President Bush...history...and terrorism
57Those who do not know history are bound to repeat it.
This is a quote that I have heard many times ... and I always somehow related it to knowing the history of the World Wars .... of the fall of the Roman Empire ... you know... old history.
I realize now it applies to all history ... even 9/11.
As we try to figure a way how to prevent an incident like the one at Virginia Tech from ever happening again ... anywhere .... we must have forgotten about 9/11.
Why else would so many people be so against the war on terrorism that our President took upon himself to fight for the sake of the security of this country? He has taken that on his shoulders because he is our commander in chief and knows we are not capable of doing it ourselves. He continues on that path not allowing what is being thrown at him from every direction to divert him.
He cares not about what is written about him... he cares not about polls. He cares about what will happen here on our streets should we not win this war.
Who do you think will be blamed .. if... when he leaves office all of this battle is forgotten... thrown aside.... run away from... and the next terrorist attack takes place .... again on our shores? Of course that will happen if we give up the fight.
Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it.
Remember 9/11. It was real.
|
A People's History of the United States: 1492 to Present (P.S.)
Price: $10.66
List Price: $18.95 |
|
The History of Love: A Novel
Price: $3.95
List Price: $13.95 |
|
Cracking the AP World History Exam, 2008 Edition (College Test Prep)
Price: $11.12
List Price: $18.00 |
|
Cracking the AP U.S. History Exam, 2008 Edition (College Test Prep)
Price: $11.15
List Price: $18.00 |
|
The Secret History
Price: $8.53
List Price: $14.95 |
|
Harry, A History: The True Story of a Boy Wizard, His Fans, and Life Inside the Harry Potter Phenomenon
Price: $10.88
List Price: $16.00 |
|
A Brief History of Time
Price: $7.25
List Price: $18.00 |
|
Case Histories: A Novel
Price: $4.03
List Price: $7.99 |
Share it! — Rate it: up down [flag this hub]
Who do you believe we are fighting in Iraq? Do you really believe it is only a coincidence we have not had any attacks on our shores since our President took the fight to them?
Those are two completely separate issues.
The government HAS done a good job of preventing attacks on our country.
Choosing to attack Iraq was NOT part of making our country more secure. It was a mistake, it cost lots and lots of money and lives, and did NOT help make us more secure.
I would say we've been fortunate to enjoy security in the U.S. DESPITE the war against Iraq.
How has our government prevented these attacks and who do you believe we are fighting in Iraq ..... and in Afghanistan?
Oh, I don't know...maybe actually CHECKING what people are bringing on flights (I don't think box cutters are getting on board anymore), being VIGILANT at our BORDERS.
Since there were no terrorists planning to attack the US in Iraq, I don't know who we're fighting. New enemies? People we armed about 20 years ago?
Did I mention Afghanistan? Almost no one complained about the US attacking Afghanistan and deposing the Taliban. The problem was overreach, supported by "dittoheads" who think questioning our own leadership is an act of treason (something I think the Taleban would agree with).
Do you believe our airport security and border checks are the only things that have stopped el Qaida here in the U.S.? How many top members of el Qaida were killed in Iraq ... and why were they there? Do you think el Qaida and Taliban are very closely aligned? Remember 9/11.
1. Iraq and Afghanistan are 2 different countries. They don't speak the same language and Afghans are not Arab.
2. The Taleban were associated with al-Qaeda. The Taleban were in Afghanistan.
3. The Taleban had nothing to do with Iraq.
4. Al-Qaeda was just as linked with Iraq before the war as any other assorted Muslim country (i.e. minimal).
5. The war in Iraq has NOT stopped Al-Qaeda attacks in the U.S.
Who are we fighting in Iraq? Do you believe it is mere coincidence we have not been attacked since 9/11 when President Bush took the fight to the terrorists? Don't forget how many times we were attacked before 9/11. What were the top el Qaida members doing in Iraq?
Iraq under Saddam Hussein had zero connection to 9-11. Our reckless, costly and failed invasion has increased the danger of terrorism to the U.S. here at home and around the world.
When you are reviewing your history, take a look at Vietnam which was another giant mistake.
Nothing I say will change things .. or change you... just as nothing you say will change me. We are both looking at the same reality... seeing it as two differnt truths. There is only one truth.
Time will be the judge of the truth that is today. Let's hope we are able to live with it in the future.
Well, if you are going to take a position that your mind cannot be changed, there really is no point in talking to you, is there? The discussion is important if it offers some insight we can all learn from. I know you are not loking at the same reality as I am, or most of the other posters here because you don't seem to be very aware of the basic news that's been reported for over 5 years now.
My mind has always been open to change. I have come to that point where I know what I see is the truth and once you arrive there .. there can be no change. It really is as I said.. an amazing thing.. because of course there is only one reality in any situation in any given moment in time. It is all a matter of how open and free minded a person really is if he is ever able to really come to see the real truth. It takes a lot of soul searching and mind wracking to get there. In the process every human influence is stripped away ... finally allowing the truth to stand stark naked ahead... where you can no longer doubt it. The basic news as I have heard it for more than five years now has been becoming as onesided as anything I have ever heard and that is what set me off wondering. I have listened to our President be maligned over and over again... yet I never heard a bad word come from him about anyone or anything. To me..that showed class. Now I have been wondering if the truth that I am seeing or hearing in those news reports is true.. that "most Americans" agree with what the news reports say ... about the war, socialized health insurance, global warming, terrorist threat, equal distribution of wealth... all of it. The number of responses here far from prove that to be true. Also... the truth as I have come to see it? The Iraq war has everything to do with our security. It is not about freeing the Iraqi people.... it is about building a stronghold against the terrorists with the freedom for the Iraqis being a very big added bonus for them.
Iraq was never a threat to our security. It had no weapons of mass destruction and had no reason to harm the United States. Our invasion of Iraq has fueled terroism throughout the Middle East and created a recruiting and training ground for terrorists where there was none before. Those are the facts.
"Winning, however you define it, is not in the cards in Iraq. Whatever the outcome in Iraq, terrorism will continue to be a threat to the United States here and to our embassies and corporations in many other countries. For the most part, this threat cannot be overcome with military action. Controlling it will require better intelligence and counter-intelligence and improved cooperation among all nations. "War on terror" was a poor choice of words for this effort because it led to a mistaken focus on military action and neglect of other more effective measures.
George Bush's invasion of Iraq is the worst error by a President in the history of the country. Moreover he compounded the mistake by cutting taxes when he should have increased them to pay for the war and running up a huge debt which our grand children will be paying off.
Here's what William F. Buckley, founder of the conservative magazine "Weekly Standard" has to say about the war in Iraq and the Bush administration--http://www.townhall.com/columnists/WilliamFBuckley
Time... history... will tell the story .... won't it?
It's pretty clear already. Bush is a near total failure. Now the economy is crashing as a result of his failed economic policies--cut taxes and spend like there's no tomorrow.
"A moment I've been dreading. George brought his ne're-do-well son around this morning and asked me to find the kid a job. Not the political one who lives in Florida ; the one who hangs around here all the time looking shiftless. This so-called kid is already almost 40 and has never had a real job. Maybe I'll call Kinsley over at The New Republic and see if they'll hire him as a contributing editor or something. That looks like easy work." From the REAGAN DIARIES…this entry is dated May 17, 1986.
NOTE: The Ronald Reagan quote about the young George W. Bush which is circulating in cyberspace is a fake. The quote actually came from an article by Michael Kinsley in the New Republic in which Kinsley imagined what Reagan's reaction to Bush would have been. However, the quote does have quite a ring of truth to it!
Oh Ralph.. no matter how hard you try... you can't win. Kinsley and REagan?????
I went to the library and read the Kinsley article. It was pretty clever. Apparently Reagan did say that he had lunch with David Brinkley, Meg Greenfield and Kinsley, in "The Reagan Diaries," edited by historian, Douglas Brinkley. Kinsley said he never had lunch at the White House with Reagan but he wrote the humorous column using his imagination to come up with some of the things Reagan might have said. Apparently Reagan mistook Michael Kinsley for Charles Krauthamer, conservative columnist for the Washington Post, who was actually the third guest at the lunch with Reagan. Anyway the whole thing is pretty funny. And it's completely plausible, although he didn't, that Reagan could have made the unkind remarks about the young wastrel, Bush.
Those who do not remember history are bound to repeat it, remember that some of the greatest military losses came about because battling nations were spread so thin that they had to hire mercenaries. Ever heard of Blackwater?
I was mildly in favor of the incursion into Iraq, though this zeal was based on false assumptions provided by our government. At the very least we cannot afford this war. We're the only country in the world that thinks it can! The time to go is soon . . . Please read my hubs.
Kosmo
At the very least ... we could not afford not to have this war. 9/11 was not a figment of anyone's imagination... as were none of the bombings before that when Clinton was President. President Bush's leadership has kept us safe.. kept the bombings out of our streets. His decision to fight this war on terror ... how could it have been wrong? I will never understand you who think it has been .. and would bow out. Do you really think the terrorists have bowed out? Do you think they may be listening to all the ranting and raving about us getting out of this war.. just biding their time till the right President comes along who will sympathize with them and get us out.. saying all we must do is "talk" to our enemies???? Should that happen.. how long do you think it would be before there is another 9/11? The leftist thinking is mind boggling.
Oh My! I guess you were and are out there in Iraq and Afghanistan fighting w/ the U.S. military AND the NATO Armies, arent you? And you know EXACTLY what goes on. If history repeats itself and the Roman Empire is what you referred to, guess what? The Roman Empire FELL as with any other Empire that came and went. You are searching and claiming the TRUTH?? Well hear from troops who are fighting the war and know why they are there!! Not that it matters all that much b/c troops are being paid to do their job and fulfill a contractual agreement with the government. You do not know what you are being protective of.
Alinka.. thanks for reading my hub... but you should read it again. You didn't even get close to the point of it.
working
Kathy says:
18 months ago
How was attacking Iraq a wise move in the war against terrorism?
How was attacking Iraq in any way related to 9/11? That's a canard we have to do away with, over 5 years later.
I think Bush is concerned with saving face and making himself look resolved, when he clearly hasn't backed that resolve with a sense of responsibility and accountability.