Zeke, George and John
Way back about 2,600 years ago, Ezekiel had a vision regarding Egypt that sounds like a good justification for the war in Iraq. Lost in MSM chatter about WMDs is much mention at all of the war in Iraq as a deterent against other terrorist-harboring dictators. In Ezekiel's prophesy, God sees things differently, saying that long-term benefits can come from actions that face criticism:
I will trouble the hearts of many peoples
when I bring about your destruction among the nations,
among lands you have not known.
I will cause many peoples to be appalled at you,
and their kings will shudder with horror because of you
when I brandish my sword before them.
On the day of your downfall each of them will tremble every moment of his life.
Eze. 32: 9, 10
The Los Angeles Times boldly misses this point today on yet another Page One appeal designed to give Kerry voters just enough comfort to punch the D chad. In an effort to unspin the highly effective RNC flip-flop message, Kerry apologists Ronald Brownstein and Kathleen Hennessey claim that Bush, too, waffles on the war.
Their argument: "Before the war, the major chord was security and terrorism. Bush continually warned that Hussein could provide weapons of mass destruction to terrorists. As the evidence has accumulated that Iraq did not possess chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, Bush increasingly has argued that building democracy in Iraq would inspire democratic change across the region in a domino effect. That argument was part of, but secondary, in the administration's case before the invasion."
Bush's speeches present multiple reasons for the war that accurately reflect his policy. Key among these convincing justifications is, "I will trouble the hearts of many peoples when I bring about your destruction among the nations ... kings will shudder in horror because of you." The Times can limit its focus to WMDs to create an illusion of inconsistency from Bush, if it chooses to, but the label just doesn't stick. Can't stick. This has nothing to do with Bush being a Teflon president; it has everything to do with the contrast between the President who is resolute to the (occasional) point of criticism, and the opponent, who is irresolute to the point of perpetual confusion.
I will trouble the hearts of many peoples
when I bring about your destruction among the nations,
among lands you have not known.
I will cause many peoples to be appalled at you,
and their kings will shudder with horror because of you
when I brandish my sword before them.
On the day of your downfall each of them will tremble every moment of his life.
Eze. 32: 9, 10
The Los Angeles Times boldly misses this point today on yet another Page One appeal designed to give Kerry voters just enough comfort to punch the D chad. In an effort to unspin the highly effective RNC flip-flop message, Kerry apologists Ronald Brownstein and Kathleen Hennessey claim that Bush, too, waffles on the war.
Their argument: "Before the war, the major chord was security and terrorism. Bush continually warned that Hussein could provide weapons of mass destruction to terrorists. As the evidence has accumulated that Iraq did not possess chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, Bush increasingly has argued that building democracy in Iraq would inspire democratic change across the region in a domino effect. That argument was part of, but secondary, in the administration's case before the invasion."
Bush's speeches present multiple reasons for the war that accurately reflect his policy. Key among these convincing justifications is, "I will trouble the hearts of many peoples when I bring about your destruction among the nations ... kings will shudder in horror because of you." The Times can limit its focus to WMDs to create an illusion of inconsistency from Bush, if it chooses to, but the label just doesn't stick. Can't stick. This has nothing to do with Bush being a Teflon president; it has everything to do with the contrast between the President who is resolute to the (occasional) point of criticism, and the opponent, who is irresolute to the point of perpetual confusion.
posted by Laer at 7:14 AM
<< Home