Originally Posted By Mr X A Taliban suicide bomber tries to kill the American Vice President as he visits a war zone. The press breaths a sigh of relief that the VP is okay. Some off hand remarks about the 2 dozen people injured or killed in the attack ensue. MY question is, was it really necessary for him to be there at all? If the region is unstable (which it obviously is), wouldn't it have been better to meet with Afghanistan leaders in a safer place? Do they even take that stuff into account when planning those tours and meetings?
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Did he need to be there? Depends on where you're coming from, I suppose. If he's willing to put soldiers in harm's way, he should be ready to do himself what he's asking them to do. Boosts morale and all that. He may also be there to personally emphasize or bring a message to certain leaders, illustrating the importance of whatever it is he's saying. On the other hand, it's easy to criticize it as a stunt to show how "macho" he is. Love him, hate him, or want to prosecute him, he is after all the Vice President of the United States and one has to wonder about the wisdom of making him such an easy target.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2007/02/27/markets/markets_0945/index.htm?cnn=yes" target="_blank">http://money.cnn.com/2007/02/2 7/markets/markets_0945/index.htm?cnn=yes</a> The attack on Cheney apparently contributed ot the Dow fallling over a 230 points. One of these days, someone will have to explain to me the connection between all that.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj ^^ The Dow is falling because the markets in Asia had a big sell-off last night. Additionally, the durable goods number for February was horrible. The economy isn't looking so bright. For whatever reason, the business news organization don't like to talk about a sour economy and would rather attribute stock market declines to political events vice fundamental weakness in economic markets. The Dow has a lot further to fall in the months ahead before this is all over.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper When our leaders don't go they are criticized for being out of touch. When they do go they are criticized. Oh, the easy life of a politician.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "Country Bear 66", if not a sock puppet, or worse yet, you-know-who, should go over to Community and introduce him or herself.
Originally Posted By jonvn just report them. It's what i do. What I find interesting is that they were able to either know the VP was coming there in advance, or was able to instantly mobilize someone to attempt to kill him. Either way, not good.
Originally Posted By Dave Since my son in law is deploying to there in the next few day my answer would be NO
Originally Posted By Dave haha I read the title wrong...excuse the post I thought it said do we need to be
Originally Posted By jonvn OH, I see. Actually, we probably do. And we should be in pakistan, too. And we should be slaughtering them with no qualms. Because that is what they want to do to us.
Originally Posted By DlandJB It isn't dyslexia - its getting used to bifocals. Thanks for the help, gang.
Originally Posted By ElKay The recent attack directed toward Cheney is sort of ironic in that just after the fall of Baghdad, the Hotel that Paul Wolfowitz was staying was hit by a missle and that was sort of the opening salvo on the insergency that this Admin. kept saying wasn't happening. That a murderous attack was conducted at the gates of the air base that Cheney was staying at reeks with irony especially when Cheney is the biggest cheerleader for these wars and so dismissive of the actual situation on the ground.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh Because ElKay knows more about the acutal situation on the ground than the Vice President.
