Palin leaves open option of war with Russia

slightofjeff

cubbieblue82 wrote:

How is there any difference in meaning between the 2 phrases?

How can you interpret that our leaders our sending our soldiers out as a "task that is from God" as different from God's plan? They're the same damn thing!

You're missing the point.

It's the "Pray that" that precedes her comments that makes all the difference.

The way Gibson originally phrased the quote, it's as if Palin firmly and 100 percent believes that what we are doing is ordained from God.

The way she ACTUALLY said it shows that she is HOPING what we are doing is right, and asking for God's guidance in order to do what's right.

Huge, huge difference.

If you are totally offended that she used the word "God" or talked about "prayer" -- well, that's one thing.

But to act as if she thinks we are on some kind of holy war is grossly disingenuous and highly unfair.

JD Sal

Solat13 wrote:

You're right I did use a poor example. But Russia's response to Georgia's initial move was a little excessive. The thing is if Georgia was in NATO, Russia's response probably wouldn't have been as large and Georgia probably wouldn't have tried to reclaim the breakaway provinces and the conflict probably never would have happened.

I agree that Russia's response was excessive. I also thought John McCain's line about how we're all "Georgians" was ridiculous.

cubbieblue82

slightofjeff wrote:

And this is my point exactly. That's not the full quote Palin said in church.

She asked to "PRAY THAT our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God."

There's a difference, and a very important one.

I thought her answer to this question was the best one of the entire interview.

Now you are paraphrasing her. I really don't see such a fundamental difference here. How can anyone say that the Iraq war is a task that is from God.

I guess it's a theological difference but I really don't see the interpretation you are pushing here.

slightofjeff

cubbieblue82 wrote:

Now you are paraphrasing her. I really don't see such a fundamental difference here. How can anyone say that the Iraq war is a task that is from God.

I guess it's a theological difference but I really don't see the interpretation you are pushing here.

I answered it above, probably at the same time you were typing this response.

She was praying for God's guidance, which is what Christians do.

She's not a "religious nutjob," as some people seem to want to make her out to be. She's just religious.

cubbieblue82

slightofjeff wrote:

I answered it above, probably at the same time you were typing this response.

She was praying for God's guidance, which is what Christians do.

Yep I didn't see your response until I posted!

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree here.

I just think it's scary that people invoke God as a justification for such a morally ambiguous war.

slightofjeff

cubbieblue82 wrote:

Yep I didn't see your response until I posted!

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree here.

I just think it's scary that people invoke God as a justification for such a morally ambiguous war.

I don't think she's using God to justify it at all.

Christians pray for guidance. That's all she's doing there.

Wobbie

slightofjeff wrote:

And this is my point exactly. That's not the full quote Palin said in church.

She asked to "PRAY THAT our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God."

There's a difference, and a very important one.

I thought her answer to this question was the best one of the entire interview.

OK - I'll give you that, But me? I'd just as soon we left GOD out of this.

Is the following a "liberal media" distortion, as well? I saw the interview and I don't think so. "stumped" and "stared blankly," etc. probably show a liberal slant but are accurate of Palin's response...

In her first major interview as the Republican vice presidential nominee, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin was stumped when asked about the so-called "Bush Doctrine," unable to answer whether she agreed with the six-year-old U.S. policy of military preemption.

Asked by ABC News' Charlie Gibson whether she supported the Bush Doctrine, Palin stared blankly for a moment before turning the question back on Gibson. "In what respect?"

The ABC anchor responded, "Well, what do you interpret it to be?" clearly testing her knowledge of the policy that has been in place since September 2002, before the Iraq war.

Palin couldn't say, offering an answer that didn't even mention preemption. "I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell-bent in destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made, and with new leadership, and that's the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better."

Gibson, who clearly felt he had not received a sufficient answer to the question he had asked, proceeded to define the Bush Doctrine for the governor. According to Bush's National Security Strategy from September 2002: "While the United States will constantly strive to enlist the support of the international community, we will not hesitate to act alone, if necessary, to exercise our right of self defense by acting preemptively against such terrorists, to prevent them from doing harm against our people and our country."

Thus, Gibson pressed Palin. "The Bush Doctrine is we have the right to self-defense, pre-emptive strike against any country we think is going to attack us," he noted. "Do you agree with it?"

Finally, Palin came close to offering an opinion on preemption. "Charlie, if there is enough intelligent and legitimate evidence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country," she said.

They key point she missed is that Bush decided we would invade Iraq even though he admitted the threat was not "imminent." He just felt the threat was there.

cubbieblue82

slightofjeff wrote:

I don't think she's using God to justify it at all.

Christians pray for guidance. That's all she's doing there.

I think that's a little questionable.

I take your interpretation as that she is "hoping/praying/whatever" that US forces are on a task from God. That, to me anyway, is a very scary thought when this war is clearly not so black and white of an issue.

I do realize it's open to interpretation though.

slightofjeff

imalive wrote:

OK - I'll give you that, But me? I'd just as soon we left GOD out of this.

Is the following a "liberal media" distortion, as well? I saw the interview and I don't think so. "stumped" and "stared blankly," etc. probably show a liberal slant but are accurate of Palin's response...

In her first major interview as the Republican vice presidential nominee, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin was stumped when asked about the so-called "Bush Doctrine," unable to answer whether she agreed with the six-year-old U.S. policy of military preemption.

Asked by ABC News' Charlie Gibson whether she supported the Bush Doctrine, Palin stared blankly for a moment before turning the question back on Gibson. "In what respect?"

The ABC anchor responded, "Well, what do you interpret it to be?" clearly testing her knowledge of the policy that has been in place since September 2002, before the Iraq war.

Palin couldn't say, offering an answer that didn't even mention preemption. "I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell-bent in destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made, and with new leadership, and that's the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better."

Gibson, who clearly felt he had not received a sufficient answer to the question he had asked, proceeded to define the Bush Doctrine for the governor. According to Bush's National Security Strategy from September 2002: "While the United States will constantly strive to enlist the support of the international community, we will not hesitate to act alone, if necessary, to exercise our right of self defense by acting preemptively against such terrorists, to prevent them from doing harm against our people and our country."

Thus, Gibson pressed Palin. "The Bush Doctrine is we have the right to self-defense, pre-emptive strike against any country we think is going to attack us," he noted. "Do you agree with it?"

Finally, Palin came close to offering an opinion on preemption. "Charlie, if there is enough intelligent and legitimate evidence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country," she said.

They key point she missed is that Bush decided we would invade Iraq even though he admitted the threat was not "imminent." He just felt the threat was there.

Who wrote the part in bold? I'm just asking. I like to know my sources on analytical pieces.

Wobbie

slightofjeff wrote:

She was praying for God's guidance, which is what Christians do.

to paraphase an old saying..... "pray in one hand and spit in the other." Great way to conduct foreign policy.

binger

She was praying for God's guidance, which is what Christians do.

Don't Muslims do the same with 'Allah be willing' or 'praise be to Allah.'?

cubbieblue82

binger wrote:

She was praying for God's guidance, which is what Christians do.

Don't Muslims do the same with 'Allah be willing' or 'praise be to Allah.'?

I really don't see how she is praying for God's guidance.

She is praying that our war is a "task from God."

It probably falls down to an issue of semantics, but I don't want my foreign leaders relying on this type of "guidance" when we are at war. I think that we've already seen where that leads us. Remember GW thinks God wanted him in the White House.

Commy

wait her son's name is Track?

inmytree

sweet...let's beat the drums of war with Iran and Russia....

we all know since Alaska is so close to Russia, she knows how to handle them...

yeah, she's ready....to be a warmonger....

RainDog

Commy wrote:

wait her son's name is Track?

Better. Track Enfield.

Track Enfield Palin.

Seriously.

OffHeGoes29

homeratbat wrote:

i posted this before in a different thread but i'd still love to know why she said her son is serving for the "right reason" and what exactly then would the "wrong" reason to serve your country in war be?! gibson should have asked her that!! plus when you do watch look how she has 0 clue what the "Bush doctrine" is...she said "what part" then never gave a real answer

Money, thats the wrong reason. But then again thats why 95% of people join, not going to lie to you.