Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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 04-12-2013, 03:08 AM
 
15,063 posts, read 6,199,020 times
Reputation: 5124

Advertisements

I'll be voting for a 3rd party candidate. Glad that we are out of Iraq but we need to be out of Afghanistan as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-12-2013, 05:24 AM
 
Location: Bettles Field, AK
311 posts, read 493,788 times
Reputation: 220
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
Yes, but what happened to the marches? The body counts? The scathing articles in the news? Is it suddenly no longer cool to be anti-war?

Sadly, I think the anti-war fad passed with the election.
This is what confuses me. Prior to the 2008 federal election, there was an outcry about how unjust the wars were, and rightfully so. Today, outside the Occupy movement, there is no real protest about the continued wars and invasions from either side of the aisle.

When it comes to this subject, both parties are virtually the same.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2013, 06:41 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,876,922 times
Reputation: 24863
these wars are continously increasing the fortunes of the investors and financiers that actually control our and most of the rest of the world's governments. We have not left Afghanistan because to leave would derail the gravy train the plutocrats depend upon for their wealth and security.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2013, 08:52 AM
 
59,342 posts, read 27,505,965 times
Reputation: 14351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
Speaking as an independent that voted for Obama....largely due to hopes of getting our troops back home, I am growing increasingly upset with the democrats that demanded the troops home and now won't do anything.

Really, are you guys so far gone into the kool-aid that this is suddenly ok? Will you consider voting against the incumbents? Voting 3rd party?

Sadly, I am having a really hard time telling that Bush has left the whitehouse right now.

Please, thoughtful responses only...I don't want to have to read the usual stupidity from the partisans around here.
What is that saying, "You can fool some of the people all of the time,,,,,,"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2013, 10:05 AM
 
Location: NW Nevada
18,161 posts, read 15,665,805 times
Reputation: 17153
Being militarily minded, and thus being quite analytical regarding projection of force, I feel that Iraq was a complete strategic cluster, and Afghanistan should never have been more than a tactical operation. The US accomplished nothing in Iraq. For all the lives we lost, now we just pull out, completely? We get nothing for our blood. It would be smart, if we, at least, could put a sizable, forward air base in place, to keep Iran in check. Our oil prices should reflect our losses as well. These are just a couple things, that come to mind, but the point is, fighting for ten years should net us more than a "yankee go home". So much for strategy, of any kind. But hey, how noble our people look in those flag draped coffins.

Afghanistan should NEVER have gone this far. We should have treated it as a strictly tactical operation. Hit AlQueda and the Taliban straight in the Nads, left them writhing on the ground, after a parting foot in the face, and been home for cornflakes. We never should have put a long term ground force there.

Back to Iraq, I don't feel we should have gone in anyway. You can call it unjust, unwise, whatever, fact is, we should have saved our forces. Whatever political objective one wants to hang on the rationale behind it, it was just flat stupid.

Last edited by NVplumber; 04-12-2013 at 10:06 AM.. Reason: spelling
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2013, 11:03 AM
 
Location: Orlando
8,276 posts, read 12,878,463 times
Reputation: 4142
In the 2008 election I was under no illusion Obama would continue the war and increase its scope... same as McCain would have. The primary difference between the two is Obama is more calculating and will actually get the job done.

For me I voted for Nader as he was the one that would have ended the war. in 2012 I knew Romney was just a flag of the prevailing color and would swing anyway he had to. not a good trait for a president. Obama has done a good job on the economy and turned around what some thought was not fixable, and certainly not in a few years.

Obama is a hawk but he has accomplished something ...bin laden and al queda. Otherwise the war effort is more for some people to get richer, not for any real purpose. It is sad it hasn't ended sooner.

My preferences with Obama

he should not give into the repugs in the house
he should end the wars
he should investigate previous administration crimes
he should take down the wall street bankers and introduce them to a jail cell
he should see to it 17 seats move from r to d in the house in 2014
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2013, 11:23 AM
 
78,664 posts, read 60,852,359 times
Reputation: 49974
Quote:
Originally Posted by AONE View Post
My preferences with Obama

he should not give into the repugs in the house
he should end the wars
he should investigate previous administration crimes
he should take down the wall street bankers and introduce them to a jail cell
he should see to it 17 seats move from r to d in the house in 2014
Let's review:

1) Despite RWNJ complaints, Obama gave in on numerous items including Obamacare.
2) Surge, baby surge!
3) Never ever ever.
4) He has removed some bankers from wall street ..........and introduced them to cabinet positions.
5) In 2010 63 seats went from d to r. In 2012 the dems got back a whopping 8 seats.

I'm rather at a loss as to how you can stomach all this?

Basically, and especially with the "repugs" comment I'm at a complete loss how you voted Nader in 2008 and then after seeing 4 years of things that were 180degrees opposite of your preferences.....you then decided to vote for Obama? I mean, I can understand if you were strict party loyalist or if you voted Obama 2008 and then were ticked off and protested voted 2012....I guess I'm just baffled.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2013, 11:34 AM
 
78,664 posts, read 60,852,359 times
Reputation: 49974
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moreau36 View Post
This is what confuses me. Prior to the 2008 federal election, there was an outcry about how unjust the wars were, and rightfully so. Today, outside the Occupy movement, there is no real protest about the continued wars and invasions from either side of the aisle.

When it comes to this subject, both parties are virtually the same.
Yep. Which is why I haven't voted Republican in well over a decade and regret the one time I voted Democrat in that time-period.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2013, 11:36 AM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,842,017 times
Reputation: 20675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
Ouch! I'd forgotten about her.....so I googled.....

What happened to the antiwar movement? Cindy Sheehan hits 'hypocrisy' of Left, Democratic allies. | Washington Examiner (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-53628177.html - broken link)

Wow. I had my suspcions but that's some extremely damning commentary from a gal who in my book has a lot of credibility. (She was on Bush like a bulldog and is topic interested, not partisan.)
Cindy Sheehan's Soapbox: Requiem for the Antiwar Movement by Cindy Sheehan

So many make a lot of money when the U.S. goes to war so, it never ends.

Maybe a yea to war vote needs to be accompanied with committing one's own children to serve that war on the front line.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2013, 11:40 AM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,842,017 times
Reputation: 20675
Quote:
Originally Posted by AONE View Post
My preferences with Obama

he should not give into the repugs in the house
he should end the wars
he should investigate previous administration crimes
he should take down the wall street bankers and introduce them to a jail cell
he should see to it 17 seats move from r to d in the house in 2014
No way #5 has a shot, if #1-4 are seriously pursued.
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:05 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top