15 Billion...New idea>>>

[Hessian]

All of us are aware of the goodies we dangled in front of Turkey and I find it embarrassing. I am glad the Turks didn't nibble--its fiscally stupid, sets a bad (read: Romans dumping silver on the barbarians to defend them) precedent.

So, Mr President,

Why not take those funds and offer 1/2 off flights to countries to nations that have publicly supported us?

That's right...let us fly to Denmark, Britain, or wherever and spend our vacation US dollars touring on a wave of thanks and good will.

**Helps airlines...
**Strenghtens ties...
**Makes our critics peeved at the loss of US trade & tourists...
**Lets the world know we are not afraid to travel...
**Boosts our ally's economy, opens some new trade relationships.
**Doesn't cost any new $$ because it was already designated to prop up the Weak Man of Europe.(Turkey)

C'mon George, take 300.00 off my flight to Denmark and I'll pay the rest and spread the word we appreciate their support!

Time to have a burger and freedom fries,...

 

[jimmy]

This...actually isn't a bad idea.

 

[willie]

Hmmmmm I like revenge

 

[Bruzilla]

What's really embarassing is that after the stand that the Turkish Parliment took caused their markets to crash they are now wanting to take a second bite at the US apple.

I would rather take that 20-odd billion dollars and give it back to the taxpayers.

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by Bruzilla
What's really embarassing is that after the stand that the Turkish Parliment took caused their markets to crash they are now wanting to take a second bite at the US apple.

I would rather take that 20-odd billion dollars and give it back to the taxpayers.

Our president is a republican. Which means he is handles two things very well - Foreign Policy and money. There is a very good reason why Bush would affer such an amount to these people, and it wasn't money that was just laying around collecting dust.
Talk about fair weather fans. Had the deal gone through the first time and we launched a very successful attack from Turkey, everyone would be saying how great of a deal it was. But since the initial deal didn't go through, everyone talks about how bad the deal was.

And people questioning the President on his decision?? Isn't that UNPATRIOTIC????

You people crack me up sometimes.

 

[Kain99]

Originally posted by SmallTown
And people questioning the President on his decision?? Isn't that UNPATRIOTIC????

Why YES, it is Unpatriotic! Especially considering the issues he being questioned on.

 

[Bruzilla]

Sure it's unpatriotic... so what? We're not the ones trying to wrap ourselves in the flag to balance out attacks on our country and leadership. Speaking for myself, I have no need to be referred to as a patriot.

I think we should reimburse the Turks for any costs that they incur in supporting us and a reasonable fee for the use of their bases. I don't think we should be bribing them for their support. If they don't want to support our efforts, fine. We'll just put that down in the old ledger book for the next time that Turkey runs into problems and wants our help. We already have enough fairweather friends. What we really need are Allies.

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by Bruzilla
Sure it's unpatriotic... so what? We're not the ones trying to wrap ourselves in the flag to balance out attacks on our country and leadership. Speaking for myself, I have no need to be referred to as a patriot.

Then I am confused. In the thread about patriotism, you were the first response with something along the lines of "Way to go Larry!"

then later you said
"So Jimmy, I would say that if someone is not supporting the attack they can not be considered a patriot."

I would say logistic things such as trying use the turkey as a launching point is considered part of the attack. So you go after jimmy about not being a patriot, then say you have no need to be referred to as a patriot. Again, people going along with whatever is convenient at the time.

 

[vraiblonde]

Can we just have a little refresher on what, exactly, the word "patriotic" means? It's an allegiance to your country, not the man who happens to run it. You can be patriotic without defending or supporting the President.

If someone ( Maynard, for instance) is taking the part of a foreign nation over the country he lives in, he is unpatriotic. Merely disagreeing with Bush doesn't make you unpatriotic.

 

[Bruzilla]

Of course you're confused Smalltown... you're a Liberal.

Yes I did say... err... wrote "Way to go Larry!" and "So Jimmy, I would say that if someone is not supporting the attack they can not be considered a patriot." Now where in there did I say that "I, Bruzilla, am a patriot"? The point is that a lot of Liberals who are attacking Bush and the Republicans under the guise of condemning the war are seeking absolution by saying that they are against the war but they are still patriots. This is a false statement based on the definition Larry so aptly provided.

I will concede your point that regime change in Iraq is our national interest, and that the logistics are not, so I guess a true patriot can still complaign about bribing Turkey.

Vrai, I guess I don't have the same dictionary that Larry has, but here's what mine says:

Patriot: "A person who loves, supports, and defends his or her country and its interests."

Patriotic: "Expressing or inspired by patriotism."

Patriotism: " Devoted love, support, and defense of one's country; national loyalty."

So basically, you either love, support, and defend one's country and national interests (as defined by our representative government) and be a patriot, or you don't and you can only claim title to American citizen.

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by Bruzilla
Of course you're confused Smalltown... you're a Liberal.

*sigh* Nope. The liberals are pretty Fed up as well.

Yes I did say... err... wrote "Way to go Larry!" and "So Jimmy, I would say that if someone is not supporting the attack they can not be considered a patriot." Now where in there did I say that "I, Bruzilla, am a patriot"?

That is like Doc (or another athiest) saying we're are not good christians. You can't really point fingers in that kind of a situation.

 

[Bruzilla]

The problem is that Liberals want to redefine what being a patriot is. You'all need to get together and fire off a request to Webster, Random House, American Collegiate, etc., and ask them to change the definition to something like...

Patriot n. 1. a person who has citizenship. 2. A person who opposes the government for reasons they perceive are valid. 3. Someone who enjoys the freedoms of their country but doesn't wish to defend them. 4. Anyone who wants to feel good about saying bad things about their country.

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by Bruzilla
The problem is that Liberals want to redefine what being a patriot is.

Nobody is trying to redefine anything (though it was pointed out in the other thread there are many different definitions to the word)

I just find it odd that some one who opposed Bush's notion for an immediate attack and occupation of iraq is unpatriotic, yet someone who blasts Bush for logistic failures is either still patriotic, or fall into the "I dont care if I am considered patriotic"

Like I mentioned in the patriotism thread, no american wants to be called unpatriotic. Which is why people use that to their advantage by saying if they don't support a certain issue they are unpatriotic.


But you'll have to ask the republican and democrat talking heads to see what the "official" party reasoning is behind this issue.

Patriotism doesn't distinguish between republicans and democrats.

 

[MGKrebs]

So can the President be unpatriotic?

 

[demsformd]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
If someone ( Maynard, for instance) is taking the part of a foreign nation over the country he lives in, he is unpatriotic. Merely disagreeing with Bush doesn't make you unpatriotic.

I see no reason to believe that MGKrebs is unpatriotic. One can oppose war and still be a patriot. We have to realize that while we disagree with Hussein, he is clearly entitled to oppose this war. And I have yet to see him take the position of the Iraq regime.

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by MGKrebs
So can the President be unpatriotic?

Using the Merriam-Webster definition for patriot – one who loves his or her country and supports its authority and interests.

Initially, I thought that I might be able to answer yes due to the fairly recent behavior of a previous Chief Executive when he knowingly provided false testimony in a legal proceeding. But after re-reading the definition there is a dual requirement for patriotism:
(1) Love his or her country, and;
(2) Support its authority and interests.

Based on my concept of the term, I say no to your question. My reasoning is the following. As it is obvious that anyone who takes on the challenge of running for the office and, once elected, takes on the challenge and doing what they see is the best for the country (even if we don’t always agree) obviously has to love the country. Even if their personal character and integrity has shown that they don’t always adhere to the laws, which in my mind is the authority.

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by Ken King
As it is obvious that anyone who takes on the challenge of running for the office and, once elected, takes on the challenge and doing what they see is the best for the country (even if we don’t always agree) obviously has to love the country.

I must disagree. I believe we have had previous Presidents that only loved POWER and being called "President". That doesn't necessarily mean that they loved the country. So I say "yes", a President can be unpatriotic.

And, Dems, I didn't say Maynard was unpatriotic. I merely used him as an example.

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
I must disagree. I believe we have had previous Presidents that only loved POWER and being called "President". That doesn't necessarily mean that they loved the country. So I say "yes", a President can be unpatriotic.

I can somewhat agree with your claim as to what might be a motivating factor for going for the job (power). But I really don't believe that any of our Presidents didn't truly love this country. Another case of agreeing to disagree.

 

[jimmy]

Well if a president were to make a decision he KNEW wasn't in our country's best interest out of some sort of personal motivation, I'd say that was unpatriotic. I can't think of a case to point out to illustrate this but I'm sure it's happened. But does that make THEM unpatriotic? I don't know...

This whole "patriot v. unpatriot" debate is so ridiculous to me. The people who keep pointing back to definitions to stay to the letter of the law, keep infering things themselves. This idea about supporting "our national interests" is predicated on the assumption that those are determined by each president (and administration) alone. That's still an assumption.

For those of you to whom it matters, you CAN dissagree with the direction the administration is going and STILL be patriotic if you love and support your country. You don't have to join the military, abstain from voicing your dissenting opinion, or blindly follow the policies laid forth by each individual administration to do that.