Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

Palomar · 2005-07-01 11:57:18

So in order to help others in any amount, we have to be willing to invade and bomb?

*That seems a rather intellectually dishonest question, considering you were entirely pro- Iraq war and pro-Bush in 2003. Too bad all those posts are now mysteriously "gone" and no longer available for reading in the original threads.

That's the problem with being "top-dog", having an apathetic electorate, and a lunatic in charge.

Which was just fine and dandy with you about 1-1/2 years ago. What changed your mind? Or was it "changed"?

--Cindy

Cobra Commander · 2005-07-01 11:58:09

What you just offered is proof that we have a choice in how we employ our resources.

Only if given that choice, people aren't going to vote to put the resources that go into the military to instead build giant humanitarian happy ships to help the world. The military can be justified as being necessary to protect American interests abroad and offer humanitarian uses as a side benefit. Going straight to the electorate and saying "we need to keep the tax burden up to so we can put a third of the federal budget into helping foreigners that don't like us" will result in a less-than-supportive response, followed shortly by massive tax cuts. Woohoo!

As long as we're so tied to the rest of the world we need that military. Free us from those bonds and we can cut it to a shadow, but it won't mean we can be Santa Claus to the world.

Again, much of our humanitarian work is a result of our military capacity and dependent on that for its existence.

Whether the military is being misused is certainly open for debate, but it's not an either/or question between military or humanitarian capacity.

Edited By Cobra Commander on 1120240796

clark · 2005-07-01 12:15:11

That seems a rather intellectually dishonest question, considering you were entirely pro- Iraq war and pro-Bush in 2003. Too bad all those posts are now mysteriously "gone" and no longer available for reading in the original threads.

Oh! A golden opportunity to offend you in some small way! My cup runeth over.

As you have so frequently observed, I always seem to change sides. So, am I to assume that all individuals have no leeway in changing their stance or opinion? How now brown cow!

Where all the old posts have gone, I certainly do not know. Maybe I deleted them, maybe someone else deleted them, or maybe the board ate them. But I share your disappointment that the posts are gone. Much like life, here today, gone tomorrow. Just the memory to sustain us. [sniff]

Perhaps we could work together an eulogize my old missing posts. Would you like to?

“They were good posts. They were insightful posts. Cut down in the prime of their existence!”

Whatever. Contrary to your insinuation on my predisposition, I keep an open mind and approach intellectual debate (such as it is, depending on whom it is with) in a manner that allows me to understand my own perspective and that of others. I’m not going to apologize for how I arrive at my own conclusions, as you yourself seem quite content at arriving at your own conclusions without worrying how it might offend others.

Which was just fine and dandy with you about 1-1/2 years ago. What changed your mind? Or was it changed?

Nothing has fundamentally changed. I said then as I say now, we did the right thing for the wrong reasons. What that means is I can understand certain arguments for action, just as much as I understand the ones against them. I thought then, just as I think now, that prosecuting this war with Iraq would have some obvious benefits, but the way in which it was prosecuted was poorly designed and would lead to the general problems we face now.

We were all lied too, and yes it is an issue. We can all agree that we need to win now, but that still does not excuse the fact that we were lied to. Instead, the public at large is told to get over it, march in step.

It would be like your husband cheating on you, you finding out, and him shrugging and saying, “get over it.”

But all of this is neither here nor there. Ideas, which are the point of conversation, never grow through agreement. They never develop further unless challenged. In all those Enlightenment discussions you’ve had on your yahoo group, did no one ever discuss the point of the Enlightenment philosophy and what made it work?

Voltaire was an argumentative obstinate a-hole. Get it?

clark · 2005-07-01 12:23:43

Only if given that choice, people aren't going to vote to put the resources that go into the military to instead build giant humanitarian happy ships to help the world.

Don't be so sure... have you heard what the Left manifesto says?

Whether the military is being misused is certainly open for debate, but it's not an either/or question between military or humanitarian capacity.

Well, I never said we needed less military. I said we should be utilizing it less. It ain't defending our freedom and democracy in Iraq- it's saving Bush's failed foreign policy in the Middle East.

Cobra Commander · 2005-07-01 12:42:40

And now that the cup that runneth over hath spilled upon the table. . .

Don't be so sure... have you heard what the Left manifesto says?

Have you heard what happens at the polls every time they come right out and say it straight up?

Well, I never said we needed less military. I said we should be utilizing it less. It ain't defending our freedom and democracy in Iraq- it's saving Bush's failed foreign policy in the Middle East.

Okay, utilizing it less is a valid position. It has problems of course, among them being that a military that is unused for too long turns into something else, but that's a topic all its own.

Surely we could use it less for killing people and more for helping people, but again, that misses two important points. The military doesn't exist to help foreigners, it just sometimes does so as a side benefit. And sometimes military action is necessary to help people. Bosnia and Kosovo come to mind, American military forces being used solely to help foreigners that we really don't give a damn about. Often citied as a great success.

We're still in Bosnia by the way. Where's the exit strategy?

We're still in Germany too, but I digress.

Sure, you can read all kinds of stuff into what I'm saying but the bones of it is this: The American military does more good than ill in the world, much of that good would not be possible if the military was not the monstrous fighting force that it is, and in order to continue doing good and retain the ability to perform its prime function it needs to be deployed around the world and it needs to fight from time to time.

Fortunately from that purely theoretical perspective, there are plenty of threatened American interests in the world for which their services are required.

So in a roundabout way, American military activities around the world help far more people than any foreign aid program or gaggle of Euro-rockers could ever hope to do.

clark · 2005-07-01 12:49:38

Have you heard what happens at the polls every time they come right out and say it straight up?

I admit that the left needs to do better at selling their plan, and I also admit that the right is very effective in mobilizing the militant-compound-nut vote.

the military doesn't exist to help foreigners, it just sometimes does so as a side benefit.

Huh? I thought the point of our war in Iraq was to help foreigners. You mean it isn’t?!

We're still in Bosnia by the way. Where's the exit strategy?

They’re not shooting at us. “Hail the liberators!” Wasn’t that what we were told to expect?

The American military does more good than ill in the world, much of that good would not be possible if the military was not the monstrous fighting force that it is, and in order to continue doing good and retain the ability to perform its prime function it needs to be deployed around the world and it needs to fight from time to time.

I would counter that the military does nothing but good in the world, except when it is used and abused by lunatics. More people would be accepting of what we are doing if, one, we had been upfront, and two, we had a f*cking realistic plan.

Grypd · 2005-07-01 13:02:35

I often wonder what's the point of all this interdependence? I'm not pitching for nor advocating isolationism, btw.

We have evolved the world into an interconnected collective its really a matter of resources and of trade. The USA is a net importer like many western or developed countries. So to disengage is impossible now you have to live with the rest otherwise you become the North Korea of the western world.

Only if given that choice, people aren't going to vote to put the resources that go into the military to build giant humanitarian happy ships to help the world.

No, but many people would put a lot of money to having ships to leave the world behind and all its problems. I remember with fun reading some of the libertarian plans to do this. Until we can live in our own self created paradises better make sure that you can hammer your neighbours and to make them know it too. Still it is always better to get on with them never know when you might need to do something and need the help. It seems the USA certainly can do the former but with the latter it has a lot of trouble.

Cobra Commander · 2005-07-01 13:05:02

I admit that the left needs to do better at selling their plan, and I also admit that the right is very effective in mobilizing the militant-compound-nut vote.

Uhm, not really. When most people really understand the plan of the Left they don't like it.

They only sell it when they pull a bait-and-switch.

Crap, I didn't want to let that get out.

Huh? I thought the point of our war in Iraq was to help foreigners. You mean it isn’t?!

The real point of the war, as I often stated, was to create a US-friendly democratic nation in the MidEast to act as a symbol for other Arab states and a base of operations. Doing so just entailed freeing millions of people from a brutal dictator.

Helping foreigners was again a bonus, but if that was all it takes for military action we'd be in Sudan.

They’re not shooting at us. “Hail the liberators!” Wasn’t that what we were told to expect?

And there was a decent amount of that. Most of the Iraqi army gladly surrended, some units tried negotiating it months before the war started. Many American units were greeted warmly upon their arrival.

But we're only supposed to remember the Fedayeen.

I would counter that the military does nothing but good in the world, except when it is used and abused by lunatics. More people would be accepting of what we are doing if, one, we had been upfront, and two, we had a f*cking realistic plan.

I agree on the plan part, it was chock full of stupid at the start. Being totally upfront would have required a much more belligerent stance. "We're here for weapons and to free the Iraqi people" plays alot better with the locals than "we're here to create a free Arab state that we'll use to undermine all you guys later. Syria, Iran, Suadi Arabia, we got yer number."

Palomar · 2005-07-01 13:34:27

I often wonder what's the point of all this interdependence? I'm not pitching for nor advocating isolationism, btw.
We have evolved the world into an interconnected collective its really a matter of resources and of trade. The USA is a net importer like many western or developed countries. So to disengage is impossible now you have to live with the rest otherwise you become the North Korea of the western world.

*Yes. But I meant it in a global-wide sense (not just pertaining to the US).

It's like certain anti-abuses laws. No matter how many laws are established, the abuses continue (and sometimes actually increases).

But maybe I'm being overly cynical.

--Cindy

Grypd · 2005-07-01 14:21:03

Well the G8 summit is here again and its in Scotland. Apart from the incredible police prescence and a good bit of riot training for myself and many major companies closing down for the week and boarding there windows, Buisness as usual.

Seems the Guardian newspaper has managed to get a copy of the USA's position on the tackling Global Warming bit of the conference. It appears the USA the only G8 country not to be a signed up member of the Kyoto accords objects to certain key statements.

http://www.spacedaily.com/2005/05063023 … spacedaily article

There is also a possiblity that Tony Blair will break away from the USA at this conference and sponsor a commitment to tackling CO2 emissions and even to the point where the USA is ostracised by the rest of the G8 something that has never happened to any country.

I think GB is in for an interesting visit to Scotland. I wonder if he likes whiskey, he may need a drink after this.

Josh Cryer · 2005-07-01 15:05:12

EGYPT: AUTHORATIVE SUNNI LEADER CALLS FOR IRAQI TRUCE

Cairo, 1 July (AKI) - The Grand Imam of the Al-Azhar mosque, Mohammed al-Tantawi, has made an appeal to Iraqi insurgents to halt their hostilities for a month. Only in this way, he said, can the occupying forces have the chance to withdraw from Iraq: "I tell you in all honesty and sincerity that if the killings and sabotages in Iraq were to be interrupted for a month, all the foreign forces could start to withdraw from your land and the whole world would be on your side" said al-Tantawi in a statement published in the Voice of al-Azhar newspaper.

Several days ago, Tantawi met the former Iraqi prime minsiter Iyyad Allawi for discussions on the Iraqi crisis. On that occasion, he emphasised that Iraqi resistance was an action that was permitted and to be encouraged, but the continuing attacks by guerrillas in the country are undermining the reconstruction process and are counter-produtive.

It is unusual for the Grand Imam of the al-Azhar mosque to make critical comments about the Iraqi resistance, which is predominantly Sunni.

Tantawi, who is named by the Egyptian government, also said that he would be willing to travel to Iraq if invited.

http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level.php?c … ...4&par=0

Palomar · 2005-07-01 15:20:24

EGYPT: AUTHORATIVE SUNNI LEADER CALLS FOR IRAQI TRUCE
Cairo, 1 July (AKI) - The Grand Imam of the Al-Azhar mosque, Mohammed al-Tantawi, has made an appeal to Iraqi insurgents to halt their hostilities for a month. Only in this way, he said, can the occupying forces have the chance to withdraw from Iraq: "I tell you in all honesty and sincerity that if the killings and sabotages in Iraq were to be interrupted for a month, all the foreign forces could start to withdraw from your land

*Someone over there finally figured that out, huh?

--Cindy

DonPanic · 2005-07-01 15:29:01

LO

Besides, the "surrounding hostile world" that most Americans are now feeling the sting from has nothing to do with defense spending.

Sure, it has.
I do think that those trusts benefiting the defense spendings are interested in propaganding that feeling to get more defense spendings and benefits. One has a name that starts whith "hal" and ends with "ton"...

The places where the hostile sentiment emanates from are not the places defense spending is directed at. No one expects a war with France or Canada for example.

Strange examples, you mix hostility to this administration with islamo-extremism hate trying to destroy occident. Did you have any report of US citizen feeling threatened in his life in Canada or France ?

BWhite · 2005-07-02 00:54:14

Cobra, more troops now is too late.

More troops then to prevent looting and to guard Saddam's arsenal would have been useful. All those IEDs are being made with explosives we could have guarded in the weeks after regime change.

We also need to define "victory conditions" in a clear and succinct manner.

BWhite · 2005-07-02 01:28:15

Step 2? Harry Reid and George Bush co-equally choose the next Supreme Court justice behind closed doors and dare ANY GOP-er or Democrat to object.
This is really screwy. No precedent, Constitutionally questionable and what does Bush get out of it? Some half-lib moderate Justice? He's gonna pass, it's a no-win.
That, and are we really supposed to believe that the same deal will apply when the situation is reversed? I highly doubt it. And who elected Reid co-President exactly?
Sure, we could do this joint-rule thing, but Bush and Reid? You give them both too much credit. :;):

Clinton had a nice chat http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0465028 … -page]with Orrin Hatch about his Supreme Court nomination decision.

Oh yeah, I forgot. Rove said there was no reason for Republicans to talk to Democrats, except to condemn or demand obedience.

Actually I hope he nominates his Attorney General.

BWhite · 2005-07-05 07:29:52

Ah, the value of good http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … tml]police work.

Alliance Base demonstrates how most counterterrorism operations actually take place: through secretive alliances between the CIA and other countries' intelligence services. This is not the work of large army formations, or even small special forces teams, but of handfuls of U.S. intelligence case officers working with handfuls of foreign operatives, often in tentative arrangements.
Such joint intelligence work has been responsible for identifying, tracking and capturing or killing the vast majority of committed jihadists who have been targeted outside Iraq and Afghanistan since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to terrorism experts.
The CIA declined to comment on Alliance Base, as did a spokesman for the French Embassy in Washington.
Most French officials and other intelligence veterans would talk about the partnership only if their names were withheld because the specifics are classified and the politics are sensitive. John E. McLaughlin, the former acting CIA director who retired recently after a 32-year career, described the relationship between the CIA and its French counterparts as "one of the best in the world. What they are willing to contribute is extraordinarily valuable."

Edited By BWhite on 1120570245

BWhite · 2005-07-05 16:52:47

Actually I hope he nominates his Attorney General.

Check out my new new sig. Wonkette is so very snarky. I think I love her.

DonPanic · 2005-07-05 18:22:06

Ah, the value of good http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … tml]police work.
Alliance Base demonstrates how most counterterrorism operations actually take place: through secretive alliances between the CIA and other countries' intelligence services. This is not the work of large army formations, or even small special forces teams, but of handfuls of U.S. intelligence case officers working with handfuls of foreign operatives, often in tentative arrangements.
Such joint intelligence work has been responsible for identifying, tracking and capturing or killing the vast majority of committed jihadists who have been targeted outside Iraq and Afghanistan since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to terrorism experts.
The CIA declined to comment on Alliance Base, as did a spokesman for the French Embassy in Washington.
Most French officials and other intelligence veterans would talk about the partnership only if their names were withheld because the specifics are classified and the politics are sensitive. John E. McLaughlin, the former acting CIA director who retired recently after a 32-year career, described the relationship between the CIA and its French counterparts as "one of the best in the world. What they are willing to contribute is extraordinarily valuable."

LO
What a stupid trick to reveal this information
We have to be looked at as antagonistic powers so one can get what the other can't get among some countries or political groups.
So, please do engrave in your brain definitively that we, froggies, want to compete at USA, economically, politically and militarily, that we are ennemies, that you hate us as much as we hate you.
Dig it ?
And by the way, this information is bullshit, we don't cooperate with our american ennemies in any matter and by any manner.
We don't even speak to them and <span style='font-size:17pt;line-height:100%'>never</span> visit their forums.

BWhite · 2005-07-05 20:39:36

Ah, the value of good http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … tml]police work.
Alliance Base demonstrates how most counterterrorism operations actually take place: through secretive alliances between the CIA and other countries' intelligence services. This is not the work of large army formations, or even small special forces teams, but of handfuls of U.S. intelligence case officers working with handfuls of foreign operatives, often in tentative arrangements.
Such joint intelligence work has been responsible for identifying, tracking and capturing or killing the vast majority of committed jihadists who have been targeted outside Iraq and Afghanistan since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to terrorism experts.
The CIA declined to comment on Alliance Base, as did a spokesman for the French Embassy in Washington.
Most French officials and other intelligence veterans would talk about the partnership only if their names were withheld because the specifics are classified and the politics are sensitive. John E. McLaughlin, the former acting CIA director who retired recently after a 32-year career, described the relationship between the CIA and its French counterparts as "one of the best in the world. What they are willing to contribute is extraordinarily valuable."
LO
What a stupid trick to reveal this information
We have to be looked at as antagonistic powers so one can get what the other can't get among some countries or political groups.
So, please do engrave in your brain definitively that we, froggies, want to compete at USA, economically, politically and militarily, that we are ennemies, that you hate us as much as we hate you.
Dig it ?
And by the way, this information is bullshit, we don't cooperate with our american ennemies in any matter and by any manner.
We don't even speak to them and <span style='font-size:17pt;line-height:100%'>never</span> visit their forums.

Napa Valley wine is the very best in all the world! Hah!

= = =

PS - - I also hear George W. Bush simply loves to eat snails.

= = =

PPS - - We US-ians also must love the Italians, we don't cooperate with them at all despite public appearances to the contrary.

Edited By BWhite on 1120618124

DonPanic · 2005-07-06 02:01:13

Napa Valley wine is the very best in all the world! Hah!
= = =
PS - - I also hear George W. Bush simply loves to eat snails.
= = =

LO
US citizens are so starving thin that the slightest wind blows them away unless they are harpooned to the ground nah

As its name indicates, Kentucky Bourbon is french invention nah

clark · 2005-07-06 05:36:45

What's not to love about France?

Our fighting men once gave them liberty, and their darling women returned the favor with VD. nah.

French posting during working hours? Must be a strike. nah.

If Finnish food is the worst, and British food the second worst, what does that make American food? We like to be first at everything. Doing good, or you know, torturing prisoners.

I heard that a bunch of military guys in the US military watched a movie about the big military operation in Algiers conducted by the French. Apparently we are learning our behavior from the best! Thanks froggy!

oh-la-la.

DonPanic · 2005-07-06 19:08:26

LO

Our fighting men once gave them liberty, and their darling women returned the favor with VD. nah.

Just a little lack of instructions of your troopers : in France, the houses with red lights and warm welcoming women in were brothels, not to be confused with battlefields recognizable with green uniformed german soldiers and armoured tanks.
(Brothels, famous french institutions were abolished and closed in 1947)

I heard that a bunch of military guys in the US military watched a movie about the big military operation in Algiers conducted by the French. Apparently we are learning our behavior from the best! Thanks froggy!

Ha la la, the lessons have been misunderstood, you have to catch and torture terrorists before they blast their bombs !
After, results are, let's say, rather more modest.

DonPanic · 2005-07-07 02:34:49

Did Bin Laden's Al-Qaida terrorist group watched http://www.onnouscachetout.com/images/t … 1.avi]this ?

DonPanic · 2005-07-07 05:10:02

Sorry, I'm no more in mood for kidding, I'm so sad for London attacks, it's remind me too much blasts in Paris metro.

Fledi · 2005-07-07 05:33:38

Damn, not again!
I hope you guys there are allright despite this recent cowardly attack.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#126 2005-07-01 11:57:18

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#127 2005-07-01 11:58:09

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#128 2005-07-01 12:15:11

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#129 2005-07-01 12:23:43

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#130 2005-07-01 12:42:40

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#131 2005-07-01 12:49:38

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#132 2005-07-01 13:02:35

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#133 2005-07-01 13:05:02

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#134 2005-07-01 13:34:27

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#135 2005-07-01 14:21:03

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#136 2005-07-01 15:05:12

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#137 2005-07-01 15:20:24

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#138 2005-07-01 15:29:01

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#139 2005-07-02 00:54:14

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#140 2005-07-02 01:28:15

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#141 2005-07-05 07:29:52

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#142 2005-07-05 16:52:47

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#143 2005-07-05 18:22:06

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#144 2005-07-05 20:39:36

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#145 2005-07-06 02:01:13

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#146 2005-07-06 05:36:45

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#147 2005-07-06 19:08:26

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#148 2005-07-07 02:34:49

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#149 2005-07-07 05:10:02

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#150 2005-07-07 05:33:38

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

Board footer