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 10-25-2010, 01:47 PM
 
11,946 posts, read 14,220,748 times
Reputation: 2772

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper View Post
Right now the United States military spends more money than the next 15 of the worlds largest and most powerful nations COMBINED, and yet it can't seem to root out a few backwater Taliban?

There is reality and then there is fantastic wishful thinking.
Correct. Their version of military is about pageantry/ theatrical displays as if saber rattling solved anything. Taliban & generalized terrorist activity can only be dealt with through surgical strikes & quality intelligence reports. Sending in troops to secure the peace in Afghanistan is akin to fighting someone else's civil war for them. Haven't we seen enough of that in Iraq?

The UN is still as ass backwards as it's ever been. They've got all the time in the world to cook up agenda 21 undermining sovereigns but little time to be the effective peace keeping force as impartial world cop. See how it played out in Africa-- the French selectively threw select citizens under the bus and fed the despots they found more palatable or could benefit from personal gain (as a nation). We're notoriously doing that ourselves in central america and middle east. We're long overdue for foreign policy to grow the hell up. Taliban got their training from us and we PERSIST in ignoring the lesson.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-25-2010, 01:53 PM
 
11,946 posts, read 14,220,748 times
Reputation: 2772
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamontnow View Post
Your Bundist, Buchananite policy is repudiated by that shameful piece of history.
Since when is minding your own porch shameful? Hitler could have easily been neutralized if the banking industry, including our own FED, refrained from feeding him. Just because people don't want to be lured into wars on false premises to support weasels profiteering from strife doesn't automatically make them isolationists.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2010, 02:38 PM
 
11,946 posts, read 14,220,748 times
Reputation: 2772
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Pft!

I'm staring at China!

Would you as a nation, any nation jack with them right now?

We don't have to be the worlds nanny, to have a big military.
We need a big military, so we don't have to be a nanny and get involved.
This Progressive idea we have to be the worlds police was brought on after WW-I
That is our problem.
I'll start with my particular branch of service- the coast guard. Do you have any idea of their mission? People have a vague sense of their duty but are clueless as to the devils in the details. They are military and they're being tasked with worldwide assignments even in times of peace. They're subject to every wild lame brained idea coming down DC's pike. They decide the coast guard only deserves funding if they half heartedly fight the war on drugs with a navy hand me down pea shooters on high seas. They decide CG works for navy, no IRS, no EPA, no dept of homeland terrorism. It's nuts!

BRACs that are important to close are loran stations in italy. Another example of spendthrift nonsense- I can see no viable reason why my full ships compliment should have been in Japan or Guam on taxpayers dime, much as I enjoyed the ride & the cultures. Why are we actively managing the worlds navigation systems when the core mission of CG is to protect our own waters? Instead they close small boat stations, relying heavily on effective range equipment, but distance /speed = time distance equations result in collateral damage of civilian population.

Instead they close vessel traffic services in vital ports like LA and NYC. Instead they redirect their efforts as rent-a-cop impromtu container inspectors in ports like LA without protest because it's the latest term and condition of their funding thanks to congressional shenanigans. Instead they send CG personnel to Kuwait for port security and cross train local navy personnel to pick up the slack of duty as a life saving service on Americas coast.

Much maligned as CG is by other branches of service, they'd be far better off as civil service employees with a job description etched in stone than be the jack of all trades tool of congress tasking them with the job of meter maid on high seas at will. The force is miniscule by comparison to other branches and always has been (about 35,000 total). Dropping the pomp and circumstance of military structure in CG alone would save billions in the long term, but that might put a damper on academy officer prestige & ambitions. Wouldn't Joe public be better served with guaranteed medivac capability vs yet another graduating class from the academy of self service?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2010, 05:12 PM
 
11,946 posts, read 14,220,748 times
Reputation: 2772
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx View Post
The Time article from Apl 4, 1983 is especially telling. When it comes to cutting defense spending and the military budget, Republicans revert to the tried and true method of smoke and mirrors.
Worse than that. They'll use it as political fodder typified in bentbow arguments. If this were a subject of education expenditures people use the sentiment of-- do it for the kids-- to justify blank check mentalities. No school district deserves a blank check based on sentiment, and neither does military. I do support education and troops/ military, but the imprudent misuse & abuse is something I reject in both. A $500 hammer in military is just as nuts as a million dollar space pen from NASA when they could have used a pencil.
States should be examining closer themselves regarding education. Here are a few examples...
Misuse of S.F. school funds?
Four indicted in probe of school funds - Los Angeles Times
Parents demand audit of Hernandez's time with school district
Controversy follows former Torrington school business manager from O'Brien administration- The Register Citizen

Note that these abuses are taking place among non union members but our national dialog is being led into attacking the salaries of teachers are primary cause of abuse. Similarly military personnel get thrown under a bus when gov't bestows it's grace and favor to military industrial complex, to pomp and circumstance & careerism ambitions of military elite. This leaves our troops with defective or absent kevlar vests. Justice served entails putting that CEO in a vest and using him as a test dummy for his defective merchandise. The nickel saved represents a lavish lifestyle to him justifying his existence, but it represents cost overruns in the VA & a betrayal of troops caught in the gears of commerce. Their job is hard enough and our troops do deserve better all around. The wiser application of tax cuts for military would mean telling these armament contracts they shouldn't plan their retirement around engineered obsolescence to perpetuate said contracts to infinity and beyond. Instead each round of tax cuts for military is born on the backs of troops with reduced benefits, services, and pay for triple the duty obligations. See that DOD link I posted for bentbow and you'll hear DOD telling troops they aren't giving enough, then need to be 'more agile'. The only ones who aren't agile are the stuffy brass. The rest are lean mean fighting machines. Cutting into their funds to support stuff shirt junkets is downright criminal. Same thing happens with farm subsidy, right? Majority on both sides of the aisle agree family farms deserve protection and yet time & time again we see corporate whales angling the legislation to tilt it all for themselves leaving those family farms begging for something to trickle down.

So read this article and see all the culprits as an echo of a larger problem. L.A. unveils $578M school, costliest in USA - USATODAY.com
Will Donald Trump get the stigma he deserves from 9 million dollars worth of frivolous lawsuit & costly delays? If he can't have it his way & get his piece of entitlement cake (aka corporate welfare), sabotaging kids is acceptable conduct of adults? His populist politics stink to high heaven and a close examination of his campaign contributions proves him out to be a spoiled child playing mommy liberal and daddy conservative off one another for a living. THIS is my beef as centrist relentlessly having my ear burdened with these monkey in the middle arguments.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2010, 05:44 PM
 
1,263 posts, read 2,270,311 times
Reputation: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by harborlady View Post
Since when is minding your own porch shameful? Hitler could have easily been neutralized if the banking industry, including our own FED, refrained from feeding him. Just because people don't want to be lured into wars on false premises to support weasels profiteering from strife doesn't automatically make them isolationists.
I find it incredible that a few posters, and thankfully very few, would have opposed American intervention to stop the Nazis, had they been around 70 years ago. They would have opposed it, of course, until Hitler's hoardes arrived on US borders. That's called "minding your own porch"?
It's classic isolationism. It's Paulist and Buchananist and it's WRONG. It's wrong strategically and morally. In WWII the delay in America's intervention, due to pressure from the isolationists, costs millions of lives, including that of many Americans.
Isolationism, or "minding your own porch", is the policy consistently pushed on this forum by this OP. And yes, it is shameful.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2010, 06:01 PM
 
11,135 posts, read 13,698,888 times
Reputation: 3691
Quote:
Originally Posted by harborlady View Post
Correct. Their version of military is about pageantry/ theatrical displays as if saber rattling solved anything. Taliban & generalized terrorist activity can only be dealt with through surgical strikes & quality intelligence reports. Sending in troops to secure the peace in Afghanistan is akin to fighting someone else's civil war for them. Haven't we seen enough of that in Iraq?

The UN is still as ass backwards as it's ever been. They've got all the time in the world to cook up agenda 21 undermining sovereigns but little time to be the effective peace keeping force as impartial world cop. See how it played out in Africa-- the French selectively threw select citizens under the bus and fed the despots they found more palatable or could benefit from personal gain (as a nation). We're notoriously doing that ourselves in central america and middle east. We're long overdue for foreign policy to grow the hell up. Taliban got their training from us and we PERSIST in ignoring the lesson.
For some reason this reminded of a point made in a movie I recently watched called Lord of War. Near the end while the DEA agent had the Russian arms dealer in custody and he was explaining what would happen next, he also pointed out that the top 5 arms suppliers in the world also happened to be the 5 permanent members of the UN security council. For some reason this hit me like a diamond bullet.

When placed in the context of the movie where the viewer ends up despising the the protagonist for his sales of arms to butchers, mad dictators, etc... it dawns on you that this is what takes place daily among the five most influential nations on earth.

As I try to pinpoint specific points in time that led to our current foreign policy, I can't help but keep coming back to NSC 68. However, from a citizens point of view, I have yet to determine with any precision when Americans began to associate national defense with empire defense and this notion that we not only should be the worlds police but that it is somehow our duty to do so.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2010, 10:30 PM
 
11,946 posts, read 14,220,748 times
Reputation: 2772
Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper View Post
A terrorist attack from a small group of ideologically driven nut jobs does not equate to the Chinese Marines landing on the beaches of South Carolina.
But they already have in the context of Eisenhowers understanding of economic strength equating to military strength. I agree with him, but what bentbow cannot see is that allowing ourselves to be beholden to chinese gov't financially to sponsor someone else's civil war is a lose lose proposition for America that spans generations covering that tax & a whole other tax that defies accounting- ill will. I rebuke the abuse of our troops as paid for mercenaries to a foreign gov't BECAUSE I'm loyal to the troops, not to foreign gov'ts, and not to political flavor of the month whims declaring war on fill in the blank we don't need reasons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper View Post
America has become obsessed with this notion that perfect security exist and that if we spend enough that we can achieve a state of pure safety and this is pure fantasy.
Is this not the very same accusation leveled at ham handed progressives, only a different pet issue header?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper View Post
The military establishment is probably the toughest cookie to crack and one that few Republicans refuse to even consider and even fewer Democrats wish to challenge for fear of being seen as weak.
Yes, and when the press gets a hold of a dem voting against school lunches they never ask the details why when it was endorsing filet mignon on the menu. Equally spinning Reagan as hero of military... if it were loyalty were truly to his troops I'd applaud just as loudly with conservatives. Meanwhile McCain is being painted as anti military by faux conservatives but no one asks him for clarification about his vote. Those earmarks are deal breakers often and ignoring that fact is disingenuous non information regularly doled out in media. The media doesn't ACTUALLY represent right or left, it represents their own avarice as does Trump in post response to mohawk.

Liberal & libertarian anti war is still going on but receives little to no coverage. They're also confronted by whom in the course of their protests? Dem hawks or repub hawks? I can't make out that flag red green and black. Don't miss the accusation.. "you support terrorism (by supporting peace)".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pz0HzG8KJB0
Especially do not miss the statement from potomic films claiming constitution party and right leaning libertarians need to commandere the peace movement away from liberals viewed as communists and anti business socialists. Fell right into the 'us vs them' trap vying for power/ esteem. Presuming that I'm too gullible & will sign up with crazy Ivan just because I'm hearing protesters out is more than a little insulting. Islam for peace doesn't sound kosher when reading the details of those posters but I don't see them representing the majority.

Here's more Tn- it's there if you're willing to see it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rq3AC7eyBRs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0Ftq9N4fzo
see minute 1:28
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImoMGyJjWIk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vO-PWP_I5U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN77P8x5qbY
Did Cindy Sheehan render herself mute or lose her resolve after elections? Did Obama mistreat or belittle her? Note the absence of riot gear, substituted for police on bicycles. Amazing how much more peaceful peace protests become when police & officials aren't acting like napoleons themselves (pattern? I think so).
Pandemonium outside Hofstra debate: Mounted police push back protesters and spectators. At least three trampled and injured. Fifteen arrested - Be The Media

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YnwXHBxD9s

You rightfully make an observation that liberals are less than vocal about war now than they were during Bush. I believe that can be explained by the fact that Bush started these wars under dubious circumstances and they felt he (and lockstep R's) couldn't be trusted with national security, much less the constitution. They trust Obama more not because he's a liberal but because he didn't start the mess and his family isn't connected into oil. They see him making efforts to close Gitmo and close the door to Iraq. They aren't Disney endings, they generally don't hold politicians to that standard of theatrics, but it's movement in the right direction so they're less vocal in blogs & in the press. That doesn't mean silent on the subject, and Olbermann isn't one to hold back. Keith Olbermann Blasts President Obama
The liberal backlash to Olbermann's commentary..
Quote:
Keith Olbermann isn’t interested in discussing the issue of what do in Afghanistan in any depth. Instead, he is only interested in providing his liberal audience with more red meat. This is why Olbermann is no different than Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh. Obviously, the solution is not to stay in Afghanistan forever, but Olbermann’s shortsighted advice would only lead to failure both in Afghanistan and political defeat for the Democratic Party.
They had me until the very end mentioning political defeat of Dem party. Being in service to power for the sake of power killed repubs and it will kill dems too. Get over yourselves!

Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper View Post
As far as the Tea Party is concerned, I believe it has gotten to the point where the mob is tossing the rope over the tree limb and any calls to the mob to give a trial first are drown out. The truly fiscally conservatives within this movement are simply drown out in a sea of mouth breathers.
From the onset I've made the observation they're angry with themselves and just don't know it yet. Accountability would be a thing I'd endorse but they aren't accountable for themselves when lapping up their own vomit via tabloid journalism. They're defending finance believing that any attempt gov't makes holding these people accountable is an 'abuse of capitalism' sponsored by communist pinkos. They defend lies and call it the right to free speech. They bear false witness on a regular basis and claim themselves Christian. They're the antithesis of hippies. They're the thing hippies have been protesting all along. They aren't the high road Barry Goldwater set, or the 'ask not what your country can do for you' set. They're neocons saying 'screw U, where's mine'? They're the NIMBY's, yuppies, and the HOA's are normally content to smugly operate the world by remote control because 'I've got mine' until something threatens their insular lifestyles. They just don't believe that any endorsement they've made was the very thing unleashing hell upon them. You already know the canned answer. Liberals did it.

You already know their ego protection logic. My response to them makes me a bizarre combination of misogynist feminazi when I'm pointing out the worst attributes of women (control freak biddies, nagging ankle biters) animated in this movement. This vet isn't a 'real' american, ergo, a traitor for failing to applaud VFW drunks congratulating themselves at the expense of real time soldiers. They paint pictures of a pick and choose Christian when I fail to endorse their abuse of others in the name of God or fail to lend credibility to their martyr story. They have no commitment to reality or fair play. They only want to be on the winning side of Disney. Their commitment is to being perceived as righteous even at the expense of actual righteousness. Supporting troops means patronizing them with a pat on the head or slapping a bumper sticker for a pat on the back from peers but they're first to say no to PTSD vet care. Constitution be damned, and God be damned too if they're praying for America to fail.

Love him or hate him, consider the prophetic words of Barry Goldwater (the man who revitalized conservatives and put Reagan on the map) in relation to Tea Schlafly Party. In his end years he refused to be associated with Republicans calling them 'kooks'. His biggest grievance being with social conservatives second to communists for a reason.
Quote:
“Equality, rightly understood as our founding fathers understood it, leads to liberty and to the emancipation of creative differences; wrongly understood, as it has been so tragically in our time, it leads first to conformity and then to despotism.”
That said, I'm off to read that link you suggested.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2010, 11:54 PM
 
11,135 posts, read 13,698,888 times
Reputation: 3691
Quote:
Originally Posted by harborlady View Post
But they already have in the context of Eisenhowers understanding of economic strength equating to military strength. I agree with him, but what bentbow cannot see is that allowing ourselves to be beholden to chinese gov't financially to sponsor someone else's civil war is a lose lose proposition for America that spans generations covering that tax & a whole other tax that defies accounting- ill will. I rebuke the abuse of our troops as paid for mercenaries to a foreign gov't BECAUSE I'm loyal to the troops, not to foreign gov'ts, and not to political flavor of the month whims declaring war on fill in the blank we don't need reasons.
I think it is pretty obvious that a strong military is impossible without a strong economy being able to procure the tools and means. In any sense of long term, one cannot have a perpetual state of war and a civilization at the same time without perpetual source of wealth.

Quote:
Is this not the very same accusation leveled at ham handed progressives, only a different pet issue header?
Well I see this concept used in a great many of situations, as I find it an absolutist proposition. Among the general population, absolutism rules our day, and I cannot help but be reminded of the racist concept of "One drop theory". Case in point, William Buckley Jr. merely said he disagreed with John McCain so the right simply branded him a RINO as though all his years of conservatism didn't exist because he didn't tote this one line. Chuck Hagel suffered a similar fate when he spoke out against the war in Iraq.

America demands perfection and when it isn't achieved it then depends upon who sits in the big chair, if it is one who shares the same political ideology, it is then rationalized, if not, it is them demonized and no place offers better examples of this mindset than right here on C-D.



Quote:
Liberal & libertarian anti war is still going on but receives little to no coverage. They're also confronted by whom in the course of their protests? Dem hawks or repub hawks? I can't make out that flag red green and black. Don't miss the accusation.. "you support terrorism (by supporting peace)".
For one it warms my heart to see anti-war protests continue, even if they are anemic in comparison to those back in 05-07 Actually I have no idea who those folks represented but the flag looked like the Palestinian flag and since its time frame was near that of the sign with Israel's flag with a swastika, I am going out on a limb to say this is likely a humanitarian driven liberal opposed to that conflict and our support of it. I know from my own experiences here and elsewhere that many on the right often place Israel in higher regard than that of the US due to religious considerations. However, since I'm often wrong, I may be here as well.

Quote:
Especially do not miss the statement from potomic films claiming constitution party and right leaning libertarians need to commandere the peace movement away from liberals viewed as communists and anti business socialists. Fell right into the 'us vs them' trap vying for power/ esteem. Presuming that I'm too gullible & will sign up with crazy Ivan just because I'm hearing protesters out is more than a little insulting. Islam for peace doesn't sound kosher when reading the details of those posters but I don't see them representing the majority.
Here is an example of that absolutist mindset again. Libertarian good, Liberal evil and nothing in between. One thing I have to give kudo's to our member Kovert is that this poster does what they can to build bridges amid some of our most partisan times. I know from some experience from some dealing with a peace group in West Virgina that I shall not name, the concept of anti-war Liberals joining with anti-war Conservatives on just this one issue, even if they disagreed on everything else was just undoable. It is as though no one could put aside other differences to adjoin in one serious cause to which they both agreed upon and I struggle with this reasoning in some people.
Quote:
Did Cindy Sheehan render herself mute or lose her resolve after elections? Did Obama mistreat or belittle her? Note the absence of riot gear, substituted for police on bicycles. Amazing how much more peaceful peace protests become when police & officials aren't acting like napoleons themselves (pattern? I think so).
This may also be due to having far fewer people as well. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to see just one bloke standing with a sign on a street corner.

Quote:
You rightfully make an observation that liberals are less than vocal about war now than they were during Bush. I believe that can be explained by the fact that Bush started these wars under dubious circumstances and they felt he (and lockstep R's) couldn't be trusted with national security, much less the constitution. They trust Obama more not because he's a liberal but because he didn't start the mess and his family isn't connected into oil. They see him making efforts to close Gitmo and close the door to Iraq. They aren't Disney endings, they generally don't hold politicians to that standard of theatrics, but it's movement in the right direction so they're less vocal in blogs & in the press.
Back about 6-8 months ago, I remember watching an episode of Washington Week in review or perhaps the McLaughlin Group in which this topic was discussed. Of the two guest representing the left, one pointed out that there was a great deal of fear and apprehension among the left of being too critical of Obama. Reasoning that to being too outspoken would only further embolden the right and no matter how bad their guy might end up being, anything was better than a Republican.

I believe I even stated in a thread here prior to Obama even becoming President that I said if he were elected, it would all but spell the end of the anti-war left for the above named reason. The other part is that some folks just simply hated Bush, hate everything about the right and Republicans and take the mindset that their counterparts take that the opposition is the nearest thing to hell on earth and any manifestation of it is pure evil. Again, this absolutist mindset that so baffles me.

Glad to see they haven't totally vanished, so I then must ask myself, why (chuckling) if the media is so liberal isn't the liberal media covering a bunch of liberal anti-war protesters. Since I know you know the answer to this I can only offer you this as a bit of humor. Yet this question remains, is it because the media isn't liberal but has a financial interest either directly or indirectly in the US engaging in perpetual war? Hard to say.


Quote:
That doesn't mean silent on the subject, and Olbermann isn't one to hold back.
When I see the likes of Olbermann tearing Obama a new one, I then think to myself if he truly feels this way about a given issue then why not cite this example like his nightly reminder of how long we have been in Iraq?

One thing Walter Cronkite taught us was that the American public has the collective attention span of a 5 year old and if not reminded daily to do or think about something it goes straight to the memory oubliette of oblivion. The power of media just isn't what is said, but who says it, how often it is repeated and the context in which the subject is framed. Give me CNN for one year and I could have 20% of Americans drinking their own urine thinking it is a cure for male pattern baldness and female infertility. People really are that gullible as an oft repeated lie, one will come to believe it themselves.


Quote:
They had me until the very end mentioning political defeat of Dem party. Being in service to power for the sake of power killed repubs and it will kill dems too. Get over yourselves!
Haha, yeah well how else are pundits supposed to make a living without a little fear and the sky is falling clap trap?

Quote:
From the onset I've made the observation they're angry with themselves and just don't know it yet. Accountability would be a thing I'd endorse but they aren't accountable for themselves when lapping up their own vomit via tabloid journalism. They're defending finance believing that any attempt gov't makes holding these people accountable is an 'abuse of capitalism' sponsored by communist pinkos. They defend lies and call it the right to free speech. They bear false witness on a regular basis and claim themselves Christian. They're the antithesis of hippies. They're the thing hippies have been protesting all along. They aren't the high road Barry Goldwater set, or the 'ask not what your country can do for you' set. They're neocons saying 'screw U, where's mine'? They're the NIMBY's, yuppies, and the HOA's are normally content to smugly operate the world by remote control because 'I've got mine' until something threatens their insular lifestyles. They just don't believe that any endorsement they've made was the very thing unleashing hell upon them. You already know the canned answer. Liberals did it.
Coming from a more paleoconservative mindset and adjoining with those others like myself who drank the Paulade and transformed into Paulbots, I was for a brief time quite pleased to find during the 08 cycle, a fair number of what I would consider old school traditional conservationism. Even within this relatively small circle, there were many things I disagreed with but I tend to have an anti-establishment bent in general so I enjoyed the ride while it lasted. What it has become now however is absolutely NOTHING like the meet up groups and meetings I attended during the primaries. At least then the message was how do we improve things, how do we instill a sense of liberal and the ideas of Taft or Goldwater conservationism, now it seems to be about little more than tearing down and further externalization of blame so as not to have to accept the responsibility or be accountable for the previous 8 years.


Quote:
You already know their ego protection logic. My response to them makes me a bizarre combination of misogynist feminazi when I'm pointing out the worst attributes of women (control freak biddies, nagging ankle biters) animated in this movement. This vet isn't a 'real' american, ergo, a traitor for failing to applaud VFW drunks congratulating themselves at the expense of real time soldiers. They paint pictures of a pick and choose Christian when I fail to endorse their abuse of others in the name of God or fail to lend credibility to their martyr story. They have no commitment to reality or fair play. They only want to be on the winning side of Disney. Their commitment is to being perceived as righteous even at the expense of actual righteousness. Supporting troops means patronizing them with a pat on the head or slapping a bumper sticker for a pat on the back from peers but they're first to say no to PTSD vet care. Constitution be damned, and God be damned too if they're praying for America to fail.
I can offer no meaningful response to this.

Quote:
Love him or hate him, consider the prophetic words of Barry Goldwater (the man who revitalized conservatives and put Reagan on the map) in relation to Tea Schlafly Party. In his end years he refused to be associated with Republicans calling them 'kooks'. His biggest grievance being with social conservatives second to communists for a reason.
I have to wonder what Barry would have thought of the whole Kristol, Cheney, Perle, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Poderhertz crowd. Although I would have loved to have watched him sit down with Strauss for some Oolong tea and some choice words but that is for another thread.

Quote:
That said, I'm off to read that link you suggested.
Hope you enjoy it, it had some pretty good, albeit short discussion.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2010, 12:05 AM
 
11,946 posts, read 14,220,748 times
Reputation: 2772
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamontnow View Post
I find it incredible that a few posters, and thankfully very few, would have opposed American intervention to stop the Nazis, had they been around 70 years ago. They would have opposed it, of course, until Hitler's hoardes arrived on US borders. That's called "minding your own porch"?
It's classic isolationism. It's Paulist and Buchananist and it's WRONG. It's wrong strategically and morally. In WWII the delay in America's intervention, due to pressure from the isolationists, costs millions of lives, including that of many Americans.
Isolationism, or "minding your own porch", is the policy consistently pushed on this forum by this OP. And yes, it is shameful.
You missed the point entirely. Do your own homework. Where did Hitlers money come from? Follow the money trail- it's sickening to realize. Fact is IF we had dutifully minded our own porch (fully accountable for ourselves reigning in the nonsense done in our names with our finance, AKA refusing to support terrorists hiding behind 'charitable' facades and front corporations) Hitler could have been rendered a laughing stock among Germans. The musicman was financed by avarice to animate a madman for their own profit. But hey, boys will be boys, right?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2010, 01:03 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,876 posts, read 14,643,049 times
Reputation: 5238
Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper View Post
A terrorist attack from a small group of ideologically driven nut jobs does not equate to the Chinese Marines landing on the beaches of South Carolina.

Unlike WWII, we aren't some second rate nation today.

I'm sorry I do not live in the same kind of fear that so drives many of my fellow countrymen. Under the guise of this fear, they will roll over on their bellies and demand that government save them from whatever boogyman is cited, whether real or imagined.

I fear having a heart attack, getting killed by a drunk driver, or dying during a robbery more than I fear the Chinese starting a military war with us, let alone dying of an act of terrorism. I know others will disagree and you all are free to live in fear, I will not.

As Thomas Babbington Mcauly once so eloquently stated in Horatius at the Gate, "Death cometh to all men sooner or late, how better to die than facing fearful odds for the ashes of my fathers and the temples of my gods".

I fear the US goverment more than I fear any terrorist or other country. I also do not see very many people wanting to reign in the size, scope and power of the fedgov either.
Rate this post positively 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 01:03 PM.

© 2005-2023, 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