac is confusing at best, and can best be described as somewhere between 'well it worked for Ol' Dubya' and 'well it is muscular on national defense without making the anti-Iraq-War donors angry'.
Which is not a good place to be, IMHO.
Tancredo isn't saying anything any different from what half of right-wing punditry and talk radio have been talking about since 1979.
What do your left wing friends think of this? Well, first of all: New Plan. DADVocate, you're just going to have to run for Congress. Sorry. I know it will be a big inconvenience and stuff, but it has to happen.
Why the two leading Democratic candidates for President chose to enter into this rhetorical cu-de-sac is confusing at best, and can best be described as somewhere between 'well it worked for Ol' Dubya' and 'well it is muscular on national defense without making the anti-Iraq-War donors angry'.
Which is not a good place to be, IMHO.
Tancredo isn't saying anything any different from what half of right-wing punditry and talk radio have been talking about since 1979.
What do your left wing friends think of this? Well, first of all: New Plan. DADVocate, you're just going to have to run for Congress. Sorry. I know it will be a big inconvenience and stuff, but it has to happen.
Pakistan is in a very tough spot. The government is struggling to maintain control. Radical Islam threatens it and is too strong to simply crush in a single blow.
Pakistan's nuclear capability combined with its instability certainly does make it one of the most dangerous nations on Earth. Your description may be more accurate.
It is simple pragmatics that we can't invade every nation on Earth that "threatens" us in some way. We need to work on alliance building and other non-military strategies more. Much of the Middle East has been embroiled in fighting of some sort for decades. To believe we can end this on our present course is unrealistic.
One of our shortfalls in Iraq is that we didn't take into the consideration the cultural differences. They think and believe differently than us on many levels. Approaches that would work in Western cultures won't in their culture.
I'm not sure what the answers are but we need to do much more investigation into finding those answers in the best cultural context to accomplish our goals.
Pakistan's nuclear capability combined with its instability certainly does make it one of the most dangerous nations on Earth. Your description may be more accurate.
It is simple pragmatics that we can't invade every nation on Earth that "threatens" us in some way. We need to work on alliance building and other non-military strategies more. Much of the Middle East has been embroiled in fighting of some sort for decades. To believe we can end this on our present course is unrealistic.
One of our shortfalls in Iraq is that we didn't take into the consideration the cultural differences. They think and believe differently than us on many levels. Approaches that would work in Western cultures won't in their culture.
I'm not sure what the answers are but we need to do much more investigation into finding those answers in the best cultural context to accomplish our goals.
it reminds me of summat, if the opposite to pro is con, and theres progress meaning to advance, what does congress mean?
There is a bright spot - as these do not come often. That of Homeland Security and the Aug 10th Announcement...see http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/releases/pr_1186757867585.shtm .
The good news they are getting the message albiet, late. It may make Bush's rating go 'uptick' 0.005%.
The not so good news - this could have been done at the begining of this Administration.
Lets see if they follow though - On this eveyone sould be from Missouri(show me).
Post a Comment
The good news they are getting the message albiet, late. It may make Bush's rating go 'uptick' 0.005%.
The not so good news - this could have been done at the begining of this Administration.
Lets see if they follow though - On this eveyone sould be from Missouri(show me).
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
