So... it's acknowledged that I *did* respond to your question (responded a couple of times, with some fairly lengthy replies) BEFORE I ever asked you the same sort of question in return (about Rudy's positions....) Nothing sneaky there.
AND, you have *finally* posted a response to me, (thanks!), that includes a link to Rudy's '12 points' --- though I hardly think that does much of a job of answering what I asked, which was a bit more SPECIFIC: WHAT proposal that Rudy has put forward has the *slightest* chance of achieving strategic, [not Pyhrric], victory for America?
(I was trying to ask WHAT Rudy had proposed that YOU THOUGHT could bring America strategic victory over our foes. The only thing I see in 'Rudy's 12 points' about that is where he says he wants to "fight terrorism proactively"!)
I mean --- I'm SURE that EVERYONE is ALL FOR being 'proactive', but I'm not sure he has bothered to come out from the shadows much on this 'war on terrorism thing'. (Oh, excepting of course that he also said he wants to send '12 more brigades to Iraq'... I won't waste much time here tearing into that one. But, those two things seem to be it for 'Rudy's plan'....)
Now, if you want to lay this thing aside for awhile... leave it with me thinking that you have been dodging and talking past me... and you thinking the same about me... (but BOTH acknowledging that the other guy DID at least *post some kind of reply* to the questions asked) well, that would be OK with me too. 'Cause we don't seem to be getting much traction anymore on this. :-) |
