One of the ways the Bush Administration misleads and flat out lies to you is through the use of buzz words and ridiculous phrases, all of them wildly inaccurate. Phrases on television.
Remember, I’m not a Democrat. I didn’t like Clinton either. I’m a conservative, who can’t stand lying.
Here are some buzz phrases of Bush.
The Central Front.
Iraq is the “Central Front" in the war on terror. Terrorism exists worldwide, not just in the Middle East. So this statement by Bush is incredible. First of all, Front means like a front line. It harkens back to the days of World War I, when men in trenches faced each other across a no-man’s land. Front? Front?
I find it hard to swallow that a war conducted where one side has no formal uniforms (Al-Qaeda), and where soldiers search houses by kicking doors in, and climbing down into basements and up on top of rooftops….has a “Front Line."
Where is it? Where is the “Front Line?" Baghdad? Some other town? The Sunni Triangle? It’s in Iraq, somewhere.
Central? Central? If it’s the Central Front, there have to be two other fronts, one on each side of the Central Front. Where are they?
One could be Afghanistan.
But where is the other? Bush has never explained. Instead of Central Front, it would be more accurate to call it the Dual Front (meaning just two, Iraq and Afghanistan). That still isn’t accurate.
Bush has his mind rooted in World War II. The last good war. He didn’t fight it. His father did. But he watched John Wayne fight it in the movies. Bush and his cronies constantly harp about the similarities between Iraq and World War II, hoping that the two will work out the same. They’re different. But that’s why he talks about front lines in a war where there aren’t any.
“The president is determined to win in Iraq." His spokesman said this. Win! Win! Win what?
As always, the president has never explained. Since he won’t, I have to venture a guess. We know that unlike World War II, Al Queda won’t rent formal uniforms and walk into a school house in Reims, France (where the Germans surrendered in World War II), and sign a formal surrender document to us.
We know that won’t happen. They won’t surrender.
In this case, what does “win" mean?
It means that somehow, the policies that for the past four years haven’t worked, will work now, or next year, and the bad guys will get tired and give up. This is what we hoped would happen in Vietnam. We’ll have them all locked up in jail, and Iraq and Afghanistan will be peaceful, prosperous places where everyone basks in the light of happiness.
Any takers on the likelihood of this happening?
Our policies are gaining Al-Qaeda recruits. Bush is the best friend they ever had. When we storm into a house and kill fifteen people, some of them women and children, we killed one suspect, or two. But the twelve year old boy who sees his uncle killed for no other reason than he was standing in the wrong place..at the wrong time…vows revenge.
“They’ll follow us over here."
“They’ll follow us."
The terrorists. Bush has said this time and again. If we don’t win in Iraq (Bush hasn’t defined win). If we don’t win in Iraq, they (terrorists) will follow us.
Follow us? Follow us? How will they follow us? By boat or plane?
What will happen if we see three hundred guys wearing turbans carrying grenades getting off a jet in New York?
They don’t have a navy. Maybe they’ll take the Queen Elizabeth Two luxury liner.
Do the people of New York believe they’ll be invaded by hostile Arabs?
If the security systems that should be in place are in place, we should be able to spot the three hundred Arabs with grenades on the plane.
They’ll follow us over here? Maybe on bicycles.
This is a simple tactic to spread fear, or as Chicken little might have said, “the sky is falling."
The outcome of Iraq doesn’t automatically mean evil Arabs will make easier entry into the United States to do harm a year from now.
It’s a tactic.
Bush has to spread and promote fear to keep you listening to him.
© Copyright 2007 by SammonSays.com
|
tweet this!