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 19 of 29 FirstFirst ... 91718192021 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 285

Thread: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

  1. #181
    Whoa, daddy!
    MadLib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,225

    Re: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    There are many threats to world peace and I am not going to try to draw up an exhaustive, ranked list. To be brief, what makes the neocons such a threat is that their ideology is having a substantial influence on US foreign policy.
    When's the last time the neocons ordered a massive and needless attack against civilians? Have they ever advocated jihad or ethnic cleansing? Do they claim the right to forcibly annex the territories of other nations simply because of ethnic distribution? No; as a matter of fact, the neoconservatives (however wrong their defense of Cold War policy and unhelpful their calls for war against Iran may be) have taken it upon themselves to oppose these abominations, which continue to plague the world today.
    In particular, the notion that the US should preempt the rise of competitors like Russia and China is a very dangerous. Since the mid 19th century, advancements in technology have made warfare an extremely gruesome affair.
    The reason we should attempt to prevent Russia from reemerging as a superpower is because it will bring back the old balance-of-power system that caused plenty of continental wars, two world wars and a vicious cold war. Putin chose to attempt to recreate such a dangerous and unstable world order, not us. Russia has been presented three opportunities to forget past animosities and become our ally - the collapse of the Soviet Union, the War on Terror, and Obama's reset strategy - and it has rejected these opportunities through its own actions. If we can deny Putin influence, we can prevent this from happening and wait for an enlightened and pro-West government to take hold in Moscow and rejoin us on the world stage.
    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Hah. If someone put me in their sig, I'd never know. I have sigs off.

  2. #182
    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
    if you want to get into a pointless debate on semantics you can fight that alone. The Nuclear Era, when it is used historically, is used to describe the end of WWII forward; usually it is used to ensure that the era immediately preceding the Cold War is captured. Regardless, the point remains.
    The exact point is chosen depending on what is the desired emphasis. Not only that but the fire bombing of Tokyo occurred at the end of WWII so it is definitely part of the Nuclear Era.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Reading is Fundamental - my point is simply that objectively war has become less gruesome, dirty, and uncivilized, not that it has ceased to contain these things.
    There is nothing objective about the notion that some white guy, engaged in the practice of self deception, believes that war has become less gruesome. It sounds just like the same garbage the Israelis regurgitate when they do things like fire missiles in the midst of innocent people to kill an old man in a wheelchair.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    That is also incorrect. If you wish to argue otherwise, please go down to the history forum, where I will enjoy watching you have your butt handed to you after being diced into many pieces.
    Although it is debatable, there is strong evidence to support it. And if I did go there, by the time I was through with kicking butt, you would be the new poster child for the "raggedy a**" club!

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    no he didn't. The decision to drop the bombs was made completely without his input.
    Wrong! Yes he did. And if that's your idea of cutting butt, then I would suggest that your little butter knife needs some retooling, because that just ain't gonna cut it. Pun intended.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Sort of - we are in the information era. For example, we still use bronze for stuff, but we are no longer in the "bronze era", just as we also use stone for stuff, but are no longer in the "stone age".
    There is no "sort of." Different eras can coincide. Just like the nuclear era also coincided with the jet age.


    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    You think we are still in the Cold War?
    The point is that the neocons want to bring the cold war back. They need war to justify their existence, otherwise they become irrelevant.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    We didn't encroach - that's the problem with our foreign policy in Ukraine. Putin didn't invade because he felt the US was threatening him, he invaded because he knew we wouldn't. Putin advances where he knows he faces weak or no opposition - what was the U.S. doing in Georgia to threaten and demand that Putin invade?
    Yes we did encroach in Ukraine. There is no doubt about it. Putin took Crimea because he had to and he would have done it regardless, because Russia had the military capability to do it. And if you say otherwise, since you feel Putin is such a problem, why not just invade Russia and overthrow him like we did Saddam? Why not just remove him like we did Noreiga in Panama? Why don't we do it? Because of Russia's military capability, that's why.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    You are blaming Neocons for the actions of Putin - that's idiotic.
    No, what's idiotic is the notion that we should go to war with Russia over Ukraine.

  3. #183
    Sage
    Geoist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    9,916

    Re: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

    Quote Originally Posted by Soupnazi630 View Post
    So obviously not neo cons.
    True, but their interventionist policies remain popular with most politicians.
    "Men did not make the earth ... it is the value of the improvement only, and not the earth itself, that is individual property... Every proprietor owes to the community a ground rent for the land which he holds." -- Thomas Paine, Agrarian Justice
    http://www.wealthandwant.com/

  4. #184
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    There is nothing objective about the notion that some white guy, engaged in the practice of self deception, believes that war has become less gruesome. It sounds just like the same garbage the Israelis regurgitate when they do things like fire missiles in the midst of innocent people to kill an old man in a wheelchair.
    There are some people who ya just know are eventually going to use race in a debate, no matter if it's appropriate or not..

  5. #185
    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 MadLib View Post
    When's the last time the neocons ordered a massive and needless attack against civilians? Have they ever advocated jihad or ethnic cleansing? Do they claim the right to forcibly annex the territories of other nations simply because of ethnic distribution? No; as a matter of fact, the neoconservatives (however wrong their defense of Cold War policy and unhelpful their calls for war against Iran may be) have taken it upon themselves to oppose these abominations, which continue to plague the world today.
    Don't get me wrong, they are personally likely not terrible people. Actually, I think if I knew some of them, I would probably like them. But they may not like me because, I don't know, they may not like black people.
    As I said earlier in the thread, when I think of them, I am reminded that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

  6. #186
    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 Grant View Post
    There are some people who ya just know are eventually going to use race in a debate, no matter if it's appropriate or not..
    You know how we do it!!!!

  7. #187
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    You know how we do it!!!!
    Yes, i do. I've seen it often enough.

  8. #188
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    As I said earlier in the thread, when I think of them, I am reminded that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
    One of the most tired cliches of all and you think it's worth repeating a second time. Is the road to heaven paved with bad intentions? Are good intentions actually a bad thing? Do you ever stop and think before you press "Post Quick Reply"?

  9. #189
    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 MadLib View Post
    The reason we should attempt to prevent Russia from reemerging as a superpower is because it will bring back the old balance-of-power system that caused plenty of continental wars, two world wars and a vicious cold war. Putin chose to attempt to recreate such a dangerous and unstable world order, not us. Russia has been presented three opportunities to forget past animosities and become our ally - the collapse of the Soviet Union, the War on Terror, and Obama's reset strategy - and it has rejected these opportunities through its own actions. If we can deny Putin influence, we can prevent this from happening and wait for an enlightened and pro-West government to take hold in Moscow and rejoin us on the world stage.
    The problem with that position is that states have a natural tendency to endeavor to increase their influence. This itself is the result of their natural tendency to desire to improve the economic conditions of their citizens. Therefore a state will naturally act to facilitate the favorable exchange of goods and services with other nations. If one nation is to preempt the rise of another, it must act to restrict this exchange. When it does so, simply for the sake of preempting the rise of that particular nation, that nation will feel that it is the victim of injustice and the result will be animosity. Animosity is the catalyst for war, especially when a nation's vital interests are at stake.

    In the case of Ukraine, this attempt to restrict Russia has come right up to one of its near borders. To see why this is problematic we should recall that Gorbhachev was promised that NATO would not expand one inch eastward if 300,000 Soviet troops were removed from East Germany. The result was not only did NATO expand into former Soviet republics, but George Bush pushed for NATO membership for Ukraine. Russia shares a large border with Ukraine from which it is vulnerable to attack. NATO is a military alliance that was formed specifically to contain Russia. Therefore the attempt to place such a military alliance right on a vulnerable Russian border cannot be viewed as anything than a blatant attempt to restrict Russia. Our attempt to restrict Russian influence in Ukraine is therefore a source of Russian animosity towards the US.

    One very important thing that does not get much attention is that Russia gets vital military equipment from Ukraine. Here's an article that talks about this:

    Complex Ties: Russia's Armed Forces Depend On Ukraine's Military Industry

    .................
    The Ukrainian facilities which are most important for Russia's military are Motor Sich in Zaporizhzhya, which produces helicopter engines, Yuzhmash in Dnipropetrovsk, which manufactures rockets and missiles, and the Russian company Antonov's plant in Kyiv, which makes planes.

    Some of the most important ties between the two countries' military industries concern Russia's strategic nuclear forces.

    Most of Russia warheads are delivered by rockets which were entirely produced or designed by factories in Soviet-era Ukraine or contain key components from them.

    In his article for RFE/RL's Russian Service, Voronov notes that more than half of the components of ground-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) can be traced back to Ukraine and that these rockets carry over 80 percent of Russia's warheads.

    The essential components include targeting and control systems, most importantly for Russia's keystone ICBM, the RS-20B Voyevoda, known by NATO as the SS-18 Satan. The guidance system was produced in Kharkiv at a factory known as "Elektropribor" in the Soviet era and as "Khatron" today.
    .................
    Just how important Ukraine is to Russia with regards to military equipment is further emphasized here, and it so important that there is a worry that Ukraine could sell Russia's military secrets:

    Can Russia's military fly without Ukraine's parts? - CSMonitor.com

    ...........
    Though military integration between Russia and Ukraine is well down from its Soviet-era peak, Ukraine still makes a surprising number of essential parts that go into modern Russian weaponry.

    According to a 2009 survey by Kiev's Razumkov Center, Ukrainian factories produce the engines that power most Russian combat helicopters; about half of the air-to-air missiles deployed on Russian fighter planes; and a range of engines used by Russian aircraft and naval vessels. The state-owned Antonov works in Kiev makes a famous range of transport aircraft, including the modern AN-70. The Russian Air Force was to receive 60 of the sleek new short-takeoff-and-landing aircraft, which now it may have to do without.

    Valentin Badrak, director of the Center of Army Studies in Kiev, says that even Russia's new Ilyushin Il-476 transport aircraft, which is built in the central Russian city of Ulyanovsk, cannot be produced without Ukrainian spare parts. He says Russia will be hurt by a cutoff of cooperation in "several spheres.... In Ukraine we have about two dozen companies that had projects with Russia important to Russia's security and defense."

    The mainstay of Russia's strategic missile forces is the SS-18 Satan multiple-warhead intercontinental ballistic missile, all of which were produced in Soviet times at the giant Yuzhmash works in Dnipropetrovsk, and which still rely on Ukrainian expertise to keep in working order. However, the Razumkov report notes that Russia's next generation of strategic missiles, including the mobile Topol-M, are entirely produced in Russia.

    "We have our own specialists who can service the Satan missiles," says Mr. Litovkin. "The problem is mostly a legal one," because the Ukrainians have the propriety rights to do that work, he adds.
    Selling Russian secrets?

    The Kremlin may also be worried that a Ukraine freed from its contractual obligations to Moscow might go out and sell Russian military secrets to other countries.

    Russia's foreign ministry posted an unusual note earlier this week warning that Ukrainian representatives of Yuzhmash, which built the SS-18, were meeting with "representatives of some countries, regarding the sale of a production technology for heavy-class intercontinental ballistic missiles."

    It added "we trust that despite the complicated foreign policy situation in Ukraine and the lack of legitimate supreme authorities, the current leaders of the country will be responsible, will fully comply with their obligation" to fulfill legal requirements and international rules against the proliferation of missile technologies.

    Some Russian bloggers suggested that Ukraine was trying to sell Russian heavy missile technology to Turkey, a NATO country.
    ..............
    Our attempt to restrict Russian influence in Ukraine is therefore the source of Russian animosity towards the US.

    Crimea was actually a part of Russia until it was given to Ukraine as a gift in 1954. Indeed Russia's naval power is based at Sevastopol. Our attempts to restrict Russian influence in Ukraine is therefore the source of Russian animosity towards the US.

    What is absurd about the neocon position that Russia must be restricted in this way in Ukraine is that it appears to be oblivious to the fact that is puts Russia in a position in which it is exposed to clear and present dangers to its vital interests. When we factor in the fact that Russia has the capability to destroy the US, it becomes clear that the neocon notion that Russia must be restricted in Ukraine is a suicidal recipe for disaster.

    Therefore the neocons are a threat to world peace.

  10. #190
    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 Grant View Post
    One of the most tired cliches of all and you think it's worth repeating a second time. Is the road to heaven paved with bad intentions? Are good intentions actually a bad thing? Do you ever stop and think before you press "Post Quick Reply"?
    You know how we do it!!!

Page 19 of 29 FirstFirst ... 91718192021 ... 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
  •