Proud fans of a 128-year old tradition

It is currently Fri Aug 22, 2014 10:42 am

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Nauseating
PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 5:54 pm
Posts: 6127
Location: Keystone State
IA Pirate wrote:
Come on, that is a pretty poor effort in trying to spin things in your views. My wife works in the media. Their bosses tell them that fear sells. Being upset sells. The viewership will agree with a news station if they say it's freezing cold even though the thermometer reads 95 degrees and 99% humidity.

Afghanistan is the ignored war? Why? Because we haven't had as many troops killed there lately? It isn't news if they lead off a telecast saying "Two schools open in Afghanistan...women allowed to vote for first time."

I could go on and on about the media. It isn't there to inform...it's there to get ratings and money.


What does the media have to do with my points? You can't fight religion, IA. It's stronger than any government.

As for Afghanistan, my point is that is where the war on terrorism should have been fought. We have not put the same resources in that battle that we have in Iraq. This is coming from our military leaders, not the media.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/lo ... 75795.aspx

_________________
The Bucs are going all the way, all the way this year!


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Nauseating
PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 6:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Piratefan13 wrote:
What do you know about the war in Iraq? What do you know other than what CNN or Fox News tells you? Are you in the government and privy to secure military information? Or do you get your statistics and opinions from what you watch on TV? The only thing that is ignorant is your dillusion that you are informed. I hold a clearance and I'm not even informed.

Given your apparent definition of informed, you're right: I'm not informed. The Administration has not informed me or the rest of the public of the true reasons for the war, the goals the administration hopes to achieve in going to war, whether we've made any progress to those purported goals, or whether there is any hope that we're going to end this war. There's no transparency regarding the war. Instead, we have to do our own investigation through the media, and I see this as a problem.

You don't see this lack of information as a problem? Shouldn't we know of the reasons for going to war? Shouldn't we know of the progress and pitfalls that have occurred during the war? Why should it be permissible for the Administration to operate in a completely black box when it comes to the lives of our soldiers and the money in our nation's coffers? I can understand some confidentiality, but in my view, the people that choose to give these administrators the powers they exercise should receive in return good information on why and how the administrators choose to exercise their powers. The Government is supposed to be responsive to the people, not the other way around.

Quote:
1. A vicious tyrant in Saddam Hussein is dead and gone
2. We haven't had an attack on in the US for 7 years
3. We have an apparent stronghold deep in the middle of the hotbed of terrorism(the Middle East)
4. We have instilled a democracy in the country of Iraq, providing freedom for its people
5. Terror cells are fighting us there, against our soldiers, instead of here, against our civilians
6. Iraq gives us a great launch point for our inevitable confrontation with Iran

1. Fair enough, but I don't think that was our choice to make. It should be up to the Iraqi people if they want tyranny overthrown; then they can seek out our help. See the American Revolution.
2. That's like saying I haven't had a broken bone in 7 years because I started taking asprin regularly 5 years ago. Correlation does not equal causation, and there's a conspicuous lack of evidence tying Iraq to 9/11.
3. A "stronghold" that's costing hundreds of American lives to maintain for no apparent meritorious purpose. Whatever cognizable benefit this "stronghold" provides does not outweigh the human cost to maintain it. Furthermore, last I checked, it was Afghanistan that was the "hotbed of terrorism" with which we were concerned, not the Middle East.
4. A democracy that apparently nobody in Iraq wants.
5. Terror cells were not coming from there to fight us here, so I don't see how this fighting is a good thing.
6. So the logic is that, in order to be best prepared for a conflict in Iran, we should enter a conflict with Iraq? Whatever fortuitous position we may be in with regard to Iran does not justify the initial decision to enter Iraq. It is possible that a conflict with Iran would not be so inevitable if we had not chosen to create a conflict with Iraq.

Quote:
Seems to me that things are in good shape. So in a way, we are both ignorant to the details of the war in Iraq so as we are left to our perceptions. Mine look much brighter than yours.

Yeah, apparently. This is what leads me to question the breadth and quality of your perception.

PirateFan13 wrote:
Policy and politics are how we establish war, but once it is declared, the military should be given every resource to complete the mission swiftly. The war in Iraq and the war in Vietnam are similiar in retrospect based upon the concern to "appease" everyone instead of get the job done.

But what if we don't know what the mission is? Shouldn't we know what the damn mission is?

And, assuming we actually know what the mission is, what if we decide later that the mission is not a good one to complete? What if we think that the war we started is unjustified? Are we not allowed to change our minds? And should government not be responsive to the people if we do change our minds? Must we complete a task that we know would be a mistake to complete?

You're basically saying that the military should be given a blank check to pursue whatever goals it deems worthy. I don't agree with that assertion at all, especially when we think that those goals are poor ones to pursue.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Nauseating
PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:15 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:11 pm
Posts: 3364
Location: Wheeling, WV
For those who believe in Palin or the Republican Party as it exists today, I suggest you read George Will, David Broder, David Brooks, Peggy Noonan, and others who are all conservative republicans. To a person they believe that we have entered a new era and the future of the Republican Party is a dire need of adjustment. It has in their opinions become the party of yesterday.
Read, don't read, you choose. The Washington Post, The New York Times, and The Wall Street Journal all can be read on-line for free.These and many other writers are featured in these papers.

_________________
2011 Will Be Our Year -- well make that 2012 (just saying) So it looks like 2013 now - how long must this go on!
THIS IS IT-- NO MORE STREAK!!! *** Finally*** Time to win it in 2014


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Nauseating
PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  YIM  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:24 pm
Posts: 4144
Location: Zelienople, PA
Substitute2 wrote:
For those who believe in Palin or the Republican Party as it exists today, I suggest you read George Will, David Broder, David Brooks, Peggy Noonan, and others who are all conservative republicans...


If you want to understand the conservative part of the Republican party, you don't read those at all. These represent the Blue Blood, Upper West Side of NY and the dinner party crowd of K street.

They do not represent the conservative movement to any great degree. If you want to see what Palin means to the conservative wing, just go to one of her campaign stops, and see the crowds, and how they react.

ZM

_________________
Someone tell Votto... rbis are good


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Nauseating
PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
ZelieMike wrote:
Substitute2 wrote:
For those who believe in Palin or the Republican Party as it exists today, I suggest you read George Will, David Broder, David Brooks, Peggy Noonan, and others who are all conservative republicans...


If you want to understand the conservative part of the Republican party, you don't read those at all. These represent the Blue Blood, Upper West Side of NY and the dinner party crowd of K street.

They do not represent the conservative movement to any great degree. If you want to see what Palin means to the conservative wing, just go to one of her campaign stops, and see the crowds, and how they react.

I've seen the people at one of these campaign stops. It reminds me that bigotry and fear are alive and well in this country.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Nauseating
PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:50 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:11 pm
Posts: 3364
Location: Wheeling, WV
Read Kathleen Parker another conservative writer in the Washington Post today.

These writers that I have referenced are all highly respected and very well paid writers who have all written several books. They are not a small group of radical right wingers. They are the most respected of the conservative movement. They are the Republican Party. PLease don't indicate that the the haters who scream 'U S A' as if they are the only Americans who love their country are the torch barrers of the Republicans. The 'you batchas' aren't the real people they proport to be. At least they are not the majority as shown on election day.

If the Republican Party stays where they are now, they will never win another presidency because they are becoming a regional not national party. That region as indicated in the last election is most of the south and some low populated western states. Not enough to win.

_________________
2011 Will Be Our Year -- well make that 2012 (just saying) So it looks like 2013 now - how long must this go on!
THIS IS IT-- NO MORE STREAK!!! *** Finally*** Time to win it in 2014


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Nauseating
PostPosted: Thu Nov 13, 2008 10:03 am 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  YIM  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:24 pm
Posts: 4144
Location: Zelienople, PA
Substitute2 wrote:
Read Kathleen Parker another conservative writer in the Washington Post today.

These writers that I have referenced are all highly respected and very well paid writers who have all written several books. They are not a small group of radical right wingers...


No, they are not, as Palin is not.

ZM

_________________
Someone tell Votto... rbis are good


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group  
Design By Poker Bandits