Posted on 05/17/2006 6:35:18 PM PDT by Las Vegas Dave
I'm thinking this is just Bush's military strategery at work. If I was playing a complex computer strategy game and I had multiple hostile parties around the world - it would make sense to try to reach cease-fire and peace agreements to lull at least some of the parties to a lower threat level then concentrate on the enemies with the least hope of reforming with the most firepower. I'd at least go through the motions to court an agreement to hold the hostile parties at bay. Let's say you're Hugo Chavez, Kim Jong Il, or even Ahmadinejad...as trouble brews for the US in multiple areas - you'd feel empowered to act up as you know the US can't fight a multi-front war. By dangling this olive branch to NK, it signals to me military action in Iran is coming. I think a mere 2 diplomats chatting with NK's Dear Leader could cause him to think his best interest lies in negotiating with the US - even as the bombs fall in Tehran. The alternative? If we don't go through these motions, Pyongyang could become emboldened and increasingly belligerent especially at the outset of hostilities in Iran...who knows what kind of distraction they would make or perceived weakness in the US they'd try to exploit? With Chavez, Kim Jong Il, and Ahmadenijad to choose from - Kim Jong Il would be the easiest to buy by far. He doesn't have the oil cash cow coming in to fuel his delusions. Nor does he have anything we need - other than to put him in a box so he doesn't stir anything up at an inconvenient moment.
At any rate, I overlooked your nastiness to address the issue you raised, and to point out that your accusation that there are those on this board who call anyone who disagrees with the President a troll, needed to be corrected because it was a false charge. Veiling it with 'it seems' didn't change the essence of the accusation, so I responded accordingly.
'I'm waiting for Bush Team Wants Peace Talks with Conservatives'
Good one!
It's rather amusing that someone who posted THIS to me is now trying to accuse me of being 'rude' when I calmly defended myself against such a nasty personal attack.
I think this conversation is over, 4.
Your communication skills are lacking to the point where meaningful conversation becomes difficult, and your hypersensitivity to being called on your own unkind words blocks any real communication anyway.
All I can say is, toughen up. If you are reeling because of the things I've said here, I hate to think of how badly you get hurt when someone really IS rude.
Naw,just give them some more nukes as long as they don't use them against anybody.
well of course not, they just can't wait to sell their products to the rest of the world and provide a tourist destination.
from the May 19, 2006 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0519/p09s02-cods.html
Bush may be losing his base
Conservatives are openly dissenting from policies of Republican leadership.
By Daniel Schorr
WASHINGTON - The term "base" is not in William Safire's political dictionary, but he tells me it will be included in the next edition. "Base" refers to that solid core of political supporters who will stick with you through electoral thick and thin as long as you are perceived as advancing their principles. Most often, the term is applied to religious conservatives.
Something seems to have gone off the rails between President Bush and his base, judging by a recent Gallup poll that shows his support among conservatives down from a long-standing 80 percent to a current 50 percent.
Religious conservatives have found the administration and Congress falling short on issues such as same-sex marriage, obscenity, and abortion. They have expressed disappointment that the president has not been more active in seeking a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
The issue of the week is immigration. In what he called a compromise proposal in his television speech on Monday night, the president sought to allay the criticism of conservatives by proposing to deploy 6,000 National Guard troops along the Mexican border.
There may be less there than meets the eye. The Guard troops will be mainly in support roles. The arrangement may not last more than a year. And the president, who also has a business base, felt compelled to propose a "guest-worker" (not amnesty, repeat, not amnesty) program.
At the same time, the administration was trying to shift attention to consensus Republican issues such as tax cuts and judicial nominations. But, the dissension within Republican ranks was evident. The $105 billion war-spending bill, passed by the Senate, was called "dead on arrival" by House speaker Dennis Hastert. When Senate majority leader Bill Frist called Gen. Michael Hayden the "ideal man" for CIA Director, Speaker Hastert announced his opposition to having a military man in the job.
Influential conservatives have begun speaking openly of their reservations about the Republican leadership. Dr. James Dobson, head of Focus on the Family, has said that he might turn critic of the administration unless it does more to deliver on conservative goals.
At this point, the thunder from the right may be in the nature of admonition. But I can recall a time when evangelicals shunned the ballot box. If that were to happen again, it would change the face of American politics.
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.