Oh, he could've answered the question. He could've said that we aren't going to run the war like those morons did Vietnam. The goal, unlike Vietnam, is victory, not a stalemate. We won't have the President and SecDef picking all the bombing targets like LBJ and McNamara did. LBJ was quoted as saying: `they can't bomb an outhouse without my approval" and was actually stupid enough to think that was a good thing. Nor do we have McNamara anywhere near the decision-making process this time. From the same source:
SAM sites were another case in point. Secretary of Defense McNamara knew that Soviet technicians were installing and often operating the new surface-to-air missile batteries. Because of concern about harming 'neutral' Soviets, U.S. TACAIR crews were ordered by the Pentagon to pass up these sites even when they were vulnerable during construction. One F-4 squadron commander off USS Midway actually watched the SAM site being built that eventually shot him down in 1965.
Not this time. The President will set the goals and let the military run the battle.
But Bush was too tactful to say that. Straight talk tends to rattle the Europeans who prefer diplomatic double-speak to reality, as the humor site ScrappleFace pointed out this morning.
Likeks said it much better this morning, but then he's a very good writer. The link isn't working right now but it's worth checking later. Here's an exerpt.
And while I agree that ordinary citizens have protested our government in foreign capitals, I'd ask you why American security should be determined by 26 year old Belgian college students, and I'd also note that these rallies have been organized by people who'd dance in the street if someone set off a tactical nuclear device in the lobby of the Monsanto corporate office. But more to the point, Terry, I'd ask: What went wrong in your education that you believe that the disapproval of China constitutes failure?
Current Events » in reply to Hardly unanswerable
Re: Hardly unanswerable
The whole thread (92 posts)
- Bush gives a great press conference
- Re: Bush gives a great press conference
- Ran rings around?
- Only His Doctor Knows for Sure
- "WHEN IT COMES TO OUR SECURITY, we really don't need anybody's permission."
- Re:
- Here is the evidence that Sadam is a Clear and Present Threat to the United States Civilian population
- Re: Here is the evidence that Sadam is a Clear and Present Threat to the United States Civilian population
- You apparently have set "Your Bar for war" irrationally high
- I guess you didn't read the whole article
- Re: Here is the evidence that Sadam is a Clear and Present Threat to the United States Civilian population
- I guess you missed Colin Powell's presentation to the UN a few weeks ago
- Here is the evidence that Sadam is a Clear and Present Threat to the United States Civilian population
- Re:
- "My job is to protect America and that’s exactly what I’m going to do."
- HOGWASH!
- Re: HOGWASH!
- Re: HOGWASH! Well said n/t (n/t)
- There's so much nonsense in your post I'm not even sure where to start
- Pompous bleating...
- HOGWASH!
- Re: Bush gives a great press conference
