Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Vattel

(9,289 posts)

24. I couldn't disagree more. We can have it both ways.

Reply to Peacetrain (Original post)

Wed Sep 24, 2014, 06:45 PM

Sep 2014

"Go ballistic because Bush did not listen to warnings about Al Qaeda and attacks on our country happened..

or

Go ballistic because Obama acts proactively when getting intelligence on possible attacks on our country."

This is a false dichotomy. Bush should have listened to warnings and should have protected our commercial airlines. Obama should not fight preventive wars of choice based on speculation about future threats. I go ballistic about both.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

28 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

We can't have it both ways.. and I do not have a simple answer for any of it.. [View all] Peacetrain Sep 2014 OP

We're running blind CJCRANE Sep 2014 #1

That was then and this is now. Skidmore Sep 2014 #9

We never will control the ME RobertEarl Sep 2014 #15

The past does matter and history needs to be told. Skidmore Sep 2014 #16

Not talking about them RobertEarl Sep 2014 #17

This goes back much further than Bush/Cheney. Much further. Skidmore Sep 2014 #19

Did I not mention crusade? RobertEarl Sep 2014 #25

I essentially agree with Peacetrain. Skidmore Sep 2014 #28

Why is it "we" upaloopa Sep 2014 #2

why do you say that? Schema Thing Sep 2014 #3

Sure it is. It is our funding our planes upaloopa Sep 2014 #8

That's up in the air. Skidmore Sep 2014 #10

Can't win for trying, our President. Seriously...I wouldn't want that job. nt msanthrope Sep 2014 #4

I think he's the best man for the job CJCRANE Sep 2014 #7

OIL rurallib Sep 2014 #5

it might be more meaningful if you did. Just saying "oil" seems kind of sophomoric. KittyWampus Sep 2014 #6

yes it was an excellent OP rurallib Sep 2014 #11

It's also not wrong... DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #22

K & R. n/t FSogol Sep 2014 #12

Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Sep 2014 #13

Right... whatchamacallit Sep 2014 #14

Let's play what if... it's a game I hate but let's play anyway justiceischeap Sep 2014 #18

But the hijackers were based in Hamburg CJCRANE Sep 2014 #20

Not a good game whatchamacallit Sep 2014 #23

How quickly we forget history... DavidG_WI Sep 2014 #21

No, the Taliban rejected Bush's demand. former9thward Sep 2014 #27

I couldn't disagree more. We can have it both ways. Vattel Sep 2014 #24

I think this whole mess is so confusing that even those of us who have been against every war since jwirr Sep 2014 #26