God, was I wrong about Ron Paul. After the Fox Debates (which polls on the Fox web site show that he won!) and this interview with Bill Maher, my view of him has launched him to second best...just behind Our Mayor...with the highest possible B.
Someone had to say it. Our dicking around in Middle Eastern affairs, by both Democrat and Republican administrations, was one of the causes of 9-11. Sorry to burst your bubble out there, folks, who believe that the good ol US of A is just this weepy little innocent babe in the woods who couldn't have possibly done anything wrong...please go buy a clue...but it's true.
Now's the part where all of you call me and Ron Paul "America Haters."
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Presidential Profiles Redux
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
All of you? Not me, sir. You are a patriot and so is Ron Paul. It's about time a real Republican stepped up and spoke the truth.
Check this out!
http://infowars.com/articles/us/paul_ron_video_wins_debate_despite_pundits.htm
I'm glad you mentioned "both Democrat and Republican administrations." The first Bush did not bring the war to closure, leaving things set for Clinton to torture the country with bombing and especially forced trade isolation, like a cat playing with a mouse.
Yeah, I've been on a real anti-Democrat kick lately. Check out tomorrow's post. I think most Democrats are completely worthless and proving be extraordinarily unimpressive.
Mark, I'm not sure how you can like both Ron Paul and Rudy Giuliani. Paul basically said that Giuliani is an empty gasbag who doesn't know anything about terrorism or history.
The United States didn't "ask" for 9/11, but we certainly did plenty of cynical, self-serving things that caused Muslims to dislike us: overthrowing the shah in 50s, backing bin Laden and the Taliban in Afghanistan against the Soviets, promoting Islamic fundamentalism in the Soviet Union, publicly backing Saddam Hussein against the Iranians while at the same time selling weapons illegally to the ayatollahs, etc.
There is plenty of blame to go around, but the worst decisions were made by Eisenhower with the shah, and Reagan's backing of Saddam, the Taliban, and bin Laden. Because of its oil wealth, the Middle East has been a much more attractive playground for the Republicans than the Democrats.
On the whole, Democratic presidents have promoted peace in the Middle East (Carter and Clinton), while Republicans have promoted revolution and war (Eisenhower, Reagan, Bush and Bush). Nixon tried a little but was too wound up in Viet Nam to make any headway.
The only blame Republicans and Democrats share over the Middle East is their blind support for Israel. We cannot abandon Israel, but we need to publicly slap them upside the head for something -- anything -- to demonstrate to the Muslims that we can be a neutral party interested only in a peaceful resolution. Right now we just look like cheerleaders for Shin Bet.
Regardless of party, unless our next president acknowledges the errors of our previous foreign policy and takes action to correct it, we are going to be under siege until Middle East oil runs out. At that point, the Republicans and their big oil backers will lose interest and finally stop meddling with the Muslims.
Which reminds me of one of the stupidest things that George Bush ever said, but no one ever picked up on: "Do you want the terrorists be control the oil in 50 years?" There won't be any oil in the Middle East in 50 years -- we'll have burned it all up long before then.
In the long run this "clash of cultures" will peter out because we will have no more interest in the Middle East. We will abandon it, and they sink back into the arid oblivion they were in before oil became king.
Post a Comment