G.W. Bush's Idealism is Winning the World

[Genuine Realist]

It's amazing that the CIA is still around. They cause more trouble than they're worth and they're wrong about everything.

Oh, yeah, right. Seriously, do any of you who find my totally vanilla posts remember anything about the Cold War?

The CIA does ok on non-politicized fronts, given the (appropriate) constraints US society imposes on it. On the very worst day the CIA ever had, compared to the GPU and the KGB on their best, they were like tenderfoot boy scouts.

Do you think I had these views all my life? During the 60's to 80's, I had the conventional faults-on-both-sides stuff. It was only after the collapse, when all of the viciousness came to light, that my attitudes changed. Reagan couldn't know just how evil an empire it was, when he spoke, but his instincts turned out to be correct.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Oh, yeah, right. Seriously, do any of you who find my totally vanilla posts remember anything about the Cold War?

The CIA does ok on non-politicized fronts, given the (appropriate) constraints US society imposes on it. On the very worst day the CIA ever had, compared to the GPU and the KGB on their best, they were like tenderfoot boy scouts.

Do you think I had these views all my life? During the 60's to 80's, I had the conventional faults-on-both-sides stuff. It was only after the collapse, when all of the viciousness came to light, that my attitudes changed. Reagan couldn't know just how evil an empire it was, when he spoke, but his instincts turned out to be correct.

Even if they did, *any* another (intelligence) agency could do that.

But no, I don't think that you had your views all your life, and even if you did, that's irrelevant. Besides, I wasn't criticizing your views.

 

[Luminous]

You weren't attacked personally, friend. What I did was try to thin out that enormous herd of sacred cows you have mooing in your back yard. But this call for reinforcements is kinda interesting. Safety in numbers, eh, what?

did you know that there is a difference between moscow and east-berlin? east-berliners were likely a bunch of conquered Nazis in the eyes of the Soviets.
Germany gave alot of strive to Russia because of its Nazi tretchery.

 

[Genuine Realist]

'Treachery' is spelled as so.

Lenin's and then Stalin's depredations began in Russia and countries within the Russian sphere of influence. Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovoakia, Rumania, and others were subject to the same totalitarian rule, in addition to East Germany. Most of these countries were enemies of the Third Reich.

Try to take in the film 'Katyn' some time. It's only one item - the literature is huge - but it is a terrific movie, by the great Andres Wajda, then 80. It was made in 2007. It's a pretty good, if sickening, depiction of the way the Soviets did real politik back then. You'll find it illuminating.

 

[Luminous]

'Treachery' is spelled as so.

thanks. when in rome. i find it amazing that you understood what word i actually wrote. i guess the spelling functioned for its purpose in the end.

Lenin's and then Stalin's depredations began in Russia and countries within the Russian sphere of influence. Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovoakia, Rumania, and others were subject to the same totalitarian rule, in addition to East Germany. Most of these countries were enemies of the Third Reich.

yes very true. I wonder why Lenin and Stalin decided to be so totalitarian...i assume it was because the conservatives within their country were so extremely annoying that they felt they needed to force them a little; although i was talking about the likely degraded condition of east berlin as opposed to moscow.

Try to take in the film 'Katyn' some time. It's only one item - the literature is huge - but it is a terrific movie, by the great Andres Wajda, then 80. It was made in 2007. It's a pretty good, if sickening, depiction of the way the Soviets did real politik back then. You'll find it illuminating.

a film? what can you learn from a film other than one specific narrative being expressed by a business man? I'm affraid Russians were likely trying to copy the conservative model of political power. would it have made sense for the soviets to have been naive pushovers like liberals are in America? probably not.

 

[ninerbuff]

BOTH Bushes???? Can't anyone here remember a timeline???

OBL did not 'exist' as a terrorist when Bush I left office in 1992. He was ensconced in Afghanistan when Bush II took office in 2000. The responsibility fell on the guy in between - what was his name again?

Wrong. Bin Laden had been forming his terrorist network well before Bush 1 left office.

When did bin Laden become involved with Afghanistan?

During the 1979-89 war against the Soviets. Bin Laden raised money and supplied heavy machinery for the anticommunist mujahadeen, or holy warriors, fighting the Soviet invasion. He also provided financing for the so-called Services Office, which recruited and trained a brigade of foreign Muslim militants that fought alongside the Afghan mujahadeen.

How did bin Laden found al-Qaeda?

Once the Afghan resistance—financed by the Saudis and the United States—began to wear down the Soviet army, bin Laden looked to extend the holy war beyond Afghanistan. Bin Laden forged an alliance with radical Islamist groups in Egypt and elsewhere, organizing al-Qaeda in 1988.

Wasn’t bin Laden on America’s side in Afghanistan in the 1980s?

Yes and no. The United States and bin Laden supported the Afghan resistance, but for different reasons. Containing Communism was the U.S. government's top priority. It gave support to the mujahadeen through the Pakistani ISI military intelligence service, which decided how to apportion aid among resistance groups. Bin Laden wanted to expel the atheist Soviets and install a fundamentalist Islamic regime. While CIA case officers knew of bin Laden's existence, the U.S. had no direct ties to his operations.

When did bin Laden begin to consider the United States his enemy?

In the 1980s, bin Laden disdained America for its alliances with Israel and moderate Muslim states, but it was the Gulf crisis that crystallized his hatred. When Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, bin Laden wanted Arab veterans of the Afghan war to help the Saudi army defend Saudi Arabia. He saw the arrival of American troops to confront Saddam—and the continued U.S. military presence in the Gulf after the war—as a violation of the sanctity of Muslim territory.



Profile: Osama bin Laden - Council on Foreign Relations

That said, planning for the Bay of Pigs was well under way when Kennedy took office. His failure was in believing CIA estimates of popular discontent in Cuba, which proved to be disastrously overstated.

Lol, so he should have went there and did a poll? Why have a CIA if they fail at intelligence?

 

[Genuine Realist]

Wrong. Bin Laden had been forming his terrorist network well before Bush 1 left office.

Sorry, but that simply misses the point. OBL had undertaken no terrorist acts before Bush I left office. 'Forming a network' is absolutely meaningless in terms of an actionable agenda. Since Qutb began writing in 1947, there's been a ton of Fundamentalist theorizing and interconnecting, as to which the US neither could - nor should - respond. I think you'd be one of the first to cry foul.

OBL's participation in the first WTC bombing in 1993, however, was more than mere theorizing. That was on Clinton's watch.

 

[Genuine Realist]

Who are you talking to?

The kid that misspelled treachery.

But you'd enjoy 'Katyn' too.

 

[ninerbuff]

Sorry, but that simply misses the point. OBL had undertaken no terrorist acts before Bush I left office. 'Forming a network' is absolutely meaningless in terms of an actionable agenda. Since Qutb began writing in 1947, there's been a ton of Fundamentalist theorizing and interconnecting, as to which the US neither could - nor should - respond. I think you'd be one of the first to cry foul.

OBL's participation in the first WTC bombing in 1993, however, was more than mere theorizing. That was on Clinton's watch.

I don't let Clinton off the hook either, but to say that forming a terrorist network is meaningless....guess that's why we have a homeland security force now. Hindsight better than foresight? But I guess unless we get attacked, guys like Bin Laden will sit on the back burner. Wouldn't it make sense to be proactive than reactive? We may be more proactive now, but it's because we had to get attacked to do it.

 

[tumbleweed41]

If Obama knew all this about Clapper,why did he make Clapper the head of his intelligence? Either way the mistake of intelligences relates back to Obama's judgment.

And Bush's.

See how that works?

 

[tumbleweed41]

The first thing JFK did was to freeze his balls at the Bay of Pigs. That freeze betrayed the Cuban people and set the stage for the USSR to arm Cuba with nukes. JFK's crowdedness created his own crisis forced him to show any balls at all.

Kind off like Reagan creating our current crisis?

 

[Reverend Rick]

And Bush's.

See how that works?

You make a fair an valid point.

 

[tumbleweed41]

You make a fair an valid point.

A rulers friends judge him by his achievements, his detractors by the means he used to attain them.

Hero-worship is very one sided.

 

[Genuine Realist]

The network that OBL formed in the 80's, to the extent it can even be called that, wasn't a terrorist network at the time. It had the general goal of 'lifting the word of God', but its specific activity was directed at supporting the mujahideen in Afghanistan against the Soviets.

After Desert Storm, when OBL denounced the presence of US troops on Saudi soil. (The troops were there at Saudi invitation because of the war.) OBL was banished to Sudan and began to undertake terrorist planning. This was in the last few months of Bush I's term.

OBL hadn't done anything anti-Western until then, but talk. There was nothing for Bush I to respond to, unless you believe in political assassination for protest, which I sure don't.

 

[Debunker]

You make a fair an valid point.

Yes he does. The fact is, to blame liberals or conservatives for the problems in this world is reactionary and poor judgment. Terrorism, for example, exist not because anything either of these groups committed but it comes from the philosophies of the terrorist themselves. Iran hates Obama as much as they hated Bush.

But, that being said, I still maintain that American idealism is strongly at work in the modern world today.

 

[Debunker]

A rulers friends judge him by his achievements, his detractors by the means he used to attain them.

Hero-worship is very one sided.

I agree with Rev. Rick that you make a valid point but do you also miss the valid point that the liberal journalist's condemnation of Bush does not come from fact but a strong prejudice of political biases? You speak of the "means he used to attain them" but when GWB began his journey into Iraq, he had the almost unanimous support of all Democrats and liberals. It was a planned strategy to make the war in Iraq a Republican war so the Democrats could take the government. Although the people understood this strategy and re-elected Bush to a second term, The liberal press and many politicians still like to blame GWB for all of their political failures. Obama often refers to the alleged failures of Bush to explain his failures.

 

[Jacksnyte]

I agree with Rev. Rick that you make a valid point but do you also miss the valid point that the liberal journalist's condemnation of Bush does not come from fact but a strong prejudice of political biases? You speak of the "means he used to attain them" but when GWB began his journey into Iraq, he had the almost unanimous support of all Democrats and liberals. It was a planned strategy to make the war in Iraq a Republican war so the Democrats could take the government. Although the people understood this strategy and re-elected Bush to a second term, The liberal press and many politicians still like to blame GWB for all of their political failures. Obama often refers to the alleged failures of Bush to explain his failures.

You mean the "liberal press" as in Fox News?
Give me a break! You don't think that the press was in GWB's pocket? If you watch some news from sources outside the US, you can get a less biased look at what is going on! Oh, and by the way, the "people" did not re-elect him to a second term. It has been proven that it was rigged(have you forgotten about the ballots in Florida?).

 

[Reverend Rick]

Who could forget the hanging chads?

 

[tumbleweed41]

I agree with Rev. Rick that you make a valid point but do you also miss the valid point that the liberal journalist's condemnation of Bush does not come from fact but a strong prejudice of political biases? You speak of the "means he used to attain them" but when GWB began his journey into Iraq, he had the almost unanimous support of all Democrats and liberals. It was a planned strategy to make the war in Iraq a Republican war so the Democrats could take the government. Although the people understood this strategy and re-elected Bush to a second term, The liberal press and many politicians still like to blame GWB for all of their political failures. Obama often refers to the alleged failures of Bush to explain his failures.

Yes, the means he used to attain them. I am not talking about the press or conspiracy theories against the so called "liberal press".
I am talking about reality.
I am not here to defend Obama. I do believe he is better that the alternative, however he does not represent all Liberal ideals.

The point I am trying to make is that you, and other hero worshipers, Conservative or Liberal, seem to ignore the "means" and "failures" and focus only on the "achievements".

This is disingenuous and dishonest.

 

[McBell]

I won the argument

Only in your own mind.
but that if that is good enough for you, who am I to argue?