cj001f Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 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 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.)? Quote
iain Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 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. Quote
scott_harpell Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 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. Quote
scott_harpell Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 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 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. Quote
TrogdortheBurninator Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 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. Quote
Dr_Flash_Amazing Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 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. Quote
catbirdseat Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 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. Quote
foraker Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 would those be the blind stupid lemmings who voted for bush or the blind stupid lemmings who voted for kerry? ;-) Quote
minx Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 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 Quote
selkirk Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 I think i'm coming down with a 4-year long flu, nausea, aches, pains, headaches, the works. Quote
TrogdortheBurninator Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 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. Quote
ncascademtns Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 What's the record for pages on a Post in 1 day? Quote
ncascademtns Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 What's the record for pages on a Post in 1 day? Quote
tivoli_mike Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 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... Quote
ncascademtns Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 What's the record for pages on a post in 1 day? Like I really needed to ask that again, and again. Quote
scott_harpell Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 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. Quote
selkirk Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 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. Quote
TrogdortheBurninator Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 I think that the republican control of the presidency,house, senate, and soon supreme court makes statements about a 70 year reign for one party a depressing albeit real possibility. Quote
tivoli_mike Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 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 Quote
jmace Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 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. Quote
thelawgoddess Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 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 ... Quote
selkirk Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 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. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.