Hello Destee Family, I'm just wondering if anyone else find it a tad bit odd, that George Bush hasn't had much to say during this whole situation? His television appearances and comments seem to be very brief and doesn't make much sense (tho I'm not surprised). Personally, I don't think he has tried to heal or comfort the American people as a leader should. Do you agree or disagree?

Epiphany:heart:

he's trying but his efforts are effortless.. meaning.. he's trying.. I just don't think hard enough.. But we do have to remember... he's human.. not to mention got some age on him.. So i'm personally trying to give him the benefit of the doubt. I do commend him on how he's handle things.. the way hes got everything planned and organize.. I'd rather for him to go about that way rather than react the same way those terrorist did.. That would make us less human if he didn't proceed with this.. with caution...

hmmm, very interesting thoghts. I would say that he is doing the best that he can without allowing his personal feelings get involved. as the leader of the country, he must be as neutral as he can as well as determine what the next step of action should be. When it comes down to him expressing his emotions on this point please note that he was crying during his interviews on thursday afternoon. This whole crisis has shaken him but you can't expect so much out of him personally becasue he is serving in the "Office of the President" meaning his advisors is telling him to be strong. I feel his efforts to respond to the actions are good because he is taking the necessary steps to prevent it from happening again. Although i am not a supporter of his administration, i do give him credit fro seeking more avenues than just war. In others words seeking econimc sanctions and whatever they may feel pertinant to resolving the matter. But i do sense a level of pain in his voice when he does make himself available to the public.

There are some reasons why he has not been available as much as expected. One is National Security meaning that because there are still threats out there he needs to be on the move constantly. This is why he was flying all over the country on Tuesday rather than staying in the white house. Remember he is still a target.

The reason for his few selective words duringt his time? to avoid the presumption of his reaction to this tragedy. He is being very selective in order to not alert the other countries his plans. also he did not have the judicial right to call for all out war without the support of Congress. so because his hands are tied he has to be careful how he worded his statements during the last week.

As for the age thing. I feel thaqt his age really has nothing to do with how he reacts to this situation but since it was put out there my questions would be this:

1. If he was a man in his mid 20's, how do you feel he would have responded to this situation?

2. Why is age such an important parameter to you when it pertains to such political discussions? I have been following your responses to many of the forums and it seems that age is such a large stronghold for you. (Shaneak) I've read your views and conversations but please enlighten me as to what age has to do with it?

When running for a president a person or individual usually had to meet certain criterias. .now if that changed within the past few years please let me know.. and one of those is age.. and Bush is not even in his 30 thirties if you really want to brake it down. An individual is also suppose to serve some time in the military to meet that criteria.. i'm not sure of all what is pertained in the criteria to run for president but I do now their are restrictions and guidelines. You will also find some of the criteria located here: http://www.debates.org/pages/news3.html just to confirm a little bit of what i just told you.

Now my opinion... :x: As for a 20 year old running the US.. Fat chance.. I won't even allow it.. i've dealt with going on twenty year olds and twenty year olds and i'm only 21 one.. And i know.. I have more sense than than the average 21 year old. :x: But no.. an individual of that age doesn't now the depth of his Countries history... like they truly should.. many arent' even in the reserves...and so many lack the knowledge and education needed to govern a country like this.. now I do think a 2 year old could run the country... Teach them our worldly values and morals.. get an old wise man to back him.. and by golly george we'll be back in business. :D

But I can't wait till the next election.. I'm voting for Hillary.. I pray that she runs... I need to check and see if she's done her military duties though.. maybe it won't apply to her... Anxiously waiting on your views D!!!

ACTUALLY dubya is well in his 50's. It's impossible for anyone to become president if theydo not meet the basic criteria. Also, how could he be in his thirties when his daughter is 19 and 20? He meets the criteria very well and the criteria for military experience is not true. There is no criteria for military ecperince for many preseidents were not in the military, bill clinton being one of them.

You might want to reevaluate your ciriteria because while your views are itneresting they are a little off course. As for maturity. Maturity is not solely fdefined by one's age. There are many who are more settled beyond their years but it cannot be validated by age. I fidn it troubling that your views are so egotisitcal that you don't even see that you lack support for half the things you say. You attempt to validate your wisdom with rhetorric and assumptions without completely investigating the facts. As i have dealt with many 20 and 21 year olds i find when involved in a discussion with them that the at least make the effort to get theri facts straight. Forgive me for being harsh but as much as you fight for respect of your knowledge, it's hard to take seriously when you spew inaccuracies. I chalk this up to age and lack of experience not wisdom. I believe you are a very intelligent person but in order for it to come across as such i would suggest you investigat more clearly the topics on which you freely express opinions without foundation. Although there are times that Kemetstry, Wisdomseed and I do not agree, i do respect their efforts to support their opinions with facts.

I thank you fro the link but the criteria for president is High School Political Science 101 or in sokme edicational systems, History 101.

Once again forgive me for the harsh statements but they are spoken in order to stregnthen and not harm.

i would like to continue this discussion but i just found it frustrating when the facts were clouded...

once again i apologize if my words were harsh. that is not the intention...

epiphany,

i know a few (my uncle for one) who when they were in vietnam, they did not want to even think of their family for this reason(s):

(1) for fear that worrying will get kill or get them killed
(2) they didn't feel like it :lol:

what i'm saying is that judging by the appearance you would think that he is an impassive person, but i don't believe that is the case.

like Dnommo said it could be for his security. Also to think of seeing him all day on CNN will tell me he is not at work with the matter at hand. i mean, you know, check my thoughts ma...


jh.

No.. I don't feel your words are harsh.. actually I've heard worse.. no big deal. Anyways.. First off.. i didn't say president Bush was in his 30 if that be the case.. i would be wrong right off. Because that is one of the first criterias.. that you have to meet. Now.. military issues.. That i looked into more and found that it was not necessary but they do prefer that most presidents carry that background.

I personally feel you words are wisdom and never take offense to what you say.... so feel free to express yourself.. in whatever way you see... fit.

Also.. alot of what I speak on is my views as you very well should know because I state off the back.. these are my views or my opinions.. I also state if I don't know the facts... whether Or not I am accurate enough about those things.. which is why i provided you with the link and also.. the reason why i knew all this.. is because i took history in High School.. somethings just seem to stick wit ya!!! ;)

Thanx, I appreciate your input to my thread, it offers me different perspectives and gives me the opportunity to evaluate and think about my own viewpoint. as well as others. Much love. Epiphany :heart:

hey kemet,

i would NEVER compare you with Wisdomseed. that would be unfare to Wisdom :rolling:

No seriously. We do agree on most things but we have stood on opposite ends before and that increased my respect for your views. Not only because you stood your ground but youo supported your opinions so clearly. It's always good to pop in and se whats going on in the mind of Kemet...

We cool tho' cuz you knows i got cha back bro'

as for his efforts. In light of some information that occurred this weekend (executive order to shoot down commercials planes) i am certain that Bush is still in shock about it all. Cheny and Powell is his strength and without them he could barely stand (unless he calls his father :lol: ) Bush has a lot on his hands and lately he is making the situation personal. In his position his personal feelings have to be quieted in order to see responsibly the right action to take.

The sad reality is this: We are going to attack warring factrions against us. There wil be a loss of life but it determines whether it would be one (Bin Laden) or many (military troops). At this point the choice is left up to the Taliban and the religiuous leaders of that area.

It's a waiting game at this point.

Shaneak, how very true are your words and i am glad you did not take offense to my words. Once again they are for strengthening not destruction. But i reiiterate my statement. While your opinions are YOUR opinions, it would be advisable to know more about the subject and not just go on your opinion. That can lead to a very dangerous position when it comes down to what you stand on and what you don't. Although the optimal society would be that people respect your opinions, very few do. They will challenge it in attempts to change it. TO prevent such problems my suggestion was to know more about it before expressing your opinion. It gains support and respect for your attempts to be ackowledged as wise. It's all good to me for i tend to stay in the shadows until i see the situation get out of hand and then i speak or as some say STRIKE.

I anjoy the dialogue and look forward to more...

Hey Kemet, what's the next exciting topic? My pen is itching for some comments....

Kemetstry
I do agree with your opion that a few cruise missiles will not resolve this issue. My question to anyone who believe that this would resolve the issue is...... where would you point these missiles?? What guarantee does the US have that they will capture Bin Laden in Mr Bushes words "dead or alive"?My understanding is that Bin Laden has the finance to move about and hide as he sees fit. I do agree that more attacks are inevitable. There are groups of people out there that feel they have nothing left to lose. There country has already been reduced to nothing and without a rational resolution what is to be accomplished.
Dnommo
My question to you.... do you really think that the Taliban will turn Bin Laden over to the US.
Shaneak
I applaud you for your comments and opinions and how you stand behind what you believe to be true.... Although I do feel that your comments are based on emotions and your perceptions of a perfect society, rather than the rational needed to deal with situations such as this.which as Dnommo stated " the optimal society would respect such but very few do".

Bakari,

first of all...WELCOME..Second of all, OF COURSE NOT. The Taliban has taken a strong stance against the United States and they don't appreciate the threats made by the White House. Although turning over Bin Laden would resolve a lot of issues and heal so much pain, that i don't see happening. The Taliban would rather die than to turn over their main source of income...

I return the mic to you and ask how you feel about it?

From what I heard on the news.. Pakistan had agreed to help the US in return for them helping their economy... So i"m not very clear on what you guys are discussing... Now.. is Afghanistan (unless that is the Taliban) going to turn him over.. Fat Chance..

Bakari: Thank you.. and i do agree with that.. Also though.. my views aren't really emotional... I look at things in my perception... based on my beliefs and what i feel is safe for our society. If was emotional.. I might would haven't wanted to retaliate like so many americans....

Kem.. You make me laugh.. always have.:D and i agree with you.. but the question is how does the US plan to handle this.. President Bush said it would take at least 2 months to set up Baracades or Position themselves around Afghanistan and he also stated that this war may take years..

Dnommo: See my opinions are based on what i read.. hear and see on TV and in our society for that matter. So most of what i say... just like what is stated up above.. I got it all off the news.. channel 11 if you would like to know.. I don't believe in giving out false information.. My intent is not to convince someone that my thinking is right.. I'm a very open minded person.. I don't believe in judging or assuming and I try my best not to contradict myself for I see it occurs so frequently in our society even though i do it from time to time. So even though you may not think my views are all that accurate.. I find them to be very informative.. For in my eyes.. you would have to start some where.. Thats just like me sitting on this site and watching everyone else spit out their views and me believing it with no proof...

I felt the need to correct myself: Now.. is Afghanistan (unless that is the Taliban) going to turn him over.. The taliban is not Afghanistan....

I received this email today.. from which and Afghanistan wrote.. though you guys would like to read it: Dear Gary and whoever else is on this email thread:
>>
>>I've been hearing a lot of talk about "bombing Afghanistan
>>back to the Stone Age." Ronn Owens, on KGO Talk Radio today, allowed that
>>this would mean killing innocent people, people who had nothing to do
>>with this atrocity, but "we're at war, we have to accept collateral
>>damage. What else can we do?" Minutes later I heard some TV pundit
>>discussing
>>whether we "have the belly to do what must be done."
>>
>>And I thought about the issues being raised especially hard
>>because I am from Afghanistan, and even though I've lived here for 35
>>years
>>I've never lost track of what's going on there. So I want to tell
>>anyone who will listen how it all looks from where I'm standing.
>>
>>I speak as one who hates the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden.
>>There is no doubt in my mind that these people were responsible for the
>>atrocity in New York. I agree that something must be done about those
>>monsters.
>>
>>But the Taliban and Ben Laden are not Afghanistan. They're
>>not even the government of Afghanistan. The Taliban are a cult of
>>ignorant
>>psychotics who took over Afghanistan in 1997. Bin Laden is
>>a political criminal with a plan. When you think Taliban, think Nazis.
>>When you think Bin Laden, think Hitler. And when you think "the people
>>of Afghanistan" think "the Jews in the concentration camps."
>>
>>It's not only that the Afghan people had nothing to do with this atrocity.
>>They were the first victims of the perpetrators. They would exult
>>if someone would come in there, take out the Taliban and clear out the
>>rats nest of international thugs holed up in their country.
>>
>>Some say, why don't the Afghans rise up and overthrow the
>>Taliban? The answer is, they're starved, exhausted, hurt, incapacitated,
>>suffering. A few years ago, the United Nations estimated that there are
>>500,000 disabled orphans in Afghanistan--a country with no economy,
>>no food. There are millions of widows. And the Taliban has been burying
>>these widows alive in mass graves. The soil is littered with land
>>mines, the farms were all destroyed by the Soviets. These are a few
>>of the reasons why the Afghan people have not overthrown the Taliban.
>>
>>We come now to the question of bombing Afghanistan back to
>>the Stone Age. Trouble is, that's been done. The Soviets took care of
>>it already. Make the Afghans suffer? They're already suffering. Level
>>their houses? Done. Turn their schools into piles of rubble? Done.
>>Eradicate
>>their hospitals? Done. Destroy their infrastructure? Cut them off
>>from medicine and health care? Too late. Someone already did all
>>that.
>>
>>New bombs would only stir the rubble of earlier bombs. Would
>>they at least get the Taliban? Not likely. In today's Afghanistan,
>>only the Taliban eat, only they have the means to move around. They'd
>>slip away and hide. Maybe the bombs would get some of those disabled
>>orphans, they don't move too fast, they don't even have wheelchairs. But
>>flying over Kabul and dropping bombs wouldn't really be a strike against
>>the criminals who did this horrific thing. Actually it would only
>>be making common cause with the Taliban--by raping once again the people
>>they've been raping all this time
>>
>>So what else is there? What can be done, then? Let me now
>>speak with true fear and trembling. The only way to get Bin Laden is
>>to go in there with ground troops. When people speak of "having the belly
>>to do what needs to be done" they're thinking in terms of having the
>>belly to kill as many as needed. Having the belly to overcome any moral
>>qualms about killing innocent people. Let's pull our heads out of the
>>sand.
>>What's actually on the table is Americans dying. And not just because
>>some Americans would die fighting their way through Afghanistan
>>to Bin Laden's hideout. It's much bigger than that folks. Because
>>to get any troops to Afghanistan, we'd have to go through Pakistan. Would
>>they let us? Not likely. The conquest of Pakistan would have to be
>>first. Will other Muslim nations just stand by? You see where I'm going.
>>We're flirting with a world war between Islam and the West.
>>
>>And guess what: that's Bin Laden's program. That's exactly
>>what he wants. That's why he did this. Read his speeches and statements.
>>It's all right there. He really believes Islam would beat the
>>West. It might seem ridiculous, but he figures if he can polarize the
>>world
>>into Islam and the West, he's got a billion soldiers. If the West wreaks
>>a holocaust in those lands, that's a billion people with nothing
>>left to lose, that's even better from Bin Laden's point of view.
>>He's probably wrong, in the end the West would win, whatever that would
>>mean, but the war would last for years and millions would die, not just
>>theirs but ours. Who has the belly for that? Bin Laden does. Anyone else?
>>
>>Tamim Ansary

Dnommo

I appreciate the welcome.... I do not agree that turning Bin Laden over will resolve this issue.... He has followers of million+ that would fight to their death if such an agreement was made which would cause more heart ache and pain on the lives of many. It is known that the Taliban does not appreciate threats made by the US which is why I can not understand how and why every step made to resolve this situation is broadcast throughout the world with statements demanding Bin Laden being turned over, threats of war, more sanctions, and adding more economic hardship to a country where mothers have watched their own children die due to a need of medical attention....... and I now return the mic to you.....
Shaneak
In regards to your statement.. your perceptions are based on the life you lead... so what works for you may not work for all and as far as the news...... we see and hear what they want us to hear...

how true but some of the statements you've made have been, for one, quite contradicting as well as inaccurate.

Case in point. When you discussed the qualifications of Bush you stated that "he was not even in his thirties" which could be led to understand that you meant he was younger. What was your meanig behind this statement so that i may understand.

Second, your statement about "military experience was needed"
was incorrect but when "called" on it instead of leaving it alone you acknowledge the inaccuracy but then attempted to support it with the statement that "military experience is preferred." This is also an inaccuracy but i choose to ignore it.

My whole premise from the beginning is that opinions comes from facts. Most opinions can be supported by what is read and indulged by the one who holds true to the opinion. As Bakari stated, much of your views are highly opinionated but when someone speaks of your inaccuracies you attempt to support it with more rhettoric. I'm not hear to persuade you to accept my views. I want to hear and respect your views but i find it difficult when the views lack a factual evidence.

As for the Pakistanian governement helping the United States. Well, they are very apprehensive about it but are willing to open their air space to the U.S.. This came before the offer of econimc assiatance because at this point, the U.S. is trying to figure out how to stabilize the economy while pursuing the concept of WAR on Terrorism. Money is a major part of it but even more is the fact that Pakistan runs the risk of upheaval in its own land due to many thousands of BinLaden supporters as well as Taliban supporters in their country. The money would not help if there is no country to defend.

Might i suggest you continue to strengthen your knowledge by following MSNBC.COM (http://www.msnbc.com/news/NEWS_Front.asp?0dm=N---N&ta=y) , NEWSWEEK (http://www.msnbc.com/news/nw-front_front.asp?0dm=N20YN) ,CSPAN (http://www.c-span.org/) and many other links to help keep you up on the latest information.

It simply comes down to this. You stated that you've heard worse than what i spoke before which means someone has a pretty strong opinion of you. Although i don't know what that opinion is my views on the subject is this. When an opinion is given there will always be someon there to say "How do you figure that?" If you cannot back your words then your opinion is unfounded.

Being highly opinionated is not a sign of strength nor wisdom especially when that opinion leads the receiver to beleive that person doesn't know what they are talking about. Obtaining a little information from a few new reports and then expressing emotional filled opinions can cause confusion.

Actually this shall be my last recouse on this subject for this forum was created to discuss the topic of Bush not clarity of opinions. If you want to continue this further we can open another line of discussion. I'm sure My brother Kemet would not mind...

Bakari,

I agree with you because you have a point. It will be futile to turn him over simply because theleader maydie but the cause will go on. Now the sad occurance in Afghanistan is sad but it is not truly as bed as we see it. With a goevernemnt that is afraid of one man but need that man's money, they are willing to do what they must to keep "the open checkbook." If you read the email Shaneak posted you will see someone attempting to dispel the power of the Taliban. The truth is this, Afghanistan wants the Taliban gone but they don't know how to do it. Their only strength was the leader who was murder two days before the WTC attacks. You see if he had been in office then there would be no problem with finding and destroying Bin Laden as well as the Taliban. I find it sad that the country is suffering and the U.S. bombing it won't help. The real question is how to reach and destropy the seed of evil that Bin Laden has planted.

I must go to lunch but i shall retrun to read your views...

giving the mic back to Bakari...

Of FYI, not everything is being broadcast as to what the U.S. is plannign to do. There has been a media security ban placed on the news when it comes down tot he particulars of Bush's plans. In other words, we will only hear what they want us to hear...

I think as american people we are so use to believing that everything we see, everything we hear and everything that is published is facts. In every disagreement there is two perceptions. I in no way condone what happened in New York, it is truly an American tragedy.....but this country has been built on tragedy, past and present. Our tragedy is no more important then any suffering that goes on in this world. I tend to not be narrow-minded in my thinking, I believe from every action there is a reaction. As African Americans, we more then anyone should understand oppression and understand that not all of what the United States say is bond. I'm glad Shaneak brought this post, so that we can see that the Unites States is Sleeping with the enemy, and just perhaps the true blame is not with Osama
Bin Laden but the fact that.....Osama Bin Laden, Fidel Castro, Saddam Hussein, were all CIA trained. Sooner or later the abused dog will bite the hand that feeds it. Dnommo, I respect your opinion, for backing up comments with facts, but sometimes opinions just come down to common sense. I think it was Bishop(sorry if I'm wrong) in one of his posting directed us to check out alternet.com, what I found there was unbelieveable........According to this site in May Bush just awarded the Taliban with $43 million dollars. So I don't say this crime should go unpunished but I do say don't let the emotions of the act cloud your judgement....because we have been bamboozled by the media many times and this is no different. Lets not be so niave to think that there is some dealings going on that is not reported by the media, and that we don't know about. These people may have a legitimate reasons for hating the US(again I want to stress that it does not excuse what they did). I think this last election proved that the American people's wishes is secondary to political gain and control. So if you want to see the other side of the coin, check out this site, you may be surprised what you will find.........

I would like to thank Bakari, J'hiah and Kem for their posting....and Dnommo feel free to go off the subject anytime........Epiphany:heart:

Thank you for allowing me to express my views. This was a very interesting topic.. I'm not sure how it go so heated but well never mind i do.. But anyways... I enjoyed learning others views as well as expressing my own.

Thanks!!!
:toast:

I thank you for posting......As far as the subject being heated...if everyone agreed, we couldn't learn from each other, we couldn't evaluate a response and it would be pretty dang boring! :peace:

Epiphany :heart: