U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-23-2008, 01:55 PM
 
11,961 posts, read 12,853,422 times
Reputation: 2772

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jaguar5822 View Post
Lol I don't really care, I knew as soon as I posted anything even loosely interpretted to be bad about Obama, that I was placing my head on the chopping block. To be honest, I didn't like McCain either, I believe in having your own values and goals, rather than just pursuing the agenda of your party to make them happy. I will say that I'd rather get deployed to Afghanistan rather than Iraq, the weather is nicer there, and there's less sand to get everywhere. I agree with some of what he has said, and disagree with other stuff, I am both left and right wing dependant on the issues at hand. I believe the vote wasn't won by fine informed voters such as most if not all of the people posting in this thread. It was won by the mass of uninformed voters, including those that don't even speak english. Unfortunately for us, there in no empirical evidence to confirm or deny that. His campaign strategist was a genius, 100%.

And please don't start with the he's not CIC yet, we're talking about his plans, which is the step before action.
'THEY' would be the same voters who elected Bush, right?

Lets remember there's more than one form of intelligence. The founders of this nation were counting on us to put all our 2 cents together to make intelligent decisions. When any group fills themselves with conceit thinking they have all the answers, we all suffer. Divided 'We the People' fall prey to malevolent forces infiltrating political process.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-23-2008, 02:07 PM
 
Location: SE Arizona - FINALLY! :D
19,872 posts, read 22,803,639 times
Reputation: 7186
Quote:
Originally Posted by floridasandy View Post
i thought that most americans wanted to get out of the war altogether and consider it an economic disaster for our country, not to mention the loss of lives of our soldiers. liberals are now advocating going into another country with its associated cost and potential loss of life? i have to say that is a little surprising.
Clearly you need to reevaluate how you come to such conclusions. There is (and HAS BEEN) much more support (from both the Right AND the Left) for finishing up the job properly in Afghanistan.

Ken
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2008, 02:08 PM
 
11,961 posts, read 12,853,422 times
Reputation: 2772
Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarmaple View Post
I think it is important to remember that we have a President-elect, he has not yet been sworn in...we have a current president who, by virtue of time-constraints is really not doing too much and certainly is not going to do too much given the short period of time before he leaves the Oval Office; I think our President-elect is putting together a strategic plan, he is putting together an interesting a bi-partisan team, and that is what I also strongly believe, it will be a team....and when he hits the ground on inaguration day, he will hit the ground running...I do not think he is going to be soft; I do not think he is going to be gingerly careful...I think he is going to be fair, prudent, sensible, have his ducks in a row and has an enormous task ahead of him and I think he is planning carefully; I think he is asking the right questions, I think he is looking at the 'whole' picture not simply what is specifically in front of him (which, in itself has got to be overwhelming) and I think he is really going to use some of the words of Kennedy...'ask what you can do for your country' because we are all going to have to be a team to move forward, get out of the horrible mess we got placed in and rather than finger pointing, which sure does not help or work and at this point is absolutely irrelevant, but rather figure out how we all pitch in, and I mean all...and that goes for the big companies, the Fortune 500 companies....the 3 major automobile companies as well...they have all lived well, their executives have all lived well without a care in the world for those in our country who have had to struggle and now, have to do more than struggle...if these companies want financial help, they have to make commitments not only to Congress, but to us...

And, we have an obligation to support our President-elect as well; and more significantly, we need to stop saying what he has not done yet in regard to his campain 'platform'..how can he...he has not yet been sworn in...
Well, I don't know. Perhaps republicans would prefer they vote Bush out of the dead wood chair he's in right now and let Obama get to work early? One way or another, someone needs to be responsible, and if Obama is up for early swearing in he's got my vote. Unless of course republicans prefer Bush take full responsibility for 8yrs in these last 2 months???

When I was in service there was a poster on the wall we had to run past to jump on a rescue boat--
"You can either help or get the hell out of the way".
I hope that comforts Joe public knowing the coast guard takes your life and property seriously enough when you're calling mayday.

The executive branch? Not so much.

Republicans... pick one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2008, 02:12 PM
 
48,516 posts, read 84,010,700 times
Reputation: 18050
IMO it was all a ploy to get the anti-war vote. Afganhsiatn is by far the toughest nut to crack;witness the british rule ;the russiaians and the fact that it has never had a centrlized goverment that could control it. Now it will becomje the single focal point for the fundalmentalist movement.Even then it will have to be supported economically for centures.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2008, 03:14 PM
 
31,385 posts, read 32,123,757 times
Reputation: 14897
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav View Post
IMO it was all a ploy to get the anti-war vote.
Hmmm, sending more troops... sounds like a logical "ploy" to get the vote of anti-war advocates. Please try using a little logic when expressing an opinion honest or otherwise.

Quote:
Afganhsiatn is by far the toughest nut to crack;witness the british rule ;the russiaians and the fact that it has never had a centrlized goverment that could control it.
Well that's a fact. Obama should be wary of "nation building" and just take care of the job at hand, going after al-Qaeda. Personally I wouldn't care what deal he might cut with the Taliban as long as in contains assurances that al-Qaeda isn't allowed to reestablish itself in Afghanistan, that would preclude the errors made the British, the Russians and Bush.

Quote:
Now it will becomje the single focal point for the fundalmentalist movement.
I prefer one rather than two.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2008, 03:55 PM
 
4,586 posts, read 4,886,332 times
Reputation: 939
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaguar5822 View Post
Lol I don't really care, I knew as soon as I posted anything even loosely interpretted to be bad about Obama, that I was placing my head on the chopping block. To be honest, I didn't like McCain either, I believe in having your own values and goals, rather than just pursuing the agenda of your party to make them happy. I will say that I'd rather get deployed to Afghanistan rather than Iraq, the weather is nicer there, and there's less sand to get everywhere. I agree with some of what he has said, and disagree with other stuff, I am both left and right wing dependant on the issues at hand. I believe the vote wasn't won by fine informed voters such as most if not all of the people posting in this thread. It was won by the mass of uninformed voters, including those that don't even speak english. Unfortunately for us, there in no empirical evidence to confirm or deny that. His campaign strategist was a genius, 100%.

And please don't start with the he's not CIC yet, we're talking about his plans, which is the step before action.
Uninformed?? You just posted a thread that is not accurate. Who's uninformed?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2008, 04:34 PM
 
Location: San Antonio, TX
262 posts, read 940,976 times
Reputation: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tank1906 View Post
Uninformed?? You just posted a thread that is not accurate. Who's uninformed?
I was being sarcastic after hearing the anti-war obama voters for so long.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2008, 04:54 PM
 
Location: In a house
5,230 posts, read 7,510,112 times
Reputation: 2569
Why is it ok to occupy Afghanistan & kill its people but not Iraq? IMO at this point its 6 in one 1/2 dozen in the other.
We ought to get the Iraqis to attack Afghanistan & sit home watching on the tube.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2008, 05:01 PM
 
1,271 posts, read 3,656,613 times
Reputation: 584
Well let's see, his plan is to redirect troops to the area they were supposed to be in the begginning. Which means less time wasted in an area we had no business in to begin. This also means that there is a possible resolution in sight.

Looks to me like he is taking the necessary steps to have some sort of resolution with this war.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jaguar5822 View Post
Karzai: Obama promises to fight terror in region - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081123/ap_on_re_as/as_afghanistan - broken link)

So much for bringing everyone home within 16 months ehh? I guess the voters never saw it coming?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2008, 05:41 PM
 
7,279 posts, read 13,538,196 times
Reputation: 3610
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Knocker View Post
Why is it ok to occupy Afghanistan & kill its people but not Iraq? IMO at this point its 6 in one 1/2 dozen in the other.
We ought to get the Iraqis to attack Afghanistan & sit home watching on the tube.
This post shows an absolute lack of understanding of just about everything about these conflicts, warfare, and foreign policy in general.

It's not about being "ok to occupy" and kill one group or the other. This isn't a war for territory. Any effort in Afghanistan should be about disrupting terror cells and apprehending or killing terrorists. That conflict is directly tied to 9/11. That conflict has the support of the world community.

It's not about just invading and killing any old nation populated by Brown people. It should be a matter of strategy and policy.

Having said that, maybe you were kidding. I hope you were.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:23 AM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top