Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • olyclimber

      WELCOME TO THE CASCADECLIMBERS.COM FORUMS   02/03/18

      We have upgraded to new forum software as of late last year, and it makes everything here so much better!  It is now much easier to do pretty much anything, including write Trip Reports, sell gear, schedule climbing related events, and more. There is a new reputation system that allows for positive contributors to be recognized,  it is possible to tag content with identifiers, drag and drop in images, and it is much easier to embed multimedia content from Youtube, Vimeo, and more.  In all, the site is much more user friendly, bug free, and feature rich!   Whether you're a new user or a grizzled cascadeclimbers.com veteran, we think you'll love the new forums. Enjoy!
Sign in to follow this  
EWolfe

4 more years of...

Recommended Posts

Regardless, FDR knew that the reaction of this embarbo would be war and he was right. If diplomacy fails, you are right, I do feel the only recourse is war. What do you suggest? Ignoring the cancer in hopes taht it goes away?

No, he didn't. If he did think that wouldn't our forces have been on alert wazzup.gif I'm sure he thought one of the outcomes might have been war, but that result was not inevitable.

 

In your world view what purpose does diplomacy hold if the end result is always war (as it was in WW2, Iraq, etc.)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The worst president in a hundred years has the unequivocal support of a majority of Americans.

 

I agree, this is what hurts the most. I was holding out hope that most folks would be thinking "wow, this guy's way over the line, not at all the person I voted for in 2000". It's shocking to believe that the majority of people actually approve of what's going on.

 

It's almost as if some people I know are shackled into voting for him, no matter what he does, as it would represent a moral inconsistency to change their minds. I could certainly see myself struggling with that self analysis, as it might suggest a weakness in my convictions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

people flying airplanes into buildings, people trying to eradicate entire religious/ethnic groups. Mostly the fact that there is genocide going on everywhere in the world. That was my first clue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Regardless, FDR knew that the reaction of this embarbo would be war and he was right. If diplomacy fails, you are right, I do feel the only recourse is war. What do you suggest? Ignoring the cancer in hopes taht it goes away?

No, he didn't. If he did think that wouldn't our forces have been on alert wazzup.gif I'm sure he thought one of the outcomes might have been war, but that result was not inevitable.

 

In your world view what purpose does diplomacy hold if the end result is always war (as it was in WW2, Iraq, etc.)?

 

You are misquoting. I said that IF diplomacy did not work, war was an option. If the UN were not so limp dicked, it is possible that it would have worked against Iraq, but they have a precedence of being flacid when faced with conflict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont know what is more disappointing, the fact our system elected a president 4 years ago without the popular vote, or the fact that there are enough blind, stupid, lemming americans to actually give him the popular vote after all the lies and bullsh*t he has delivered to the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont know what is more disappointing, the fact our system elected a president 4 years ago without the popular vote, or the fact that there are enough blind, stupid, lemming americans to actually give him the popular vote after all the lies and bullsh*t he has delivered to the world.

 

That reminds DFA of another thing he thought of this morning. We wouldn't be in this, to quote C3PO, "ridiculous position," had the 2k election clusterfuck not been decided in the Texas Terror's favor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The remarkable thing about this thread is that there are people expressing opinions on politics that I don't recall having done so before. Some of them are really well expressed. thumbs_up.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

would those be the blind stupid lemmings who voted for bush or the blind stupid lemmings who voted for kerry? ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm truly surprised by my reaction to this. i am genuinely depressed. during the last debacle, i saw the results and moved on. this time, i truly don't feel like leaving the house. ugggh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my liberal bubble perspective, republicans seem more likely to follow the status quo (ie parents, friends, neighbors), compared to democrats that seem more likely to question the current state of affairs and make autonomous decisions. At the same time, a considerable number of americans did vote for Kerry with the "anybody but bush" mentality. I dont agree with this, but am not certain that makes them blind, only aware of the current administrations state of affairs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, one thing I hope comes of this is that the Democratic party finally goes through the bloody transformation from being the party of "Republican-lite" to something more progressive or perhaps we'll slide into a Mexican-style democracy ( a la the PRI ) where one party is pretty much in power for 70 years...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, one thing I hope comes of this is that the Democratic party finally goes through the bloody transformation from being the party of "Republican-lite" to something more progressive

 

You think this will get a Democratic candidate elected? I feel that if John Kerry would have stuck with his guns instead of asking his base what to do (via polls) he would hav slaughtered Bush. Instead he polarized his views and lost the middle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question... How many sitting presidents have been ousted in the middle of a war?

 

On the upside we'll get a nice swing and probably a good 8 years of Democrats after the next presidential election. Now if the supreme court justices can just hang on for 4 more years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually the middle didn't decide this election, it was far larger turnout of the Republican base ( i.e. White Christian Evangelicals ) that turned it to Bush

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a quick question: so all those peole that say you invaded Iraq for the wrong reasons, does that imply that you shouldnt have invaded iraq at all or you should have done it for different reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we actually had a job candidate tell us this morning she was not going to live her anymore with bush as president. she is selling her house and moving to canada. lucky for her she has dual citizenship ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me?? I don't think we should have invaded at all.

 

But if the president decides we are going to invade, would really have appreciate knowing the real reasons, and not have smoke blown up my ass.

 

On the first count I disagree with Bush, on the s

econd I lost respect for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×