I Voted For Barack Obama
The Most Dangerous Sentence in Obama’s Second Inaugural Address
In regards to Bill Kristol’s essay “The Most Dangerous Sentence in Obama’s Second Inaugural Address”, anyone reading this who continues to regard Kristol as a serious person should perhaps consider his contribution to foreign policy and national security.
Kristol is the author of The Project for a New American Century, which is the neo-imperialistic manifesto that informed the foreign policy of the Bush Administration before 911. The Bush people came to town determined to go to war, hopefully with Iraq, but with any belligerent they could find. China almost provided the partner they needed by accident as a result of the spy plane incident. Colin Powell was able to get ahead of the curve and defused the situation in such a way that China became an important partner after 911. But Kristol and the saber rattlers were just barely contained.
Of course, 911 gave Cheney and his Chicken Hawks the pretext they needed to start a war, first in Afghanistan, and then in Iraq. With our bases in Kuwait, we didn’t need to go into Iraq to eventually remove Hussein and, even if we did, we didn’t need to expand our footprint beyond Baghdad International Airport to achieve regime change in collaboration with the United Nations inspection regime.
The short version is that, everybody that died after Baghdad International was taken died needlessly to fulfill Kristol’s wet dream about his notions of warfare and his need to stoke his libido with a war or two. Even discounting the fact that the invasion was an unnecessary blunder based on phoney intelligence, the conduct of the occupation was a monument of stupendous incompetence by Cheney, Rumsfeld and the various Chicken Hawks that subscribed to Kristol’s world view. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were killed and displaced, and their nation reduced to a stone age status as a direct result of people who agreed with Kristol’s Project for a New American Century and the world is a far more dangerous place as a direct result. Krisot’s suggestion that Obama is unmindful of the example of WWII while he represents military competence is pure pixie dust.
As I understand it, Obama has been working to restore the Clinton nation building agenda that was abandoned by the Bush administration. Kristol’s idea that Obama’s construction of a single line in his speech reflects a fatal inattention to the military and diplomatic exigencies is a product of equal parts an imagination informed by the alternative universe of the Project for the New American Century and inflamed by the overripe narcissism of his libido.
Everything these people touch turns to ****.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/most-dangerous-sentence-obama-s-second-inaugural-address_696642.html?utm_source=Kristol%20Alert%20-%2001/22/2013&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=TWS%20Alerts
In an otherwise unmemorable second inaugural speech, I was struck by one sentence: ‘But we are also heirs to those who won the peace and not just the war, who turned sworn enemies into the surest of friends, and we must carry those lessons into this time as well.’
———————————————————————-
Thomasw540/ramrodd
In regards to Bill Kristol’s essay “The Most Dangerous Sentence in Obama’s Second Inaugural Address”, anyone reading this who continues to regard Kristol as a serious person should perhaps consider his contribution to foreign policy and national security.
Kristol is the author of The Project for a New American Century, which is the neo-imperialistic manifesto that informed the foreign policy of the Bush Administration before 911. The Bush people came to town determined to go to war, hopefully with Iraq, but with any belligerent they could find. China almost provided the partner they needed by accident as a result of the spy plane incident. Colin Powell was able to get ahead of the curve and defused the situation in such a way that China became an important partner after 911. But Kristol and the saber rattlers were just barely contained.
Of course, 911 gave Cheney and his Chicken Hawks the pretext they needed to start a war, first in Afghanistan, and then in Iraq. With our ba
The short version is that, everybody that died after Baghdad International was taken died needlessly to fulfill Kristol’s wet dream about his notions of warfare and his need to stoke his libido with a war or two. Even discounting the fact that the invasion was an unnecessary blunder ba
As I understand it, Obama has been working to restore the Clinton nation building agenda that was abandoned by the Bush administration. Kristol’s idea that Obama’s construction of a single line in his speech reflects a fatal inattention to the military and diplomatic exigencies is a product of equal parts an imagination informed by the alternative universe of the Project for the New American Century and inflamed by the overripe narcissism of his libido.
Everything these people touch turns to ****.
By:
Ramrodd
Age:
61-65
,
Male
