Changes

**Now "an official policy of a president" gets confused with "the US military core responsibilties".  Order, please take note, you are not speaking with someone who swallows any line of Liberal crap because it sounds reasonable or intelligent.  This kinda of meaningless nonsense isn't even worth the time discussing if you cannot present a coherent arguememnt.

**Now "an official policy of a president" gets confused with "the US military core responsibilties".  Order, please take note, you are not speaking with someone who swallows any line of Liberal crap because it sounds reasonable or intelligent.  This kinda of meaningless nonsense isn't even worth the time discussing if you cannot present a coherent arguememnt.

:# Firstly, you may or may not believe the claim that the administration does it for human rights, you may believe that the administration has ulterior motives

::1. Firstly, you may or may not believe the claim that the administration does it for human rights, you may believe that the administration has ulterior motives

:::Been over this probably four times now: (1) the Adminstration is a constitutional Office with a Constitutional responsibility; (2) opponents & critics have the right to think and say whatever garbage they want, they still are just that, opponents ant critics of Official US policy.

:::Been over this probably four times now: (1) the Adminstration is a constitutional Office with a Constitutional responsibility; (2) opponents & critics have the right to think and say whatever garbage they want, they still are just that, opponents ant critics of Official US policy.

:# Secondly, even if you do believe a policy want to further human rights, you might believe that a given policy fails to do so.

::2. Secondly, even if you do believe a policy want to further human rights, you might believe that a given policy fails to do so.

:::Fine. So what? Because they oppose US policy means they do not oppose US policy? What's the point here?

:::Fine. So what? Because they oppose US policy means they do not oppose US policy? What's the point here?

:# Furthermore, you might think that furthering human right abroad is none of the US military's business.

::3. Furthermore, you might think that furthering human right abroad is none of the US military's business.

:::OK, we're getting onto something.  The Pentagon and the Statement Department, while both part of the Administration, are two different Departments.  Now, which Department handles diplomatic relations and foreign policy?

:::OK, we're getting onto something.  The Pentagon and the Statement Department, while both part of the Administration, are two different Departments.  Now, which Department handles diplomatic relations and foreign policy?

:# And finally, you might be opposed to human rights.  

::4. And finally, you might be opposed to human rights.  

Bush falls clearly in category 2, with his criticism. And most Liberal critics today of Bush as well. The article however suggest that the Liberals critics belong to category 4. And that's incorrect. Just as much as it would be incorrect to say that Bush opposed democracy in Haiti. Now, that you are able to see these differences when it concerns Bush, you might be evenly capable to see these differences when it concerns Liberals.  

Bush falls clearly in category 2, with his criticism. And most Liberal critics today of Bush as well. The article however suggest that the Liberals critics belong to category 4. And that's incorrect. Just as much as it would be incorrect to say that Bush opposed democracy in Haiti. Now, that you are able to see these differences when it concerns Bush, you might be evenly capable to see these differences when it concerns Liberals.