Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The George Bush You Forgot (The Libertarian George Bush Who Was Against Nation Building)
Youtube ^ | Uploaded on Aug 15, 2008 | merrimac290

Posted on 11/18/2013 11:36:19 AM PST by Skeez

Youtube Video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9SOVzMV2bc&feature=c4-overview-vl&list=PL2A98BEEA82D96E4E

See link. Short video from 2000 campaign. Unbelievable.


TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: bush; bush43; foreignpolicy; libertarian; ronpaul
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

1 posted on 11/18/2013 11:36:19 AM PST by Skeez
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Skeez

that was before 9/11. that would change anyone.


2 posted on 11/18/2013 11:37:42 AM PST by JohnBrowdie (http://forum.stink-eye.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Skeez

He was always into nation destruction.

That’s the result of open borders with an enemy nation that has 30 or 40 million colonizers to spare.

He had no problem letting them in.


3 posted on 11/18/2013 11:39:48 AM PST by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Skeez

Pat Buchanan writes about something like this in his books and of course, I agree with Pat.


4 posted on 11/18/2013 11:41:31 AM PST by BeadCounter (The night they drove O'BamaCare down...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Skeez
Pres. Bush didn't send troops in just to nation-build like Clinton did.

Pres. Bush sent troops in for national security reasons.

5 posted on 11/18/2013 11:42:49 AM PST by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnBrowdie
that was before 9/11. that would change anyone.

BS. When you are attacked by a third world gang, you sink their navy, flatten their airfields, and smash their armor. Then you drop small arms to the oppressed and let them sort out how to build their nation. With our naval and air capacity, we do it at an arms length, no troops on the ground. No trillions to rebuild.

Do that once, and you will not see another attempt upon us for a generation. It's cost effective. It commands respect.

6 posted on 11/18/2013 11:46:31 AM PST by LoneRangerMassachusetts (The meek shall not inherit the Earth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JohnBrowdie

Tried it. Still doesn’t work.


7 posted on 11/18/2013 11:47:37 AM PST by DManA (enis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Skeez

That he got stuck with doing it doesn’t mean he thought it was a good thing. It was the least crappy of many crappy alternatives. I didn’t like it either.


8 posted on 11/18/2013 11:49:32 AM PST by Ramius (Personally, I give us one chance in three. More tea anyone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LoneRangerMassachusetts

being rational about GWB always stokes the “conservatives” that are suffering from a more severe case of BDS than ever plagued a liberal.


9 posted on 11/18/2013 11:56:10 AM PST by JohnBrowdie (http://forum.stink-eye.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: LoneRangerMassachusetts

Yup....as long as no neighbor hostile to us is sitting there ready to unite with a large minority and take over all of the militarily wrecked nations resources and expands its borders to allow it easy access to your allies...then that becomes really, really stupid.

Even more stupid when that neighbor’s primary military form is asymmetrical warfare.


10 posted on 11/18/2013 11:57:12 AM PST by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: lepton
Yup....as long as no neighbor hostile to us is sitting there ready to unite with a large minority and take over all of the militarily wrecked nations resources and expands its borders to allow it easy access to your allies...then that becomes really, really stupid.

Even more stupid when that neighbor’s primary military form is asymmetrical warfare.

Real snarky. Like we would miss Afghanistan if someone took it over.

11 posted on 11/18/2013 12:01:24 PM PST by LoneRangerMassachusetts (The meek shall not inherit the Earth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Skeez

That guy would have been a great president.


12 posted on 11/18/2013 12:01:38 PM PST by muir_redwoods (Don't fire until you see the blue of their helmets)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LoneRangerMassachusetts
Like we would miss Afghanistan if someone took it over.

If communist China took over and began to threaten India you might miss having an independent Afghanistan.

13 posted on 11/18/2013 12:10:22 PM PST by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LoneRangerMassachusetts

I had figured you were talking about Iraq...since that’d already happened to Afghanistan, which was why it had become even more of a cesspool than it was a few decades ago.


14 posted on 11/18/2013 12:12:31 PM PST by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Skeez

Yes, he could have been a much president had he not gotten bogged down in the feckless task of “nation building”.


15 posted on 11/18/2013 12:49:50 PM PST by 3Fingas (Sons and Daughters for Freedom and Rededicaton to the Principles of the U.S. Constitution...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3Fingas

correction:
Yes, he could have been a much better president had he not gotten bogged down in the feckless task of “nation building”.


16 posted on 11/18/2013 12:50:39 PM PST by 3Fingas (Sons and Daughters for Freedom and Rededicaton to the Principles of the U.S. Constitution...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: what's up

“If communist China took over and began to threaten India you might miss having an independent Afghanistan.”

Ha HA. I don’t think anyone has shown how to “take over” Afghanistan.


17 posted on 11/18/2013 12:58:59 PM PST by Augustinian monk ("BUSHES WITHOUT BORDERS")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Augustinian monk
Ha HA. I don’t think anyone has shown how to “take over” Afghanistan.

The Moghuls did it quite successfully. And from there they were able to control India.

18 posted on 11/18/2013 1:05:15 PM PST by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: what's up

“Timur’s armies caused great devastation and are estimated to have caused the deaths of 17 million people.”

Thats a quote from Wikipedia regarding afghans histroy. I guess if country wanted it that bad...


19 posted on 11/18/2013 1:15:19 PM PST by Augustinian monk ("BUSHES WITHOUT BORDERS")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Augustinian monk
I guess if country wanted it that bad...

The fact that they suffered 17 million deaths indicates that they didn't want it but were forced into it.

20 posted on 11/18/2013 1:22:36 PM PST by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson