Re: Cheney Blunder Lauded Anti-Bush Web Site
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBank_Hank
Vid I have always thought of you as fairly objective until that post. I can’t honestly believe that you would think that.
For crying out loud Edwards couldn’t even answer that question last night.
And you guys have the never to call me one sided.
So now you are calling my stance unobjective...please tell me what Kerry said right before the "global test" bit.
I am objective, i took the whole statement into account, not just the global test.....
here are kerrys words
Quote:
No president, through all of American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to preempt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America. But if and when you do it, Jim, you've got to do in a way that passes the test—that passes the global test—where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing, and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.
Here we have our own secretary of state who's had to apologize to the world for the presentation he made to the United Nations. I mean, we can remember when President Kennedy, in the Cuban missile crisis, sent his secretary of state to Paris to meet with [French President Charles] de Gaulle, and in the middle of the discussion to tell them about the missiles in Cuba, [the secretary of state] said, "Here, let me show you the photos." And de Gaulle waved them off, and said, "No, no, no, no. The word of the president of the United States is good enough for me." How many leaders in the world today would respond to us, as a result of what we've done, in that way?
he states if and when we take action we do it in a way that passes the global test. please say where he said i would ask first.
It's clear from Kerry's first sentence that the "global test" doesn't prevent unilateral action to protect ourselves. Notice what else Kerry says. The test includes convincing "your countrymen" that your reasons are clear and sound. Kerry isn't just talking about satisfying France. He's talking about satisfying Louisiana. He's talking about you.
Edwards did answer the question but just in case you missed it with those fingers in your ears, here is Edwards response.
Quote:
What he's saying is we're going to go back to the proud tradition of the United States of America and presidents of the United States of America for the last 50 to 75 years.
First, we're going to actually tell the American people the truth. We're going to tell them the truth about what's happening.
We're not going to suggest to them that things are going well in Iraq or anyplace else when, in fact, they're not.
We're going to make sure that the American people know the truth about why we are using force and what the explanation for it is.
And it's not just the American people. We're also going to make sure that we tell the world the truth.
Because the reality is, for America to lead, for America to do what it's done for 50 years before this president and vice president came into office, it is critical that we be credible.
It is critical that they believe that when America takes action, they can trust what we're doing, what we say, what we say at the United Nations, what we say in direct conversations with leaders of the world -- of other countries.
They need to know that the credibility of the United States is always good, because they will not follow us without that.
I doubt you will agree :)
Re: Cheney Blunder Lauded Anti-Bush Web Site
Quote:
But if and when you do it, Jim, you've got to do in a way that passes the test—that passes the global test—
I think the exact opposite, being this:
You do not have to do it in a way that passes the test--that passes the global test.
Here's why:
if the threat to American people (which is under debate in Iraq; I understand, but this is hypothetical) is dangerous, I global test should have No Bearing Whatsoever on "the way" we act.
Quote:
and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.
Proving to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons has no bearing whatsoever on how America acts. It's a nice plus (that is almost never achieved, by the way, if actions are unilateral), but it has No weight in any decision to protect the American people.
The idea that can't get through Kerry's rather large skull is that other countries have their own interests at heart; not American interests. Thus it is of no consequence if they do not agree on our action because their decision is not concerning protecting the American People, it is concerning their own people and interests.
:)
Re: Cheney Blunder Lauded Anti-Bush Web Site
speaking of factchecking....
My favorite Cheney quote:
"Your hometown newspaper has taken to calling you "Senator Gone." You've got one of the worst attendance records in the United States Senate.
Now, in my capacity as vice president, I am the president of Senate, the presiding officer. I'm up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they're in session.
The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight."
two problems with this:
1. They've been photographed and videotaped together several times in the past, including sessions in the Senate.
2. Cheney seldom attends on those "Tuesdays" that he refers to - less than half the sessions.
still, it's a pretty good soundbite and the GOP is running with it.
Re: Cheney Blunder Lauded Anti-Bush Web Site
Quote:
Originally Posted by spinningfreemanny
I think the exact opposite, being this:
You do not have to do it in a way that passes the test--that passes the global test.
Here's why:
if the threat to American people (which is under debate in Iraq; I understand, but this is hypothetical) is dangerous, I global test should have No Bearing Whatsoever on "the way" we act.
Proving to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons has no bearing whatsoever on how America acts. It's a nice plus (that is almost never achieved, by the way, if actions are unilateral), but it has No weight in any decision to protect the American people.
The idea that can't get through Kerry's rather large skull is that other countries have their own interests at heart; not American interests. Thus it is of no consequence if they do not agree on our action because their decision is not concerning protecting the American People, it is concerning their own people and interests.
:)
Manny
that's clutching at straws.
so you think it's ok for the USA to attack another nation for "suspect" reasons ? If a country is a "genuine threat" why wouldn't it be considered just?
You think that America has the right to invade any nation without justification?
Can i take it that you feel that other countries should have the same rights of action? Can i take it that Palestine doesn't have to justify itself? can i take it that Iran doesn't have to justify itself? can i take it that Russia doesn't have to justify itself..... sudan?.... SADDAM?....any country that isn't a democracy?....or just the USA?
And you think we are a target because we are "christians":rolleyes:
So please explain to me how that makes the world....not just "your world"...everyone elses world safer?
Re: Cheney Blunder Lauded Anti-Bush Web Site
Global: Of or involving the entire earth; worldwide.
Test: A procedure for critical evaluation; a means of determining the presence, quality, or truth of something; a trial: a test of one's eyesight; subjecting a hypothesis to a test; a test of an athlete's endurance.
Source
How much more clearly can I illustrate this to you? You among others like to like to accuse me of spinning but in this case its you who is making me dizzy.
Re: Cheney Blunder Lauded Anti-Bush Web Site
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBank_Hank
Global: Of or involving the entire earth; worldwide.
Test: A procedure for critical evaluation; a means of determining the presence, quality, or truth of something; a trial: a test of one's eyesight; subjecting a hypothesis to a test; a test of an athlete's endurance.
Source
How much more clearly can I illustrate this to you? You among others like to like to accuse me of spinning but in this case its you who is making me dizzy.
Ok how much clearly can i point out...read what he said right before
Quote:
No president, through all of American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to preempt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America.
Where did he say he would ask first?
Re: Cheney Blunder Lauded Anti-Bush Web Site
I’m sorry for a minuet there I thought that you could actually see how the whole thing is a contradiction in itself.
Lets look at the whole thing again shall we.
Quote:
No president, through all of American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to preempt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America.
Ok here he says he’s going to protect our country from a threat and would do what it takes to take care of the problem. That’s ok. But then we have this:
Quote:
But if and when you do it, Jim, you've got to do in a way that passes the test—that passes the global test—where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you're doing what you're doing, and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.
Heres where the problem comes in. Only after he checks with the world to see if its ok with them and passes their test will we do something.
Global: Of or involving the entire earth; worldwide.
Test: A procedure for critical evaluation; a means of determining the presence, quality, or truth of something; a trial: a test of one's eyesight; subjecting a hypothesis to a test; a test of an athlete's endurance.
I hate the new quote system.
Re: Cheney Blunder Lauded Anti-Bush Web Site
Quote:
Originally Posted by B.Helto
speaking of factchecking....
My favorite Cheney quote:
"Your hometown newspaper has taken to calling you "Senator Gone." You've got one of the worst attendance records in the United States Senate.
Now, in my capacity as vice president, I am the president of Senate, the presiding officer. I'm up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they're in session.
The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight."
two problems with this:
1. They've been photographed and videotaped together several times in the past, including sessions in the Senate.
2. Cheney seldom attends on those "Tuesdays" that he refers to - less than half the sessions.
still, it's a pretty good soundbite and the GOP is running with it.
Part of the reason I said Cheney won the debate....
On facts he was seriously shitty but facts don't necessarily win debates.
It's all about public perception.
Re: Cheney Blunder Lauded Anti-Bush Web Site
Again i ask you to point out where he says he would ask first.
Passing the test means doing things in a manner that can be seen as just. at no point does it say it means we have to get permission first.
I am looking at what he said...not what the spin doctors are saying he said.
Are you happy for the USA to do things for illigitimate reasons?
If Bush had said it we would no doubt be hearing you praise this "global leader" showing the way.
I am not taking a side with kerry on Iraq. I agree we him that we went in so we have to deal with it. I agree it was the wrong war/time/place. But i disagree with him when he says he would have gone in...even though he says he would have done it differently.
Re: Cheney Blunder Lauded Anti-Bush Web Site
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBank_Hank
I’m sorry for a minuet there I thought that you could actually see how the whole thing is a contradiction in itself.
Lets look at the whole thing again shall we.
Ok here he says he’s going to protect our country from a threat and would do what it takes to take care of the problem. That’s ok. But then we have this:
Heres where the problem comes in. Only after he checks with the world to see if its ok with them and passes their test will we do something.
Global: Of or involving the entire earth; worldwide.
Test: A procedure for critical evaluation; a means of determining the presence, quality, or truth of something; a trial: a test of one's eyesight; subjecting a hypothesis to a test; a test of an athlete's endurance.
I hate the new quote system.
Come on man.
What President won't be for security in America? Some of you are sprouting bullshit.
Dismissing Kerry saying that he will get an "ok" from all the other countries is idiotic. Your President fucked up in major way and your failure to acknowledge this makes you seem more idiotic than the President. He even knows he fucked up. I can see his reason for not saying so, what's yours.
U.S. Ambassador Paul Bremmer says he fucked up.
U.S. Inspector Duelfer says he fucked up.
It's head-out-your-ass time.
