Where in hell have these words been?

Via ABC News' blog:

"Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along," the President said to the country's legislative body, "We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: 'Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.' We have an obligation to call this what it is –- the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history." Watch video of Bush's comments on terror HERE.

In a statement, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., shot across the bow: "It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 6Oth anniversary of Israel's independence to launch a false political attack. It is time to turn the page on eight years of policies that have strengthened Iran and failed to secure America or our ally Israel. Instead of tough talk and no action, we need to do what Kennedy, Nixon and Reagan did and use all elements of American power -- including tough, principled, and direct diplomacy - to pressure countries like Iran and Syria. George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the President's extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel."

This should've been the tone heard from the White House bully pulpit year in and year out since 9/11.  And it should become the mantra sung by John McCain and his people from now till beyond.

Don't, sadly, hold your breath.

Comments

[Vita]

Bush has been saying - the press has been filtering it. Every since they walked away in the middle of his Whitehall Palace speech, they've muted Bush on this issue. And they're freaking out now that he's being heard again.

[tim]

Combine this with Pres. Bush’s news conference verbal beat down on some delusional reporter a couple weeks ago and I think he has finally found some type of comfort zone. Who knows why it took him this long but maybe the remaining months of his presidency will be bring us more us this straight talk. Too little, too late but still, it’d be nice.

Did Obama just call Israel our ally…twice…in one short paragraph? Dude better be careful or he may lose some votes with that crazy talk. (Morgan, it’s fairly close to #7 of your “What Would Make Him Unelectable”)

“It is time to turn the page on eight years of policies that have strengthened Iran and failed to secure America or our ally Israel.”

Strengthened Iran? Really? We have troops on two of Iran’s borders. Europe and the U.N. are breathing down their necks about their nuclear facilities. Sanctions are crippling their economy.

Pres. Bush has failed to secure America? Please name me the attacks since 9/11on American soil, ships or embassies, then compare them to the previous 7/8 years.

Lastly, is Obama going on record that Israel is under threat? Is he willing to tell us who exactly that threat is and what he would do about it? Besides dialogue that is.

[salvage]

No.

He is saying here the same stupid things he's been saying all along.

If the Uk thought this way; shutting down political avenues to end conflict then the IRA would still be active.

Israel would still be at war with Egypt.

Cyprus would still be in a civil war.

Spain would still be a dictatorship.

The Soviet Union would never have ended.

And so on.

It seems you can only think one way; bomb bad people until they are good people and yes that has worked in the past but crazy thing, not every problem can be solved the same way.

For instance you can't hammer in a screw anymore than you can screw in a nail. Some task require tools with more depth.

And Bush is a shallow tool if there ever was one.

[Morgan K Freeberg]

Not only has force worked in the past, but talking has failed in the past. Quite a lot.

And those who want us to use more talking, it's such a funny thing -- they never go into the details. Like, fer example...during all this magical talking through which Jimmy Carter solved these problems, and will solve problems later: What was said? What was talked about? How did all this talking work?

How's it gonna work with Ahmadinejad? Huh? Is this one of those things where I simply demand details, and the whole "talk 'em out" argument just crumbles? Why yes, I believe it is. You're going to say something flippant, and take my question to Appeaser Headquarters, and they're going to tell you what to say back to me: Change the subject.

Oh and here's ANOTHER thing you appeasers don't quite seem to get (even though it's constantly explained to you). These asswipes like Ahmadinejad and Arafat and Khadafi and Hitler do their "talking" with us...they make photo ops out of them. They've got their own bitter warring factions to worry about, and when they meet with us they show off how they can keep that "paper tiger" that is the United States at bay. That's how they stay in power.

It soothes over those bitter warring factions. Because some of them simply don't want us attacking their country. But others of them are, indeed, building up weapons and don't want interference from us.

Historical revisionism, you say? If so, you're just showcasing your ignorance of a little place, once visited by his Carterness, known as North Korea.

History shows we haven't been too quick to use force. Not by a long shot. We've been dilatory in using it, if anything. To an extreme fault.