the so called Bush doctrine revisited

[xibalba]

I´ve read an article written by the service Obama basher number 1 of the Washington Post, the neoconservative Charles krauthammer, on teh new events in the arab world. That great analyst concluded that all that stuff is a consequence of that so called Bush doctrine and the invasion of Irak.

Well the mythically and primary process dominated confused "reborn" christian Dubya is now elected main protagonist of the sequential revolution happening by armchair "pundits" too easily eager to bypass any serious historical analyses  like that vast movement of successive deconstructive emancipatory waves among the arab people leading to this present post-islamic, post-panarabic nationalism era, a process that took place already during the days of the old Ottoman empire before WWI.

Amazing shallow writers always fast to veil the truth to people and to keep them into sustained trance states.

[Balder]

Huh?  What?  Did you say something?  I thought I heard someone talking but I was afraid to take my eyes off the TV.  Charlie Sheen had just driven his car off the cliff and was about to crash land on top of Oprah and Gayle in the middle of their big Yosemite Camping Adventure.

[xibalba]

ahhahahhhahahah

A good fucking one Balder

 

Et c´est la vie!!

 

cheers with a gorgeous Chambertin red wine from Bourgogne area, cher ami

Balder said:

Huh?  What?  Did you say something?  I thought I heard someone talking but I was afraid to take my eyes off the TV.  Charlie Sheen had just driven his car off the cliff and was about to crash land on top of Oprah and Gayle in the middle of their big Yosemite Camping Adventure.

[e]

Too funny! When Bush flew onto an aircraft carrier and declared the war in Iraq won, I was teasing a liberal friend (as I am often wont to do) saying, "imagine 200 years from now when Democracy has spread throughout the Middle East, Bush will be considered the father of Democracy there like George Washington in the US," All kidding aside, it is probably the fact that Iraqis themselves have embraced democracy and are seen to be "successful" in putting aside sectarian differences that has made others in the Middle east not only wildly dream that democracy is possible for themselves. Surely Bush is not the "cause" but you have to admit, even if it goes against your liberal sensibilities, he had a hand in it. The pragmatic me couldn't care less about what will be written in history books as long as people are enabled and emboldened to move towards it.

[xibalba]

I see a scenario more like throwing shoes at the father of mocking-cracy responsible of a tremendous mess and 2 millions irakis who left their country.

Why did they do that btw?

[e]

Like this  :-)

 

Why did they do that btw?

 

They could.

[kelamuni]

that krauthammer REALLY annoys me. what a pompous ass. i need do samatha meditation to calm down after hearing or seeing him. hahaha. as if what happened in cairo had anything to do with the cheney's private little war in iraq.

[xibalba]

hhahahha easy to be qualified antisemite for that, in police state ben USA.

kelamuni said:

that krauthammer REALLY annoys me. what a pompous ass. i need do samatha meditation to calm down after hearing or seeing him. hahaha. as if what happened in cairo had anything to do with the cheney's private little war in iraq.

[kelamuni]

haha. good one, my fine, french dandy pal. i should watch what i say. the Men in Black might show up at my door.

krauthammer is also such a fug.

[kelamuni]

sounds like e might be a conservative we can pick on. ;-)

[xibalba]

yeah I noticed it, ahahha

well shoot first mister the Canadian,

you know much better than me the anglo-american political soil.

Yuk Yuk

kelamuni said:

sounds like e might be a conservative we can pick on. ;-)

[e]

LOL I am the most apolitical guy you will meet. When I happen to chat about politics my liberal friends think I am conservative and my conservative friends think I am liberal because I point out the weakness (bias) in their respective arguments. I mean I just have to be on the "other side" when I don't agree with their partiality. But in how you see me we have discerned your weakness haven’t we? ;-)

The way I see it, the liberals take your money and give it to their poor friends and the conservatives take your money and give it to their rich friends. I see little difference as neither approach is sustainable in the long run. Here is a cartoon of the recent petty squabbles. As you can see there is more than enough blame (trillions) to go around.