PDA

View Full Version : Man United NSR Politics thread


Pages : 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

mhtwins113
01 Feb 2006, 12:20 PM
Thats what ive been saying all along
i dont think someone in there right mind could turn down that ticket
Apparently, I'm not in my right mind. That ticket would be absolutely disastrous, simply because McCain and Giuliani have a habit of turning their backs on their base on important issues (illegal immigration, campaign finance reform, etc). McCain's an OK senator, but I would never vote for him for President unless the alternative was Howard Dean or someone of that ilk.

prymetyme
01 Feb 2006, 12:20 PM
What did everyone think of the Response Last night?
I thought that it was a bad move to have the new guy make the speech, you could tell he was intimidated.
By the way, I thought he was suppose to talka bout America not Virgina:D :D

Motterman
01 Feb 2006, 12:20 PM
When you give people the power to choose, they choose freedom. Or terror. The one flaw in the exportation of democracy; what if the people freely elect someone we don't like? D'oh!

It's not about not liking somebody in this case. It's obvious that Hamas has their goal clearly defined, and little restraint when it comes to methods of achieving it.

It doesn't look like the next few months are going to go well....

prymetyme
01 Feb 2006, 12:22 PM
Apparently, I'm not in my right mind. That ticket would be absolutely disastrous, simply because McCain and Giuliani have a habit of turning their backs on their base on important issues (illegal immigration, campaign finance reform, etc). McCain's an OK senator, but I would never vote for him for President unless the alternative was Howard Dean or someone of that ilk.

I think McCain is what the country needs, hes moderate but knows how to run a war effort. Giuliani is no different. He would make a great leader because again he can lead a war effort, and just look at what he did with New York. He turned crime upside down in that city, and his leadership on 9-11 was impecable.

StrikerCW
01 Feb 2006, 12:22 PM
I have met Iraqi and Afghan war vets, and they say that they're glad to serve the country. Bush read a letter that a fallen soldier left behind last night and the soldier talked about how it was a honor to serve his soldiers and country. I believe this is how the majority of Iraqi war familys feel. I dont even want to start on Cindy Sheehan, who was arrested last night by the way.
I rest my case.

prymetyme
01 Feb 2006, 12:24 PM
I rest my case.

What else am i suppose to base the war effort from the military on? I cant talk to Bush, I cant talk to Iraqi's or Afghans...

Vermont Red
01 Feb 2006, 12:25 PM
It's not about not liking somebody in this case. It's obvious that Hamas has their goal clearly defined, and little restraint when it comes to methods of achieving it.

It doesn't look like the next few months are going to go well....

The hope is that people voted for Hamas in order to end corruption. Common sense dictates that people want prosperity more than they want war. Let's see if the tax payments and aid money makes it to the Palestinians.

Achtung
01 Feb 2006, 12:26 PM
When you give people the power to choose, they choose freedom. Or terror. The one flaw in the exportation of democracy; what if the people freely elect someone we don't like? D'oh!

And that's the thing that so many people, apparently including Bush, don't understand. That is, elections ≠ democracy. Democracy requires basic security for the people, stable economic institutions, and a proper system of checks and balances. It's a slow and evolving process, and not something that can be implemented with a shotgun approach.

Democracy didn't come to Eastern Europe because we forced them to accept it--the people forced it upon their leaders. If its ever going to happen in the Middle East, it would have to be done like that. As it is now, we have insurgencies and threats of civil war. In Palestine, we have a heavily armed political group elected to power (although honestly not that different from Sinn Fein or Hezbollah). If there was a proper setup for democracy in Palestine or Iraq, these issues would resolve themselves much more easily. But instead, we're staring straight down the barrel of another quagmire due to our inability to properly define what a democratic government really is.

Vermont Red
01 Feb 2006, 12:27 PM
What else am i suppose to base the war effort from the military on? I cant talk to Bush, I cant talk to Iraqi's or Afghans...

Let's ask the members of BigSoccer if they think that sport should be abolished. :rolleyes:

My comment said to ask the families of the deceased. It makes sense that the people who volunteered to risk their lives did so because they believed in the cause. But how do the families feel about the human cost? What about the moral cost?

StrikerCW
01 Feb 2006, 12:27 PM
What else am i suppose to base the war effort from the military on? I cant talk to Bush, I cant talk to Iraqi's or Afghans...
But his point was about the 2k+ US deaths over there.

Sapphire
01 Feb 2006, 12:27 PM
The future of Iraq was always pretty murky, but after Hamas won those Palistinian elections.... :(See, the problem is democracy does not equal freedom. The day Iraq became an "islamic republic" according to its constitution, that was a day when I realized whatever hope we had of setting up a western-style democracy there was gone (I had almost no hope to begin with, mind you). I think we can agree that democracy cannot function without separation of church and state (see Thomas Jefferson, "Notes on the State of Virginia"), so the fact that we created a new Islamic Republic from a secular dictatorship, well, its not great progress.

People have to be educated on what democracy is, and they have to be actually convinced to believe in liberal humanism as a foundation for law. In others words, in our country, it's illegal to kill someone, not because God said "Thou shalt not kill", but because we've decided, as a collective, that killing a person violates our shared principles of liberal humanism. If people don't understand that collective social sense, then their democracy cannot succeed. I don't understand how anyone can think you can just "build" a democracy (especially a functional one) in a country that's been under a horrible dictator for so many years. It doesn't make sense. Especially with a majority population which relies on religion for its common social structure and values, how could you not end up with an islamic state?

And I believe that most successful democracies have been formed during a period in which the country in question had a growing middle class that forced democracy to the forefront (see French Revolution, American Revolution). Iraq's middle class has been destroyed; most people with money and stature got the hell outta there during "shock and awe", as most reasonable people would. While it might sound good to believe that freedom will prevail because of its appeal to the human spirit or whatever, and that people will naturally choose freedon for themselves through the democratic process, I think you need the economic conditions to back it up. And those that history tells us are necessary are simply not there in Iraq.

*Sigh* I wish I had a solution for this. It depresses me beyond belief. :(

Achtung
01 Feb 2006, 12:30 PM
I dont even want to start on Cindy Sheehan, who was arrested last night by the way.

Apparently for doing something so terrible as wearing a shirt with an anti-war slogan on it...

Vermont Red
01 Feb 2006, 12:30 PM
*Sigh* I wish I had a solution for this. It depresses me beyond belief. :(

I'd rep you if I could. Given the choice, I, too, would rather eat than vote.

StrikerCW
01 Feb 2006, 12:31 PM
You all hit on the points that Dubya doesn't realize. You can NOT enforce Democracy on people who don't want it. It is an internal change, not something that must come from the outside.

prymetyme
01 Feb 2006, 12:31 PM
Concidering how long weve been there, 2K deaths is little for a war. But fallen soldiers family's arent all as bitter as many may think. I have met 2 that like in Massachusetts, and they say that they stand strong with there kids. If he or she believed in what they were fighting for, they do as well. They backed up there kids. Bush's letter last night was a good example, he passed away but was honored to serve. Obviously I havent talked to everyone, but i doubt anyone else here has either. Cindy Sheehan is an odd person out. But you cant say that the soldiers didnt die for a reason, since we have a voulenteer army. They had to believe what they were fighting for, and if there parents didnt then they should have backed there kids up anyway. I would want my parents to. If I had to go to the war, I would. I would be honored to serve the country and would be willing to die for it. I think Cindy Sheehan is disshonoring her son, I can respect that she misses him but doign what she's doing isnt the way to go about it.

prymetyme
01 Feb 2006, 12:33 PM
Apparently for doing something so terrible as wearing a shirt with an anti-war slogan on it...

No for blocking of streets in Washington, protesting in the House in the Capital, making a stink of Bush not talking to her for the 10th time, and for Dishonoring her son who believed in what he was fighting for. She is dis regarding what he thought and I wouldnt want my parents doing what she is doing if I had died in Iraq.

Motterman
01 Feb 2006, 12:35 PM
Cindy Sheehan

I think it's best if we don't discuss this subject. But I'm not going to delete/edit people for doing so, I'm just saying this without my mod hat on.

mhtwins113
01 Feb 2006, 12:35 PM
What else am i suppose to base the war effort from the military on? I cant talk to Bush, I cant talk to Iraqi's or Afghans...
I can, and I'll tell you that for the large part, I think they can make democracy work there. That might be hopeful, but you can just call me Mr. Brightside. Anyway, knowing the mentality back there, the Iraqi's are thankful to have Saddam gone, but are resentful that they were unable to do it themselves and that the nanny state Americans did it for them more than anything. People back there take pride in their self-sufficiency and the US invasion was a blatant violation of it. So ultimately, once our troops can snuff out the majority of this insurgency, then I think democracy can work there.

StrikerCW
01 Feb 2006, 12:37 PM
Most of the 'volunteer's in the army, would have been there before the war and would have had no way to get out even if they wanted to anyway.

Secondly, what is the National Guard doing over there anyway? If I am not mistaken, the NG is different than the reserves (could be wrong) and they are designed to protect OUR borders not the ones across the world.

The soldiers did die for a reason, no reason. What is the reason? Freedom for people who didn't want it anyway and are fighting against us now? This had nothing to do with America, there is absolutely no reason to be over there.

Motterman
01 Feb 2006, 12:38 PM
No for blocking of streets in Washington, protesting in the House in the Capital, making a stink of Bush not talking to her for the 10th time, and for Dishonoring her son who believed in what he was fighting for. She is dis regarding what he thought and I wouldnt want my parents doing what she is doing if I had died in Iraq.

Look, Cindy Sheehan is a citizen and has the right to do what she wants, within the law. However, you're going to get called out by alot of people for expressing your disapproval of her actions though.