State of the Union
So, did anyone watch the speech? I particularly liked the lines...
"The United States has no right, no desire and no intention to impose our form of government on anyone else. That is one -- (applause) -- that is one of the main differences between us and our enemies. They seek to impose and expand an empire of oppression, in which a tiny group of brutal, self-appointed rulers control every aspect of every life. Our aim is to build and preserve a community of free and independent nations, with governments that answer to their citizens and reflect their own cultures." (my emphasis)
Iraq Invasion
Step 1: Get elected without the popular vote (self-appointed?)
Step 2: Pass legislation that limits citizens rights (Patriot Act) and then attempt to extend that control in order to survey and monitor the popular (i.e. checking library lists, detaining without cause, phone taps, internet surveillance, etc.) (controlling every aspect of life?)
Step 3: Ignore the United Nations in favor of reckless unilateralism that has historically led to the exploitation of Latin America, the expansion of the African slave trade and an era of unjustifiable wars like Vietnam (empire of oppression?)
Step 4: Invade a country (Iraq) that didn't ask us to come and then only give them the choice to vote in democratic elections modeled after those in the US (imposing our form of government on anyone else?)
"That is one of the main differences between us and our enemies." ---- Just how big is that difference after all?
Hmmm...I find it uniquely interesting when put into context.
My favorite part is when he contradicts himself...
"To promote peace in the broader Middle East, we must confront regimes that continue to harbor terrorists and pursue weapons of mass murder. Syria still allows its territory, and parts of Lebanon, to be used by terrorists who seek to destroy every chance of peace in the region."
Huh, what a coincidence.
"The United States has no right, no desire and no intention to impose our form of government on anyone else. That is one -- (applause) -- that is one of the main differences between us and our enemies. They seek to impose and expand an empire of oppression, in which a tiny group of brutal, self-appointed rulers control every aspect of every life. Our aim is to build and preserve a community of free and independent nations, with governments that answer to their citizens and reflect their own cultures." (my emphasis)
Iraq Invasion
Step 1: Get elected without the popular vote (self-appointed?)
Step 2: Pass legislation that limits citizens rights (Patriot Act) and then attempt to extend that control in order to survey and monitor the popular (i.e. checking library lists, detaining without cause, phone taps, internet surveillance, etc.) (controlling every aspect of life?)
Step 3: Ignore the United Nations in favor of reckless unilateralism that has historically led to the exploitation of Latin America, the expansion of the African slave trade and an era of unjustifiable wars like Vietnam (empire of oppression?)
Step 4: Invade a country (Iraq) that didn't ask us to come and then only give them the choice to vote in democratic elections modeled after those in the US (imposing our form of government on anyone else?)
"That is one of the main differences between us and our enemies." ---- Just how big is that difference after all?
Hmmm...I find it uniquely interesting when put into context.
My favorite part is when he contradicts himself...
"To promote peace in the broader Middle East, we must confront regimes that continue to harbor terrorists and pursue weapons of mass murder. Syria still allows its territory, and parts of Lebanon, to be used by terrorists who seek to destroy every chance of peace in the region."
Huh, what a coincidence.