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)
 
Old 06-06-2021, 12:15 AM
 
Location: Somewhere below Mason/Dixon
9,471 posts, read 10,808,176 times
Reputation: 15980

Advertisements

Condoleeza Rice is a highly qualified candidate. I would support her if she could win the primary. She does come with the baggage of being part of an interventionist administration and she will have to defend her past actions. I do believe the Iraq war and war on terror can be justified considering the post 9-11 era the Bush Administration was dealing with. She would have to reassure voters that she does not wish to entangle us in a foreign war and make her case that the situation today is different from the one our nation faced 20 years ago. Clearly most republicans do not want more American involvement overseas. The GOP has moved closer to the libertarian side in recent years. Having said this she would be the perfect leader to reaffirm important alliances, especially NATO. It is international cooperation among the free nations that prevents conflict and war. Trump was dead wrong on NATO, his view should not be the view of the party on this issue.

Some parts of the MAGA message are very much worth keeping. A tough stance against predatory trade relationships like the one we have with China is a strong point of the Trump administration. Lower taxes and regulations are a MAGA strongpoint. Trump was dead right about border security but it needs to be done in a way that is respectful towards our neighbor and major trade partner Mexico. We can secure the border and enforce immigration laws without a big offensive wall and lots of name calling. Trump proved we can work with Mexico to get Mexico’s southern border controlled to prevent the trouble from ever entering Mexico to begin with. Rice would be far better in the area of statecraft than Trump ever was.

Just a thought.....Desantis and Rice could complement each other on a ticket. Rice brings foreign policy experience and establishment credentials, desantis brings MAGA credibility. Both are capable of being great presidents or Vice Presidents. Either could be the leader on the ticket. Re-unite the Party anyone??? The best of MAGA can be reconciled with the traditional GOP. The meshing of the two points of view could make our conservative cause more appealing and practical.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-06-2021, 12:50 AM
 
13,461 posts, read 4,295,282 times
Reputation: 5391
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielj72 View Post
Condoleeza Rice is a highly qualified candidate. I would support her if she could win the primary. She does come with the baggage of being part of an interventionist administration and she will have to defend her past actions. I do believe the Iraq war and war on terror can be justified considering the post 9-11 era the Bush Administration was dealing with. She would have to reassure voters that she does not wish to entangle us in a foreign war and make her case that the situation today is different from the one our nation faced 20 years ago. Clearly most republicans do not want more American involvement overseas. The GOP has moved closer to the libertarian side in recent years. Having said this she would be the perfect leader to reaffirm important alliances, especially NATO. It is international cooperation among the free nations that prevents conflict and war. Trump was dead wrong on NATO, his view should not be the view of the party on this issue.

Some parts of the MAGA message are very much worth keeping. A tough stance against predatory trade relationships like the one we have with China is a strong point of the Trump administration. Lower taxes and regulations are a MAGA strongpoint. Trump was dead right about border security but it needs to be done in a way that is respectful towards our neighbor and major trade partner Mexico. We can secure the border and enforce immigration laws without a big offensive wall and lots of name calling. Trump proved we can work with Mexico to get Mexico’s southern border controlled to prevent the trouble from ever entering Mexico to begin with. Rice would be far better in the area of statecraft than Trump ever was.

Just a thought.....Desantis and Rice could complement each other on a ticket. Rice brings foreign policy experience and establishment credentials, desantis brings MAGA credibility. Both are capable of being great presidents or Vice Presidents. Either could be the leader on the ticket. Re-unite the Party anyone??? The best of MAGA can be reconciled with the traditional GOP. The meshing of the two points of view could make our conservative cause more appealing and practical.



highly qualified candidate on what? running one of the worst foreign policy in U.S. History?


say again? after 19 years and the facts, she can still justify that failed foreign policy and war blunder? LMAO!! That is going from double down to triple down on steroids.


She won't assure the public that she won't do it again because her Bush policy is to keep the same wars and expand.


How is Trump wrong on NATO? NATO was built after the WW 2 to handle the Soviet Union and the communism aggression worldwide. Today neither exist and the U.S. can't be carrying the burden on the European defense when the economy of the European Union is #2 in the world behind the U.S. and 16 times bigger than Russia.


Trump's view is supported by the majority of the party. We shouldn't be the police of the world and we shouldn't be taken the heavy lifting in Europe like we have been doing since WW 2.



if Rice was a failure in avoiding war in the biggest foreign policy blunder in history, what make you think she can reach a deal with Mexico and other countries with amnesty which is what she is for like W Bush and Jeb Bush? how is she going to get support from her on party on this, forget about Mexico, this will be DOA in Congress.




What makes Rice qualified? if you are proud how she ran the national security of the nation under W Bush then pretend because that is not what happened. Anybody part of that disaster is not qualified. Not only to go in but to mismanaged the whole occupation on both fronts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2021, 01:28 AM
 
Location: Somewhere below Mason/Dixon
9,471 posts, read 10,808,176 times
Reputation: 15980
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanJuanStar View Post
highly qualified candidate on what? running one of the worst foreign policy in U.S. History?


say again? after 19 years and the facts, she can still justify that failed foreign policy and war blunder? LMAO!! That is going from double down to triple down on steroids.


She won't assure the public that she won't do it again because her Bush policy is to keep the same wars and expand.


How is Trump wrong on NATO? NATO was built after the WW 2 to handle the Soviet Union and the communism aggression worldwide. Today neither exist and the U.S. can't be carrying the burden on the European defense when the economy of the European Union is #2 in the world behind the U.S. and 16 times bigger than Russia.


Trump's view is supported by the majority of the party. We shouldn't be the police of the world and we shouldn't be taken the heavy lifting in Europe like we have been doing since WW 2.



if Rice was a failure in avoiding war in the biggest foreign policy blunder in history, what make you think she can reach a deal with Mexico and other countries with amnesty which is what she is for like W Bush and Jeb Bush? how is she going to get support from her on party on this, forget about Mexico, this will be DOA in Congress.




What makes Rice qualified? if you are proud how she ran the national security of the nation under W Bush then pretend because that is not what happened. Anybody part of that disaster is not qualified. Not only to go in but to mismanaged the whole occupation on both fronts.
Well I guess we stand apart. NATO has value as a deterrent to Russian aggression. The best way to avoid a Third World War is to have a strong alliance of free democratic countries to deter aggression. I just cannot go down the isolationist path. We were isolationist in the 1920s and 1930s. That attitude only aided the tyrants as we buried our heads in the sand only to have to fight the bad guys anyway after our negligence had allowed them to become stronger. Isolationism is bad policy. Opposing isolationism does not mean supporting a aggressive interventionist foreign policy. There is a middle ground and we should take that path. US military force should only be used as a last resort.

I know I’d no GOP figure calling for amnesty for illegal aliens. We should secure the border and we should not give out amnesty to those who willfully broke our laws.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2021, 01:42 AM
 
13,461 posts, read 4,295,282 times
Reputation: 5391
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielj72 View Post
Well I guess we stand apart. NATO has value as a deterrent to Russian aggression. The best way to avoid a Third World War is to have a strong alliance of free democratic countries to deter aggression. I just cannot go down the isolationist path. We were isolationist in the 1920s and 1930s. That attitude only aided the tyrants as we buried our heads in the sand only to have to fight the bad guys anyway after our negligence had allowed them to become stronger. Isolationism is bad policy. Opposing isolationism does not mean supporting a aggressive interventionist foreign policy. There is a middle ground and we should take that path. US military force should only be used as a last resort.

I know I’d no GOP figure calling for amnesty for illegal aliens. We should secure the border and we should not give out amnesty to those who willfully broke our laws.

What? Russian aggression? We have NATO and U.S. troops on Russia's border. We have military all around the world and we invade and overthrow governments but Russia is the aggressor and a threat?


You are using the Neo Con argument why we need to continue endless wars and endless occupations.





You say
Quote:
Opposing isolationism does not mean supporting a aggressive interventionist foreign policy. There is a middle ground and we should take that path. US military force should only be used as a last resort.

an aggressive interventionist foreign policy we have been doing non-stop since WW 2. Rice is for that still after her failure in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2021, 10:02 AM
 
Location: Somewhere below Mason/Dixon
9,471 posts, read 10,808,176 times
Reputation: 15980
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanJuanStar View Post
What? Russian aggression? We have NATO and U.S. troops on Russia's border. We have military all around the world and we invade and overthrow governments but Russia is the aggressor and a threat?


You are using the Neo Con argument why we need to continue endless wars and endless occupations.





You say


an aggressive interventionist foreign policy we have been doing non-stop since WW 2. Rice is for that still after her failure in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
Well clearly you are a full on isolationist and I just disagree with that position. Isolationism has been discredited IMO by the history of the 20th century. While I am not a full on interventionist either I do support a wise application of US military power to promote our interests and stability in the world when necessary. I do firmly believe in NATO. My views on foreign policy do put me more in the neocon group and not the isolationist one championed by MAGA supporters. One of my greatest criticisms of Trump had to do with his treatment of our important allies and his anti NATO statements.

Your position that we are the ones who are the aggressors towards Russia I also disagree with. I live in the southeast.....just a few weeks ago this whole region ran out of gas because those friendly Russians used ransom ware to shut down the fuel pipeline suppling the entire southeast. Yes we need NATO to deter these bullies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2021, 10:51 AM
 
Location: "Arlen" Texas
12,285 posts, read 2,969,609 times
Reputation: 14526
I would vote for Condy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2021, 11:52 AM
 
13,461 posts, read 4,295,282 times
Reputation: 5391
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielj72 View Post
Well clearly you are a full on isolationist and I just disagree with that position. Isolationism has been discredited IMO by the history of the 20th century. While I am not a full on interventionist either I do support a wise application of US military power to promote our interests and stability in the world when necessary. I do firmly believe in NATO. My views on foreign policy do put me more in the neocon group and not the isolationist one championed by MAGA supporters. One of my greatest criticisms of Trump had to do with his treatment of our important allies and his anti NATO statements.

Your position that we are the ones who are the aggressors towards Russia I also disagree with. I live in the southeast.....just a few weeks ago this whole region ran out of gas because those friendly Russians used ransom ware to shut down the fuel pipeline suppling the entire southeast. Yes we need NATO to deter these bullies.



LMAO! You are using the neo con talk, so you must be a neo con. It's call the Department of Defense, not the Department of Offense.


Like Neo Cons, you like to play with words to the point of lying and the public sees this B.S and thankfully the base of the GOP gets it and rejects it. You say :


Quote:
While I am not a full on interventionist either I do support a wise application of US military power to promote our interests and stability in the world when necessary.
That is EXACTLY what you support, a full interventionist. What do you call invading other countries (most on B.S. reasons), paying foreign mercenaries to overthrow governments and continue these endless wars? that's the definition of interventionist and on steroids because it's never ending.



This is what Rice said to the nation in 2000:
Quote:
... America's armed forces are not a global police force. They are not the world's 911[
She is your typical Neo Con liar that plays with words because that's the opposite of her mess of foreign policy. Then U.S. Congress subpoena her in 2004 and she declined to testify. She was subpoena again in 2007 regarding the prewar claim that Iraq sought yellowcake uranium from Niger and other lies and she declined to testify. Bush after Congress pressure allowed her to testify under oath and Rice refused. You don't want to get liars under oath because they will look like big liars and incompetent . This is how weasel Rice is. She sells this war and mismanages the biggest military blunder in U.S. history but she refused to testify under oath about her words and actions but this is the person you want running the country? thanks for the laugh.


One more time, NATO was formed after WW 2 to deal with the Soviet Union and the Cold War. Neither doesn't exist today. If Europe wants to fully fund NATO they can it's their money, their borders and their countries but We shouldn't take the load of NATO. Do you understand that We shouldn't nation build other countries on the backs of the American taxpayers?


NATO: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the United Kingdom and the United States. The other member countries are: Greece and Turkey , Germany , Spain , the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland , Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia , Albania and Croatia, Montenegro and North Macedonia.

So your Neo Con argument is We Americans must keep pumping endless money and military power and take the load and continue these endless wars and endless occupations because Russia is a threat to the alliance of 30 nations that 3 Super Powers make nuclear weapons and 5 other NATO countries host nuclear weapons? LMAO!

Only Neo Cons believe that our foreign policy is not aggression. They believe in their own B.S. Our country invades and overthrow governments based on B.S. reasons but that's not aggression. Our government pays foreign fighters to commit terrorism to overthrow governments and to weaken their economies but that's not aggression. Our government bombs other countries back to the stone ages but that's not aggression.


You are an example, after 18 years you just said you can still find reasons to invade Iraq and continue these mess of foreign policy. You neo cons live on fantasy land. Like Rice, they build a world of lies around them but testify under oath in Congress to back up her b.s.? that's like Holy Water to the Devil.

Last edited by SanJuanStar; 06-06-2021 at 12:12 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2021, 12:00 PM
 
Location: USA
2,112 posts, read 2,597,136 times
Reputation: 1636
So "owning the libs" is the only reason why you want her to be president? Nothing about her policies or no
explanation how about she would make this a better country for all? All you care is about owning the libs? ok...........
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2021, 12:00 PM
 
13,461 posts, read 4,295,282 times
Reputation: 5391
Quote:
Originally Posted by PegE View Post
I would vote for Condy.

I like Oprah better, she at least gives free stuff and can pay for her mistakes by writing a check and she is more of a woman to look at. Forget policies, lets vote on who makes us feel good and who has a darker tan.


I finally want a President giving the state of the union and say on T.V. "look under your sofa or recliner, a brand new Iphone special edition in a special exclusive pink color with my signature stamped on the back"

Last edited by SanJuanStar; 06-06-2021 at 12:15 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2021, 05:14 PM
 
73,024 posts, read 62,622,338 times
Reputation: 21934
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielj72 View Post
Well I guess we stand apart. NATO has value as a deterrent to Russian aggression. The best way to avoid a Third World War is to have a strong alliance of free democratic countries to deter aggression. I just cannot go down the isolationist path. We were isolationist in the 1920s and 1930s. That attitude only aided the tyrants as we buried our heads in the sand only to have to fight the bad guys anyway after our negligence had allowed them to become stronger. Isolationism is bad policy. Opposing isolationism does not mean supporting a aggressive interventionist foreign policy. There is a middle ground and we should take that path. US military force should only be used as a last resort.

I know I’d no GOP figure calling for amnesty for illegal aliens. We should secure the border and we should not give out amnesty to those who willfully broke our laws.
This is one of the reasons it is good to have a President who is well-versed in geography and geopolitics.
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 03:01 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