"National security" has been given a range of meanings these days. Protecting another nation's oil resources from evil European and Russian companies has not markedly affected my security, I can tell you. But I guess national security is in the eyes of the guy with the nukes.
This is just another thing Bill Clinton passed onto George W. Bush
Here come the cavalry, folks.
Or should I say the dittoheads?
I for one believe it. Then again, I dont have a problem with it.
I may have posted it in another thread, but it bears repeating. There's nothing I can part with easier than someone else's life.
A lot of Gulf War vets came away with a bad taste over the way it ended. Then we were treated to 8 years of letting the situation go slack. I have no problem with the thought of GWBush coming into office with a massive sense of unfinished business. It is the big reason I supported the war, not WMD.
Well I, for one, am happy for you J. I don't know what you'd do without a new reason of the month. First WMD, then liberation, then "unfinished business", whatever that means. All right, folks, about face! Back to Iraq! We didn't kill enough people last time! Or was it unfulfilled munitions contracts? Kickbacks that never went through? Trying to explain things in terms of the sentiments of the VETERANS is kind of ridiculous! Since when has any President cared for Veterans except when they mobbed the White House Lawn? This is the President that has attempted to make ends meet by cutting twenty six billions of dollars worth of veteran benefits, slashing combat pay in mid-war, and using dirty tricks to keep the troop flow up and keep ordinary soldiers stranded in Iraq for months past their tours of duty. But to make up for that he gives speeches on carriers and serves soldiers turkey dinner.
Reasonable, that.
One might think that, if Bush's big goal was to take down Saddam - he has made Iraq the virtual focus of his administration - then that fact would be made apparent either overtly or by implication in his campaigning for President. After all, the people should know what they're getting into, yes?
But of course, that would be a fundamental misunderstanding of the way George Bush does anything. The essential rule is, "Do first, explain later - if you get caught". Or, in this case, make some pretty pathetic ATTEMPTS to explain.
Of course somebody who has something to sell is bias but it's not like these allegations are new.
