Blast from Campaigns Past

Politicians lie from time to time...some more than others. We all know that. Some others don't lie...they just don't tell the truth. And others do neither, they are just "equivocal". Yet others make claims and statements that look REALLY, REALLY bad when seen through the lens of history. Whether they are lying, not telling the truth, being equivocal or simply saying things that they don't necessarily agree with, it really doesn't matter. It still is worth a mention when we see one that jumps out with neon lights.

Russ Roberts over Cafe Hayek found this gem from the 2000 campaign by our soon to be ex-commander in chief and I thought it was worth a mention.

I would take the use of force very seriously. I would be guarded in my approach. I don't think we can be all things to all people in the world. I think we've got to be very careful when we commit our troops. The vice president and I have a disagreement about the use of troops. He believes in nation building. I would be very careful about using our troops as nation builders. I believe the role of the military is to fight and win war and therefore prevent war from happening in the first place.

Ummm.....no comment. :)

Submitted by John on Sat, 2008-02-09 00:09
-->
Tags:

Comments :

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

But John...

9/11 changed everything!

I think Bush went in believing that overthrowing Saddam was necessary for advancing the war on terror and that it would be a quick military battle. They didn't expect a nation-building mission, even though people warned of the insurgency, and now we're stuck.

Regardless, in my view this is an odd criticism for Bush to level against Gore. I know the Republicans went isolationist when we bombed Yugoslavia, but to describe that as nation building is a stretch. After Somalia went bad Clinton didn't do much at all about Rwanda, which is one of the greatest shames of his presidency. And of course we let Iraq just sit there.

Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson

by: Brendan - 2008-02-09 10:42 …………

Good summary if the situation...

9/11 changed everything!

I think Bush went in believing that overthrowing Saddam was
necessary for advancing the war on terror and that it would be a quick
military battle. They didn't expect a nation-building mission, even
though people warned of the insurgency, and now we're stuck.

Even so, if we are to believe the two main planks of the liberal criticism of the war, i.e. 1) al Qaeda was not in Iraq before the war, and 2) the Iraq war is the best recruiting vehicle ever for Bin Laden, then to me this amounts to the flypaper theory working (whether it actually was the plan going in or not) because we have killed and captured thousands upon thousands of terrorists in Iraq since the start of the war. 

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

by: GoRight - 2008-02-09 17:49 ………… parent •

Cause

We are so winning......... right!

Heard the word victory out of Bush's mouth lately.

The Great Power of the US can't even get troops from Nato to help the US in Afghanistan.

I'm only half stupid

by: missliberties - 2008-02-09 19:35 ………… parent •

The flypaper theory works better

if our missteps don't result in breeding new flies.

If they are able to recruit faster than we can kill then we have a problem and should rethink our approach.

Which, to be fair, I think we finally did. I believe we're doing the best we can in Iraq now, I just wonder whether it matters anymore. I don't think the war is "lost" any more than it is "won" but I really have no idea what Iraq will look like 10 years from now.

Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson

by: Brendan - 2008-02-09 19:43 ………… parent •

The War has accomplished

exactly the opposite of what the experiment was designed to do....... create a democracy in Iraq that would then spread throughout the region.

Iraq is worse off, a picture of authoritarian rule. Pakistan has been sucked into the mess, while Afganistan is destabilizing.

Yet the neo-cons the elite intellectuals who pushed for this war, refuse to accept reality. The arrogance is stunning.

I'm only half stupid

by: missliberties - 2008-02-09 19:57 ………… parent •

Nonsense. Pure nonsense. That is all.

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

by: GoRight - 2008-02-09 20:11 ………… parent •

Time to Face Facts

What IS non-sense and wrong headed is your refusal to accept the fact that the War in Iraq achieved the exact opposite result that was intended.

I'm only half stupid

by: missliberties - 2008-02-09 20:55 ………… parent •

Nope. You're wrong.

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

by: GoRight - 2008-02-09 21:27 ………… parent •

You are being obtuse

If you are for the war then you should support the newly annointed neo-con acolyte in training----John McCain.

I'm only half stupid

by: missliberties - 2008-02-09 21:58 ………… parent •

We're not breeding new flies by increasing Bin Laden's ...

recruitment.  We are doing exactly what flypaper is intended to do, bringing the flies to us.  I don't make a distinction between the flies that were already buzzing around us and any others that care to come join them from who knows where.  They were out there all along even if they hadn't signed up yet.

In other words, I don't only want to deal with those flies that were on the rolls on 9/11, I also want to deal with any flies that are likely to join the rolls any time in the future as well.  Why would we want to only deal with 1/2 of the problem? 

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

by: GoRight - 2008-02-09 20:09 ………… parent •

But they weren't likely to join the rolls

absent a compelling reason.

I think we pushed some fence sitters onto the other side with our initial missteps.

Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson

by: Brendan - 2008-02-10 23:53 ………… parent •

Well ...

I would take the use of force very seriously. I
would be guarded in my approach. I don't think we can be all things to
all people in the world. I think we've got to be very careful when we
commit our troops. The vice president and I have a disagreement about
the use of troops. He believes in nation building. I would be very
careful about using our troops as nation builders. I believe the role
of the military is to fight and win war and therefore prevent war from
happening in the first place.

I'd like to understand your thinking here:

  1. You don't think that Bush is serious about his use of force? :)
  2. You don't think that he is guarding his ability to continue the use of force? :)
  3. You think that we can somehow be all things to all people in the world?
  4. You don't think it is obvious that Bush didn't intend to be stuck using the military to nation build in Iraq? :)
  5. You don't believe that the planning done before the war was primarily focused on "fighting and winning the war" (i.e. ousting Saddam which was completed in a couple of weeks time with very few casualties)? :)

If we take all of the criticisms of Bush from liberals don't they actually paint a picture that is completely consistent with the quote above? I contend that they, in fact, do just that. :)

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

by: GoRight - 2008-02-09 18:01 …………

Like I've said before,

I just think you're being coy. :)

It was a terrible idea exacerbated by being done in the most terrible way possible. That's what I think.

by: John - 2008-02-09 18:52 ………… parent •