Eine Kleine Gore Bashing
(Sorry, but there’s just one last little detail that got stuck in my brain.)
As Vice President, Al Gore supported the Pentagon’s Two War strategy — that the US could fight, and win, two simulataneous regional campaigns. Under President Bush last year, the unrealistic plan was downgraded to a Fight-Hold-Fight plan. We’d hold’em in one place, win in the other, than go back and win in the first.
Whew.
These ideas were the backbone of White House nationally security planning for years.
So now Gore says we can’t fight one medium-sized campaign against Iraq, while engaging in a small, light-unit semi-occupation-in-force, at the same time.
And this while spending more on defence than Clinton ever asked for.
Which is the sham, Al — your old boss’s budgets or your claims from Monday?
Or both?
The sham is what he should be hiding under, after that speech of his. The New Republic, not normally a rabid, anti-Gore platform, pretty much tore him to ribbons.
Maybe he should just climb under the entire bed and sleep it off.
now, let’s be fair to gore. he never really liked clinton, as proven by his arm’s length approach to bubba during his own campaign. when you’re the veep, your job is to shut up and nod. so it’s quite possible he never thought a two war campaign was possible but was hoping to ride clinton’s coat tails into the white house so he said nothing.
not saying that’s what actually happened, just that it’s possible.
thanks for the link to strategy page.
Well, Lieberman has come out and said that he didn’t agree with some of what his running mate did.
It’s Gore’s turn already…
Gore hated Clinton so much that when he was being impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice, rather than do the principled thing and push him out the window (polittically speaking, I’m not advocating homicide), Gore led a pep rally on the stairs of the White House saying this was a Republican partisan smear campaign. He may very well hate CLinton, but he likes power more and will say or do anything to get it.
Stephen, in answer to your question: both.
You know, I’ve been wondering about this. All these long years, we’ve been gearing up to fight the planet’s (other) biggest badasses, the Soviets. And now, suddenly, we can’t take on Iraq, which doesn’t have nearly our technology, nor does it have a trained and dedicated army. So, if we can’t pound the snot out of Iraq without breaking a sweat, what were we going to do with the Soviets? What would we do if we had a halfway-competent enemy?
Now, the urgency of the last question is somewhat offset by the fact that we don’t, barring an invasion from Mars, have such a threat. But still…
Honestly, it’s a pretty shabby world-girdling imperalistic be-tentacled hegemon that can’t take on an outfit like Iraq.
Let’s not forget that “greatest president” line.