• 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!

Do you still feel the same now about our middle east involvement...

Do you still feel the same now about our middle east involvement

  • Total voters
    54
ecofarm said:
It's not only okay for the President. It's okay for any civilian to comment on military action and support any position therein.

"If you don't volunteer, you cannot support military action" is pathetic BS.
Click to expand...

Going much farther than my premise.

First, I referred only to the willingness of a person either to volunteer or fight without the military; not to whether they actually volunteer.

Also, to say that it's "not okay to comment" implies that it should somehow be a crime or a tort. Obviously I don't believe it should. You're free to comment on whatever you like, but that doesn't mean that your comment has any integrity or deserves any respect. (Much like the comments that guy from Duck Dynasty made about gays.)
 
DifferentDrummr said:
First, I referred only to the willingness of a person either to volunteer or fight without the military; not to whether they actually volunteer.
Click to expand...

That's even more stupid. You're basically requiring that your opponent be a ****ing lunatic or their opinion is not legitimate. "Go fight without the military"... what kind of asswipe does that.

Can you see the ignorance folded upon itself in such a moronic position?
 
Montecresto said:
Ad hominem!?!? Ok, well thank you for that, but do remember that you are the one that rushed me with the accusation of dishonesty to begin with. Otherwise, you and I wouldn't even be speaking!
Click to expand...

I addressed what I saw as a politically motivated distortion and untruth with no basis in fact. I didn't suggest that you didn't believe the distortion, so there was no accusation of intentional dishonesty directed at you personally.
 
ecofarm said:
That's even more stupid. You're basically requiring that your opponent be a ****ing lunatic or their opinion is not legitimate. "Go fight without the military"... what kind of asswipe does that.
Click to expand...

Still can't see the difference between being willing to do something and actually doing it, can you?

Bottom line: if you're willing to put someone else through something that you're not willing to go through yourself, you are a piece of fecal matter.
 
Helix said:
the current war is not likely to be completed in hours. the US will most likely be mired down for years, looking for an exit strategy. either that, or we will just bomb and drone a bunch of places, and then gradually ease out of it.
Click to expand...

The exit strategy should be victory.

it's the job of the regional hegemons, such as Saudi Arabia and Iran. not the US.
Click to expand...

I know that you do not like the Europe analogy, however it is appropriate. ISIS has much deeper goals then just creating a caliphate in Iraq and Syria. We must defeat ISIS by whatever means necessary. It is not just a middle east problem. It is an international problem. If we do not cut them down to size in Iraq and Syria, we will be fighting them on the streets in New York. Remember 9/11/01.
 
Montecresto said:
It's the extremes people have gone to defend failed policy. The phony "war on terror" cannot be won, has not been won and will not be won no matter what party is in the White House. But it's job security for the military and the defense contractors as well as other big businesses.
Click to expand...

You would have fit in well with the WW2 era peaceniks who thought....."Those Nazis will never be defeated. We should just appease them".
 
Montecresto said:
So! I suppose in that case it would make me an ally of George Bush on that issue as well. He's the one that stated two months into the war in Iraq that Al Qaeda was decimated. Guess he didn't know who he was fighting.
Click to expand...

Do you have a link to that claim?
 
DifferentDrummr said:
Do you honestly think that the majority is never immature or small-minded? .
Click to expand...

Why? Because they do not and never did want obamacare?


Not at all; just that they have to be willing to do so if they want to earn the right to support the war.
Click to expand...

That is so insane. Does that include your grandma? The disabled? Amputees and paraplegics? Are you the "thought police? What gives you the perceived right to declare what others must be willing to do in order to have a given opinion?
 
German guy said:
I was strongly against the Iraq War in 2003, because I was afraid it would be a huge mistake. Now I feel frustrated because all my fears have been confirmed. On the long run, that war created even a much bigger mess than it was supposed to end.

I feel differently about Afghanistan now. I felt in 2001 and the years on that it was a justified war, and was optimistic about the outcome, that some kind of nation building was possible and would be successful. Now, not anymore.

I was ambivalent about Obama's withdrawal from Iraq. On one side, I found it a good and necessary step, but wasn't sure if the job was really done. And I ultimately knew too few about the situation to make an educated guess whether the time was right or not. Now I feel it was a mistake.
Click to expand...

The mistake was not leaving a contingent of troops behind to prevent what is now going on. We are leaving a contingent behind in Afghanistan.
 
Boo Radley said:
Yes I do. I was still a mistake to recklessly invade these countries, especially Iraq. It was our imperialistic overreach that opened the door for ISIS. The question is will we learn form or mistake or keep making it?
Click to expand...

I don't think you have even a basic understanding of imperialism.
 
ObamacareFail said:
You would have fit in well with the WW2 era peaceniks who thought....."Those Nazis will never be defeated. We should just appease them".
Click to expand...

But I've never advocated for appeasement. And you might fit in good with Pinnochio.
 
ObamacareFail said:
No...I do not.
Click to expand...

Can you tell me if groupthinking up a non-existent WMD case in order to sell a war to congress and the American public that cost hundreds of thousands of lives and $1 trillion U.S. taxpayer dollars qualifies as idiocy? Because if it does I have a long list of candidates for idiot:

George Bush, Dick Cheney, "Scooter" Libby, Karl Rove, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Richard Perle.... Do any of these people qualify as "idiots" in your non-partisan opinion? :confused:
 
ObamacareFail said:
me said:
Do you honestly think that the majority is never immature or small-minded? .
Click to expand...
Why? Because they do not and never did want obamacare?
Click to expand...
Nice dance, but you'll have to answer my question above if you want a response.

That is so insane. Does that include your grandma? The disabled? Amputees and paraplegics?
Click to expand...
So you don't think that the elderly and disabled are as brave as a healthy 18-year-old? That's both patronizing and insulting to them.

Are you the "thought police? What gives you the perceived right to declare what others must be willing to do in order to have a given opinion?
Click to expand...
I realize it seems threatening, but conservatives don't have a monopoly on policing thought. You'll get over it.
 
Ahlevah said:
Can you tell me if groupthinking up a non-existent WMD case in order to sell a war to congress and the American public that cost hundreds of thousands of lives and $1 trillion U.S. taxpayer dollars qualifies as idiocy? Because if it does I have a long list of candidates for idiot:
Click to expand...

You mean the ones Hillary, Reid, Pelosi, Allbright, Kerry, Gore, and many other prominent democrats insisted were there long before Bush became president? BTW....son...they were not non-existent. The weapons in question were located and documented by the first group of inspectors after the 1991 war and admitted to by the Saddam Regime. They were unaccounted for in the long lead up to the 2003 war. The regime was supposed to destroy them in a manner that the UN inspectors could verify. And some of them were located after the 2003 invasion. Just not the massive stockpiles expected.

George Bush, Dick Cheney, "Scooter" Libby, Karl Rove, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Richard Perle.... Do any of these people qualify as "idiots" in your non-partisan opinion? :confused:
Click to expand...

Yes....in my opinion Karl Rove is an idiot. He is one of the main reasons the republicans have run to uncharismatic geriatric RINOS (McCain and Romney) against Obama.

Do you feel better now?
 
DifferentDrummr said:
Nice dance, but you'll have to answer my question above if you want a response.


So you don't think that the elderly and disabled are as brave as a healthy 18-year-old? That's both patronizing and insulting to them.


I realize it seems threatening, but conservatives don't have a monopoly on policing thought. You'll get over it.
Click to expand...

Sorry. We are done. I just can't take you seriously.
 
ObamacareFail said:
You mean the ones Hillary, Reid, Pelosi, Allbright, Kerry, Gore, and many other prominent democrats insisted were there long before Bush became president?
Click to expand...

So much for non-partisanship, eh? ;) But the fact is Bush was the one who wanted Saddam Hussein removed from power, and the neocons in his administration made it their mission in life to make it happen. They did, and now, $1.7 trillion or whatever and change later, Iraqis and U.S. veterans (the ones who didn't die) and their families are paying the price. Meanwhile, these guys are back on Fox once again tossing peanuts from their gallery at Obama on Syria. But when they're asked about whether they bear any responsibility for getting us involved in a war that cost untold Iraqi lives and the lives of 4,500 U.S. servicemen and women their mea culpa is "Oops! We goofed! We thought he still had weapons" or "Our detractors just don't like Jews." (Richard Perle: Don't Blame Neocons for Iraq Crisis)

ObamacareFail said:
BTW....son...they were not non-existent. The weapons in question were located and documented by the first group of inspectors after the 1991 war and admitted to by the Saddam Regime. They were unaccounted for in the long lead up to the 2003 war. The regime was supposed to destroy them in a manner that the UN inspectors could verify. And some of them were located after the 2003 invasion. Just not the massive stockpiles expected.
Click to expand...

The Bush Administration in the Fall of 2002 seemed to believe there was some urgency to invading Iraq. They agitated for a congressional authorization to do just that based on the idea that Iraq was seeking to develop nuclear weapons once again even though Bush's CIA never prepared a National Intelligence Estimate concerning the Iraq threat. And the International Atomic Energy Agency, which had supervised the dismantling of Iraq's nuclear program in the aftermath of the First Gulf War, stated in its 1998 report to the UN Security Council that there was no evidence that Iraq possessed even the capability to produce weapons-grade nuclear materials in any significant quantity (The IAEA in IRAQ: Past Activities and Findings).

ObamacareFail said:
Do you feel better now?
Click to expand...

I'll feel better if you put aside your hatred of Obama for a minute and just admit (like I did) that, where it concerns the invasion of Iraq, we were all snowed and now they're back at it again. It's just too bad Bush listened to them instead of his generals. My father said cynically just before the First Gulf War, "The veterans' hospitals are empty. It's time to fill them up again."
 
Last edited:
DifferentDrummr said:
Bottom line: if you're willing to put someone else through something that you're not willing to go through yourself, you are a piece of fecal matter.
Click to expand...

I'm not willing to personally go and fight crime. Am I therefore a piece of fecal matter for supporting the existence of a police force?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom