War use for campaigning

[loki09789]

Question to those who are more Historically versed:

In election history has the criticism surrounding Bush about using the Irag/Agh war/911 stuff happened before? I would think that it was a valid demonstration of his abilities or the lack of them. People are using that part of his time in office to create discredit, why should they argue that he can't use it to create credibility?

 

[michaeledward]

I would think that it was a valid demonstration of his abilities or the lack of them. People are using that part of his time in office to create discredit, why should they argue that he can't use it to create credibility?

I am surprised he is using the images. Although, it could show that he has the courage of his convictions, which is what I think they are trying to show, I think it also could have a negative impact.

As Sandy Berger told Condalesa Rice that their administration would spend more time focusing on terrorism in general, and Osama Bin Laden in particular 10 months before September 11, I find it odd that the Bush administration wants to draw these events to our attention. In the first 9 months of the Bush presidency, his administration did very little to address terrorism. Word is, that Bill Clinton asked his National Security People to assemble a plan to engage Bin Laden in Afghanistan late in his second term. When the plan was finalized, it wasn't launched, because he would be handing an incoming adminstration a war.

I hope the Bush Re-election committees continue to push these events. I think they require closer inspection, very close inspection.

Bush, Cheney, Clinton & Gore have all agreed to speak to the 911 investigation committee. I am looking forward to the results.

Mike

 

[Nightingale]

Personally, I feel using such a tragedy for personal gain is sickening. And I would be just as upset if it were Kerry doing it.

 

[Ender]

Personally, I feel using such a tragedy for personal gain is sickening. And I would be just as upset if it were Kerry doing it.

What about Kerry using his "Viet Nam war veteran" status?...does that sicken you too?

War or threatening war has mixed reactions and consequences. Some argue that Kennedy escaladed the missile crisis in Cuba to cover up the bumbling of the Bay of Pigs incident. Others say that by not taking action in Iran during the hostage crisis was what did Carter in. Or that Nixon, by not ending the war sooner got poor public opinion, while Johnson who intesified the war got no reaction.Then we have GW Sr. who got alot of credit for the liberation of Kuwait, but that didn't really translate into any gains in his re-election campaign. So sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.*shrug

 

[Nightingale]

1. the vietnam war is not a national tragedy. some would argue that it was a rather boneheaded military strategy, but not a tragedy.

2. 9-11 is still so fresh in people's minds and hearts that using it for political gain can bring nothing but hurt.

 

[MisterMike]

I think they should "show it every day", to quote Darrell Warrely <sp>.

I think people have forgotten all too quickly actually. Esp. the Dem's who couldn't wait to hop on the anti-war bandwagon.

 

[Nightingale]

I think they should "show it every day", to quote Darrell Warrely <sp>.

I think people have forgotten all too quickly actually. Esp. the Dem's who couldn't wait to hop on the anti-war bandwagon.

there is a distinct difference between viewing the footage as a reminder, and using the footage for political gain. I don't feel people should prosper from an event such as this.

 

[OULobo]

Bush's use of a national tragedy in a political advertisment is a travesty. Even his supporters feel it is dispicable. I don't have a problem with him using the war if he thinks it will help, espcially considering he created that war entirely. I don't have problem with Kerry using his military history because it's truthful. I didn't much like Bush Sr., but one thing I really respected about him was his military action in WWII.

I see Ender's point about military history or actions not always having an effect on an election, but this ad was not about a military action, it was about exploiting a national tragedy. It really cemented my anti-Bush status.

 

[Rick Wade]

If we remember past President we remember them for what they did or didn't do. President Carter got a bone job Hostages in Iran his administration planned the rescue however it happened on Reagan’s Time. Nixon Impeachment. Bush War on Terrorism. I think Bush should be aloud to use it but maybe he shouldn't use the images of the Towers there were allot of lives lost that day. Now before The Military personnel get going I am in the Military and have been to both Dessert Storm and Iraqi Freedom and I will say that That is our job we chose it and If you don't like it get out. We are getting more recognition now than we ever have in history. I guess my best advise would be President Bush be careful what you choose when showing the War on Terrorism it hits close to home.

Thanks

Rick

 

[loki09789]

I wasn't originally meaning the 911 images in the advertising as much as the mention/criticism of his war policies in relation to Afg and Irag. It is all related though. I think associating the emotional tragedy with the Pres. is a possible reaction, but I don't think it is a logical one. If the POTUS uses the images in campaigns to demonstrate his competency (I didn't say I agreed or disagreed), then I think it is valid. Personally, I get upset when I see those images too, but I remember that the cause of the tragedy was a handful of terrorists who hijacked jets. I don't want to 'shoot the messanger' just because Bush is awakening those emotions through his campaigin.

 

[michaeledward]

I think they should "show it every day", to quote Darrell Warrely <sp>.

I think people have forgotten all too quickly actually. Esp. the Dem's who couldn't wait to hop on the anti-war bandwagon.

Which 'Anti-War' bandwagon is that?
The Axis of Evil, Weapons of Mass Destruction, Reconstituted Nuclear Weapons, Imminent Threat to America, Smoking Gun in the form of a Mushroom Cloud, there's a clear Iraqi-Al Qaeda allience Band-wagon?

The 1 Billion Dollar a Week, Halliburton No-Bid Contract, CIA Covert Agent Exposing. Arab Democracy, Mission Accomplished Band-wagon?

Please. - Mike

 

[loki09789]

"If we remember past President we remember them for what they did or didn't do."

Thanks for bringing back the historical aspect to the thread

 

[MisterMike]

Which 'Anti-War' bandwagon is that?
The Axis of Evil, Weapons of Mass Destruction, Reconstituted Nuclear Weapons, Imminent Threat to America, Smoking Gun in the form of a Mushroom Cloud, there's a clear Iraqi-Al Qaeda allience Band-wagon?

The 1 Billion Dollar a Week, Halliburton No-Bid Contract, CIA Covert Agent Exposing. Arab Democracy, Mission Accomplished Band-wagon?

Please. - Mike

Yup. Especially them. Those not in touch with reality. Those are just the type who forget.

The reason a Democrat can't put an ad on TV with 9/11 footage is because they are not for defense spending. An tragedy like that is just a Fact-of-Life sort of thing to them. Maybe it could have been avoided if we all hugged a radical Muslim more often. Pu-lease. The President's approval ratings were the nearly the highest in our nation's history all due to how he handled 9/11. Why wouldn't he mention that day?

 

[MisterMike]

there is a distinct difference between viewing the footage as a reminder, and using the footage for political gain. I don't feel people should prosper from an event such as this.

Then I suppose you don't think Kerry should mention how he voted on the issue either?

So it is your doctrine that all such occurrences are to be stricken from political debate and campaigning?

 

[rmcrobertson]

I realize that it's comforting to turn one's brain off and emulate that Michael Savage character, living in a world where everybody who disagrees with you Hates America and Is Filled With Psychotic Rage, where Democrats Are Un-American and Hate the Military, where Liberals Are Supporters of Al-Quaida and Probably Communist Lesbianism Too, where Teachers Are Brainwashing Our Children to Smoke Crack and Spit on the Flag, where Everybody Who Isn't A Protestant Will Be Tortured in Everlasting Hellfire, but this is ********.

I could go on about the military-industrial complex, but hell, y'all know about the military-industrial complex.

As a teacher, I just wish some of you folks were better-educated, or even better, willing to go out and actually read the stuff you keep complaining about. (It continues to fascinate me that I know far, far more about the right-wing and conservative world of ideas than the right-wingers and conservatives on this forum know about my little intellectual world--because believe me, y'all haven't a frickin' clue.) I wish you'd at least try to get a grip on what's actually happening, on our collective history, and on who's sticking it to you--because it sure ain't me, babe. Or anybody like me. Or even John Kerry, not my first choice for Prez by any means.

I guess it's too painful to look at reality. Oh well. I often feel the same way.

As you get pissed and write back angrily, a note: the way some of you guys talk about your fellow countrymen and women, about differing ideas, about civil rights, is scary on a level I haven't seen in thirty years or more. Congratulations for repudiating most of the country's best ideals.

It's a democracy, kids. We have a Bill of Rights. None of this means that only YOUR ideas are allowed. Get used to it.

 

[Touch Of Death]

I realize that it's comforting to turn one's brain off and emulate that Michael Savage character, living in a world where everybody who disagrees with you Hates America and Is Filled With Psychotic Rage, where Democrats Are Un-American and Hate the Military, where Liberals Are Supporters of Al-Quaida and Probably Communist Lesbianism Too, where Teachers Are Brainwashing Our Children to Smoke Crack and Spit on the Flag, where Everybody Who Isn't A Protestant Will Be Tortured in Everlasting Hellfire, but this is ********.

I could go on about the military-industrial complex, but hell, y'all know about the military-industrial complex.

As a teacher, I just wish some of you folks were better-educated, or even better, willing to go out and actually read the stuff you keep complaining about. (It continues to fascinate me that I know far, far more about the right-wing and conservative world of ideas than the right-wingers and conservatives on this forum know about my little intellectual world--because believe me, y'all haven't a frickin' clue.) I wish you'd at least try to get a grip on what's actually happening, on our collective history, and on who's sticking it to you--because it sure ain't me, babe. Or anybody like me. Or even John Kerry, not my first choice for Prez by any means.

I guess it's too painful to look at reality. Oh well. I often feel the same way.

As you get pissed and write back angrily, a note: the way some of you guys talk about your fellow countrymen and women, about differing ideas, about civil rights, is scary on a level I haven't seen in thirty years or more. Congratulations for repudiating most of the country's best ideals.

It's a democracy, kids. We have a Bill of Rights. None of this means that only YOUR ideas are allowed. Get used to it.

Two legs good, four legs better! :asian:
Sean

 

[TonyM.]

I lived through this nonsense in the sixties and early seventies. It chaffes my shorts that we're going through it again.

 

[Ender]

Al-Qaida offically endorses the Senator from France, John Kerry.....hehehe

 

[michaeledward]

Then I suppose you don't think Kerry should mention how he voted on the issue either?
So it is your doctrine that all such occurrences are to be stricken from political debate and campaigning?

I'm confused about the noun in your first sentence, 'Issue'. To which 'issue' are you referring? Nightingale made a comment about how the images from September 11 might be used (there is a distinct difference between viewing the footage as a reminder, and using the footage for political gain.). I don't recall any vote on how images from September 11th might be used. (Nightingale, I hope you don't mind my commenting here on your behalf).

As to whether their should be debate about this subject, I certainly think there should be. It will be wonderful now that the Bush adminstration has allowed the 9-11 investigation commission a bit more time to complete their work, especially after they chose not to release information to the investigation committee. In fact, after considerable outside pressure, only two members of the committee were able to view information from the White House, and they had to summarize those documents for the rest of the committee. (Sunshine is the best disinfectant).

Hopefully, President Bush and Vice President Cheney will spend sufficient time with this commission so that we might be able to have a proper debate on the subject. Here, again, you no doubt know, that until very recently, they had refused to sit down and talk to the commission at all. When they did capitulate to a meeting, President Bush originally was only going to offer one hour's worth of participation. (As you no doubt know, the Secretary of the National Security Administration, C. Rice, has declined further participation).

Oh, yeah, and the investigation into how the U.S. intelligence services assembed, interpretted and dispersed information prior to September 11, and the Iraq invasion won't be published until early 2005. If I'm not mistaken, that is long past the appropriate time for political debate, isn't it?

Mike

 

[Ender]

In October 2003, months after the Iraq war began, former President Bill Clinton visited Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Manuel Durao Barroso. Durao Barroso said, "When Clinton was here recently he told me he was absolutely convinced, given his years in the White House and the access to privileged information which he had, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction until the end of the Saddam regime."

French President Jacques Chirac, in February 2003, spoke about "the probable possession of weapons of mass destruction by an uncontrollable country, Iraq," noting "the international community is right ... in having decided that Iraq should be disarmed."

Former President Bill Clinton on Dec. 16, 1998, stated, "Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them. Not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq ... I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again ..."

Former President Clinton, in an appearance on "Larry King Live" on July 22, 2003, said, "... t is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons. "



I don't think Bush or Clinton lied or misled the country about Iraq. I think they both had access to the same information. I also think Clinton could have led us into the same war, but his credibility was at an all time low and it was not politically expedient to start a war when he wanted his "legacy" to be a peaceful one. That was why he was pushing so hard with the Palestinians and the Israelis to come to some sort of agreement.