Give a Legitimate Argument For McCain, Against Obama - Page 9 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-22-2008, 08:36 PM   #121
Refugee
 
MadelynIris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 1,501
Local Time: 10:33 AM
Quote:
You can't afford to stay there for 50 more years.

Are you willing to bankrupt your country for theirs?
Peace Corps is cheap no? Seriously, why do we assume we'd have the same level of deployement/cost model that whole time? I don't want to bring up the Japan/Germany model, but economic aid that promotes social and idealogical change, while protecting, as much as possible, against a reversing of progress.
__________________

__________________
MadelynIris is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 08:39 PM   #122
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 15,635
Local Time: 11:33 AM
I don't think you can afford to stay there long enough to get it to the point where something like Peace Corps would be viable.

And the rest of the world has no interest in bailing you out financially or contributing to the cause.
__________________

__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 08:39 PM   #123
Refugee
 
MadelynIris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 1,501
Local Time: 10:33 AM
I must also admit, that the "GET THE HELL OUT AND DON'T LOOK BACK -- FEND FOR YOURSELF" philosphy does have some merit as well.

The Ron Paul version? Or does Obama have a similar policy?
__________________
MadelynIris is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 08:47 PM   #124
Refugee
 
Bluer White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maine
Posts: 1,739
Local Time: 11:33 AM
It may not be not advisable for political reasons, but permanent military installations in Iraq breaking America financially??? That's silly.
__________________
Bluer White is online now  
Old 02-22-2008, 08:53 PM   #125
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2isthebest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vision over visibility....
Posts: 12,332
Local Time: 12:33 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris
I must also admit, that the "GET THE HELL OUT AND DON'T LOOK BACK -- FEND FOR YOURSELF" philosphy does have some merit as well.

The Ron Paul version? Or does Obama have a similar policy?
No he doesn't, that is, if you're referring to the "just get out" policy. That's why I posted the link to his Iraq policy. It will allow us to begin the imperative measure of pulling our troops out of Iraq while still helping the Iraqi government through diplomacy and humanitarian aid.
__________________
U2isthebest is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 09:02 PM   #126
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 38,376
Local Time: 10:33 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Snowlock


Pussy. It's true and you know it. Sorry if you were offended. Hillary lost because of her personality end of story. Everyone hates her.

Hmmmm, I don't recall making any personal remarks about you prior either Irvine.
You gotta love the Snowlock once a month drunken drive-by...
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 02-22-2008, 09:06 PM   #127
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 41,826
Local Time: 08:33 AM
Re: oh forgot, my legitimate argument for McCain

Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris

I think it's a message to the boomers, albiet an early one. Your time is over. We're taking over early.

I can only hope this is true.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 09:12 PM   #128
Refugee
 
MadelynIris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 1,501
Local Time: 10:33 AM
Understand U2isthebest. But in the middle east especially, you have to back it up with some military might.
__________________
MadelynIris is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 09:28 PM   #129
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2isthebest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vision over visibility....
Posts: 12,332
Local Time: 12:33 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris
Understand U2isthebest. But in the middle east especially, you have to back it up with some military might.
We've been backing it up with military might for almost 5 years now, and it's caused nothing but trouble and death. Diplomacy will always trump military action because it's the higher way. Yes, we likely need troops in the Middle East, especially to protect our embassies, ambassadors, diplomats and other non-military workers who are currently in them, but military might in terms of wars and attacks will not help anything at this point. We've lost all our credibility in terms of being a relatively civil nation that knows how to employ and obey just war regulations, and it's going to take us years to get it back if we ever do.
__________________
U2isthebest is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 09:54 PM   #130
Refugee
 
MadelynIris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 1,501
Local Time: 10:33 AM
Diplomacywithout economic or military power = ?
__________________
MadelynIris is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 10:20 PM   #131
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 11:33 AM
Re: Re: Give a Legitimate Argument For McCain, Against Obama

Quote:
Originally posted by Zoomerang96
i'm sorry, but in almost everything, experience is massive.

why can that not be used in this thread?
1. It's been beaten to death, and thus, exxagerated and obscured. I wanted a thread that talked about the issue stances. Instead I got ... well ...

2. I agree, experience is one thing. But Obama's lack of experience in comparison to older folks has been exxagerated. He's still been a politician since 1997. He's a former civil rights lawyer and community organizer. He's got some very good experience already, and it's not like he's unaware. No one's caught him off-guard and shown him to not understand the issues. He's not saying things like, "I don't understand the economy but I'm reading a book about it" (coincidentally, McCain is).

3. Experience has been overrated. All the people complaining about Obama's experience never complained about Bush.

Essentially, I think people have just used that number, number of years, to shun Obama unfairly. There have been plenty of people with more experience who are less competent and less understanding of the issues than Barack Obama.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 10:25 PM   #132
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2isthebest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vision over visibility....
Posts: 12,332
Local Time: 12:33 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris
Diplomacywithout economic or military power = ?
We've abused our use of the military so badly in the past few years that it will be a long time before it's trusted again. The American attitude about military force has to change before it can ever be effective and more importantly, as humane and respectful of life and freedom as just war stipulations state. In the past few years, our mishandling of a war based on lies has just reinforced that the U.S. thinks we're superior to other countries and will resort to any means necessary to make others agree with us or do what we want them to do.
__________________
U2isthebest is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 11:08 PM   #133
Blue Crack Addict
 
onebloodonelife's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 15,106
Local Time: 11:33 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris
Iraq for 50 for sho. Hopefully not 100. And I'm talking social and economic reform, with the backing of a military presence.

Can we really change the middle east to sort of a modern western way of thinking? Iraq would be our best shot at this moment.
It's not our place to impose the western way of thinking into their country or culture.

Historically, when military power is used to force democracy as a political system onto a country, the country that has been violated retaliates, and in a huge way. We're seeing it now in Iraq. The entire idea of democracy being pushed on another country goes entirely against the ideal of sovereignty for states. The U.S. generally doesn't want other states meddling in our business, and there's no reason we need to push our way into other states' business.

I'm not going to deny that obeying a state's sovereignty can lead to massive problems as well, and it also calls into question "When is it okay to go into another country?" Is it okay to force a political system onto a people if human rights abuses are occurring under the current government? Maybe. I think it depends on circumstance. But, the fact is that unless the people of the country choose their political system, there will be massive and violent revolts.

In my view, Iraq was an unnecessary target, and there was no evidence that the country was a threat to the U.S.; therefore, we had no legitimate reason to invade.



Anyway, I think that Obama's healthcare policy is much better than Clinton's, and that is a major reason in my support for him. The feature that I like more about his plan is that he allows for individuals to keep their current healthcare, if they so choose, but allows for those who do not have healthcare to get it. To me, that's a win-win. I happen to have very good insurance, and I would likely have no reason to change it, but I also believe that healthcare is a right, and everyone should have the opportunity to have good healthcare.
__________________
onebloodonelife is offline  
Old 02-22-2008, 11:54 PM   #134
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 38,376
Local Time: 10:33 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris
Iraq for 50 for sho. Hopefully not 100. And I'm talking social and economic reform, with the backing of a military presence.

Can we really change the middle east to sort of a modern western way of thinking? Iraq would be our best shot at this moment.
Modern day Crusades...

At least you're somewhat honest.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 02-23-2008, 12:33 AM   #135
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,763
Local Time: 12:33 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris
Can we really change the middle east to sort of a modern western way of thinking? Iraq would be our best shot at this moment.
Personally, I think it's doubtful that Iraq will achieve that, if only because that statement isn't mindful of the traditional distribution of Islamic culture.

Quote:
It is a remarkable fact that, with few exceptions, most Muslim scholars…in the intellectual sciences have been non-Arabs, thus the founders of grammar were Sibawaih and after him, al-Farsi and Az-Zajjaj. All of them were of Persian descent they invented rules of (Arabic) grammar. Great jurists were Persians. Only the Persians engaged in the task of preserving knowledge and writing systematic scholarly works. Thus the truth of the statement of the prophet (Muhammad) becomes apparent, "If learning were suspended in the highest parts of heaven the Persians would attain it"…The intellectual sciences were also the preserve of the Persians, left alone by the Arabs, who did not cultivate them…as was the case with all crafts…This situation continued in the cities as long as the Persians and Persian countries, Iraq, Khorasan and Transoxiana (modern Central Asia), retained their sedentary culture. --Ibn Khaldun, Muqaddimah (1377)
Basically, in terms of cultural influence of Islam, historically, it is divided between three cultures: Arabic, Persian, and (I believe?) Turkish. So, basically, I doubt we're going to get a revolutionary change in the region, unless you can get all three of the main actors on our side.

Unfortunately, Iraq's place in all of this is merely where the three nations that are most representative of those three cultures--Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Turkey--try to extend their influence, and so I doubt that Iraq is ever going to be a model for anything. Turkey is already fairly Western-friendly, and so, even though the Turks and the Kurds hate each other, I think it isn't surprising that the Kurds are the most secular of the three factions in Iraq, because of Turkey's cultural influence. On the other hand, Iran and Saudi Arabia will be rather difficult to change. Traditionally, Iran would probably be the easier of the two to "Westernize," and we saw measures of that in the mid-20th century, but we do happen to have a rather awful government in power there that has used anti-American rhetoric as one means of staying in power. So, chances are, that won't be changing, as long as their current government is in power. Saudi Arabia, likewise, will probably be very difficult, due to the traditional close ties between the House of Saud and Wahhabi Islam. Of course, Saudi Arabia and the U.S. also have traditional close ties, at least economically, so they may be more open to persuasion, particularly if they even sniff the possibility that the U.S. might become energy independent and not need them at all anymore.

Unfortunately, for all our hopes, I don't think that Iraq registers all that highly in the Middle East importance scale. But I guess, while we're there, it's worth a shot.
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com