[Rhodes22-list] Politics

[Herb Parsons]

"So you're saying this has NOT been a catastrphe?"
Exactly

"So you're saying the war in Iraq is NOT a tragedy ?"
No more than any war is a "tragedy". Anything that involves loss of life 
is a tragedy. However, to call this war "the tragedy of the Iraq war" 
singles it out as different from the tragedy of any war, or anything 
else that involves the death of humans. I disagree that it is different.
However, you completely overlooked what I REALLY said. Go back and read 
it again, and see if you can do better.

"So you're saying the situation in Guantanamo is OK? "
Nope, not quite. I think if the bleeding hearts would get their asses 
out of there, and quit trying to afford constitutional protection to 
those that don't merit it, and leave the running of a MILITARY operation 
to the military, it would be OK. In spite of that, the military leaders 
there are doing a pretty good job.

"Wasn't Donald Rumsfeld part of the Bush administration? What ever 
happenedto 'the buck stops here?' "
Yes he was; however, Donald Rumsfeld had nothing to do with what 
happened at Abu Gharib. I know some of the "hate everything Bush" crowd 
wants it to be different, but the FACTS to support the notion are simply 
not there. A small group of individuals were responsible, they were 
tried, they were punished. The phrase "the buck stops here" refers to 
the practice of passing the buck up to the higher level; in other words, 
blaming the bosses for what you did. In this case, the "buck" stopped 
right where it should have. The "buck" never made it Rumsfeld, nor 
should it have, unless he gave some sort of orders for the abuses. If 
you have evidence that he did, I suggest you start writing your own 
article, you'd probably win a pulitzer.

There, I've answered each of your questions directly. Are you EVER going 
to do the same? I doubt it.

Steven Alm wrote:
> On Feb 12, 2008 1:00 PM, Herb Parsons <hparsons at parsonsys.com> wrote:
>
>   
>> The question as to whether or not the Bush administration was a
>> "catastrophe" is definitely open to debate. The person writing is
>> expressing an opinion, not fact.
>>     
>
>
> So you're saying this has NOT been a catastrphe?
>
>   
>> The question of wether or not the Iraq war was a "tragedy" that was
>> caused by the Bush administration is open to debate, again expressing an
>> opinion, not fact. (The FACT is that the war was authorized by congress,
>> and the result of many violations of a cease-fire agreement, and
>> agreement that was structured during the previous Bush admninistration,
>> and violated numerous times during the Clinton administration, but hey,
>> let's not let facts get in the way of a good Bush-bashing).
>>     
>
>
> So you're saying the war in Iraq is NOT a tragedy ?
>
>   
>> The "shame" of Guantanamo is that so many leftists have made it out to
>> be something worse than it its.
>>     
>
>
> So you're saying the situation in Guantanamo is OK?
>
>   
>> The "shame" of Abu Gharib was NOT the result of "the Bush
>> administration", that's hyperbole.
>>     
>
>
> Wasn't Donald Rumsfeld part of the Bush administration?  What ever happened
> to "the buck stops here?"
>
>   
>> Slim
>>
>>     
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>
>
>   

-- 
Herb Parsons
S/V O'Jure - O'Day 25
S/V Reve de Pappa - Coronado 35