Let me provide a different perspective. We went into Kuwaite to protect our oil, but it was still the right thing to do. Just as WWII was the right war to fight.
The Vietnam war was a tragedy I fought agaisnt in the streets of San Francisco.
And I had no problem with Afghanistan. First, that is where the Talibon wa and secondly, the Taliban were torturing women over there. Hell I would have fought in either war gladly.
I was for invading Iraq, but I was wrong. I did not realize how destabilizing it would be. But I was also not president, so I could muse.
I was for it becasue of the butcher of bhagdad and because I felt cultural difussion would help women.
I feel very strongly that ironically the real answer will need to be an existential understanding that if the earth is to survive 13th century cultures cannot have nuclear weapons. They will use them.
Having said all that, because dealing with the middle east will be so difficult we need great statesmen workng on it. Bush cannot do it. He simply does not have the education, brains or temperment.
We need guys like George Mitchel, Bill Clinton, Wesley Clark, Adlai Stevenson, Brent Scowcroft.
To use a poker metaphore we need people who can play with Doyle Brunson and Texas Amarillo Slim. Bush would, I am sure, lose at a friday night nickel, dime, poker game!
We need men and women with "knowledge Directed Perception"!!!!!!!!
Bush has way too little knowledge.
NewsBlast Sign-Up
StockHouse NewsBlast: Receive company sponsored news and information via email.
« Previous Message Next Message »
This message (Post #12783986) has been viewed times
Report a BullBoards Violation Ignore charles99 Post Reply View Threads
Go to
BullBoard: Symbol Company Name
Search by
Post ID:
Sponsored Links
InvestorMarketPlace.com! - Another integral tool for the smart investor...
NEW - Blogs - an online diary of personal thoughts and ideas about investing...
IntegratIR - Manage IR site effectively, IR Disclosure and Awareness, Communicate
|
