Bush endorsements
On the Charles Goyette show, the host (Charles Goyette) mentioned two endorsements for President Bush that were relatively humorous. At the time, I laughed, but upon further consideration, I'm actually quite concerned. Maybe you'll agree when I tell you where the endorsements came from.
The first, Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The second...
...
Iran.
Now, let's start with Putin, since it's slightly less paranoia-inducing. Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't Russia been at odds with our foreign policy these past few years? We had major differences on the issue of Iraq, and I see no logic behind a Putin-Bush endorsement. (Putin-Bush... hehehehehehe...) Possibly Putin believes that Bush will win the election and he's attempting to win favor for the Russians. I'm not entirely certain.
While I find the Russian endorsement odd, the Iranian endorsement is disconcerting at best, outrageous at worst. I mean... isn't Iran part of the axis of evil? Perhaps I'm mistaken. The point stands that Bush hasn't been particularly friendly towards Iran and Iran seems a state not far out of our sights. So what is this endorsement? Is it an attempt at garnering U.S. favor to avert military actions there? We already have plenty of U.S. troops in the region, so a quick hop to Iran isn't out of order. Perhaps it's sleight-of-hand aimed at confusing the American populace. "Look, we support you and your President, why would you attack us?" Perhaps. One way or the other, I'm pretty sure we'll hear plenty about Iran in the next four years.
I'm just surprised that we never hear about places like Sudan, where there is genocide going on. Why is it that we have to occupy Iraq to free the people, but we totally ignore Sudan. Even more important, why have we done nothing with Saudi Arabia, the country from which 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers are from? Saudi Arabia is a nasty, awful place, but I will spare you the rant and suggest that you simply google up some info about the status of women and prisoners in Saudi Arabia. It should prove enlightening.
The first, Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The second...
...
Iran.
Now, let's start with Putin, since it's slightly less paranoia-inducing. Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't Russia been at odds with our foreign policy these past few years? We had major differences on the issue of Iraq, and I see no logic behind a Putin-Bush endorsement. (Putin-Bush... hehehehehehe...) Possibly Putin believes that Bush will win the election and he's attempting to win favor for the Russians. I'm not entirely certain.
While I find the Russian endorsement odd, the Iranian endorsement is disconcerting at best, outrageous at worst. I mean... isn't Iran part of the axis of evil? Perhaps I'm mistaken. The point stands that Bush hasn't been particularly friendly towards Iran and Iran seems a state not far out of our sights. So what is this endorsement? Is it an attempt at garnering U.S. favor to avert military actions there? We already have plenty of U.S. troops in the region, so a quick hop to Iran isn't out of order. Perhaps it's sleight-of-hand aimed at confusing the American populace. "Look, we support you and your President, why would you attack us?" Perhaps. One way or the other, I'm pretty sure we'll hear plenty about Iran in the next four years.
I'm just surprised that we never hear about places like Sudan, where there is genocide going on. Why is it that we have to occupy Iraq to free the people, but we totally ignore Sudan. Even more important, why have we done nothing with Saudi Arabia, the country from which 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers are from? Saudi Arabia is a nasty, awful place, but I will spare you the rant and suggest that you simply google up some info about the status of women and prisoners in Saudi Arabia. It should prove enlightening.
posted by timmyform at 4:50 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home