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 28 of 29 FirstFirst ... 1826272829 LastLast
Results 271 to 280 of 285

Thread: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

  1. #271
    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?

    There are three problems with the neocon notion of preemption:

    1. It places the US in a state of constant conflict because nations will always act to increase there influence.

    2. Because preemption involves acting against threats that have not presented themselves, there is the risk of acting against threats that don't exist.

    3. Acting to preempt the rise of a nation will be the cause of conflict itself because the nation will have to defend itself against the preemption. In other words, it's a self fulfilling prophecy.

  2. #272
    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
    Here's another one of those damned war mongering neo-cons! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkS9y5t0tR0


    Hillary Clinton is so full of crap! That's what you call a neocon wanna be!!!!
    She's just trying to get some political capital from the neocon brand.

  3. #273
    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 DDD View Post
    Neocon sounds like Unicorn or some other novel concept.
    Actually it sounds like a race of evil race of war mongering robots from another planet.



    Glutenus Maximus Holius Prime, the Neocon!!! His mission is to instigate fighting amongst humans in order to soften them up for the imminent Neocon invasion!!!!

  4. #274
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where I am now
    Last Seen
    09-11-17 @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,386

    Re: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

    Are neocons a threat to World Peace?

    Duh...of course they are.

    Neocons and their self-serving, neurotic, staggeringly ignorant delusions are, IMO, directly/indirectly responsible for much of the western directed terrorism and hatred in the world.

    I personally believe, but cannot prove, that it was the actions of neocons that indirectly led to the motivation for the 9/11 attacks. No, they did not perpetrate it. But their actions indirectly created the motivation for them. And I also believe - but cannot prove - that the big shot Neocons secretly loved the attacks (assuming they lost no one to them) because it gave their causes a gigantic added boost. Suddenly most Americans were behind America policing the world and starting war after war in the name of fighting terrorism (read...fear).

    Neocon policies get brave U.S. soldiers killed in distant lands, cost American taxpayers trillions more then they need to spend and prop up horrible regimes that cause untold amounts of misery to their people.

    Neocons may or may not be well meaning (I say 'not' for the most part)...but they are, IMO, the single largest cause of world misery in areas where America has some influence.
    Last edited by DA60; 04-19-14 at 06:49 PM.

  5. #275
    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 DA60 View Post
    Are neocons a threat to World Peace?

    Duh...of course they are.

    Neocons and their self-serving, neurotic, staggeringly ignorant delusions are, IMO, directly/indirectly responsible for much of the western directed terrorism and hatred in the world.
    Yeah, Obama bought into the neocon garbage on Russia with Ukraine. He sent Kagan's wife, Victoria Nuland to straighten Putin out. The result is the current mess in Ukraine. The same can be said for Iraq, Bush bought into the neocon garbage and the result is that Iraq is a mess and the US lost thousands of soldiers lives and spent hundreds of billions of dollars for nothing.

    When will people wake up and realize that the neocons don't do anything but create a mess.

  6. #276
    Guru
    Morality Games's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Last Seen
    05-24-16 @ 10:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,733

    Re: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    It is possible to foment protest. This can very easily be seen when countries fall on severe economic hardship and ultra nationalists groups step in to fill a need.



    No it isn't. As a matter of fact one cannot refrain from doing something, not even for a moment, even if it's no more than engagement on the mental platform.



    First of all, the statement as worded is meaningless. But if you are saying that a person cannot be made to do something that they already want to do a priori, that is possible also. I don't want to go to work, but I do it because of the money. So money is one way. It can be done through deception. Usually in national elections in the US, a majority of the effort is spent trying to convince voters who have not decided to vote for a particular candidate. Not only that but voters can be made to change their minds through clever propaganda. Dukakis was leading in the presidential polling in 1988, but the Willie Horton ads help change all that. So your notion is not true, no matter how you look at it.



    I don't know where you have been, but yes the US does indeed support grassroot protest against Putin and other world leaders. For example, consider Garry Kasparov, perhaps you have heard of him.





    Please note that this council has neocon intellectuals as it's members.

    As to what Kasporov thinks about Putin, here's an excerpt from a piece that Kasparov wrote



    And please note this





    Here you just don't know what you are talking about and have simply fabricated a tale. First of all, not all "ethnic Ukrainians" want to be a part of the EU. Anyone who has been following recent events in Ukraine knows that some right wing Ukrainian groups who were influential in the Maidan protests have openly said that they do not want to have anything to do with the EU. Not only that, but when you look at some of the polls, you find the following:



    https://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukr...ns-332470.html
    ... the statement as worded means exactly what it should mean. People protest because they want to protest. Even in cases where "fomentation" occurred, they are still responsible for the results of their actions.

    Here you just don't know what you are talking about and have simply fabricated a tale. First of all, not all "ethnic Ukrainians" want to be a part of the EU. Anyone who has been following recent events in Ukraine knows that some right wing Ukrainian groups who were influential in the Maidan protests have openly said that they do not want to have anything to do with the EU. Not only that, but when you look at some of the polls, you find the following:
    Indeed. I fabricated a fairy tale when the poll says people who live in the east parts of the country (heavy with ethnic Russians and Russian speakers) favor the customs union and those in the west (heavy with ethnic Ukrainian and native speakers) favor the European Union.

    Polls like that aren't a reliable metric because there are one hundred reasons why they show the results that they do.
    Last edited by Morality Games; 04-20-14 at 09:39 AM.
    If you notice something good in yourself, give credit to God, not to yourself, but be certain the evil you commit is always your own and yours to acknowledge.

    St. Benedict

  7. #277
    Whoa, daddy!
    MadLib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,225

    Re: Are Neocons A Threat to World Peace?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    Like I said, I'm not going to make a ranked list. Let me put it like this, neoconservatives are a high priority on the list because they are very influential in the foreign policy establishment of the United States in terms of ideology and access to positions of power in government.
    The people I've listed have killed much more innocents and created much more global instability than neocons ever have.


    The problem with your position is that it completely ignores the significance of the breakup of the Soviet Union and the effect that has on Russia's position today. Not only that but it ignores the role that the United States played in bringing about the fall of the democratically elected leader of Ukraine, Yanukovych, and it's motivation for doing so. When we take into account these factors, i.e. that Ukraine is a vital interest to Russia and that the US is essentially trying to strangle Russia through it's activities in Ukraine, then it becomes clear that the territorial considerations that you mentioned are simply an excuse by the US to achieve it's goals of trying to preempt the rise of another power. This preemption, which is advocated by proponents of neocon ideology, is what is troubling. Therefore, neocons are a threat to world peace.
    1. I do not believe the US had any significant role in the ouster of Yanukovych. The evidence you and others have presented to this end is circumstantial at best and does not constitute irrefutable proof of a CIA covert operation.

    2. Once again, nothing's been forcing Russia to take a position hostile the US efforts towards a democratic world order. Moscow's support of the contemptible regimes of Milosevic, Bashir and Assad and its use of brute force to coerce its former republics into behaving the way it wants is why it's at odds with the US. We cannot have another cold war between two mutually hostile superpowers, and preempting a hostile Russia from rising is a necessary effort to stop this from happening. If Russia wishes to be a democratic and non-aggressive hegemon that does not keep fascist dictators in power in order to spite the US, then I'm perfectly fine with them expanding their influence.
    Are you really trying to put forward the notion that the breakup of the Soviet Union means that NATO is no longer a threat to Russia?
    Not at all. My point is that this agreement, if it actually exists - which is in itself dubious, because the US isn't the sole power in NATO and because Gorbachev had no authority over what other countries decided to do - was made between the United States and the Soviet Union. Since the Soviet Union no longer exists, it's questionable whether such an agreement is still binding.
    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Hah. If someone put me in their sig, I'd never know. I have sigs off.

  8. #278
    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 Morality Games View Post
    ... the statement as worded means exactly what it should mean. People protest because they want to protest. Even in cases where "fomentation" occurred, they are still responsible for the results of their actions.
    The problem is that your statements that

    One of the most abused notions in human history is that you can somehow "forment" protest.
    and

    You can't make them do something unless they really want to do it.
    would have us believe that people who foment protest bear no responsibility and that people are merely doing what they want to do. Over and above that to make a statement like: "the boy threw the ball because he wanted to throw it," is meaningless. In that case we are not given any sort of insight as to why he wanted to throw it in the first place. He may have thrown the ball because someone had a gun pointed to his head and threatened to kill him if he didn't. To see why this is important, let's suppose that someone is on trial for setting fire to a building. However, if in fact the person set the fire because someone had a gun to his head and threatened to kill him if he didn't, he would be treated much differently than someone who did it because they had some sort of ax to grind.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morality Games View Post
    Indeed. I fabricated a fairy tale when the poll says people who live in the east parts of the country (heavy with ethnic Russians and Russian speakers) favor the customs union and those in the west (heavy with ethnic Ukrainian and native speakers) favor the European Union.

    Polls like that aren't a reliable metric because there are one hundred reasons why they show the results that they do.
    Yes you fabricated a fairy tale because you said that it was drawn mostly along ethnic lines. If the ethnic composition is 17 percent Russian and 78 percent Ukrainian, as you have stated, then obviously there must be a substantial portion of the Ukrainian section that is in favor of the customs union.

    If you don't believe the poll, can you point to some objective evidence that demonstrates it's fault? Or is it that you simply don't want to believe it? Not only that, but how do you know what the ethnic composition of Ukraine is in the first place? Did you go there and count?

  9. #279
    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 people I've listed have killed much more innocents and created much more global instability than neocons ever have.
    The question was whether or not they were a threat to world peace, not where do neocons rank on the list of threats to world peace.

    Quote Originally Posted by MadLib View Post
    1. I do not believe the US had any significant role in the ouster of Yanukovych. The evidence you and others have presented to this end is circumstantial at best and does not constitute irrefutable proof of a CIA covert operation.
    That's ok if you don't want to believe it. As Julius Caesar said, men freely believe that which they desire. However, there is evidence to support the notion. If it is true, then the US did indeed play a very significant role in the ouster of Yanukovych. What is irrefutable is that Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland helped foment protest against Yanukovych. It is also clear that she was talking on the phone about making Yatsenyuk prime minister before he held the post. Those things in themselves point to a substantial role. If it is true, and there is good reason to believe that it is, that she pressured both Akhmetov and Yanukovych, then there is no doubt of a significant role.

    Not only that, but I never said it was a covert CIA operation.

    Quote Originally Posted by MadLib View Post
    2. Once again, nothing's been forcing Russia to take a position hostile the US efforts towards a democratic world order. Moscow's support of the contemptible regimes of Milosevic, Bashir and Assad and its use of brute force to coerce its former republics into behaving the way it wants is why it's at odds with the US. We cannot have another cold war between two mutually hostile superpowers, and preempting a hostile Russia from rising is a necessary effort to stop this from happening. If Russia wishes to be a democratic and non-aggressive hegemon that does not keep fascist dictators in power in order to spite the US, then I'm perfectly fine with them expanding their influence.
    The problem here is that you want to put forward the notion that it is necessary to preempt the rise of Russia. At the same time you want to say that there is nothing forcing Russia to take a position hostile to the US. It's a ridiculous statement to make. Not only that but the US has shown itself to be hostile to democratically elected leaders such as Hugo Chavez, who merely wanted to use state resources for the benefit of poor people. And as I have stated before, the US was also hostile to someone as benign as Aristide, during the Bush administration. At the same time we protect the Saudi regime, and do not speak up to this day about the alleged mistreatment of King Abdullah's daughters.

    Quote Originally Posted by MadLib View Post
    Not at all. My point is that this agreement, if it actually exists - which is in itself dubious, because the US isn't the sole power in NATO and because Gorbachev had no authority over what other countries decided to do - was made between the United States and the Soviet Union. Since the Soviet Union no longer exists, it's questionable whether such an agreement is still binding.
    So why didn't the US say it had no authority to grant such a guarantee? Gorbhachev had the authority to remove those 300,000 troops and indeed kept his end of the bargain. On the contrary the US simply lied, and that's a big reason why we have the current crisis.

  10. #280
    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


    Hillary Clinton is so full of crap! That's what you call a neocon wanna be!!!!
    She's just trying to get some political capital from the neocon brand.

    What's the real difference between Hillary Clinton and a neo con wannabe? She would seem more of a threat than Dick Cheney, for example.

Page 28 of 29 FirstFirst ... 1826272829 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
  •