About Me

Name: Mike
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Bush Doctrine on Target

Posted by Mike on Sunday, November 08, 2009 1:23:42 PM
http://westernperspective.blogspot.com/
Capitalism contains within itself the seeds of its own destruction.

Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda were primarily responsible for financing the terrorist training camps in Afghanistan. Other than training the hijackers, they had little to do with the actual attack on 9/11. Today, Osama is either dead or incapacitated.

The real culprits of 9/11 were the same crowd who tried to blow up the WTO in 1993, attempted to assassinate the pope and stage airplane hijackings from the Philippines in January 1995, and masterminded the Oklahoma City bombing in April of that year. The leaders of this gang of thugs were Ramsey Yousef and Khalid Sheik Mohammed, both with ties to Iraq and possibly receiving financial aid from bin Laden and his family. This is also corroborated by bin Laden's own statement in 2001 that those responsible for 9/11 acted as free independent agents.

The administration of George W. Bush did not want to implicate Iraq because that would have shown how stupid it really was to attack Saddam's forces after the Kuwait invasion in 1991. Still, there remains a clear trail of blood leading out of Iraq between 1991 and 2001.

America has clearly stopped terrorism in its tracks. All that is left to do now is orderly withdrawals of US and NATO forces from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Both Wars Stink

Posted by Mike on Wednesday, November 04, 2009 9:59:45 AM
http://westernperspective.blogspot.com/
While the MSM has predictably jumped on the Obama bandwagon in distinguishing between the Iraq war as a war of choice as opposed to the Afghanistan war of necessity, the fact remains that both wars together have taken a huge toll in terms of American lives, economic resources, and world recognition. The criticism leveled against Bush 43 for leading American forces into Iraq is not altogether justified. There had to be some strong military response after 9/11. To blame everything on Al Qaeda, and the Afghan Taliban for harboring Al Qaeda, seems simplistic at best. Saddam's regime was far more brutal and dictatorial than that of the Taliban, and was responsible for some of the terrorist violence preceding 9/11.

Unfortunately, America's war crimes, particularly those directed against detainees many of whom were demonstrably innocent, more than offset any rational justification for war at this point. Capitalism breeds vindictiveness. The legitimate goal of interrogation gave way to the temptation to exact vengeance and to dehumanize and ridicule.

Obama's exit strategy is the beginning of our economic recovery. Iraq and Afghanistan will never become like us. The sooner we realize this, the better.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Was W More of a Liability?

Posted by Mike on Thursday, September 24, 2009 3:10:44 PM
http://westernperspective.blogspot.com/
Historians are now beginning to reexamine the role of Sir Winston Churchill in taking down the British Empire. While none of us can say for sure what effect the Bush presidencies have or will have on America, it is worthwhile to look at the track record.

George H. W. Bush by all accounts got America into the first Gulf War over what was essentially a disputed piece of real estate known as Kuwait, and over the alleged rape of Kuwaiti women by Iraqi men. While there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein was a mean, oppressive dictator who used poison gas against the Kurds and his enemies in Iran, and who quelled public dissent through torture and assassinations, was there really a valid reason to send troops to fight against Iraq in 1990-1991?

Before terrorism became a commonplace, household word, America had the dubious luxury to defend the ideals of freedom throughout the world using our military might. This essentially is what got us bogged down in an unwinnable war in Vietnam, although there was never any serious threat of the war spilling over onto American soil. Today, America no longer has that luxury to go to war on behalf of Israel and other client states. The costs are just too great.

Today, the terms "necessary" and "discretionary" as applied to wars have become all but obsolete, and we should stop using them. War is always a losing proposition. There are times when a nation must take defensive action in self-defense, or in defense of others against an aggressor. However, the decision to go to war is never properly made as something necessary in the sense of being determined by evolution. Man always has a choice, and our leaders must take full responsibility when they commit our boys and girls to fight overseas. Likewise, wars are never discretionary in the sense that one can make a decision based upon a cost-benefit analysis. Those who start wars as a matter of personal discretion should be held fully accountable for all losses sustained on both sides.

So, the question is, did George W. Bush's term of office, in which we went to war full scale to topple Saddam, bring about better or worse results overall for America? This question is separate from whether voters did the right thing in electing President Bush because of his pro-life commitment.

We have fought long enough. It is time to come home from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »