Bernie Sanders
Related: About this forumSanders: World is paying the price today for the ‘tough, but stupid’ policies of Cheney and Bush..
n a speech in Cleveland Monday night, 2016 Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders ripped the administration of former President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney for destabilizing the Middle East with their tough, but stupid policies following 9/11.
After rapping the head of the Republican National Committee for calling current President Barack Obama weak in the fight against ISIS in the wake of the Paris attacks, Sanders invoked the memory of the Bush administrations response to 9/11.
You remember President Bush, he asked rhetorically. He was very very tough, but not very smart. He and Dick Cheney and the whole lot of them, they were tough! And they said we should invade Iraq. We should do it virtually alone and the result was 6,700 brave men and women from our country dead, hundreds of thousands of our best young people coming home with injuries physical and emotional. Many many hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead and wounded. Huge instability in the entire region, and we are paying the price today for that instability and chaos.
So I say to my Republican colleagues, he continued.Yeah, we have got to be tough, but not stupid.
Watch Sanders speech below from YouTube:
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/11/bernie-sanders-world-is-paying-the-price-today-for-the-tough-but-stupid-policies-of-cheney-and-bush/
peacebird
(14,195 posts)In turn pretty much created Al Qaeda.....
bvar22
(39,909 posts)....who helped Bush & Cheney out of "political convenience"?
Tough but Stupid too?
Divernan
(15,480 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)...that the Idiot from Crawford fooled her.
IkeRepublican
(406 posts)It was either rebel against the rhetoric, which the public being filled and overflowing with Smoke Em Out propaganda 24/7 that year would have voted for the Republican - easy. Or, they try to be tough too using similar rhetoric, hopefully win on a wish and a prayer, and not be as nutty as their Republican opponent if he or she were elected.
It's always easier to say after the fact, "Why didn't you?"
bvar22
(39,909 posts)...that the MAJORITY of Democrats in Congress voted "NO",
and many gave impassioned speeches from the House and Senate correctly calling the IWR "a blank check for WAR". That was ALL BEFORE the fact.
OTOH: Hillary voted AGAINST the Democratic Majority, and voted WITH THE REPUBLICANS, cosigning the Republican War.
That was also before the fact.
She then engaged in Cheer Leading for the Republicans to Get their War On, all before the fact.
It was only after the Invasion of Iraq turned out to be a disaster that she finally gave the excuse that Bush Fooled Her.
Now THAT was after the fact,
and she should have NEVER used such a lame excuse.
Not even the hardest core Hillary believer can say they thought she was being honest with her claim that the Village Idiot From Crawford had fooled her.
Either way, that disqualifies her for running for future office.
I prefer people who Got it RIGHT the first time to lead our Party and Government,
not the losers.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Well, at least to some here who seem to think that ignorance is the way we should roll.
N.Y. to Paris
(110 posts)Sometimes I get ready to comment on here, and then I have to laugh
because someone beats me to it and says it better than I would have...
Thanks bvar22.............. still laughing...
However when I stop laughing, take a breath; and reread what's on here
I would be first in line to do whatever I could to prosecute those bastards...
daleanime
(17,796 posts)UCmeNdc
(9,600 posts)He knows how to express himself clearly when presenting an argument for a certain position he takes.
valerief
(53,235 posts)Lotsa rich people made lotsa money. That was their intent, so they were very successful. They're still making lotsa money.
IkeRepublican
(406 posts)But illustrate that to 80% of the American electorate.
They like their facts made for easy consumption - that's the bottom line. Why? Because they're all working 50 hours a week and if they're not, then they're being inundated from the outlets containing the facts they choose. And, of course, it's not them or their sons going off to fight. If they do know of somebody who has a son going off, they're going to hear the pro-war rhetoric because they want their child's orders to be for a noble cause and they will say and do anything to make that believable.
Nixon knew what he was doing by getting rid of the draft with very little opposition from the Republicans. The Ford Gang (Rummy, Cheney, Reagan, Bush 41) were already loaded in the chamber by then.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)How much did Halliburton shareholders make on the War in Iraq, on the deaths and injuries of thousands of our young people, our best and brightest, and on hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, mostly innocent people minding their own business.
The Iraq war was a crime.
Now I said it.
Feel the Bern!
valerief
(53,235 posts)MMTampa
(82 posts)I hope that very soon one of our candidates uses the words "war criminals" to describe shrub and co. They keep dancing around it. Even Papa Shrub tried to blame Cheney for 'lil shrubs criminal behavior.
Sanders is the one who could do it without impunity.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Amen. Thanks for posting. Great statement.
In fact, we cannot defeat religious extremism that worships killing and not God unless we have a thriving society including a thriving middle class in our own country!
cprise
(8,445 posts)Regime Change, part 1
blackspade
(10,056 posts)Along with anyone else who tries to justify the "War on Terror."
My children will continue to pay the price for jingoist American hubris.