The Bush ads and 9/11

The Bush ads and 9/11
: I’ve taken a day to post my view of Bush’s use of 9/11 images in his campaign ads because I had to grapple with it.

On the one hand, the idea of exploiting those images is frightening to me — because the images themselves still frighten me; they bring back sorrow and terror every time I see them.

But on the other hand, I believe it is vital that we remember the horror of that day and act on it.

If we forget what happened or shove those memories into a PC closet we’re not supposed to open, then that is dangerous.

And if we do not admit that we are at war because of 9/11, then that, too, is dangerous.

So I believe that the war on terror must be a campaign issue. I want to see both candidates (but especially Kerry) pushed hard on what their continuing response will be to the attacks on us and the need to protect us. I fear that Kerry was so used to responding to Dean’s attacks, representing a minority of the electorate, that he will go soft on terror. And that, is dangerous.

So, in the end, I think it is necessary to frankly, even bluntly, include the war on terrorism and terror’s attack on America in the presidential campaign. I won’t criticize the use of the images in the ads. Obviously, care needs to be taken not to exploit them and the suffering behind them. But it’s more important that we make sure our government works hard to make sure that suffering does not come to our streets again.

: Matthew Yglesias and Kevin Drum can’t get worked up over this either.

  • jlb

    That was my thought when I first heard about the ads… be careful not to exploit the events, but people must be reminded, forcefully, what is at stake here. It hurts to think of all of the people who lost friends and family on 9/11, who certainly don’t need to be so forcefully reminded, but everyone else (at from what I can see), has gone so comepletely back to business as usual that I think they’ve forgotten the true import of those events.
    jlb

  • http://tvh.rjwest.com HH

    “So I believe that the war on terror must be a campaign issue.”
    It’s a sad commentary that this is even a subject for debate.

  • Doug

    My issue with Bush using the 9/11 imagery (and having the Republicans stage their convention at MSG) is his administrations continued opposition to the 9/11 probe. 9/11 and the war on terror should be an issue in the campaign. He was a strong leader… but if that’s the case, he should be prepared to answer questions about what he knew of 9/11 as a strong leader. His offered one hour testimony to two members of Tom Kean’s commission is unacceptable. This being the case, he is setting himself up to get hammered by offended 9/11 families. It just seems hypocritical to me…

  • shark

    I disagree. WHy should Bush do anything for the 9/11 commission now? The Dems (as has already been shown through various leaked memos) are quite ready and willing to exploit anything Bush will say during the election, even to the point of lies and smears.
    So blame Daschle and Kennedy and company….

  • http://www.spacerook.com Trent

    I’m not against using 9/11 in the ads. But I definitely think showing a flag-draped stretcher is gratuitous. That person did not ask to be in your political ad. That person DIED as a result of the government’s failure. Now they are being used as a campaign prop for that same government to stay in power?
    What’s really interesting is how this will effect the Republican convention. Early thoughts were that it would be 9/11 24/7. This will change that.

  • Doug

    Pot. Kettle. To which memos do you refer? The ones exploited by a Republican staffer off the Democrats internal network? Listen, I can see where you’re coming from, but this commission is nonpartisan and the intended purpose is to find out what really happened leading up to 9/11. Are you proposing that the better option is to kill it and just move forward with the war on terror, while being none the wiser? If the commission finds the Clinton administration at fault, you don’t think Republicans will line up to blame Clinton and exploit that? As Jeff says, “… it’s more important that we make sure our government works hard to make sure that suffering does not come to our streets again.” Come on, lets not forget:
    We’re all in this together.

  • Jim

    I’m with you on this one, Jeff…
    This is *the* issue of this campaign. Even absent such a life-or-death issue, Kerry’s domestic policies are non-starters anyway. Let’s face it, even if Kerry were to win his policy proposals would never see the light of day in a Republican-dominated Congress. Therefore, I’m not terribly interested where he stands on most domestic issues – it’s irrelevant…And since Democrats have decided that filibustering the president’s pick is perfectly acceptable, guess what would happen to any judge he nominated?
    What I’d like to see from Bush: where do we go from here? Obviously we’re going to continue pursuing bin Laden, but what else? How do we handle Syria, North Korea, the crumbling regime in Iran, the spread of Wahhabism, etc. What other trouble spots are we keeping our eyes on? I know where he’s been, what I want to hear is where he’s going…
    What I’d like to see from Kerry: a position. Just one position on the War on Terror. I want to see someone corner him with the opposition that was bought and paid for by UN Oil for Food corruption. From what we already know, that corruption reached high into the French and Russian governments (as well as others) and those countries were *never* going to vote to authorize force – they had lucrative oil contracts to protect. And will he now renounce the statements of all the Democrats (and his own statements if he made any along those lines) who claimed it was *Bush* whose oil interests in Iraq were the problem?
    He needs to tell the American people how he was going to work his magical voodoo on people who were already bought and paid for by the opposing team. That simple question brings down his entire argument about how “wrong” Bush was on Iraq…
    Kerry’s answer to date has been “work with our allies”…He has yet to answer the question: How long were you willing to give Saddam to dig in his defenses and acquire more armaments from his French and Russian suppliers while you got around to figuring out (as Bush evidently did rather early on) that they were already bought off and there was no point in continuing the conversation? Six months? A year? Two? However long a couple of cruise missiles a month into an empty building or two could delay the decision?
    How long were you going to keep hundreds of thousands of American troops in the field losing battle-readiness (and morale) every day you spent waffling with the French? Were you planning on permanently camping those troops there so you could eventually use them when you got around to it – or would you wait until polls showed enough people demanding action?
    His pat answer for everything is “Take it to the United Nations”…That’s a cop-out…it’s passing the buck…it’s not an answer. An American president doesn’t have the option of passing the buck. It’s the nature of being *the* hyperpower. We’re the only ones with the ability to enforce anything meaningful on an international basis.
    The world looks to our president for leadership. Our leader’s tactic of choice in a crisis can’t be limited to going to the UN and asking other people what *they* think he should do. If he doesn’t have any ideas of his own, then he should say so. If he does, I want to hear them…
    (And, by the way, he only gets to pick one side of the issue…In war, there’s no such thing as straddling the fence…)

  • shark

    I’m not against using 9/11 in the ads. But I definitely think showing a flag-draped stretcher is gratuitous. That person did not ask to be in your political ad. That person DIED as a result of the government’s failure. Now they are being used as a campaign prop for that same government to stay in power?

    I agree, we shouldn’t see flag drapped stretchers. We should see the video of people being forced to jump from the towers. Because we need to be reminded as brutally as possible just what happened. Because if this is an election between a President who has made good progress in the terror war and a candidate who views terrorism as a “law enforcement matter”, then we had better all know exactly what the stakes are. And America has already forgotten.

  • shark

    Come on, lets not forget:
    We’re all in this together.

    After watching the Dems. primary campaign season….I seriously doubt that

  • Catherine

    As it turns out, the handful of victims families offended have gone on record that they hate Bush, blame him for not protecting their families (“while my husband was dying, Bush was in Florida having milk and cookies with second graders) in articles printed in other newspapers and in Salon. One is a Kerry campaign manager and the wives photographed sadly holding their wedding rings in the daily news are part of anti-war groups. The links are on Lt. Smash and Instapundit.
    I think Lileks said it best when he said that imagine if FDR was not to mention Pearl Harbor and the war in 1944. Or would people then be questioning the importance or how necessary of the war since there were no air raids on Manhattan.
    People should ask why didn’t Kerry mention the war when he was making his acceptance speech the other day

  • Mike G

    The only reason the few thousand survivors of victims of 9-11 have any ability to draw press attention is because there aren’t already half a million survivors of the nuking of Boston.
    As James Lileks said today, “we can argue about the future of Western Civilization after we’ve ensured Western Civilization will survive.” That is THE campaign issue. The only people who don’t like Bush using it as a campaign issue are the ones who know they will LOSE that campaign issue. Like most political ads, Bush’s are syrupy drivel, but they’re not wrong to use the horror of that day. They would be wrong to pretend it didn’t happen and go on about a prescription drug benefit for seniors or whatever other nanoissue Kerry plans to run on.

  • hen

    i believe Kerry made it perfectly clear that he as President wd apologize to the French and Germans and treat all acts of terrorism as an UN/criminal matter.
    yes i wd love to see Kerry make a case for voting for him based on that. and his flip flopping on the war; on his refusal to approve additional funds for our war effort; his flip flopping on gay marriage; his liberal voting record; his voting against every major weapon system during the past 20 yrs, etc.

  • shark

    Lost in this discussion is the hypocracy of the media I notice that they have no problem exploiting 9/11 images for their own usage…

  • daudder

    wait, wait…the ads are not about policy or actions, just an attempt (successful if you listen to the reveiws) to tap into emotions. Saying you have a plan is very different than DETAILING a plan.
    And by the way, why has GWB been so shy about being seen honoring the dead soldiers from Iraq. If this was about policy and vision, then where is that fawking ad.

  • Max

    Word Daudder, OK to show the flag drapped dead of 9/11 but not the flag drapped dead coming back from Iraq? Thus the tackiness and chink in the armor that will be exploited. Can’t have your cake an eat it too.

  • syn

    I live in NYC and from what I have heard over the past two years, very few people have spoken about the events of 9/11, until this ad appeared.
    I get the feeling people in NYC want to forget 9/11 like they forgot the 1993 bombing.
    I think it is a disgrace to those whose lives were lost to forget what it was which had taken their lives.
    The ad reminds us that we cannot afford the luxury of forgetfulness otherwise we will end up right back where we started.

  • syn

    Doug
    The Republican National Convention was scheduled to be held in NYC far in advance of the events of 9/11.
    Sadly, this fact will not be recognized as truth but, instead will be twisted in order to comply with the all-consuming conspiracy theorists agenda.

  • vaildog

    Max and daudder,
    So you guys really want it both ways. we were told by those on the left that the administration was “hiding the truth” by not showing the coffins arriving at Dover. Well now you are criticizing the adminitstration for showing why the war in Iraq was neccessary in the first place.

  • shark

    looks like Daudder totally misses the point, lost in his partisian rhetoric…I think that “Max” (Daudder in disguise?) does also.

  • Jim

    Max and Daudder –
    Is there any doubt that both of you would have collapsed into wheezing fits if Bush had aired an ad about how he understands and appreciates the solemn duty that is the responsibility of sending young men and women into harm’s way, talking about the agonizing hours that went into his decisionmaking – all dubbed over Bush visiting with the troops, their families, and yes – including him saluting a draped coffin. At the end, the voiceover contrasts that of Kerry’s complete lack of experience in that arena – he commanded a handful of men for four months, Bush has led a nation at war for almost 3 years….Can we afford to find out if Kerry has what it takes to lead a nation at war?…Flashing on the screen: President Bush…Steady leadership in times of change…Fadeout…
    I dare say that I’m on pretty safe ground when I say that if that hypothetical ad were actually to ever air (thereby satisfying your stated “desire” to see him with a draped coffin) we’d want to have medical professionals standing by as you fell into convulsions about how Bush was exploiting the tragedy of a serviceman’s death.
    Kerry has exploited the 9/11 tragedy by parading around the country with the head of the firefighter’s union by his side for months now hiding behind their heroism to viciously attack the president on how he has dealt with world events from that day forward…For Kerry or any of his would-be supporters to attempt to claim some sort of “9/11 high moral ground” now is laughable. That horse left the barn a long time ago…
    You raise a bogus point in a poor attempt to score points against Bush. If you don’t like Bush and the imagery he used, it’s OK just to say you don’t like it…Trying to stand on some imagined principle that would have induced apoplexy were it to have actually happened the way you proposed is insincere at best, and a cheap shot at worst…
    Admit that *nothing* that Bush does will please you unless he were to simply call Kerry and hand him the keys to the White House without a fight. Every time he does something else, you will pretend to be outraged…outraged!…that Bush would run on his record…
    Nice try…

  • Doctor Slack

    “Showing why the war on Iraq was necessary”? Let me guess, you thought the hijackers were Iraqis, right? And you swallowed every claim about the “terror link” with Saddam, right?
    I say, if Bush wants to try to exploit those images, let him try. It will keep live the debate about what he has actually done in office. Half-assed interventions leading thus far to war-torn shell states in Iraq and Afghanistan. Cutting off funds to the firefighters whose images he’s so fond of using. Undermining nuclear proliferation treaties. Fumbling the ball on North Korea, repeatedly. Destroying America’s credibility with the international community and ruining the reputation of its intelligence services. And so on. And so on.
    Let him go there. Bring it on. I hope Kerry takes it to him.

  • Doug

    syn,
    Oh really? I’d like to see your evidence of that. This cached press release about the bidding process is dated on June 17, 2002.
    http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2004/convs/nycannouncer.html
    Maybe they NYC was in the running earlier on? Is that what you mean?

  • Charlie (Colorado)

    And by the way, why has GWB been so shy about being seen honoring the dead soldiers from Iraq. If this was about policy and vision, then where is that fawking ad.

    I take it you don’t watch TV much, then?
    Bush has given a number of speeches honoring both war dead, and the surviving soldiers, sailors, and Marines. (You may recall a carrier landing that made a lot of news.)
    He doesn’t tend to like a lot of press coverage of his private meetings with the families of war dead; that’s because, unlike Bill Clinton, he isn’t using the weepy scenes for political purposes.

  • http://myblahg.blogspot.com Robert McClelland

    >I won’t criticize the use of the images in the ads.
    So then you wouldn’t object to a Kerry ad that went something like this?
    Scene: Footage of the first WTC building in flames and the second one being hit. Cut to the second tower collapsing. Cut to the aftermath showing the rubble of the two towers and bodies being carried out of it.
    Voice-over: This is the legacy of Bush’s first term in office. Do you want to risk worse by giving him a second term? Vote Kerry because Bush has proven he can’t defend America.

  • John

    Saw the ads for the first time last night, and the brief usage of the imagry is likely to make most normal people wonder what the fuss is about, as far as the controversy about the ads themselves, as opposed to the actual event.
    There certainly is the potential for Bush, Rove and the Republicans to overplay their hand in New York during the convention, if Ground Zero is used as a gratuitous TV prop, in the same way Clinton’s walk through the corridors of the Staples Center during the 2000 DNC Convention looked like a boxer headed for the ring before an HBO bout. But the idea that 9/11 can just be shut in the closet for the next eight months as a campaign issue is not only silly, it insults the intellegence of the voters who will want to know about how both candidates plan to handle the terror issue before they touch the screen, punch the chad or pull the lever.

  • shark

    Doug-
    Mayor Bloomberg made it an immediate goal of his in the aftermath of 9/11 to attract the conventions of either of the two major parties. According to him, the Dems. wanted to come here but only if they were given exclusivity. Bloomberg actually wanted both and said no. So the Dems went up to Boston.

  • hen

    hey bobby i have a better idea for a Kerry ad: scenes of the WTC 1 bombing, the US Embassies in Africa, the USS Cole, the Khobar Tower, etc and then a voice saying: “Isn;t it time we went back to the 90’s and treat these minor criminal acts with the import that they deserve?”
    Then flash to — Kerry For President: The War on Terrorism is a Criminal Matter.
    do you like that?

  • Doug

    Shark,
    You’re 100% right. Bloomberg campaigned for both conventions. So this is the first time the RNC is being held in NYC, which is fine and good… but why is it being held so late? A cynic might say it would be to be close to the anniversary of 9/11. To some that’s fine, while to others it’s opportunistic. NYC as the convention location wasn’t in the cards (as far as I know) before 9/11. My response was in reference to syn’s comment about the convention being planned before 9/11.

  • Rootbeer

    he isn’t using the weepy scenes for political purposes.
    …which brings us right back around to where we started.

  • Jerry

    I’d like Doctor Slack to show us a piece of paper that says he’s not insane. It should be notorized with the appropriate seals and stamps.

  • Doctor Slack

    …and you are how old, Jerry?

  • http://www.thewaterglass.net Dave D

    “But I definitely think showing a flag-draped stretcher is gratuitous. That person did not ask to be in your political ad. That person DIED as a result of the government’s failure.”
    What an odd thing to say. I was under the impression that the people who were murdered in the 9/11 attacks died as a result of Islamic terrorists flying airplanes into buildings.

  • gavin

    Does it strike anyone how overplayed the democratic”outrage” is over the ads? Like the alledged subliminal “Rats” commercial of 2000′ it had the effect of making me think the Gore crowd was too effeminate to play in the big leagues. If they are already bawling over this, so early in the campaign I have to think they are already on the ropes. I’m undecided and would really like to hear Kerry’s ideas on protecting this country. Seeing democrats scurry under their Mom’s dress is not comforting, they are still fighting the perception of being weak on defense. This doesn’t help.

  • scott o

    gavin-
    ABSOLUTELY. I haven’t thought of that “Rats” thing in a long time, but man you nailed it. We’re Americans dammit. If we’re going to have a political fight, then lets have it. Instead, the ladies want to cry foul before they’ve even made it into the ring. If this looked bad in 00, imagine how it looks to a nation at war. Personally, I want to see Kerry blame Bush for 9-11. And I want to see Bush take credit for his response to 9-11. I want to hear Clinton say that he told Bush “watch out for those islamo-planes” on his way out of the oval office. I WANT TO SEE THE FIGHT, because only then can we pick the winner. So ding, ding baby, let’s get this party started right.

  • Ebb Tide

    When Truman ran ,did he use pictures of Pearl Harbor?
    ’nuff said.
    (in other words I think Bush can allude to 9-11, but should draw the line at using images of the victims, that is crass in my opinion.)

  • capt joe

    Robert is one of those Canadians that went into fits about how this was America’s comeupance mere days after 9/11. Remember the University of Victoria Prof (Sunera Thobani?) who said she was glad it happened because of all the blood on the collective US hands. Remember what the CBC said when people in the US complained about this attitude. “OH NO, the US is stifling dissent”.
    Give me a break robert. You are an outsider pooping on someone else’s greif.

  • KMK

    Doc my love,
    “Showing why the war on Iraq was necessary”? Let me guess, you thought the hijackers were Iraqis, right? And you swallowed every claim about the “terror link” with Saddam, right”?
    War in Iraq was necessary. Saddam needed to be removed, We never should have left him in Power under GB 41. Purely humanitarian IMO.
    “Half-assed interventions leading thus far to war-torn shell states in Iraq and Afghanistan”.
    I think that’s a matter of opinion.
    “Cutting off funds to the firefighters whose images he’s so fond of using.”
    The United States Fire Administration is undoubtedly the most widely recognized first responder community. Their grants are distributed through FEMA, also within DHS. The foremost funding program supporting the USFA is the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program. The goals of the assistance program include increasing the effectiveness of operations, health and safety, and new equipment in urban, suburban, and rural fire departments. For fiscal year 2003, Congress appropriated 750 million dollars to implement the program, and as of November 21, 2003, 406 million dollars to over 5800 fire departments had been awarded, a drastic increase in comparison with the 96 million in 2001, the first year of the program (www.usfa.fema.gov).
    “Undermining nuclear proliferation treaties”.
    Where was the benefit to the US?
    “Fumbling the ball on North Korea, repeatedly”.
    How would you have dealt with NK? Seriously.
    “Destroying America’s credibility with the international community and ruining the reputation of its intelligence services”.
    You mean the “oil for Iraqi blood” international community the very group that broke their own sanctions for oil profits? They owe the rest of us an explanation.
    As far as New Yorkers forgetting 9/11, no way. My weekend morning run is across the Brooklyn Bridge to my Dad and then down to the Promenade. On the Promenade you still see worn ribbons or the wire that held them and wax drippings from the candlelit vigils following 9/11. You only need to look out across the water and realize the towers are missing as well as the people who worked there. I still follow planes in the sky with my eyes. It’s true we’ve gone on about living but that doesn’t mean any one of us has forgotten. I hope America hasn’t forgotten and I’m damn glad the President hasn’t.

  • Doctor Slack

    In Canada they openly adore Al Queda.Last nite, I saw a program where a whole stinking family of Canadians suck Osama dick
    It’s always entertaining to watch angell go off the deep end. Keep spewing that mental illness, little buddy. Your cause needs you.
    If they are already bawling over this, so early in the campaign I have to think they are already on the ropes.
    I love how the 9-11 families are automatically “democrats” for expressing outrage. I suppose we’re going to see wingnuts questioning their patriotism next — without even knowing they’re sliming people who might actually have voted for Bush otherwise. Yep, someone’s on the ropes, alright…

  • Doctor Slack

    Speaking of Dems, though, Kos provides a humorous take on the whole issue. Hey, if it was good enough for Abe…

  • gavin

    Hey Doc,
    Who said anything about disregarding what SOME of the 9-11 victims had to say? I was just commenting on how unattractively weak the squealing sounds from the democrats making an issue of the ads. For a “Doctor” you sure have trouble with reading comprehension. Is that an honorary title? Like Colonel is, in the south?

  • Doctor Slack

    Who said anything about disregarding what SOME of the 9-11 victims had to say?
    You effectively did when you tried to dismiss the whole issue as just the “squealing” of Dems. Good to see you don’t really believe that.
    Is that an honorary title?
    … and good to see you take the high road here! Yes, gavin, Doctor Slack is a nick, kind of like “Doctor J.” (No, I’m not a basketball player either, gavin, it’s an example. Understand?)

  • Doctor Slack

    Hey there KMK:
    War in Iraq was necessary. Saddam needed to be removed, We never should have left him in Power under GB 41. Purely humanitarian IMO.
    That’s not the position I was taking exception to. Someone suggested, above, that 9-11 made the Iraq War necessary. It didn’t. Whether there were other reasons for the Iraq War is a different questions.
    The United States Fire Administration is undoubtedly the most widely recognized first responder community (etc)
    President Bush’s new budget would cut by one-third the money that thousands of fire departments rely on to keep their communities safe – including at least 10 departments in San Diego County that fought October’s wildfires.
    Where was the benefit to the US?
    Where was the benefit to the US in backing and enforcing treaties aimed at halting nuclear proliferation? Come on. You can’t be serious.
    Hint: the WMD argument was the one that would have sold me on Iraq if it had been true.
    How would you have dealt with NK? Seriously.
    The NK saga has been running for years. Are you looking for a summary? One thing I would have done differently? Ten? Twenty? We can go there, but I just want to establish how much detail you want to get into.
    You mean the “oil for Iraqi blood” international community
    I mean America’s allies among others, who have given blood and treasure to help her in wars before, including in ’91, and who have earned America’s respect in spades. (Yes, *gasp!* Even France.) A tradition of respect Bush was stupid to trample, and which his followers are fools to denigrate. The alleged corruption of a few individuals in those governments — even if there proves to be something to it, and I’m not holding my breath — doesn’t change that.
    I hope America hasn’t forgotten and I’m damn glad the President hasn’t.
    The President was making jokes about the “trifecta” not two months after the event. Three thousand New Yorkers were a punchline to him even then. Do you have any idea what that means? Do you begin to see why some of us hold him in contempt, and hold in contempt his attempts to trade on that day for political gain?

  • hen

    ebb tide – FDR ran in 44 under the slogan “Don’t forget Pearl Harbor” — look it up pal.
    Doctor Slack: Self medicating again? Tsk, tsk. Funny how this ad came out and literally within minutes the DNC talking points went to the so called horrified WTC survivors; but alas a quick google search of most of the shocked, SHOCKED, independance shows them mostly to be nothing more then democratic hacks, Kerry supporter or those that have an ax to grind with Bush.
    Of course you are not a real Doc. That wd require intelligence. But by all means with your spewings, Robert (little bobby’s) idiotic statements about the NRA and Bush and Jeff flogging the Stern horse til it resembles hamburger, you will soon all have this blog to yourself.
    Enjoy!

  • Doctor Slack

    Yeah, because you’re a bitter partisian who’s still burning to have “his” party regain power.
    In other words, you’re fully okay with him using 3000 dead New Yorkers as a punchline at a fundraiser. But, of course, you’re all for that War on Terror stuff. That couldn’t be a partisan thing, could it?
    Naaahh.
    Self medicating again?
    Your class and sophistication has always impressed me, along with the fact that you never make content-free posts consisting entirely of juvenile abuse. Know, my friend, that you shall be missed. Truly.

  • Doctor Slack

    FDR ran in 44 under the slogan “Don’t forget Pearl Harbor” — look it up pal.
    hen, did I say content free? I missed this little tidbit.
    Funny thing is, I thought FDR’s 44 slogan was “We Are Going to Win This War & Win the Peace That Follows,” and that he also used “Carry on With Roosevelt.” Maybe you’re not just making this up, and you actually have a source? Or is that too much to hope for?

  • KMK

    Doc,
    Maybe we agree on Iraq. Humanitarian. Perhaps strategic as some have argued but I’m not sold on that.
    The United States Fire Administration is undoubtedly the most widely recognized first responder community (etc)
    The article shows cuts in 2005. The link I gave was for 2003-2004. If the fire companies apply for it. Will it be needed in 2005? In 2001 it was only appropriating 96 million in 2003-2004 it’s 750 million.
    Where was the benefit to the US in backing and enforcing treaties aimed at halting nuclear proliferation? Come on. You can’t be serious.Hint: the WMD argument was the one that would have sold me on Iraq if it had been true.
    I am serious. You have caught my interest as someone who knows what he talking about. After all, the last conversation you and I had over WMD I went back to my friend and he told me to read the 1999 USCOM report. In it I found that they had indeed found wet and dry compounds in missile heads they tested as well as the equipment to make dry compounds. But, the big but, that you raised is did they have them when we invaded. I can’t say conclusively. I would love to know. Do you know?
    The NK saga has been running for years, but I just want to establish how much detail you want to get into.
    Just under Bush.
    I mean America’s allies among others………..
    I’m almost with you on this except to what extent did the current foreign administrations take part in the kick backs and or know about them. The NYT today reported Russian experts giving missile aide. I’m in Europe every other month. I read a few languages and I know a lot of the politics. I’m not buying into the anti-Americanism because I go there and have never been treated poorly. It’s reciprocal.
    The President was making jokes about the “trifecta”
    You lost me what joke?
    For what it’s worth Doc Slack isn’t a troll. He’s knows what he’s talking about and blogs are about conversation. I once called him a pompous *ss, which I regret. His forceful writing brought it out (my problem) but that doesn’t mean he should shut up and go away. Censorship being bipartisan and all of that.

  • http://myblahg.blogspot.com Robert McClelland

    >Robert you are sick
    Can I assume then that you wouldn’t think it was okay if the Dems used 9/11 as a political tool like Bush has?

  • hen

    not quite sure why i waste my time with you Slack, clearly your knick is oh so appropos:
    “from the May 12th, 2000, edition of the Washington Post, “In 1944, with the U.S. deeply involved in World War II, president Franklin D. Roosevelt campaigned for a fourth term arguing that his reelection was essential for an allied victory.””
    further go here: http://ronwade.freeservers.com/templateFDR.html
    and check out the button that says – Roosevelt: We are going to win this war and the peace that follows”
    Then go to ww2museum.com to find the Pearl Harbor button;
    Then look at what Lincoln said during his re-election bid about the Civil War.
    So, two things: Yeah a 1 and 1/2 second shot of an American Flag in front of the collapesed WTC is fair game and secondly i now know better to waste my time with such a raving loon.
    But thanks for playing.
    Oh and Bobby i am PRAYING that the Dems use 9/11 in their campaign. I can see Kerry now saying how it was wrong to go to war, how we need permission from the UN, etc etc…oh yeah, that’s a winner.

  • hen
  • Doctor Slack

    Hey there KMK (and thanks for the kind words, it’s good to be able to have some reasonable debate on these threads):
    Maybe we agree on Iraq.
    Certainly I think it’s the best argument left standing, though I’m not fully convinced.
    The link I gave was for 2003-2004. If the fire companies apply for it.
    Hmmm. I think we’re talking about different things, maybe. I’ll check this again.
    In it I found that they had indeed found wet and dry compounds in missile heads they tested as well as the equipment to make dry compounds.
    Sorry, I can’t seem to find this reference in the ’99 UNSCOM report. Maybe I’m looking at the wrong document, can you point me to a source?
    In any case, given the UN’s more recent findings, which seem to bear out Cordesman and others, no this isn’t a big priority for me.
    except to what extent did the current foreign administrations take part in the kick backs and or know about them.
    That’s a valid question — and though I’m heavily skeptical about the IGC’s list, it does need to be investigated. It just doesn’t, in itself, provide an explanation for why so many were war skeptics.
    You lost me what joke?
    This one.
    As for hen:
    not quite sure why i waste my time with you Slack
    Because underneath that glossy, genteel sophisticant’s exterior, you have a soft spot for me. Come on, admit it. Don’t be afraid of what you feel.
    and check out the button that says – Roosevelt: We are going to win this war and the peace that follows
    So, you’re saying that “Don’t forget Pearl Harbour” was not in fact his campaign slogan, and you agree with me about what it actually was. Good to have a meeting of the minds with you at last.
    And no, I don’t disbelieve a button exists, somewhere, that says “Pearl Harbor” somewhere on it. (That’s really not germane to the criticisms some people had of Bush — which stem more from him not actually having done much of anything concrete about the crisis, unlike Roosevelt, but never mind.) I’d rather not have to dig through the entire ww2museum site to find it, though, so if you’d like more people to see it how about linking directly?

  • Doctor Slack

    Ooops: hen, didn’t see the second link you posted. Thanks, putz!

  • Doctor Slack

    Oh, re: KMK’s question about North Korea — here is a link that says it much better than I could.