[Callahan]

If Al Gore gives a foreign policy speech and no one pays attention, did he really make a sound?

[Frapster]

If Al Gore gives a foreign policy speech and no one pays attention, did he really make a sound?

Of course we know that should actually be "If Al Gore gives a foreign policy speech and no one pays attention, is he still wrong?"

[Frapster]

Saying we ought to assume the forces responsible for 9/11 are planning a second attack. He's speaking today to recommend a specific course of action for our country that is better than the policy being pursued by Pres. Bush.

The Iraq situation has the potential to damage our ability to win this war against terrorists.

We ought to be focusing our efforts against those who attacked us on 9/11 and who have thus far gotten away with it.

The vast majority of those responsible are still at large.

We should not allow ourselves to be distracted from this urgent taask just because it is taking longer than predicted.

[Frapster]

Gore continues:

We are perfectly capable of sustaining a war against OBL and simultaneously building a coalition to take on Saddam in a timely fashion.

We should not allow anything to diminish our focus from attacking AQ and OBL.

He's criticizing GWB for not continuing to focus upon OBL and AQ members and shifting focus to Iraq. The President is proclaiming a new American right to preeminently attack anyone we choose.

The timing of the supposed urgency according to GWB is placing our former top priority is explained innocently by our COS "From an advertising point of view we don't want a new product line until after labor day."

However, Iraq is a serious threat to the stability of the Gulf region. We should address the problem. We should assume that Iraq will continue to go after weapons of mass destruction.

He's now saying we hould operate in context of the UN rather than outside of the UN.

[Frapster]

He continues blathering...

we have an obligation at the relationship between the war on terrorism and the war on Iraq.

we have a goal of regime chane in Iraq while a goal of victory on the war against terroris. he apparently thinks they're different.

The war on terrorism must be multilateral - it is impossible without the help of many nations.

Our ability to secure that kind of multilater cooperation can be severely damaged by taking unilateral actions against Iraq. If the administration must take unilateral action then George should share that information.

He felt betrayed by the first administrations hastey departure from the battle field - particularly in light of what happened to the shiites and the kurds.