View Poll Results: A War-Hawk for 2016

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

    4 3.39%
  • No

    114 96.61%
Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 71

Thread: A War-Hawk for 2016?

  1. #61
    Sage

    Mason66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,434

    Re: A War-Hawk for 2016?

    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    No way. A war-hawk is the last thing we need for 2016. After nearly a century of perpetual war, it's about damn time we bring our boys home and stop nitpicking fights overseas.
    Do you know what that term means?

  2. #62
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ask the NSA
    Last Seen
    07-24-16 @ 01:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    5,849
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: A War-Hawk for 2016?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mason66 View Post
    Do you know what that term means?
    Yeah, that's kinda why I used it....

  3. #63
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,177

    Re: A War-Hawk for 2016?

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    False?!? This criticism has much company in elements on both fringes, one of which you reside.
    I'd suggest you'd be wiser to spend your time in analysis of the subject matter rather than the posters. You might have better luck in getting something right.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  4. #64
    Guru
    sawdust's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    03-04-16 @ 09:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,177

    Re: A War-Hawk for 2016?

    Quote Originally Posted by ModerateGOP View Post
    Do we need a war-hawk as the next President?

    I think we need someone who will roll up there sleeves and deal with Russia, Ukraine, the Mid-East, ISIS and North Africa. Each one of these areas plus a few other issues like Domestic Terrorism in Europe are some of Obama's failures. Foreign Policy used to be his strong suit. Not anymore!

    How many of you agree with me that we need a war-hawk as President? And no. I am not talking about Hillary.
    We need someone who is able to construct a rational foreign policy where our allies can count on us and our enemies respect our power. They don't need to go to war but should be willing to understand international threats and be prepared to do what it takes to face them. I wouldn't call that a war hawk. I would call that change you can actually believe in.
    "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury." Attributed to Alexander Tytler

  5. #65
    Sage

    Mason66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,434

    Re: A War-Hawk for 2016?

    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    Yeah, that's kinda why I used it....
    Perpetual means constant.

    After World War I, what war was being fought before World War II started?

  6. #66
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ask the NSA
    Last Seen
    07-24-16 @ 01:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    5,849
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: A War-Hawk for 2016?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mason66 View Post
    Perpetual means constant.

    After World War I, what war was being fought before World War II started?
    Well there was US involvement in the Russian Civil War, as well as the occupation of Haiti and the Dominican Republic.

  7. #67
    Sage
    Moot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:43 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    27,460

    Re: A War-Hawk for 2016?

    Quote Originally Posted by Born Free View Post
    Sorry but if you can't determine a good commander in chief from a bad one, no explaining from me will help you. From your comment all past presidents were all excellent commanders in chiefs.
    So you can't answer the question, huh?

  8. #68
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: A War-Hawk for 2016?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    America does not have kings or noblemen. That's part of the European system that was soundly rejected by those who founded this country. “All men are created equal…” was specifically, a rejection of the idea, still observed in much of Europe, that holds some men to be superior to others simply for having been born into higher levels of nobility/royalty.
    The point Helix is making that the rulers IE law makers physically led troops into war not sat in a cushy office while ordering men to their deaths. The other point he made is that if those law makers had to physically lead troops into battle then they would be less eager to bring us into another war. Basically cock sucking neocon pieces of **** like John McCain wouldn't be screaming for war everytime something went on in the world we did not like if they had to physically lead troops into battle, nor would they be trying to provoke countries into attacking us in order to get us into war.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  9. #69
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

    Re: A War-Hawk for 2016?

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    The point Helix is making that the rulers IE law makers physically led troops into war not sat in a cushy office while ordering men to their deaths. The other point he made is that if those law makers had to physically lead troops into battle then they would be less eager to bring us into another war. Basically cock sucking neocon pieces of **** like John McCain wouldn't be screaming for war everytime something went on in the world we did not like if they had to physically lead troops into battle, nor would they be trying to provoke countries into attacking us in order to get us into war.
    Do you really want our troops to be led into battle by leaders as incompetent as those who would be doing so under that proposal?
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  10. #70
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: A War-Hawk for 2016?

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    I'd suggest you'd be wiser to spend your time in analysis of the subject matter rather than the posters. You might have better luck in getting something right.
    Don't need those either.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 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
  •