It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Wake UP America! Foreign Policy IS WORKING get rid of your anti american attitude!

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 10:26 AM
After looking at Moore's so called documentary I thought I would do alittle digging to compare apples and orange's.
I saved Condi's speech at the 9-11 commission briefing...

Here I see proof over the past 20+ years of America being attacked under our noses but yet no government seemed to take any stance until something bigger happened (9/11).

She shows us History and how governments didn't take a stand until years later, and then it was too late.
She shows us how she wanted to make sure it didn't happen again.

And she shows us the progress so far...

So for you intellects out there that was to soak up some worthwhile info, please take a read, it's well worth it...

Condeleeza Rice's comments from the 9-11 commission ( I saved it)

So was it all propaganda????

She says:

The terrorist threat to our nation did not emerge on September 11, 2001. Long before that day, radical, freedom-hating terrorists declared war on America and on the civilized world.

*The attack on the Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1983,
*the hijacking of the Achille Lauro in 1985,
*the rise of al-Qaida and the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993,

*the attacks on American installations in Saudi Arabia in 1995 and 1996,
*the East Africa bombings of 1998,
*the attack on the USS Cole in 2000 - these and other atrocities were part of a sustained, systematic campaign to spread devastation and chaos and to murder innocent Americans.

The terrorists were at war with us, but we were not yet at war with them.

For more than 20 years, the terrorist threat gathered, and America's response across several administrations of both parties was insufficient.

***Historically, democratic societies have been slow to react to gathering threats, tending instead to wait to confront threats until they are too dangerous to ignore or until it is too late.


Despite the sinking of the Lusitania in 1915 and continued German harassment of American shipping, the United States did not enter the First World War until """"""""""""two""""""""""" years later.

Despite Nazi Germany's repeated violations of the Versailles treaty and provocations throughout the mid 1930s, the western democracies did not take action until 1939. (THAT'S *****9****** YEARS LATER!)

The U.S. government did not act against the growing threat from imperial Japan ******until it became all too evident at Pearl Harbor.******

And tragically, for all the language of war spoken before September 11th, this country simply was not on war footing.

Since then, America has been at war and under President Bush's leadership, we will remain at war until the terrorist threat to our nation has ended. The world has changed so much that it is hard remember what our lives were like before that day.


After President Bush was elected, we were briefed by the Clinton administration on many national security issues during the transition. The president-elect and I were briefed by George Tenet on terrorism and on the al-Qaida network.

Sandy Berger's NSC staff briefed me, along with other members of the national security team, on counterterrorism and al-Qaida. This briefing lasted for about an hour, and it reviewed the Clinton administration's counterterrorism approach and the various counterterrorism activities then under way.
Sandy and I personally discussed a variety of other topics, including North Korea, Iraq, the Middle East and the Balkans...
President Bush revived the practice of meeting with the director of central intelligence almost every day in the Oval Office, meetings which I attended, along with the vice president and the chief of staff. At these meetings, the president received up-to-date intelligence and asked questions of his most senior intelligence officials.
From January 20th through September 10th, the president received at these daily meetings more than 40 briefing items on al-Qaida, and 13 of those were in response to questions he or his top advisers posed.
In addition to seeing DCI Tenet almost every morning, I generally spoke by telephone to coordinate policy at 7:15 with Secretaries Powell and Rumsfeld on a variety of topics, and I also met and spoke regularly with the DCI about al-Qaida and terrorism.


Of course, we did have other responsibilities. President Bush had set a broad foreign policy agenda. We were determined to confront the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
We were improving America's relations with the world's great powers. We had to change an Iraq policy that was making no progress against a hostile regime which regularly shot at U.S. planes enforcing U.N. Security Council resolutions. And we had to deal with the occasional crisis, for instance, when the crew of a Navy plane was detained in China for 11 days.

He made clear to us that he did not want to respond to al-Qaida one attack at a time. He told me he was tired of swatting flies.
This new strategy was developed over the spring and summer of 2001 and was approved by the president's senior national security officials on September 4th. It was the very first major national security policy directive of the Bush administration -- not Russia, not missile defense, not Iraq, but the elimination of al-Qaida.

He recognizes that the war on terror is a broad war.


Under his leadership, the United States and our allies are disrupting terrorist operations, cutting off their funding and hunting down terrorists one by one.

Their world is getting smaller. The terrorists have lost a home base and training camps in Afghanistan.

The governments of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia now pursue them with energy and force.

We are confronting the nexus between terror and weapons of mass destruction.
We are working to stop the spread of deadly weapons and to prevent then from getting into the hands of terrorists, seizing dangerous materials in transit, where necessary.

Because we acted in Iraq, Saddam Hussein will never again use weapons of mass destruction against his people or his neighbors, and we have convinced Libya to give up all its weapons-of-mass- destruction-related programs and materials.

And as we attack the threat at its source, we are also addressing its roots. Thanks to the bravery and skill of our men and women in uniform, we have removed from power two of the world's most brutal regimes - sources of violence and fear and instability in the world's most dangerous region.

Today, along with many allies, we are helping the people of Iraq and Afghanistan to build free societies. And we are working with the people of the Middle East to spread the blessings of liberty and democracy as alternatives to instability and hatred and terror.

The defeat of terror and the success of freedom in those nations will serve the interests of our nation and inspire hope and encourage reform throughout the greater Middle East.

In the aftermath of September 11th, those were the right choices for America to make - the only choices that can ensure the safety of our nation for decades to come.

[edit on 29-6-2004 by TrueLies]

posted on Jun, 30 2004 @ 07:57 PM
What anti-American attitude? My B.S. meter goes through the roof whenever one of these political talking-heads starts ranting about how they are saving the Country and the World.

There may indeed be some expected/desired effects of bush's so-called foreign policy, but it is in the maner in which these policies have been enacted that I find fault. "The ends justifyying the means" is a bankrupt immoral stance. Try studying ethics and you will see why this is so. Get over your self-serving agenda. It is time to GROW-UP! We are cititzens of a World community.

posted on Jun, 30 2004 @ 08:23 PM
I understand what you mean by americans with anti america attitude. unfortunately, people with this attitude wont look at the facts you presented, and even if they do, theyll blow them off

posted on Jun, 30 2004 @ 08:30 PM

Originally posted by Scat
I understand what you mean by americans with anti america attitude. unfortunately, people with this attitude wont look at the facts you presented, and even if they do, theyll blow them off

Nice tautology! Are circular arguments the Holy Grail that gives you a caption under your name? Try again.

posted on Jun, 30 2004 @ 09:55 PM

Originally posted by scottsquared

Originally posted by Scat
I understand what you mean by americans with anti america attitude. unfortunately, people with this attitude wont look at the facts you presented, and even if they do, theyll blow them off

Nice tautology! Are circular arguments the Holy Grail that gives you a caption under your name? Try again.

NIce use of vocabulary. thats a pretty fancy way of saying "we already said that you moron. quit repeating everything!"

you could have just got to the point. it was simply an opinion friend. no need to go off on biblical metaphors

and if youre so angry with circular arguments, why are you posting needless comments, just like i did?

[Edited on 6-30-04 by Scat]

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 12:34 AM
Tell me how it's the ends justifying the means when clinton had the same foreign policy agenda??

Tell me how bush's reaction to 20+ years of terrorist attacks is the ends justifying the means again??

Oh wait, youre finally tuning into whats been going on recently but have yet to take a history course or a trip down memory lane... It's ok at some point, every ostrich has to pull it's head out of the sand........

And really, your useless comments don't go anywhere except on your shoulder for a nice ego stroke ...

I'd love to debate you in ethics anyday pal, seems like you could use a few classes to go along with a trip down memory lane (history).

posted on Jul, 2 2004 @ 11:35 AM
Bring on the ethics debate!!! Any time bud, I'll be your huckleberry!

Pre-emptive attack is a prime example of ends/means philosophy.

You ignore the overt stated reason for Islamic terror historicaly. They want an end to Western presence/influance in thier historic homeland. Reasonable or not, the solution becomes more clear with each passing attack; abandon the Middle East!

I have read more than one well formulated logical argument from you in the past, this isn't one of them.

new topics

top topics


log in