• 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!

It appears we are headed to War!!!!

So, if Trump is doing what liberals favor, why are you criticizing it? You can't oppose both not meeting Kim and meeting him just because it's Trump. That's a child's reaction.

I must've missed where sonofdaedalus was criticizing trump for wanting to meet with kim. Can you link to it?
 
Schiff is a feckless prig who leaks like a sieve. When someone gives testimony in a SCIF and it hits CNN before they even leave the building, that's Schiff and his partisan hack cohorts.

Of course you can prove these leaks right? And who was it that ran to trump to leak details of the investigation and then await instruction?
 
Both based on a lie which sort of makes it hard to blame the congress that much. The Gulf of Tonkin incident was a lie and WMD's in Iraq was a lie. The administrations of both governments knew they were lies. It is a bit harder to figure out if the two congresses of those times knew they were lies or not. But there is no question that the two administrations involved both knew that the rational used were lies.

Heard that old bugger Pat Buchanon on C-span yesterday STILL talking that domino theory BS that was the overarching and totally racist mentality that was also used as justification for fighting in Vietnam. The domino theory has been shouted down probably more than any US foreign policy provocation ever but there he is, Buchanon must think we can't recognize it for what it is after all these years.

There is plenty of question about WMDs in Iraq. Even Sadaam thought he had them. Regardless, its congresses job to check the President, and the peoples to check the govt. That even starts with not giving the President more power than neccesary. So they, and WE are all at plenty of fault, regardless who is President.
 
There is plenty of question about WMDs in Iraq. Even Sadaam thought he had them. Regardless, its congresses job to check the President, and the peoples to check the govt. That even starts with not giving the President more power than neccesary. So they, and WE are all at plenty of fault, regardless who is President.

There is no argument for WMD's in Iraq and there never was. Everybody but the conspiracy theorists knows it. Your just making excuses for the worst foreign policy decision in the history of the country.

But don't worry...the guy in the WH now has a much greater field of opportunity to surpass the worst foreign policy decision in the history of the country and make the NEW worst foreign policy decision in the history of the country.
 
Last edited:
There is no argument for WMD's in Iraq and there never was. Everybody but the conspiracy theorists knows it. Your just making excuses for the worst foreign policy decision in the history of the country.

But don't worry...the guy in the WH now has a much greater field of opportunity to surpass the worst foreign policy decision in the history of the country and make the NEW worst foreign policy decision in the history of the country.

Im arguing it, as many others have, therefore there is argument. But hey keep blaming others for your own enabling.
 
Or...maybe to get someone to THINK there is interest in taking the country to war.

?

In fact, the country WAS taken to war under fraud, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. And, Bolton was a major cheerleader for that effort.

Now that he is on Team Trump, those of us who were paying attention in '03 are starting to experience Deja Vu, all over again.
 
I don't like the Bolton hiring. However, if Trump were set on war, why not hire Bolton from day one? Let's remember, too, that NK has been allowed to continue to develop nuclear capabilities for years and now that they either have or are close to a deliverable weapon, it falls on Trump to do something about it. I find it interesting that the same people who have said that Trump would get us in a war are also criticizing the decision to meet Kim Jung Un as elevating him way above his level of importance. That might be true in the short term but if it diffuses the situation, who cares? I'm thinking that the same overture, if made by Obama, would have been gushed over as statesman-like. It seems that Trump can't win with some people no matter what approach he takes.

Let's get the facts straight first.

*Reagan invades the great threat to the west called Grenada, 1983 and was in office in 1986 when plutonium was first produced in a North Korean reactor. They continued their program under President George H.W. Bush, producing enough plutonium to make 1–2 bombs. Where was the drumbeat for war ?

(BTW, Iran saw what happened to Iraq who didn't have nukes and what didn't happen to N. Korea...because they did)

*Clinton's deal was two light-water reactors, extremely difficult if even possible to create fuel for nukes, In exchange, NK dropped it nuke fuel enrichment program. The NK's did. This was under 'dad' not KJU.

*Geo. W. Bush came in and that the deal amounted appeasement. Then Bush with a very doubtful and unspecified claim that NK violated the agreement. Bush admin. didn’t like the concept of the deal itself. Giving things to the North Koreans to get them to do things we wanted was rewarding misbehavior. Might they have become a nuclear power anyway? Maybe. But it seems very hard to argue that they would have gotten there as quickly as they did or would even be there today if the US had continued with the quite minor amounts of aid the Agreed Framework required. Bush abrogated the Clinton deal. NK again starts again to enrich plutonium.

*Yes, Obama's agreement sent starving people food. So did others. Bush even let the NKs off after being caught red-handed with counterfeiting $150 million. But Obama did no less and arguably less damage than any of his predecessors.

BTW, when Obama offered to discuss meeting KJU, the right and repub said he was appeasing NK, being weak and manipulated. Now Trump offers the same, he's being a forward thinking statesman. (recall that on one TV address, Obama for the right, wore the wrong colored suit...can you imagine ?)

Bolton under W, wanted war with Iran, Bush consulted his other advisers and the CFR who all told him, not yet, we'll get back to you.

So it is the right since Reagan (1980) that has been the quickest to seek war as a solution to almost everything. (the modern right of today, need to pump up and pound their chests on these matters, to appear tough) Now of course, except any economic war, which messes with these risk-averse, capitalists...and their profits.

Oh and the minds of the right...the left is always wrong no matter what [it] does...all of the time. The right's concerns are power and profits by any means whatsoever, the country be damned.
 
Last edited:
?

In fact, the country WAS taken to war under fraud, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. And, Bolton was a major cheerleader for that effort.

Now that he is on Team Trump, those of us who were paying attention in '03 are starting to experience Deja Vu, all over again.

Perhaps you should leave the past where it belongs. There's a new Sheriff in town.
 
There are no questions about WMDs in Iraq. Even Geo. Will wrote that what could be, had already been shipped to Syria.

Under sanctions, the Iraqi nuke program was ended. Scientists from other countries even went home.

Around 1990-91 after Sadam had used chemical weapons we sold him. Sadam was met with silence over his plans for Kuwait. Being a natural born warmonger and sadistic leader, he invaded Kuwait, just what the rent-seeking war mongers on the right love. To many of them, there is nothing better or more easily profitable than a...good hot war. Plus, these warmongers wren't going to do any of the killing and dying.

The book 'Bomb in My Yard' was all hype to sell it. The 'bomb' was an old rusty centrifuge buried for 10 years, unusable and unreconstruct-able...i.e., useless and per the IAEA inspectors.
 
Somebody is dreaming. War is not only history's greatest means of projecting power but also one of the greatest profit centers. Wars therefore...will never end.

As Kant wrote at the end because of this, history will always be...written in blood.

The Dutch East Indies Trading Co. found this out in the 1600s. (1602) Considered to be the first ever multinational company. It was a huge organization, with a foothold in almost every country, employing more than 200 ships and several thousand men.

The beauty of this first 'trading company' is that it was granted semi-governmental powers (as well as a 21 year monopoly of spice) in that it was able to begin wars, prosecute trade by force if necessary. There you have the great and glorious beginning of international corp. relations and practices.

Nothing has changed much since except now a country can infiltrate (CIA) or just invade. Opium wars, oil coups, the US navy as racketeer. (Gen. Smedley Butler...'War is a Racket' 'profits are measured in dollars, losses measured in lives.'
 
Somebody is dreaming. War is not only history's greatest means of projecting power but also one of the greatest profit centers. Wars therefore...will never end.

As Kant wrote at the end because of this, history will always be...written in blood.

The Dutch East Indies Trading Co. found this out in the 1600s. (1602) Considered to be the first ever multinational company. It was a huge organization, with a foothold in almost every country, employing more than 200 ships and several thousand men.

The beauty of this first 'trading company' is that it was granted semi-governmental powers (as well as a 21 year monopoly of spice) in that it was able to begin wars, prosecute trade by force if necessary. There you have the great and glorious beginning of international corp. relations and practices.

Nothing has changed much since except now a country can infiltrate (CIA) or just invade. Opium wars, oil coups, the US navy as racketeer. (Gen. Smedley Butler...'War is a Racket' 'profits are measured in dollars, losses measured in lives.'

I think we have taken this to something of an extreme though. We have an all volunteer military that we just won't let come home at all apparently. I realize they signed up for this. But I don't think they thought they were signing up for endless strings of tours in combat zones. There is just so much IMO that military families can take before they will just flat wear out. Even for the singles, living in sand pits 1 out of every 3 years at best is a bit more than they likely bargained for. They will give us their best every time I am convinced. But at some point their best just won't be what it was.
 
Let's get the facts straight first.

*Reagan invades the great threat to the west called Grenada, 1983 and was in office in 1986 when plutonium was first produced in a North Korean reactor. They continued their program under President George H.W. Bush, producing enough plutonium to make 1–2 bombs. Where was the drumbeat for war ?

(BTW, Iran saw what happened to Iraq who didn't have nukes and what didn't happen to N. Korea...because they did)

*Clinton's deal was two light-water reactors, extremely difficult if even possible to create fuel for nukes, In exchange, NK dropped it nuke fuel enrichment program. The NK's did. This was under 'dad' not KJU.

*Geo. W. Bush came in and that the deal amounted appeasement. Then Bush with a very doubtful and unspecified claim that NK violated the agreement. Bush admin. didn’t like the concept of the deal itself. Giving things to the North Koreans to get them to do things we wanted was rewarding misbehavior. Might they have become a nuclear power anyway? Maybe. But it seems very hard to argue that they would have gotten there as quickly as they did or would even be there today if the US had continued with the quite minor amounts of aid the Agreed Framework required. Bush abrogated the Clinton deal. NK again starts again to enrich plutonium.

*Yes, Obama's agreement sent starving people food. So did others. Bush even let the NKs off after being caught red-handed with counterfeiting $150 million. But Obama did no less and arguably less damage than any of his predecessors.

BTW, when Obama offered to discuss meeting KJU, the right and repub said he was appeasing NK, being weak and manipulated. Now Trump offers the same, he's being a forward thinking statesman. (recall that on one TV address, Obama for the right, wore the wrong colored suit...can you imagine ?)

Bolton under W, wanted war with Iran, Bush consulted his other advisers and the CFR who all told him, not yet, we'll get back to you.

So it is the right since Reagan (1980) that has been the quickest to seek war as a solution to almost everything. (the modern right of today, need to pump up and pound their chests on these matters, to appear tough) Now of course, except any economic war, which messes with these risk-averse, capitalists...and their profits.

Oh and the minds of the right...the left is always wrong no matter what [it] does...all of the time. The right's concerns are power and profits by any means whatsoever, the country be damned.


All the guys up to now have failed vis a vis N. Korea, including your buddies Clinton and Obama. That's why we are where we are. BTW, I'm a life long conservative and the very last thing I ever want is war. However, there is a difference between not wanting war but being prepared in the eventuality it comes, and being utterly averse to it under almost all circumstances, which is where the modern left is. War is the last resort and then it must be the correct war, prosecuted in the correct way at the correct time.
 
Perhaps you should leave the past where it belongs. There's a new Sheriff in town.

Those who ignore the lessons of history are condemned to repeat the mistakes of history. Gosh, it's gonna be FUN! A new Sheriff, and he's just as corrupt as the old Sheriff. Let's wallow in the errors of our past administrations.
 
Why?

Have you some definite ability to see into the future where he takes us into a new war?

Bolton never saw a war he didn't like (so long as he didn't have to fight it). If you don't wish to educate yourself on neocon philosophy then that is on you.
 
It appears we are not going to War.

It appears that you were lying about us going to war.

I swear sometimes I think liberals would love us to go to war to bankrupt our country just so they can tell us how bad Trump truly is. Smh
 
No, it proves my point. It's been leak free because they have nothing worth leaking.

Flynn pleading guilty to lying wasn't leak-worthy?
Papadopolous pleading guilty to lying wasn't leak-worthy?
Van der Zwaan pleading guilty to lying wasn't leak-worthy?
Manafort laundering money wasn't leak-worthy?
Mueller charging 13 Russians for attempted election interference wasn't leak-worthy?
 
Flynn pleading guilty to lying wasn't leak-worthy?
Papadopolous pleading guilty to lying wasn't leak-worthy?
Van der Zwaan pleading guilty to lying wasn't leak-worthy?
Manafort laundering money wasn't leak-worthy?
Mueller charging 13 Russians for attempted election interference wasn't leak-worthy?

I was referencing having something leak worthy in regard to collusion with the Russians by the Trump campaign. That is what Mueller is charged with investigating. None of these things have anything to do with it. These leaks also make my point. If Mueller had anything regarding the actual thing he's supposed to investigate, we'd have known long ago. Yet, it's been a year and we've seen nothing, no matter how much he fishes.
 
It appears we are not going to War.

It appears that you were lying about us going to war.

I swear sometimes I think liberals would love us to go to war to bankrupt our country just so they can tell us how bad Trump truly is. Smh

This post is nothing but pathetic lies...
 
By watching him.

shrug...

I'd say you aren't watching him very closely...in fact, I'd say you only see what the Mainstream Media wants you to see.
 
Back
Top Bottom