Politics, Entertainment, News, Gossip, Sports, Opinion, Perspectives. Make a comment. Visit our Forum. We want to hear what you think?

Tuesday, January 03, 2006

Why George Walker Bush Should Resign-Part 4

The following post is in response to a dialogue begun between the administrator of this site and an erudite visitor who comments on opinions seen here at YouThinkWhatdotcom

    We clearly do not have an imminent danger from Iraq that we need to respond within ten minutes.

    The one time we needed to respond in ten minutes, we actually had as long as ninety minutes, we still did not have the executive decision making capability necessary to make these critical “not even split second” security decisions. This administration bears full responsibility for that. And one day in the future will be called to account for it, though likely not in this Republican house dominated term.

    It is almost laughable that we have an administration that justifies the necessity of acting without hesitation when it concerns phone calls, while justifying slow response and entire lack of action in regards to rogue jets flying through our skies.At any other time a president who failed to respond to rogue jets in this fashion would be investigated or at least calling for an investigation into the failure of security, the failure of NORAD. What was the length of time previously estimated we would have to respond to a Soviet missile attack? Seems to me it was something like 6 or 7 minutes. But George can’t even muster an adequate response in 90.

    We invaded Iraq under the pretense Iraq had nuclear weapons of which it has clearly been demonstrated Iraq had none. There are many countries that have nuclear weapons. In 1969 or 1970 an undergrad student made one at Harvard or Yale, one of the larger universities, from what he said was freely available information, so it is not so difficult to do. What is more critical, at least, is the need for a delivery system. There are few countries in the world that have missiles capable of reaching the United States. and the only country that might soon have such a missile, that is not an ally, is North Korea. But if they launch missiles and it takes us 90 minutes to respond, well it just might be too late.
READ MORE! CONTINUES HERE!

Why George Walker Bush Should Resign-Part 3

The following post is in response to a dialogue begun between the administrator of this site and an erudite visitor who comments on opinions seen here at YouThinkWhatdotcom
    It is questionable whether the method GWB used/is using to spy on citizens of the United States is necessary even in times of war, since other measures have been put in place by the Congress to allow such surveillance as long as it is monitored. (Following RMN’s resignation Senator Frank Church chaired a committee that investigated the uses and abuses of the intelligence derived from the wiretaps. From his report on electronic surveillance, emerged the proposal to create the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The Act both set limits on electronic surveillance, and created a secret court within the Department of Justice - the FISA Court -- that could, within these limits, grant law enforcement's requests to engage in electronic surveillance.)
READ MORE! CONTINUES HERE!

Why George Walker Bush Should Resign-Part 2

The following post is in response to a dialogue begun between the administrator of this site and an erudite visitor who comments on opinions seen here at YouThinkWhatdotcom
    We are now calling Iraq a war, because it dignifies our aggression over there. We still refuse to call the enemy combatants prisoners of war, because we have decided there is no official military opposition in Iraq. If there is no military opposition in Iraq then what we have is citizens of Iraq resisting what they consider an illegal occupation. (Is there any sovereign nation that considers occupation by another nation to be legal?)
    So which is it? Is it war or occupation? If it is war then the captives must be prisoners of war, and logically we in the US should be in danger from Iraq. However, if it is an occupation then we in the US are not in danger in the US from Iraqis. We clearly are not in danger of the Iraqis mounting an attack here in the United States. We are in danger in Iraq as long as we continue to occupy Iraq. There is no imminent danger in the US.

    Therefore, there is no need for extreme measures i.e., spying on one’s own citizens as might be argued in a time of a war of defense, rather than a war of aggression.
READ MORE! CONTINUES HERE!

Why George Walker Bush Should Resign

The following post is in response to a dialogue begun between the administrator of this site and an erudite visitor who comments on opinions seen here at YouThinkWhatdotcom.
    Firstly, the illegal act I speak of is the surveillance of citizens without the required warrant, which can be obtained when necessary after the fact. Some experts, who just happen to be Republican experts, say George Walker Bush’s wiretaps are as illegal as Richard Milhouse Nixon’s. In fact these same Republicans say GWB’s wiretap offenses are as impeachable as RMN’s.

    Secondly, are we really at war? If we are, with whom are we at war? I define an act of war as a situation where we are under attack, and defending ourselves, and attacking back, retaliating. Currently we are not under attack. To say we are still under attack four years after 9-11-01 is equivalent to saying we were still at war in 1949, which we were not.

    09-11-01 was one single isolated attack of which it has never been clearly demonstrated or proven who the attackers were. It seems clear that Iraq was not the country that attacked the US. It is also clear that Iraq did not possess and does not possess missiles that could make it here, jets that could make it here, or even boats that could reach our shores.


The first in a series of four
READ MORE! CONTINUES HERE!