"Uncontained Use of Force"

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by skunk, Feb 10, 2007.

  1. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #1
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6349287.stm
    Putin gets it. Why doesn't Bush?
     
  2. BoyBach macrumors 68040

    BoyBach

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #2
  3. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #3
    Because if Putin had no political prowess he wouldn't be in power, as someone would have had him removed. Whereas Bush, due to the way that American democracy works, just needed money. (Even in the British system you have to outmanoeuvre the other 600 MP's to become prime minister.)
     
  4. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #4
    That's actually kind of amusing coming from a guy who's hands are bloody from some of the "uncontained use of force" he's engaged in in Chechnya.

    But his point is well taken. Bush is fueling an arms race that will only come back to bite us in the posterior over the next generation or so. By choosing to fight the war on terror the way he has, Bush has emboldened and strengthened our enemies.
     

Share This Page