|
Post by JimB on Jun 10, 2008 15:29:53 GMT -5
Hate to say it, Bob, but it looks like you're on the wrong thread too....
So as antidote to the insanity Frecks is bringing to the table (and Bob is apparently backing up), let the education commence. First of all, "terrorism" is not an enemy - it is a strategy. Terrorists can wrap themselves in any flag they like, including an American one, and there have been plenty of American terrorists. So if you're buying into the idea that we can somehow wipe out terrorism, you're not thinking about this the right way. We can't, and it's foolish to waste resources trying.
Our enemies who are using the strategy of terrorism are using it very effectively, and in such a way that traditional military action doesn't solve the problem. (As has been proven over the last 10 years or so.) Attempting dialogue with these people is NOT equivalent to "taking the bullets out of our soldiers' guns". It's an admission that the current strategy is a failure, and a recognition that it's time to try something else.
Nice, Bob, bringing up Hitler. Has nothing to do with anything. Read your history, and you'll find that, prior to US entry into WWII, every effort was made to find a peaceful means of resolution. War was the last resort. Utterly incomparable to this situation, where we started with war and are now trying to clean up the mess that strategy has created by escalating it. Ever try to put out a fire by pouring gas on it?
I don't recall anyone, Obama included, saying we're not willing to fight. No one is surrendering. But the Middle East is half a world away, and if we're going to continue spilling blood there, we'd better have some clear reasons for it. It's certainly not helping us become any safer here - we're creating more enemies, and making them bolder, smarter, and more desperate.
Open your minds a little bit. Nobody is trying to kill you, despite what Fox News might like you to believe. It's a problem that wants solving, and it's time to abandon the "solutions" that haven't worked.
Well-reasoned counter-arguments will be duly considered. Ranting, trollishness and hyperbole will be labeled as such, then shelved and ignored.
|
|
|
Post by sheyd on Jun 10, 2008 15:39:17 GMT -5
Wow bob - and you and your family were broke during that time, right? You lost your job, couldn't afford to live then? I was young, but my family didn't seem to have any problem with those 18% interest rates either, and lived a lot more comfortably than now! And the 75% tax, you get that where? Or is that just a way of fluffing me up to be some horrible money-sucker? How sweet! I do have a problem with the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer while our environment gets sucked down the drain, though, so maybe you have me pegged.
And Hitler wasn't a terrorist - he was declaring war openly, and only half-heartedly attempted to conceal the truth of what he was doing. He didn't sneak around, he moved massive troups, declared wars, annexed countries. That is a COMPLETELY different scenario.
And do you think our current war is because of the 9-11 attacks? And is it the terrorists getting killed, for the most part? Terrorism is NOT the same as open warfare, and it can't be treated the same.
|
|
|
Post by goods on Jun 10, 2008 15:58:29 GMT -5
I remember gas lines... (none now), I remember Iranian Hostage Crisis. (none now) I remember the Country wanting 4 more years of Carter. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1980 I remember reading, watching, learning about Hitler... About his "annexing", about the folly it was for Chamberlain to accept Hitler's word to stop after the Rhineland. I remember Stalin signing a truce with Hitler and where that got him. I remember how up front Hitler was about everything he did.
|
|
|
Post by goods on Jun 10, 2008 16:06:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sheyd on Jun 10, 2008 16:26:43 GMT -5
Yep, Carter ended on a bad note with that Iranian Hostage Crisis, but Reagan did just as well with the Iran-Contra affair... LOL! There is a lot more to Carter than that election - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Carter, and a lot more to Reagan - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan. I respect Reagan, but I didn't like his economic policy, especially regarding the environment. And again - Hitler was a COMPLETELY different story - his goal was take over, not terror. He wanted to look like the good guy. So you are saying pouring gas ON the fire makes it stop? Or is it giving it an area where there is no fuel? Terrorist can and do live next door to people and not slit their throats. Makes it easy to spot one if they just killed everyone living next to them, wouldn't it? ;D That is the point - terrorism is not an open thing, it is an attempt to breed terror by surprise attacks while the main group/organization/people stay hidden.
|
|
|
Post by Phyxius on Jun 10, 2008 16:31:28 GMT -5
He's not living next to me. And he's not going to either. A term I suggest you familiarize yourself with... Straw ManThat's what kind of argument you're presenting here. Pretty weak, actually, but if it's the best you've got...
|
|
|
Post by JimB on Jun 10, 2008 16:47:57 GMT -5
A term I suggest you familiarize yourself with... Straw ManSee my reference to "hyperbole" above. ;D Filed, shelved, and ignored. Next!
|
|
|
Post by Mel (cherry) on Jun 10, 2008 17:05:50 GMT -5
And again - Hitler was a COMPLETELY different story - his goal was take over, not terror. He wanted to look like the good guy. And this is the idiocy that they want us to keep believing. You don't think their goal is to take over?
|
|
|
Post by bobfromacctg on Jun 10, 2008 21:57:25 GMT -5
Wow bob - and you and your family were broke during that time, right? You lost your job, couldn't afford to live then? I was young, but my family didn't seem to have any problem with those 18% interest rates either, and lived a lot more comfortably than now! And the 75% tax, you get that where? Or is that just a way of fluffing me up to be some horrible money-sucker? How sweet! I do have a problem with the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer while our environment gets sucked down the drain, though, so maybe you have me pegged. And Hitler wasn't a terrorist - he was declaring war openly, and only half-heartedly attempted to conceal the truth of what he was doing. He didn't sneak around, he moved massive troups, declared wars, annexed countries. That is a COMPLETELY different scenario. And do you think our current war is because of the 9-11 attacks? And is it the terrorists getting killed, for the most part? Terrorism is NOT the same as open warfare, and it can't be treated the same. Jim, I might have spoke out of turn but I think what I said was valid. You completely missed my point about Hitler and thats ok. As for 'Ever tried to put out a fire by pouring gas on it?" comment, hate to break the news to you but maybe you should learn how Red Adair put out oil fires.... Care to guess??? Thats right...an explosion..oops guess a bigger hammer does work sometimes doesn't it. Yes Shey, I was poor during the 18% interest rates. I could only afford a mobile home and it was damn expensive. Shey, YOU told me once that you would gladly pay 75% of your income in taxes. So thats a quote from you. Guess it sounds pretty stupid now doesn't it - like I thought it sounded when you insisted to me that that would be wonderful because of all the money we would have for social programs. (Head explosion here...) Hitler wasn't a Terrorist. Wow. I think he terrorized everyone that stood in his way and it stuns me to think that you don't see that. I guess watching his people round up and shoot people in the streets wasn't terror - it actually sounds kind of fun. You are right - no terror there. Maybe you all should read history. I know its not my specialty but I'm not illiterate. Little history here - watch out you might learn something.... Prior to going to Iraq, we tried UN (YOu know them, the great saviors of the world..) resolutions after umpteem UN resolutions to convince Sadaam to stop. He didn't. "Stop it - or we will yell STOP again".... 7 or 8 years worth of resolutions...guess we should have given it 10 years...then 12 years...then 15 years..All the time saying "now stop it...stop I say".... There comes a point where enough is enough. Do I agree with the actions - NO.. It was wrong but all the ones in congress screaming now, then agreed that Sadaam had the weapons and he must be stopped. HISTORY...READ THE TRANSCRIPTS@!@@!!! Oh but wait..that would get in the way of your opinions... "Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up!" Be consistent folks, thats all I'm trying to say - and apparently, not doing it very well. Oh yes.. I don't watch Fox news - or ABC, CBS , or NBC. I get my information from all types of internet sites from left wing to right wing. I read both sides and then I make up my mind. I apologise for the tone of this and the previous note. I took some shots and that was wrong. Mea Culpa...
|
|
|
Post by Mel (cherry) on Jun 10, 2008 22:29:36 GMT -5
This is a very interesting discussion.
|
|
|
Post by Phyxius on Jun 10, 2008 23:03:39 GMT -5
And then sometimes it fails miserably. Like in Iraq... Straw -- man... You know it. You knew it as you typed it. There is no comparison - none whatsoever. First rule of political debate. If you're the one making Hitler or Nazi references to make your point, you've already lost... Ahhh. So YOU[/u] have the proof of the WMD's, right? Right? Hmmmmmmm? Oh, yeah - I forget. THERE WERE NONE. He DID[/u] stop. We DID[/u] illegally invade a sovereign country without provocation. Oopsie... But what if what we've been doing is stupid? Should we still be consistent? Well?
|
|
|
Post by soupnazi on Jun 10, 2008 23:40:08 GMT -5
Freckles started out this thread saying, basically, that electing a democratic president would guarantee attacks from terrorists.
It has boiled down to arguments about Hitler, and Carter, interest rates, and finally, WMD's and the reason we are in Iraq.
Here's my take, and it basically boils down to what is going on NOW. "We" (and that includes none of us that are sitting at our computers in the United States or elsewhere, that are not actually sitting our asses in a desert) are in Iraq and Afghanistan right now. And we need a way to get out our troops (again, not WE) out of there.
It doesn't matter who in the hell voters put in the office of president of this country, we (the ones sitting at our computers and contemplating voting) need to look at the whole damned big picture and realize that a president is just a figure head, and there are a few hundred other people that we elect that have a final decision on taking our country to war.
I get sick of the bitching and the rhetoric (from all sides), and the reliance on media of damn near everyone in this country. Find something out for yourself, quit bitching about the past, and do something about the future.
Just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by sheyd on Jun 10, 2008 23:52:41 GMT -5
I like that opinion! ;D
|
|
|
Post by JimB on Jun 11, 2008 8:09:27 GMT -5
there are a few hundred other people that we elect that have a final decision on taking our country to war. Very true. There's a Democratic majority in both houses now (although a very slim one in the Senate), and they're not putting their collective foot down and demanding more from the Executive Branch regarding this military action. In other words, they're ignoring the platform they were elected upon. Frustrating. But I believe the presidential election does carry significant weight. We aren't talking about one person and one position here - we're talking about a potential total housecleaning of the entire Executive Branch vs. the status quo. Granted, enough "business as usual" politics will continue that the aforementioned total housecleaning is unlikely, but I'll take my chances with unlikely over impossible. BTW, FWIW, any glossing over of the original nutball posts that started this thread are purely intentional on my part. ;D
|
|
|
Post by goods on Jun 11, 2008 8:27:31 GMT -5
Is your life better, is the economy better, are gas prices better before or after the Dem take-over of the House? Which branch of government has a bigger impact on the economy? How?
|
|