View Poll Results: Thoughts on Presidents Speech about ISIS and US Actions?

Voters
67. You may not vote on this poll
  • Positive

    13 19.40%
  • Negative

    30 44.78%
  • Other

    24 35.82%
Page 41 of 42 FirstFirst ... 3139404142 LastLast
Results 401 to 410 of 419

Thread: Thoughts on Presidents Speech about ISIS and US Actions?

  1. #401
    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: Thoughts on Presidents Speech about ISIS and US Actions?

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Well, I will agree with you that this is being hyped out of proportion. But many of the hypsters, are republicans like Graham and McCain.
    Yes, that is why it works so well for the Dems...the Neocons love it and they look strong to the masses.

    They probably lose few votes on the lib side and definitely gain many on the undecided/borderline Republican side.


    Of course, the whole thing is moronic and pandering to paranoia...but when did that ever stop a POTUS before?

  2. #402
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Thoughts on Presidents Speech about ISIS and US Actions?

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    Yes, that is why it works so well for the Dems...the Neocons love it and they look strong to the masses.

    They probably lose few votes on the lib side and definitely gain many on the undecided/borderline Republican side.


    Of course, the whole thing is moronic and pandering to paranoia...but when did that ever stop a POTUS before?
    Ah yes, point well taken.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  3. #403
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,035

    Re: Thoughts on Presidents Speech about ISIS and US Actions?

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    So you missed it. One country left NATO and hasn't been invaded over it, is there not more then one country that had left the USSR that didn't get invaded?
    No country was either forced to join NATO, or punished for wanting to leave. The opposite is the case with the Soviet Union. When the Soviet Union was breaking up, countries rushed to flee.

  4. #404
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Thoughts on Presidents Speech about ISIS and US Actions?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    No country was either forced to join NATO, or punished for wanting to leave. The opposite is the case with the Soviet Union. When the Soviet Union was breaking up, countries rushed to flee.
    Well if Russia's to be accused of "bribing" Ukraine, then so has the US/EU, and the countries that left the Soviet Union weren't punished or invaded either.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  5. #405
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,035

    Re: Thoughts on Presidents Speech about ISIS and US Actions?

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Well if Russia's to be accused of "bribing" Ukraine, then so has the US/EU, and the countries that left the Soviet Union weren't punished or invaded either.
    Russia isn't bribing Ukraine. Russia invaded Ukraine, and seized territory through the use of military force. As for the idea that countries that wished to leave the Soviet Union weren't punished, perhaps you should check with the Czechs or the Hungarians before you make that claim.

  6. #406
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Thoughts on Presidents Speech about ISIS and US Actions?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Russia isn't bribing Ukraine. Russia invaded Ukraine, and seized territory through the use of military force. As for the idea that countries that wished to leave the Soviet Union weren't punished, perhaps you should check with the Czechs or the Hungarians before you make that claim.
    Russia is responding to US/EU intrigue in Kiev, and justifiably so. And if you'll look at my post again, you'll see that I was challenging your assertion that because you can point to one country, France, that has withdrawn from the EU, has any relevance, since there are several countries that withdrew from the Soviet Union without repercussion.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  7. #407
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,035

    Re: Thoughts on Presidents Speech about ISIS and US Actions?

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Russia is responding to US/EU intrigue in Kiev, and justifiably so.
    Complete and utter bull****. The US/EU strengthening their relationship with Ukraine is not justification to invade and seize Crimea.

    And if you'll look at my post again, you'll see that I was challenging your assertion that because you can point to one country, France, that has withdrawn from the EU, has any relevance, since there are several countries that withdrew from the Soviet Union without repercussion.
    Sure. When the Soviet Union collapsed. Prior to that, attempting to withdraw was a decision that brought on the tanks.

  8. #408
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Thoughts on Presidents Speech about ISIS and US Actions?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Complete and utter bull****. The US/EU strengthening their relationship with Ukraine is not justification to invade and seize Crimea.



    Sure. When the Soviet Union collapsed. Prior to that, attempting to withdraw was a decision that brought on the tanks.
    Crimea was annexed by popular referendum, that's something you need to deal with, like it or not!! And the Ukraine deciding not to do business with the EU brought on regime change! So your position fails.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  9. #409
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,035

    Re: Thoughts on Presidents Speech about ISIS and US Actions?

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Crimea was annexed by popular referendum, that's something you need to deal with, like it or not!
    No, Crimea was invaded, and Russia then sent troops into Eastern Ukraine, both of which wern unjustifiable acts. Crimeans were then offered a fixed election in which they were not allowed to determine what they wanted to vote on.

    For someone who claims to be so against imperialism and the like, you sure are quick to rush to support it when it contradicts US foreign policy. Leading us back again to the point that that is your one consistent position.

  10. #410
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Thoughts on Presidents Speech about ISIS and US Actions?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    No, Crimea was invaded, and Russia then sent troops into Eastern Ukraine, both of which wern unjustifiable acts. Crimeans were then offered a fixed election in which they were not allowed to determine what they wanted to vote on.

    For someone who claims to be so against imperialism and the like, you sure are quick to rush to support it when it contradicts US foreign policy. Leading us back again to the point that that is your one consistent position.
    And your one consistent position is your hypocritical support of US violation of sovereign borders while wringing your hands over perceived Russian violations of the same.

    Political legitimacy is in the eye of the beholder, and in fact, there is an argument for saying that Ukraine’s interim government is not legitimate at all.

    In early March, Stefan Soesanto, a Non-Resident Kelly Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, wrote in to Lawfare discussing this very possibility:

    “In its case Somalia vs. Woodhouse Drake & Carey, the High Court of the United Kingdom ruled that a new government derives its legitimacy through three factors: (1) whether it is the constitutional government of the state, (2) the degree, nature, and stability of administrative control over state territory, (3) and the nature of its dealings with other governments.

    “Ascertaining the legitimacy of the interim government in Kiev is quite tricky. According to Article 111 of the Ukrainian constitution, the President can only be impeached from office by parliament through ‘no less than three-quarters of its constitutional composition.’ On February 22, 2014 the Ukrainian parliament voted 328-0 to impeach President Yanukovych who fled to Russia the night prior. However for an effective impeachment under constitutional rules the 449-seated parliament would have needed 337 votes to remove Yanukovych from office. Thus under the current constitution, Yanukovych is still the incumbent and legitimate President of the Ukraine.”

    If it is the case that the interim government put in place after Yanukovych fled is not a legitimate ruling authority in Ukraine, this gives Russia a much stronger legal position. According to Mr. Soesanto, what Russia has argued is that:

    1) The interim Ukrainian government is not legitimate because it violently usurped power in a coup, forcing President Yanukovych to flee the country after threatening his life;
    2) The interim government is pushing a nationalistic agenda, which threatens the human rights of the ethnic Russian minority in the country;
    3) Russia faced a humanitarian crisis on its border due to lawlessness and “uncontrolled crime” perpetrated through revolutionary and nationalistic fervor against ethnic Russians;
    4) The Russian Federation, under Article 61(2) of its constitution, “guarantees its citizens defense and patronage beyond its boundaries”;
    5) Both the legitimate President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, and the Prime Minister of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea requested Russian military forces intervene to provide security for the Crimean region and to stabilize the political violence in the country.
    Under the condition that Ukraine’s interim government is not a legitimate authority, Russia’s actions in Crimea would appear on the surface to be supported by international law, rather than in violation of them: military forces entered legally after being invited by the leader of the country and of the region the troops remained in, and with an illegitimate federal government in place, Crimea’s secession referendum was a clear expression of self-determination.


    http://www.diplomaticourier.com/news...d-russia-apart
    Last edited by Montecresto; 09-18-14 at 12:55 AM.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

Page 41 of 42 FirstFirst ... 3139404142 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
  •