View Poll Results: Are Neocons A Threat To World Peace?

Voters
72. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    44 61.11%
  • No

    28 38.89%
Page 17 of 29 FirstFirst ... 7151617181927 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 285

Thread: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

  1. #161
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Naturally people are against human, civil, labor and environmental rights? Naturally people are against free press and speech?

    I don't think so.
    That's not what I mean. I mean things like Taiwan being a part of China, and Ukraine being under the sphere of Russian influence. That's what I'm talking about.

  2. #162
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    You analogy is flawed because comparing the United States to victims of crimes by Russia is absurd.
    No, my analogy is correct because you are mistaking someone recognizing and preparing for aggression as causing that aggression. Victims being armed don't cause robbers, they cause fewer robbers. America having a forward-leaning defense posture doesn't cause Russia and like-minded countrires to become more aggressive, it causes Russia to become less aggressive.

    The eloquent use of the terms liberty, security, and global stability mask an ignorance of the fact that Ukraine is currently in chaos as a result of the neocon notion of preemption.
    There is literally no mechanism linking neoconservative thinkers in the United States - who you will notice have no power in the White House or the foreign policy establishment, and haven't since about 2006 - to Putin's decision to seize direct control over Crimea in the face of a popular revolt against his puppet in Kiev. Ukraine is currently in chaos because they have both the misfortune to have an incredibly corrupt government and be in possession of something that Russia desperately wants - a warm water port.

    Iraq and the entire ME are in chaos as a result of the neocon notion of preemption.
    That's an interesting claim. So are you suggesting that the Arab Spring is in fact the result of the neoconservative championing of the invasion of Iraq, and that they were correct when they claimed that doing so would lead to a series of popular movements against cruel and abusive Middle Eastern tyrants?

    What will it take, at nuclear war between the US and Russia before you realize that the neocon notion of preemption is a threat to world peace?
    It would probably take me frying my brain with industrial amounts of drugs to come to that conclusion, given that it is so demonstrably at odds with the history of the last few centuries.

  3. #163
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    That's an interesting claim. Given that, objectively, war in the nuclear era has been cleaner and less gruesome of an affair, marked by sharply reduced civilian casualties, especially when the United States is involved, how do you defend it?
    What is rather interesting is your claim that war has been cleaner in the nuclear era. The firebombing of Tokoyo was part of the nuclear era, that was a very gruesome affair. Before the US bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it calculated what time of day and the exact locations in which the maximum casualties would be inflicted. In Hiroshima, the time was chosen when innocent people would be going about their regular daily affairs. WITH ONE NUCLEAR WEAPON, SMALL BY TODAY'S STANDARDS, OVER ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PEOPLE WERE KILLED IN HIROSHIMA ALONE! Is this your notion of clean? Is this your notion of less gruesome?

  4. #164
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    What is rather interesting is your claim that war has been cleaner in the nuclear era. The firebombing of Tokoyo was part of the nuclear era, that was a very gruesome affair.
    Actually that occurred prior to the nuclear era, though it was indeed part of both WWII and the massive, centuries-long decline in violence in human society.

    of course, that would involve history, and people blaming William Kristol for a centuries-old Russian search to control warm water access might understandably have erred there.

    Before the US bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it calculated what time of day and the exact locations in which the maximum casualties would be inflicted. In Hiroshima, the time was chosen when innocent people would be going about their regular daily affairs. WITH ONE NUCLEAR WEAPON, SMALL BY TODAY'S STANDARDS, OVER ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PEOPLE WERE KILLED IN HIROSHIMA ALONE!
    Yup. And was so effective that it ended WWII, saved millions of lives, and managed to ensure that, having gained control of massive weapons, the nations of the world would (thus far) avoid their use.

    Is this your notion of clean? Is this your notion of less gruesome?
    believe it or not - yes, the post-nuclear era has seen an amazing drop in the amount of violence and human tragedy associated with warfare.

    A fantastic book for you, not that you will read it, as you seem to be impervious to new information that does not confirm your pre-established positions

  5. #165
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    No, my analogy is correct because you are mistaking someone recognizing and preparing for aggression as causing that aggression. Victims being armed don't cause robbers, they cause fewer robbers. America having a forward-leaning defense posture doesn't cause Russia and like-minded countrires to become more aggressive, it causes Russia to become less aggressive.
    No it is incorrect because of the use of the term victim. The US has not been victimized by Russia. Rather, Russia has been victimized by the US through NATO expansion. An expansion that it guaranteed it would not engage in.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    There is literally no mechanism linking neoconservative thinkers in the United States - who you will notice have no power in the White House or the foreign policy establishment, and haven't since about 2006 - to Putin's decision to seize direct control over Crimea in the face of a popular revolt against his puppet in Kiev.
    Wrong. Victoria Nuland is the wife of prominent neoconservative Robert Kagan. There was absolutely no reason for Nuland to engage in Ukraine in such a heavy handed way except to preempt the expansion of Russian influence. She even arrogantly proclaimed "f*** the EU." Her actions led to the overthrow of the government of a democratically elected leader, Yanukovych. The core of Russian naval power is based in Sevastopol. Putin had to seize Crimea in order to avoid the real possibility that NATO, a military alliance that was formed to contain Russia, would be right next to the seat of Russian naval power.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Ukraine is currently in chaos because they have both the misfortune to have an incredibly corrupt government and be in possession of something that Russia desperately wants - a warm water port.
    That warm water port was put in jeopardy by US attempts to preempt Russian power.

  6. #166
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,709

    Re: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    What is rather interesting is your claim that war has been cleaner in the nuclear era. The firebombing of Tokoyo was part of the nuclear era, that was a very gruesome affair. Before the US bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it calculated what time of day and the exact locations in which the maximum casualties would be inflicted. In Hiroshima, the time was chosen when innocent people would be going about their regular daily affairs. WITH ONE NUCLEAR WEAPON, SMALL BY TODAY'S STANDARDS, OVER ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PEOPLE WERE KILLED IN HIROSHIMA ALONE! Is this your notion of clean? Is this your notion of less gruesome?
    Nuclear weapons have not been used. Even though some neoconservatives sought refuge in counterforce to stop an all-out exchange, counterforce largely became a mere hypothetical.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  7. #167
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    No it is incorrect because of the use of the term victim. The US has not been victimized by Russia. Rather, Russia has been victimized by the US through NATO expansion. An expansion that it guaranteed it would not engage in.
    that is certainly a viewpoint. It is the viewpoint of a paranoid, low-information Russian voter believing whatever Putin tells him on state-controlled media, but it is certainly a viewpoint.

    Wrong. Victoria Nuland is the wife of prominent neoconservative Robert Kagan.
    Wait. Your case depends on the notion that Putin suddenly realized that Russia had been pursuing control of warm water access for centuries because Victoria Nuland is married to a writer?

    There was absolutely no reason for Nuland to engage in Ukraine in such a heavy handed way except to preempt the expansion of Russian influence.
    Heavy Handed? Meh...

    As for pre-empting the expansion of Russian Influence - duh?

    She even arrogantly proclaimed "f*** the EU."
    So?

    Her actions led to the overthrow of the government of a democratically elected leader, Yanukovych.
    That is incorrect. Yanukovych's actions led to his own overthrow, when he became too obviously blatantly a tool of Putin. The lady you are accusing of fomenting this said mean things about the EU AFTER Yanukovych had fled.

    The core of Russian naval power is based in Sevastopol. Putin had to seize Crimea in order to avoid the real possibility that NATO, a military alliance that was formed to contain Russia, would be right next to the seat of Russian naval power.
    Ukraine was not about to join NATO, however, think about what you are saying - you are admitting that Russia was going to pursue it's national interests, which is precisely both the realist and neocon argument.

    That warm water port was put in jeopardy by US attempts to preempt Russian power.
    Incorrect. The warm water port wasn't put in jeopardy, but rather became a potential risk because Putin pushed his toady too far.

  8. #168
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Nuclear weapons have not been used. Even though some neoconservatives sought refuge in counterforce to stop an all-out exchange, counterforce largely became a mere hypothetical.
    More to the point, it was precisely the bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima that kept nuclear weapons from being used.

  9. #169
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,709

    Re: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    More to the point, it was precisely the bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima that kept nuclear weapons from being used.
    Largely so. It sticks out in one's mind that Niels Bohr asked "is it big enough?" One has to give credit to the many scientists who were at least able to get that point right. I think many scientists were a bit out of their depth with politics, but their greatest contribution was advocating it be fully unleashed the first times to make an impression.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  10. #170
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Actually that occurred prior to the nuclear era, though it was indeed part of both WWII and the massive, centuries-long decline in violence in human society.
    No, it occurred simultaneously because nuclear weapons were being developed when it happened.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Yup. And was so effective that it ended WWII, saved millions of lives, and managed to ensure that, having gained control of massive weapons, the nations of the world would (thus far) avoid their use.
    First of all it was, contrary to your claims, gruesome, dirty, and uncivilized. Next of all, it was probably unnecessary. In fact Eisenhower advised against it because, according to him, the Japanese were about to surrender anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    believe it or not - yes, the post-nuclear era has seen an amazing drop in the amount of violence and human tragedy associated with warfare.
    There is no post nuclear era. We are in the nuclear era. That's one flaw. Next of all, the reason why there has been no war between Russia and the US is that previously both sides keep within their respective spheres of influence due to the threat of MAD. Neocons have no respect for such spheres of influence. Rather they seek to preempt the rise of nuclear armed powers like Russia and China. Never in post WWII history has the US so directly encroached on Russia's vital interests as in the way that we have currently done in Ukraine. Russia had it's main naval port in Ukraine. Some of Russia's most critical military equipment is manufactured in Ukraine. Neocons, in their blind ambition, have no respect for this. Therefore they are a danger to world peace.

Page 17 of 29 FirstFirst ... 7151617181927 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •