If humans were meant to vote, god would have given us candidates
It appears that W. isn’t so sure of his military stance with China. He’s covering his ass with a Reagan era antimissile system that looks to violate 30 years of peace treaties between the US and other former Soviet affiliated nations, including China. I want everyone to remember the overwhelming margin that Bush DIDN’T win by. He lost (nationally) by about 540,000 votes.
Reader interactions
8 Replies to “If humans were meant to vote, god would have given us candidates”
Comments are closed.
the ABM treaties were developed in the Cold War era when there were much higher tensions and one knew exactly who their enemies were. Now that the USSR has fallen apart, the treaty with the USSR is no longer valid. just because there are successor states does not mean that we have to continue a treaty with them. in fact, most of the NIS have denuclearized. In a world where international terrorism is a much larger threat than any cooked up pre-emptive strike from a superpower could ever be an ABM system sound just fine to me.
The fact that Bush lost the popular vote doesn’t mitigate this fact. And just because you don’t like Bush doesn’t warrant calling the ABM policy ‘Reagan-Era,’ nor does it mean you have to automatically be against it as a faithful democrat.
I hear you! Everyday my Apple Excite home page is graced by the wise choices of the Republican party and the son of the worlds most infamous drug lord.
ABM treaties were updated after the fall of the Soviet Union to include Russia and the other newly formed nations. So to some extent we are beholden to the treaty. The threat of international terrorism hasn’t really been emphasized by Bush. He appears to be more concerned with threats from China and Russia, even though he has toyed with the idea of a joint antimissile system with Russia.
The real problem that I have with this is that it could create really unnecessary tension between us and the Chinese and even the Russians at a time when W. is kind of bumbling around testing his international effectiveness.
This proposed policy is very much akin to Reagan’s Star Wars program. To me this seems to be a “Reagan-Era” move. And his credibility in office is severely hampered in a lot of people’s minds by the shady circumstances by which he was elected.
Gumby or Qumby. The fact of the matter whether you like Bush or not is that he does not think before he opens his mouth. He shows no diplomacy which I would say is vital in politics and an especially important quality to have as the President of the United States. So far he has provoked or confused many countries throughout the world with his lack of diplomacy thus causing high tensions that did not exist prior to his term. And I do think it is relevant that Bush lost the popular vote because we have someone in office representing us as a nation that we did not choose to represent us. P.S. The Cold War Era “enemies” were created by propaganda fed to us by wonderful politicians that thought along the lines of our current president and lined their pockets with illegal monies from their covert arms and drug operations and dealings (Daddy Bush).
the ABM treaties were developed in the Cold War era when there were much higher tensions and one knew exactly who their enemies were. Now that the USSR has fallen apart, the treaty with the USSR is no longer valid. just because there are successor states does not mean that we have to continue a treaty with them. in fact, most of the NIS have denuclearized. In a world where international terrorism is a much larger threat than any cooked up pre-emptive strike from a superpower could ever be an ABM system sound just fine to me.
The fact that Bush lost the popular vote doesn’t mitigate this fact. And just because you don’t like Bush doesn’t warrant calling the ABM policy ‘Reagan-Era,’ nor does it mean you have to automatically be against it as a faithful democrat.
I hear you! Everyday my Apple Excite home page is graced by the wise choices of the Republican party and the son of the worlds most infamous drug lord.
ABM treaties were updated after the fall of the Soviet Union to include Russia and the other newly formed nations. So to some extent we are beholden to the treaty. The threat of international terrorism hasn’t really been emphasized by Bush. He appears to be more concerned with threats from China and Russia, even though he has toyed with the idea of a joint antimissile system with Russia.
The real problem that I have with this is that it could create really unnecessary tension between us and the Chinese and even the Russians at a time when W. is kind of bumbling around testing his international effectiveness.
This proposed policy is very much akin to Reagan’s Star Wars program. To me this seems to be a “Reagan-Era” move. And his credibility in office is severely hampered in a lot of people’s minds by the shady circumstances by which he was elected.
Gumby or Qumby. The fact of the matter whether you like Bush or not is that he does not think before he opens his mouth. He shows no diplomacy which I would say is vital in politics and an especially important quality to have as the President of the United States. So far he has provoked or confused many countries throughout the world with his lack of diplomacy thus causing high tensions that did not exist prior to his term. And I do think it is relevant that Bush lost the popular vote because we have someone in office representing us as a nation that we did not choose to represent us. P.S. The Cold War Era “enemies” were created by propaganda fed to us by wonderful politicians that thought along the lines of our current president and lined their pockets with illegal monies from their covert arms and drug operations and dealings (Daddy Bush).