Something New About Condaleeza Rice . . .

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
CaptnKirk

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
Now there have been some recent comments by her, and the more the world community sees that the results of U.S. Intervention is promising 'Democracy' but instead delivering Anarchy and Chaos, the less they like what is being presented.

There seems to be an overbearing cavalierness and aloofness that is being used and abused so a bully, or a clusterfuck of bullies can have their way . . .

Rice Alarms Reformist Arabs with Stability Remarks
 
1

1EZduzit

Lifer
Feb 4, 2002
11,833
1
0
Hey, it's good for oil prices. To hell with stability, that must be the "secret energy policy" that Dub and Cheney came up with.
 
B

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Hey, it's good for oil prices. To hell with stability, that must be the "secret energy policy" that Dub and Cheney came up with.
Click to expand...
The Bush administration has certainly supported "stable" oil prices.

 
D

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Maybe we really do need to have a war for oil? Hell, if we're really going to conduct unilateral military action around the globe, shouldn't we get something out of it?
 
S

smc13

Senior member
Jan 5, 2005
606
0
0
What is new with this? This is the same old nonsense of the press bashing the Bush administration. I love how they quote some unamed liberal arab. Exactly how do we know if he is liberal or not? Oh, because the unbiased journalist tells us. How do we know the Eqyption Polical Scientist is a reformist? Egypt's President has been an unelected President for about 20 years now. What's new again?
 
D

da loser

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,037
0
0
what is so new about her statements? the past policy was stability and gradual change. and it didn't work.

the current policy is to not be afraid of change or instability and actually create instability and change. the creation part is obviously worrisome. but the attitude towards change and instability should be welcomed, since it realizes the total ignorance by experts to understand world events and predict/shape the future.
 
S

smc13

Senior member
Jan 5, 2005
606
0
0
Originally posted by: da loser
what is so new about her statements? the past policy was stability and gradual change. and it didn't work.

the current policy is to not be afraid of change or instability and actually create instability and change. the creation part is obviously worrisome. but the attitude towards change and instability should be welcomed, since it realizes the total ignorance by experts to understand world events and predict/shape the future.
Click to expand...

You act as if everything has been wonderful in the Middle East since the Britain pulled out. stability in the middle east has meant wars, suicide bombings, terrorism, subjigation of women, and hatred of the west. Why would Rice make a speech saying that stability in the Middle East is desired? She is hardly the first person to push for change. The Clinton Administration pushed really hard for a major change in the region. They almost succeeded on getting a peace treaty between Israel and Palestine. They almost got a democratic Palestinian state. The Clinton administration advocated regime change in Iraq. In '98, Congress passed a resolution stating the the policy of the US was to overthrow the government of Iraq. Clinton signed it.

Rice is giving the correct speech. Continuation of the totalitarian middle eastern regimes isn't beneficial to us or the Middle Eastern people. Rice should be advocating democracy. Rice should be trusting that it can work in the region.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom