Did Bush challenge Al Queda?

[Michigander]

In a speech today, President Bush said something that struck me as almost a taunt to Al Queda (and/or the liberal voters in the US).

He said,

And we're not going to cut and run if I'm in the Oval Office.

I realize this is out of context, and a lot of context it was. But I heard this excerpt on radio news and thought, "is Bush daring Al Queda (or any terrorists) to attack the US prior to the November elections, a la Spain?"



Here is a link to the text of the speech.

 

[SodaPop]

Remember when he said, "BRING IT ON"?????????

 

[Thumper]

There is a bigger disconnect between Tejas and Michigan than I thought if you think there's anything wrong with Bush's statement, context or not.

 

[Michigander]

For the record: I did not say it was wrong.

 

[Thumper]

Cool enough. For the record, my sentences aren't often as stilted as the one represented above. Long day.

 

[Art Eatman]

Well, it ain't perzackly the language of diplomacy, but then I've never understood why you're supposed to make nice with somebody who's publicly vowed to destroy you.

Art

 

[HBK]

I agree with Art. I don't see why we should play nice with terrorists. If they say they are out to destroy us, we should let them know that we aren't going to lie back and take it. His language is strong, but it would have to get a lot stronger before I had a problem with it.

 

[PATH]

Yup! Al-Qaeda cam eup on the big dogs porch and is gonna get a whoopin!
Remember folks, "don't mess with Texas"!

 

[johnc522]

Bring it on

I took Bush's words as a mere statement of fact. Michigander, we are in a war to the death. Either Islamofascism is crushed by the forces of civilization, or we are down the tubes. The time to press the war is NOW, before the thugs get access to nukes or to bioweapons. Actually, bioweapons seem to me to be more of a longterm threat than nukes.
Any thinking American needs to get behind Bush and our brave troops who are defending freedom and the rights of man.

 

[foghornl]

It is time to take the 'kid gloves' off the steel fists, and put on the Titanium ones....

 

[bountyhunter]

In manager training classes, that is what is called:

"setting the level of expectation"

What is actually being said is to set the stage for the massive amounts of money he will soon ask for, additional troops being locked "in country" and prevented from rotating out, possibly the re-instatement of the draft, and a long, very bloody guerilla war which will require the US to maintain a major military force in country to prevent the collapse of the government we are going to install.

Bottom line, that sentence translates into: the worst is yet to come.

 

[bountyhunter]

Well, it ain't perzackly the language of diplomacy, but then I've never understood why you're supposed to make nice with somebody who's publicly vowed to destroy you.

Bush's remarks were directed more to us than them.... so that in the future when the SHTF, he can claim he warned everybody. It is also a taunt against his opposition, since the repubs are claiming the dems would not be able to fight a WOT.

 

[Thumper]

"setting the level of expectation"

Interesting characterization...I submit that expectations were set, not by Bush's "harsh words," but by radical Islamists ramming hijacked aircraft into our buildings.

You hatred of Bush leaves you with a very interesting world view.

 

[MK11]

Those words were directed to American voters, the actions of Al Queda aren't exactly going to be influenced by a presidential speech.

I'll be a lot more impressed when Bush can finally back up his "wanted dead or alive" comments about Bin Laden from three years ago. Al-Queda isn't getting "a whooping" until Bin Laden and his cronies are dead.

 

[WIG19]

Those words were directed to American voters, the actions of Al Queda aren't exactly going to be influenced by a presidential speech.

I'll be a lot more impressed when Bush can finally back up his "wanted dead or alive" comments about Bin Laden from three years ago. Al-Queda isn't getting "a whooping" until Bin Laden and his cronies are dead.
---------------------------------------
A little of both I think; that is the method by which a President also sends an international message that they count on us to not bail on the current effort (true, or not).

However, I also agree that he hasn't met one of the basic commitments to the GWOT until he gets back to real business, and one of those on the "to do" list is to exterminate UBL & Co. My loved ones in the 10th Mtn are a bit tired of reactive procedures; as good as the 10th and others are, they should've never pulled TF-Dagger out of there when they were capable of smoking this retard. Let's get back to business. Rational people already know the diff between OEF and RVN, so get over the analogies, hunt this varmint and put a 168-grainer where it needs to be. Just my $.02

 

[bountyhunter]

[QUOTE"setting the level of expectation"

Interesting characterization...I submit that expectations were set, not by Bush's "harsh words," but by radical Islamists ramming hijacked aircraft into our buildings.

You hatred of Bush leaves you with a very interesting world view.

[/QUOTE] Your constant retreat to ad hominem leaves us all with a very clear view of your mental boundaries.

Setting expectations is not a characterization, it is exactly what is going on right now. All the uglies are being floated up including the spectre of another compulsory military conscription, major increases in military budgets, as well as significant troop strength increases and durations of service. "That these things are what they are, do not blame me.." (Charles Dickens) Every one of these is a matter of public record for statements made by admin officials in the last week.

BTW: your rabid pro Bush knee jerk reactionaryism makes you see every phrase on the internet as a threat to your leader. If you actually knew anything about leadership (or had ever been through command training) you would know that setting appropriate expectations is an integral part of leadership and it is actually complimentary.

 

[Thumper]

If you actually knew anything about leadership (or had ever been through command training) you would know that setting appropriate expectations is an integral part of leadership and it is actually complimentary.

You assume a lot, o angry one.

See "appeal to authority" fallacy, usually taught at the same time one learns of argumentum ad hominem fallacies.

For your general fund of knowledge, attacking my views because I am "rabid[ly] pro Bush" is known as a "circumstantial ad hominem."



For someone that cries often of the ad hominem, your ability to incorporate both fallacies into your last diatribe border on hilarity.

Is it possible that your desire to appease the Islamists might be clouding your judgement? Or perhaps it's the involvement of your wife?

Apropos of nothing, pointing out errors in judgement stemming from flaws of character are NOT ad hominem attacks.

Back to the topic: In light of the Middle East's societal views on perceived weaknesses, I see no problem with goading one's enemy.

 

[JohnBT]

So you're saying the President challenged them and that's why they flew those planes into the buildings?

Oh, but they flew the planes into the buildings first, so that can't be right.

Is calling them a few names and issuing a few dares going to change their intentions and behavior at this point? Nope. They've been mad for a good ten years or so. Right? Go look up their previous terrorist acts if you think I'm off base here.

IT'S THE PRESIDENT'S FAULT, IT'S THE PRESIDENT'S FAULT.
Except he wasn't President when they started this war.

John

 

[fix]

If you actually knew anything about leadership (or had ever been through command training) you would know that setting appropriate expectations is an integral part of leadership and it is actually complimentary.

Your wife teach you that?

 

[Sean Smith]

Where is an indifferent shrug icon when you need one?

And we're not going to cut and run if I'm in the Oval Office.

...Seems like a stunning statement of the obvious.

And I assume the comments about bountyhunter's wife are based on the fact he bases his "expertise" in military affairs and experience with the "military lifestyle" on the fact that he married it...

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthre...perpage=25&highlight=wife combat&pagenumber=2

 

[Art Eatman]

Too much personal stuff, not much meat on the bones.