tw & me

[Roosta]

OK, so he didn't seem to do a lot. Don't moan at us, go round to little George's house and punch his freakin' lights out. Even if you do manage to get everybody on here to admit he did bugger all for five days, what the hell is it going to change?

[tw]

Originally Posted by OnyxCougar

Because if he did, it just might prove he's talking directly out of his ass.

I will respond to intelligence. To points based upon the issue - which is the intelligence and morality of George Jr.

No I will not repond to Dagneys silly attempts to avoid the fact - to subvert the question. No sense making her look silly. She thinks this president demonstrated leadership? She thinks the world was wrong to redicule the US because the president made no decisions for five days as people died? She thinks that a paltry $15 million pledge says the US was going to respond? Then put up facts? All she had posted is her feelings. That is also called emotion. She provides no supporting facts so she must divert the issue and attack the messenger? Where are facts in that response?

This thread is chock full of insults because I am demanding facts and others have none in reply. The president is that immoral and lacks intelligent thought. Dagney's silly posts will be ignored so she can calm done. Then maybe she will realize how little intelligence this president really has. He sat for five days doing nothing as tens of thousands were dying. That is fact still unchallenged by anything Dagney has posted.

[Beestie]

Originally Posted by tw

This thread is chock full of insults because I am demanding facts and others have none in reply.

No, this thread is full of insults because we have had our fill of dead-horse carpaccio.

[lookout123]

Please learn to post without your emotional outbursts.

...said the pot...



part of the problem here is that all tw wants is for someone to stand with him and condemn GWB. Anyone who doesn't is obviously a fool or a zealot. it doesn't occur to tw that maybe some of us just don't really care whether it was the 1st,3rd, or 5th day that "massive" amounts of supplies moved. it isn't out of heartlessness or anything of the sort. it is out of simple realism. tens of thousands could have been saved? how? real evidence please, not some story about a boy who was on the verge of death before a doctor reached him. "tens of thousands" is great rhetoric, but is it reality? and this outrage over the "failure of a mental midget president" would be more convincing if we didn't all know that tw oozes venom at the mention of GWB.

i've been involved in relief efforts before. nothing of this scale of course, considering that we've never seen anything like this before, but relief efforts nonetheless. they aren't neat clean plans ready to be taken out of the box. the military and government agencies have thousands of plans that they prepare and exercise for, but those of us involved with them only laugh because we know when the proverbial fan gets to twirling, the plans will be scrapped. anyone who believes that when disaster strikes the pilots get strapped in and troops start loading up and are prepared to leave within hours, or even a day probably also believes in the toothfairy and OJ's innocence.

if you want to believe that bush and cheney were sitting around looking at satellite images laughing and playing poker, while BSing about the best way to hurt more people, you are delusional. i wasn't there, nor were you. but i would think that GWB, like all presidents, looked at the info, consulted his advisors about what should be done, looked at the feasibility of the options, picked his plans, and started the ball rolling.

but none of this is really the point. tw, maybe you don't realize, people are challenging your methods of discourse, more than your viewpoint.
you tell people that they shouldn't be emotional, yet you are the most angry, venomous person in the cellar.
you condemn people for not answering your questions, while never answering questions (related to the thread) that are asked of you.
you make accusations of someone's honesty and religious beliefs, but offer no proof.
you ridicule every course of action or decision made by the administration without offering any real alternatives.
you lift up globalism and the UN as the beacons of hope, yet make excuses when people question the motives and actions of the UN.

do you see a pattern? and don't come out blasting me for being a dishonest religious extremist, or a shiny shoe salesman because everyone has read those statements ad nauseum, without proof to support your claims. look around tw, it isn't just me that is arguing with you here. your arguments have become increasingly weak and venomous in the last six months. do you think that you have become so blinded by your hate for Bush that you are allowing emotion to spill into your arguments? have you taken notice that some of the people who are "foolish" enough to debate you also despise GWB?

the question here is, do you - tw - have the intellectual honesty to step back and admit to yourself: "while i despise George Walker Bush and think him a fool, not everything he does or says is wrong and worthy of condemnation."
Can you do it?

[OnyxCougar]

Originally Posted by tw

Where were you sensible on this issue? Where is serious aid to Boxer Day Tsunami victims by the US in those first five days? I have put up that challenge repeatedly. No one has yet cited a major American attempt to provide aid in those first five days. Nothing moved for five days - until George Jr finally decided - due to world wide condemnation - that a disaster had occurred.

I have already challenged you to come up with sources that prove the timeline and chronological events from the time of tsunami to the phone calls of the leaders of the countries involved (or their embassies and ambassadors) to our government officials, requesting aid OR giving permission for our government aid to enter their soveriegn territory. You still haven't done it.

blah blah blah, mental midget, blah blah MBA blah blah blah

Dagney, if you are going to make a logical post, you must challenge the timeline.

I've challenged you to produce it.

bah blah blah mental midget, blah blah blah emotions are bad and immature, blah blah

You want to prove me wrong? Then provide facts. Show me where the thousands of US Government employees were moving to save lived in the first five days of the disaster.

Do you honestly think we keep ships loaded with food just sitting in harbors? Do you honestly think that it takes only a matter of minutes to load cargo planes and ships with food and supplies to assist in disaster situations of this magnitude? Do you honestly think that our military waited around for GWB to call THEN loaded ships up with food and medical supplies?? Those ships were loaded and ready to go when the call came in allowing them to leave. Wanna know how I know that? Because I have friends at Anderson on Guam who were directly involved with loading those ships up. Let me explain a little about what had to be done.

(1) They had to figure out what ships were in dock or in the immediate area that were suitable for the purpose at hand (IE cargo).
(2) They have to make sure personnel on the ships that will be chosen to go are properly immunized against a host of diseases not usually present in the Guam area, including one that occur frequently with high decomposing body counts.
(3) When the ships are chosen and personnel's health risk is minimized, you have to FLY IN the food and supplies required. I've been to Guam. That island is 5 miles long. There isn't alot of space to just have tons of food, water and supplies on the scale required to help these people. It takes 16 hours to get to Guam from Hawaii, then you have to offload those supplies onto the ship, make sure it's all counted and recounted, and then wait for the call to trickle down from the president to the chiefs, then the generals then the command.
(4) Please keep in mind that all ships travel in "battle groups". So take all that stuff I just said and multiply by about 10 ships, even if they are not carrying the cargo. Keep also in mind that southeast asia, worst hit by the wave is TEEMING with Al-Queda, so everything we send in there, from personnel to equipment has to be secure as possible at all times.

Show me where this president demonstrated leadership for five days? You cannot. Was he waiting for Cheney to tell him what to do? It does explain five days of indecision.

Or maybe you have no idea how the infrastructure of the military works, you've NEVER been on a relief operation, and you're talking out your ass. Again.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Roosta

Even if you do manage to get everybody on here to admit he did bugger all for five days, what the hell is it going to change?

I ask you the same thing then. What have you accomplished in your question? Why then did you bother to post - to vent your emotions? Or to learn something new?

Actually I have learned what I feared was true. I don't care if others disagree. We went through the exact same process when I was bluntly questioning the WMDs and claims that Saddam had participated in the 11 September attacks. Do you remember those posts? They too made no effort to be politically correct if it meant misrepresenting the facts. I insulted no one. Insulted were concepts or opinons that were flawed. Only those who cannot separate concepts from their own being would be insulted.

Strongly questioned were popular myths promoted by what we now know was a lying president. I was not popular for posting what we now know to be the truth - and did not care. But many should have been asking themselves whether they make decisions based upon emotion or based upon logic. The aluminum tubes being a classic example of too many who failed to conclude logically. Who blindly believed what the Limbaughs were saying.

You tell me. Facts were posted bluntly back then that were proven true. Being posted so bluntly, then many immediately disagreed. Facts proved to be wildly unpopular then (due to emotion) and yet so accurate today. I am posting facts again in that 'I don't care what your emotions are' attitude. You tell me where replies provide contrary facts. Where are the facts in posts from Dagney?

BTW, as I so often say - I will not make any effort to post politely, be politically correct, or try to 'win friends' - when such posts cannot be honest. Being honest is far more important. I resent polite conversation when it will not address problems head on. Those that others find too aggressive or insulting are the same I find most interesting - because they are being honest. I also will post bluntly. Either you have an emotional response and disagree OR you will recognize the difference between your emotional response and the facts.

Which is it. I have intentionally posted bluntly with no regard to nonsensical political correctness. Which one are you: a question to every reader? Are you one who can see the facts, OR are you one who maintains an emotional attitude (as Dagney demonstrated)?

Having asked that question, then you tell me what I have accomplished. Only the silly would say I pissed off others. Their emotions are completely irrelevant. Intelligent people don't let emotional responses make their conclusions. Intelligent people ask how immoral America was for five days after Boxing Day. The reader must ask himself whether he responds emotionally or whether he can see the facts through an emotional response.

Bottom line fact remains. George Jr again demonstrated his presidential abilities and why religious extremists are so dangerous. He did nothing for five days as tens of thousands lay dying. You tell me where anyone could call that moral. He sat on his ass while thousands of better Americans in the region could do nothing - waiting for orders.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Beestie

No, this thread is full of insults because we have had our fill of dead-horse carpaccio.

Then don't read it. I don't care if you don't like me. The fact remains - George Jr did nothing for five days. Those are facts demonstrated by the money he pledged AND the actions of US government employees. For five days, virtually nothing moved. The most important aid is required in the first three. Where was the American resonse? Sitting in Crawford TX. Those are facts. They are blunt. They remain unchallenged.

[tw]

Originally Posted by OnyxCougar

I have already challenged you to come up with sources that prove the timeline and chronological events from the time of tsunami to the phone calls of the leaders of the countries involved (or their embassies and ambassadors) to our government officials, requesting aid OR giving permission for our government aid to enter their soveriegn territory. You still haven't done it.

UT even provided same in a phone call on day three to the president of Sri Lanka. What did she deperately request? Aid and information. We had both. For two more days after that Sri Lanka request, the president still did nothing. Nothing started moving until he called for a world wide response on day five. On day five, the USS Lincoln started moving to provide assistance. On day first, Marine expeditionary force started moving south. On day five, ships finally started loading in Guam. That is the timeline that was posted previously. Do you still deny those facts?

Within two day of getting orders, the USS Lincoln was providing help. Where was the Lincoln for most of that week? Waiting for orders. Orders from the 'so decisive' George Jr. Those are the facts.

[tw]

Originally Posted by OnyxCougar

Do you honestly think we keep ships loaded with food just sitting in harbors? Do you honestly think that it takes only a matter of minutes to load cargo planes and ships with food and supplies to assist in disaster situations of this magnitude? Do you honestly think that our military waited around for GWB to call THEN loaded ships up with food and medical supplies??

Yes we have ships at ports ready to deploy within days. The newer designed fast deployment ships (which apparently were not in Guam) can be completely loaded an moving in less than one day. That is the capacity that the military has developed. A massive surge that required presidental order to expedite.

Within days, ships can be loaded and moving from Guam. Not all of them. But to have the first ships moving by Saturday, orders were required on Thursday. Guess what. Thursday is when the president finally decided to act upon Tuesday requests even from the president of Sri Lanka. She asked for aid and information on Tuesday. George Jr finally got to making a decision on Thursday. The ships from Guam were moving by Saturday. The USS Lincoln was on scene and working within two day of the president making a decision.

It took him five days to make a decision. It takes but a few days for the military to put that decision into action. The military is that good. You should have more respect for the abilities of our service people. They train to do these things that quickly - especially when the list of supplies is mostly same for a natural disaster first response. All they needed was a president to make a decision. They waited five days.

[OnyxCougar]

Originally Posted by tw

UT even provided same in a phone call on day three to the president of Sri Lanka. What did she deperately request? Aid and information. We had both. For two more days after that Sri Lanka request, the president still did nothing. Nothing started moving until he called for a world wide response on day five. On day five, the USS Lincoln started moving to provide assistance. On day first, Marine expeditionary force started moving south. On day five, ships finally started loading in Guam. That is the timeline that was posted previously. Do you still deny those facts?

Within two day of getting orders, the USS Lincoln was providing help. Where was the Lincoln for most of that week? Waiting for orders. Orders from the 'so decisive' George Jr. Those are the facts.

OK, so day three, Sri Lanka finally asked for assistance. Within two days of getting orders, the Lincoln was on the move, which was day five.

That is a paraphrase of what you just posted.

So why not rail against Sri Lanka for waiting for three days before calling?? We had aid there in TWO days of the request. If Sri Lanka had called day one, then we would have been there two days earlier.

Blame the president of Sri Lanka for waiting.




edit: in the following post, your days change. Please corroborrate (sp) the two timelines.

[tw]

Originally Posted by OnyxCougar

OK, so day three, Sri Lanka finally asked for assistance. Within two days of getting orders, the Lincoln was on the move, which was day five.

That is a paraphrase of what you just posted.

So why not rail against Sri Lanka for waiting for three days before calling?? We had aid there in TWO days of the request. If Sri Lanka had called day one, then we would have been there two days earlier.

Blame the president of Sri Lanka for waiting.

You still have it wrong. Sri Lanka publically requested aid on day one. Sri Lanka got a phone call (finally) from George Jr on day three. She asked for immediate aid and information. For two days, George Jr did nothing. Finally on day five, he acknowledged the disaster and dispatched military. On day seven, the USS Lincoln was on scene providing assistance (and not in Sri Lanka). That is four days too late for so many victims. Compare that to five days it took George Jr to make a decision

The first three days are critical. Made even worse for the Box Day victim nations because local governments could not get information. Again, you saw those satellite photos. Information we had on day one and information that people (such as the Indonesian Interior minister) desperately needed on day one. George Jr sat for five days before he finally made a decision to be helpful.

Now maybe he did provide information to Sri Lanka on day three. But clearly, George Jr took two more days to decide to send aid. His decision was clearly expressed in a sharply changed attitude in a press conference on day five. Numbers demonstrate how long it took George Jr to make a decision. It even took him three days to decide to make phone calls. Embarrassing is the politically correct response. Immoral is the honest answer.

[OnyxCougar]

Originally Posted by tw

You still have it wrong. Sri Lanka publically requested aid on day one. Sri Lanka got a phone call (finally) from George Jr on day three. She asked for immediate aid and information. For two days, George Jr did nothing. Finally on day five, he acknowledged the disaster and dispatched military. On day seven, the USS Lincoln was on scene providing assistance (and not in Sri Lanka). That is four days too late for so many victims. Compare that to five days it took George Jr to make a decision

The first three days are critical. Made even worse for the Box Day victim nations because local governments could not get information. Again, you saw those satellite photos. Information we had on day one and information that people (such as the Indonesian Interior minister) desperately needed on day one. George Jr sat for five days before he finally made a decision to be helpful.

Now maybe he did provide information to Sri Lanka on day three. But clearly, George Jr took two more days to decide to send aid. His decision was clearly expressed in a sharply changed attitude in a press conference on day five. Numbers demonstrate how long it took George Jr to make a decision. It even took him three days to decide to make phone calls. Embarrassing is the politically correct response. Immoral is the honest answer.

This is from about.com:

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is the lead agency for distribution of disaster relief funds to foreign countries. Originally created after World War II to aid in the Marshall Plan reconstruction of Europe, USAID took its modern form in 1961, when President John F. Kennedy signed the Foreign Assistance Act into law.

Since that time, USAID, an independent federal government agency, has been the principal U.S. agency to extend assistance to countries recovering from disaster, trying to escape poverty, and engaging in democratic reforms.

With headquarters in Washington, D.C. and field offices worldwide, USAID works in partnership with private voluntary organizations, indigenous organizations, universities, American businesses, international agencies, other governments, and other U.S. government agencies.
Aid available through USAID is taxpayer-funded as authorized annually by Congress through the federal budget process. Persons interested in USAID's approved FY 2005 budget and a history of funds distributed to various countries should see the following Websites:


USAID FY 2005 Congressional Budget Justification

U.S. Overseas Loans and Grants

Maybe it's not the president's job to call the chiefs and say "go to sri lanka". Maybe its USAID's job to give BUDGETED amounts to the people who need it, and maybe the president had to go through congress to get the EXTRA money. What's the opposite of pro-gress?

[tw]

Originally Posted by OnyxCougar

Maybe it's not the president's job to call the chiefs and say "go to sri lanka". Maybe its USAID's job to give BUDGETED amounts to the people who need it, and maybe the president had to go through congress to get the EXTRA money. What's the opposite of pro-gress?

And that would be more interesting facts. But the one organization with tens of thousands of people in the region was the US military. The largest organization that also could have responded within three days instead did not. To execute the fast reaction for humanitarian aid - to load cargo ships in but days and dispatch them - to redirect a marine expeditionary force - to redirect a carrier task force - all required direct orders from the president. None came for five days.

This is something that other organizations such as the UN still do not have. The UN took a shocking lessson when NATO in mid 1990 demonstrated how an organization must be structured to respond immediately. Apparently the UN never developed such abilities. This and other criticisms of the UN may be forthcoming. But western nations have structures to make such fast responses. The US military had the largest in the region available to deploy on day one.

I don't believe USAID has such abilities. They certainly don't have the resources to act on the scope and size in the Indian Ocean. Needed most was aid in the first three days. That also requires presidential decision. It keeps coming back to one bottleneck. The president did not make a decision for five days. Unacceptable and immoral. It took world wide public humiliation before this president could make a decision.

Another number that demonstrates when this president finally made a decision? He upped the paltry $35 million to $350 million. That was when he finally decided a disaster had occurred. He could have pledged $5billion without any approval of Congress. Money also demonstrates when he finally made a decision.

[Beestie]

Originally Posted by tw

Then don't read it. I don't care if you don't like me. The fact remains - George Jr did nothing for five days.

I don't have anything against you personally although I do think you drone on and on and on and on and on and on and on about the same thing as though the rest of the Cellar had some obligation to respond to your allegations against W or defend him in some way.

You made your point: W took 5 days. For all I know it took 5 days for other world leaders to respond also. For all I know W thinks they deserved the tsunami and it is God's will that they starve. I don't know. For all I know W could feed every man, woman and child on planet earth forever and you'd still hate his guts. Whatever. But, you don't need to keep making the same point over and over and over and over and over in the same and multiple threads as though there is still some remote corner of cyberspace that doesn't know how you feel about W. Newsflash: there ain't.

We get your freakin' point already. Do you get mine or do I need to post it 18 times a day in 7 different threads for two weeks?

[tw]

Originally Posted by Beestie

We get your freakin' point already. Do you get mine or do I need to post it 18 times a day in 7 different threads for two weeks?

Not according to Dagney, Onyxcougar, or Lookout123. They say otherwise. This decision to let thousands die after the disaster should not be taken lightly. The number of posts and the post from so many who 'say it ain't so' demonstrate the divide created by George Jr. We have here a prefect example of one so immoral as to do nothing. And yet people like Lookout123 would call him a moral man. George Jr will not even aplogize for doing nothing - a prediction based upon his previous fubars. IOW he is the problem. Tens of thousands died unnecessarily.

I know you will never forget that was said. Good. Because this is what morality is really about.