• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Jimmy Carter Accuses U.S. of 'Widespread Abuse of Human Rights'[W:110]

lpast said:
Jimmy Carter has been trying to be significant ever since the american people dubbed him the worst president in modern history and kicked him right to the curb.
Click to expand...

Well, after we kick Obummer to the curb, he'll be second worst Prez in modern history. :)


Tim-
 
j-mac said:
Carter has a long history of supporting terror organizations like Hamas against Israel, he has also had a history of projecting some fictitious guilt of being American.

Maybe he is sad that Obama is overtaking his crown as the Chamberlin of our times, and is trying desperately to make sure that his legacy of stupidity is carried on.

j-mac
Click to expand...

I love it when being Chamberlain is an insult. He did exactly what he was elected to do, and had the support of the British people who had no desire for war at that time. In fact, Daladier (the French foreign minister who also negotiated with Hitler) was greeted as a hero when he returned to Paris. Chamberlain's problem was that he believed his own press that somehow Hitler was going to sit back and that war would not be necessary.

Basically, saying "appeasment" is saying that Britain and France would be better off starting the war in 1938 rather than 1939. War was likely necessary anyway, but sometimes buying time is good (if you use that time to get ready for what's coming).
 
Hicup said:
Well, after we kick Obummer to the curb, he'll be second worst Prez in modern history. :)


Tim-
Click to expand...

Depends on what you mean by "modern." Between Harding, Hoover and Nixon there's a lot of competition in the 20th Century. Some here say that Roosevelt was the worst ever.
 
rocket88 said:
I love it when being Chamberlain is an insult. He did exactly what he was elected to do, and had the support of the British people who had no desire for war at that time. In fact, Daladier (the French foreign minister who also negotiated with Hitler) was greeted as a hero when he returned to Paris. Chamberlain's problem was that he believed his own press that somehow Hitler was going to sit back and that war would not be necessary.

Basically, saying "appeasment" is saying that Britain and France would be better off starting the war in 1938 rather than 1939. War was likely necessary anyway, but sometimes buying time is good (if you use that time to get ready for what's coming).
Click to expand...

Agreed. Without that extra year there would have been no Battle of Britain because there would have been no effective air defenses in place. Chamberlain's 'Peace in Our Time' may have ultimately won the Second World War.
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
Yes, Carter wasn't a good President. That doesn't invalidate his position on this. Especially if he has facts to back up what he is saying. Hell, it's at least worth an investigation.
Click to expand...

The facts are that former President Carter and President Obama have had a pretty long standing disagreement about Obama's "evolving" policies on his "war on terror."

People seem to forget how Obama's political agenda related to the middle east helped him get elected in 2008 and how it has "evolved" since his election.

(There's that "E" word again connected to Obama. If we were discussing Romney the word "evolved" would be switched with the phrase "flip-floped.")

President Obama’s response to the events of 9/11/2001 published on September 19th in the Hyde Park Herald:

Even as I hope for some measure of peace and comfort to the bereaved families, I must also hope that we as a nation draw some measure of wisdom from this tragedy. Certain immediate lessons are clear, and we must act upon those lessons decisively. We need to step up security at our airports. We must reexamine the effectiveness of our intelligence networks. And we must be resolute in identifying the perpetrators of these heinous acts and dismantling their organizations of destruction.

We must also engage, however, in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness. The essence of this tragedy, it seems to me, derives from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers: an inability to imagine, or connect with, the humanity and suffering of others. Such a failure of empathy, such numbness to the pain of a child or the desperation of a parent, is not innate; nor, history tells us, is it unique to a particular culture, religion, or ethnicity. It may find expression in a particular brand of violence, and may be channeled by particular demagogues or fanatics. Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair.

We will have to make sure, despite our rage, that any U.S. military action takes into account the lives of innocent civilians abroad. We will have to be unwavering in opposing bigotry or discrimination directed against neighbors and friends of Middle Eastern descent. Finally, we will have to devote far more attention to the monumental task of raising the hopes and prospects of embittered children across the globe—children not just in the Middle East, but also in Africa, Asia, Latin America, Eastern Europe and within our own shores.

Read more How Chicago politics shaped Barack Obama : The New Yorker
Click to expand...

I guess Carter is still feeling "empathy" for terrorists around the world. I state this because of his continued support for the terrorist organization Hamas.

It seems that President Obama on the other hand has lost his "empathy" for terrorists in the Middle East because in his continued attacks of them, he seems to have forgotten his statement: "that any U.S. military action takes into account the lives of innocent civilians abroad."
 
Last edited:
Μολὼν λαβέ;1060627523 said:
The facts are that former President Carter and President Obama have had a pretty long standing disagreement about Obama's "evolving" policies on his "war on terror."

People seem to forget how Obama's political agenda related to the middle east helped him get elected in 2008 and how it has "evolved" since his election.

(There's that "E" word again connected to Obama. If we were discussing Romney the word "evolved" would be switched with the phrase "flip-floped.")



I guess Carter is still feeling "empathy" for terrorists around the world. I state this because of his continued support for the terrorist organization Hamas.

It seems that President Obama on the other hand has lost his "empathy" for terrorists in the Middle East because in his continued attacks of them, he seems to have forgotten his statement: "that any U.S. military action takes into account the lives of innocent civilians abroad."
Click to expand...

It's easier to be in the passenger's seat than it is to be driving. But I'm not even here to defend Obama so there's that. In fact, I don't think I mentioned him ... Did I? I'm also not sure why you are bringing Romney into this?

I'm not gonna argue Hamas with you here. If you'd like, go make another tread and I'll see you there
 
It appears that Chamberlain was much better than Carter. Is anyone gonna bid 'better than average president' on Carter?
 
rocket88 said:
Depends on what you mean by "modern." Between Harding, Hoover and Nixon there's a lot of competition in the 20th Century. Some here say that Roosevelt was the worst ever.
Click to expand...

I dunno, in some respects Roosevelt was a great leader, but lousy policy. Obama is a poor leader AND has lousy policies. I'll give him props for giving it to the Taliban though. But honestly, that's about all I like about Obama. he reminds me of that office manager or supervisor that delegates everything on their plate and then sits in his office drinking coffee and watching the game.. Seriously, he does not lead by example, he delegates leadership and he should not as the president.


Tim-
 
rocket88 said:
I'm not saying that. I'm saying that we propped up the Shah, who was not a democratically elected official, and was not a proponent of individual freedoms.

Regardless of what's there today, to say that we stand up for freedom and democracy after keeping him in power - especially after we helped him overthrow a democratically elected government - umm...not always.
Click to expand...

Wow, weren't alive then were you. The Shah, for all his faults was indeed a better proponent of individual freedoms than anything that has come after. In fact, the guys running things now are the same fanatics the Shah used to jail for their ****-stirring.

I went to college with many Iranians in those days. Some were the privileged, rich sort from oil money, but most were average Iranian citizens with the freedom to travel and participate in other cultures. Women were freer than in any other ME nation of the time (except maybe Israel).

As Clinton said, "perfect is the enemy of good". Say what you want about the Shah, but he was an improvement over what came before, and heads above superior to what they have now.
 
The Barbarian said:
I'm not sure .. if he is a loon or not .... . but was a failed president ...... and still is failing
Click to expand...

Look, I don't like Obama in the least. But if you agree with Carter, then Obama has committed human rights violations. Frankly, I don't think that's the case, other opinions differ.
 
Hicup said:
I dunno, in some respects Roosevelt was a great leader, but lousy policy. Obama is a poor leader AND has lousy policies. I'll give him props for giving it to the Taliban though. But honestly, that's about all I like about Obama. he reminds me of that office manager or supervisor that delegates everything on their plate and then sits in his office drinking coffee and watching the game.. Seriously, he does not lead by example, he delegates leadership and he should not as the president.


Tim-
Click to expand...

I tend to agree that Obama's not been a very good President. My general opinion is that the last two Presidents have been failures. I simply hope that the next President is not, but given our recent record...Frankly, I can't remember the last time we as Americans voted for somebody rather than against their opponent. Possibly Reagan in '84, but Mondale's campaign looks, in retrospect, like such a cluster**** it would have been harder for Reagan to lose than it was to win. Before that...Kennedy?
 
clownboy said:
Wow, weren't alive then were you. The Shah, for all his faults was indeed a better proponent of individual freedoms than anything that has come after. In fact, the guys running things now are the same fanatics the Shah used to jail for their ****-stirring.

I went to college with many Iranians in those days. Some were the privileged, rich sort from oil money, but most were average Iranian citizens with the freedom to travel and participate in other cultures. Women were freer than in any other ME nation of the time (except maybe Israel).

As Clinton said, "perfect is the enemy of good". Say what you want about the Shah, but he was an improvement over what came before, and heads above superior to what they have now.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the Shah was great ... unless you were one of the guys he had down in the dungeons with electrodes attached to your balls. :roll:

He had a lot in common with Saddam Hussein.
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
It's easier to be in the passenger's seat than it is to be driving. But I'm not even here to defend Obama so there's that. In fact, I don't think I mentioned him ... Did I? I'm also not sure why you are bringing Romney into this?

I'm not gonna argue Hamas with you here. If you'd like, go make another tread and I'll see you there
Click to expand...

Isn't the OP about Carter's criticism of Obama?

The OP provides evidence of Obama's radical departure from a campaign platform that helped him get elected POTUS. It also provides information to compare the stark contrast between how liberals/socialists/democrats view an Obama change in platform/policy/position to a Romney change in platform/policy/position, which is hyper partisan.

Don't need to make another thread about Carter's ties to Hamas. The comments are germane here, i. e. he criticized Obama for human rights violations yet supports a terrorist organization. I wouldn't be surprised if Obama's camp responded by saying people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
 
When I hear Carter complaining about Palestinian human rights abuses, I may take him half ass seriously.
 
Meathead said:
Well, he was never the sharpest tack anyway. He has ceaselessly sought to vindicate his failed presidency and himself by presuming to be the conscience of a nation with even less success than his presidency.
Click to expand...

That's not fair. Carter did nuclear engineering design work, and I don't know any dummies who do. Do you?

Carter has been a declared and devout Christian all his life and has lived out his faith in conscience. I don't agree with his political views at all, but he shouldn't be insulted when he is so obviously sincere in them.
 
AdamT said:
Yeah, the Shah was great ... unless you were one of the guys he had down in the dungeons with electrodes attached to your balls. :roll:

He had a lot in common with Saddam Hussein.
Click to expand...

And those guys are the ones we are fighting against right now. The muslim extremists. Again, better than what was before and what came after him. You just can't argue with any honesty that the Iranian people are freer now than under the Shah.

nota bene said:
That's not fair. Carter did nuclear engineering design work, and I don't know any dummies who do. Do you?

Carter has been a declared and devout Christian all his life and has lived out his faith in conscience. I don't agree with his political views at all, but he shouldn't be insulted when he is so obviously sincere in them.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, Carter is a very sincere individual. That last part, though it has made him a great humanitarian, also made him a lousy president (at least for the times).
 
Prof. Peabody said:
He's 88 years old, I'm thinking Alzheimers and dementia.
Click to expand...


Then how would you'd explain the years he was POTUS away? :mrgreen:

He is in the top 5 of the worst Presidents in history, IMO.
 
Billy the Kid said:
Then how would you'd explain the years he was POTUS away? :mrgreen:

He is in the top 5 of the worst Presidents in history, IMO.
Click to expand...

I never said it was just now! LOLOLOLOLOL!
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1060628271 said:
Isn't the OP about Carter's criticism of Obama?

The OP provides evidence of Obama's radical departure from a campaign platform that helped him get elected POTUS. It also provides information to compare the stark contrast between how liberals/socialists/democrats view an Obama change in platform/policy/position to a Romney change in platform/policy/position, which is hyper partisan.
Click to expand...

He was a radical then and you still deem him a radical. He really can't win with you, can he? Please provide me further analysis of this Romney / Obama ("Robamney") hyper partisanship.

Don't need to make another thread about Carter's ties to Hamas. The comments are germane here, i. e. he criticized Obama for human rights violations yet supports a terrorist organization. I wouldn't be surprised if Obama's camp responded by saying people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Click to expand...

He doesn't support a terrorist organization. Hamas, by the standards of the UN, is a terrorist organization, as is Israel. Then again, from your avatar, we can all see what you think about the UN. I am unsure of any factual basis that the U.S. used to label Hamas a "terrorist organization" that couldn't be applied to Israel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom