For members of congress who really shouldn't need it.
The U.S. revolutionary war ended in 1783
The U.S. Constitution finally took effect 4 years later in 1787
The Bill of Rights (first ten ammendments) was completed and ratified 4 years later in 1791
This was all done during peace time. Nobody was trying to kill George Washington anymore, There was no "Green Zone" that Thomas Jefferson had to stay in or else he would in peril. Ben Franklin was chillin in Paris!
In the 2000 election, we had a president but maybe we didn't? We had lawsuits and challenges to the electoral process. We were in limbo for months! The news was bad, the political attacks ruthless, we had a sitting president who had been impeached and we had no clear cut replacement because it was tied up in the courts.
So 217 years after the United States was officially recognized as a sovereign nation our federal government was in complete turmoil.
Senator Warner should realize that this kind of historical change doesn't happen over night.
10 comments:
So are you saying that Rome (Georgia) wasnt built in a day?
To see how opportunistic these poll dancers are look no further than the emotional ploy used every year to "bring the troops home by Christmas" once again lacking historical perspective that perhaps our greatest military victory occured at that time during the Battle of Trenton, not to mention being blatantly discriminatory to jews, atheists and other pagans / heathens.
call me stupid (again), but comparing our revolutionary war and our growth as a nation to iraq doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
our republic grew and developed from within. we withstood the "hard times" because we, ultimately, we united as a people who were driven to control our own destiny. there was no outside force or nation setting our goals or setting time limits to our democracy. we chose democracy and we refined and developed it.
of course it's in our best interest for iraq to be safe and secure as a democratic state. but if they aren't willing to fight for it, then what can we do. we can't force it down their throats.
Yet you have no problem with the constant comparisons to Vietnam so as to put a negative spin on the war?
However your point that deocracy must be earned is valid and the reason that I have never been a fan of "democratization" as a reason for this war and while stability in Iraq is of the greatest concern to our interests, Im not so certain that it was the best course of action to acheive said goal.
That being said, Iraq is now a sovereign nation and an ally in the war defending ourselves from terrorism, so I will abide by their purple fingered wishes.
... for now.
anita, i don't even get your point.
When you say we united as a people do you mean we had free elections that the majority of the people voted in? Like in Iraq
When you say there was no outside force or nation setting our goals or time limits for our democracy do you mean to agree with me that we shouldn't be setting time tables for our new ally just like France didn't set any for us even though they were here fighting and dying with us?
You say that they're not willing to fight and die for democracy yet they are fighting and dying EVERY DAY. They voted, with purple fingers, under the threat of DEATH! Who forced them to come out and vote by the MILLIONS? MULTIPLE TIMES NOW?
The Iraqi's chose democracy, they wrote and are developing their constitution, they are feeling their way just like we did except that they're still in a war zone and we were not so their task is a little bit more difficult wouldn't you say?
This is my point about historical perspective. You should get some.
As for the Revolutionary War that was our country. We were not occupying another country.
The surge is not working. No doubt there are temporary improvements in security in the parts of Iraq that have increased troop levels.
The surge also cannot be sustained much longer without serious damage to our military.
The surge was supposed to give the Iraqis more time for political reconciliation. The political situation is worsening.
The only positive development is that Bush has recognized that Iraq is his Vietnam. The rest of us recognized that fact some time ago.
But go ahead, call me a traitor and repeat some mindless slogans.
I hope i cleared that up for you Anita.
sorry, rhino, i don't agree with you. i think your historical perspective is a little off-kilter.
and, this whole viet nam comparison is another red herring. i never said it was like viet nam. but, as dick cheney himself predicted in 1994, iraq has become a quagmire.
Well Im glad you bring that up Anita although once again your historical perspective is lacking, Cheney was as right then as he is now, and your point should put the kibosh on the erroneous claim from the left of Bush's RUSH TO WAR.
Saddam had invaded a neighboring country, we thwarted said plans and acheived a decisive military victory. Regime change is no small task and obviously a last resort not to be taken lightly so sanctions were put into place, of which through the aid of a complicit UN profiting from perhaps the greatest global scandal ever, Saddam had continually violated resulting in further miltitary action at the orders of then President Clinton and only after continued violations of said sanctions was miltary action taken by sitting President Bush after receiving unamimous approval by the UN as well as overwhelming support from the US Congress.
The cause for this war is Saddams fault, get that through your head. The tactical errors are Bush and Rumsfeld, which I readily admit, but as we are fighting an enemy unlike any before that was to be expected and not a reason to surrender.
I am glad that the strategies that I put forth from the get go are now being implement via the "surge" and by all accounts they seem to be working.
More importantly since no major candidate for President is going to withdraw from Iraq and Congress has proven they lack the sack to do so, why cant we all used to the fact that we will be there for a while and maybe I know this is a stretch but root for victory.
As far a being a quagmire, well what war hasnt been? Cheney used it realistically in 94 your side use it as catchphrase and an excuse for surrender today.
giggidy giggidy
Um, the UN did not support military action, much less unanimously. The UN Inspectors could not find WMDs, did not think there were WMDs, and wanted to continue the inspections. You can't just make shit up.
Who exactly is the enemy in Iraq? The small number of Al Qaeda? The Sunni insurgents we are now arming? The Shiite militias we are now fighting, although they are associated with the government we support (although not as strongly as Iran does)?
Good points Donkey.
keep up the good work
Post a Comment