Text of the speech that George Marshall gave at Harvard announcing his plan in 1947 can be found here](http://www.marshallfoundation.org/about_gcm/marshall_plan.htm#text_of_the_speech). Review that and compare it with with Bush’s speech today. That speech is regarded as one of the most important speeches of the last century. The Plan was clear and concise. It was meant to prevent a recurrance of fascism and ward off communism through strengthening basic society as a whole. The speech reflected this well. It barely touched on the past, but focused greatly on the present and future. It outlined the personal and national struggles of contemporary life detailing how to and why we should defeat those problems. It did not resort to shock tactics about the possible results of failure, but very well made the point that failure was not an option without doing so.
Bush’s emphasis on terror and Saddam are misplaced. Of course, their roles must be acknowledged, but they cannot be given any role in the solution. The plight of the people in Iraq and Afghanistan, and elsewhere, are more than enough to successfully sell a rehabilitation plan. We are building a future, not reworking a past.
I think you're right Thap. The public hasn't seen a suited-up chimp since Michael Jackson's Bubbles in his hey dey. You can't blame them for staring in awe.
Such matters are not decided on the basis of a speech. They are just for public consumption (and for Bush, to provide sound bites for his 2004 campaign).
Suffice is to say that Iraq remains a very dangerous place for any occupation force, whether there to rule or to help re-build. The oil revenues were grossly over-estimated and hence US is trying to get the hell outta there, as the Texans would say. Its a no-win situation. Except to give a message to would-be terrorist-sponsoring countries that "Don't mess with US", this campaign has practically achieved nothing for US.
By the very admission of US Administration, Saddam was not connected to 9/11 attack, and Iraq does not have WMD. So what was all the hooplah about? Its just getting lame every day.
I guess they will "catch" Saddam alive or bomb him to oblivion just when Bush's approval rating goes below 40% and they need to raise him in the campaign trail.
Just going back to the UN, thing for a bit, I thought detent was in the air leading up to this ‘love-in’.
After listening to Bushels and Che-Iraq it appears they're still at odds.
Bushels got in first and banged on about the need for more war on terror and more terror in war, Che-Iraq basically slagged the US off (I caught a few profanities in Francais) and called for more countries in the UN sec council (including the Faroes Islands) and a greater leading role in future global socio-political descions.
Coffee 'the donut' Anan did his usual “there’s a greater needin’ for speachin’ and dialogin’, but maybe pre-emptive strikin’ is the way to go” after having been against this for so long!!
[QUOTE] Originally posted by Faisal: *
Such matters are not decided on the basis of a speech. They are just for public consumption (and for Bush, to provide sound bites for his 2004 campaign).
[/quote]
Yeah, I know.. but if they were smart they would've written a grand speech praising the Iraqis' and Afghans' work ethic and enumerated some of what they need, etc (like Marshall above) and not even bothered with the obtuse but obvious slams on other countries. Just discuss the mission in such a way that anyone who wouldn't jump at it would have to be a heartless ******. This speech shouldn't have been for public complacency, it should have prodded them into believing the French et al truly do need to help. That way if/when they don't, the blame would lie with them and not the US. Problem with all that is we would need to have some actions of our own to back it all up...
[quote]
I guess they will "catch" Saddam alive or bomb him to oblivion just when Bush's approval rating goes below 40% and they need to raise him in the campaign trail.
[/QUOTE]
Nah.. they'll find some poor ole homeless Serb, call him Ratko Mladic and try playing it against Clark.