some intelligent topic for you

24567…19

Comments

  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    Success in Iraq?

    That's like taking a broom to the beach and trying to sweep up the sand.

    Ethnic cleansing of the middle east will not be labeled a success unless it's a genocide and several generations after the fact.

    Bush's legacy will most likely be looked back on as the antagonist to world war III
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • puremagic
    puremagic Posts: 1,907
    jlew24asu wrote:
    IF Iraq became a success why would bush still be looked at as a failure?

    remember, shortly after 9/11 he had a 85% approval rating.

    failure to capture osama? what else? cant pin him on the economy. (no im not defending bush, just discussing)


    A success in Iraq is not a success in the Middle East as a whole. You still have Israel and the Palestine issue. You have economic issues. You most certainly will still have the terrorist factor. With U.S. military bases being built in Iraq, the potential for future tension with Iran, Russia and China are not out of the question.

    Bush's legacy is marred by his non-existent domestic policies and his foreign policies. His most grievous failure was to his Oath of the Office of the President to uphold the Constitution, that legacy will affect generation after generation of Americans.
    SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    puremagic wrote:
    A success in Iraq is not a success in the Middle East as a whole. You still have Israel and the Palestine issue. You have economic issues. You most certainly will still have the terrorist factor. With U.S. military bases being built in Iraq, the potential for future tension with Iran, Russia and China are not out of the question.

    I agree. this is purely hypothetically. but if the Iraq issue is fixed. I think everyone would put the focus on the Israel issue and the Iran problem might go away. and depending who is the next president, we might actually become friends with Iran. but if Iran goes forward with getting a nuke bomb that wont help anything.
    puremagic wrote:
    Bush's legacy is marred by his non-existent domestic policies and his foreign policies. His most grievous failure was to his Oath of the Office of the President to uphold the Constitution, that legacy will affect generation after generation of Americans.

    little extreme dont ya think? if Iraq is a success he most certainly will be looked at favorably. but not the best or the worst.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    jlew24asu wrote:
    being christian has nothing to do with it. sometimes being "free" is better then living under the lock and key of a Islamic dictator.

    but seems impossible to debate that with you being how you feel "free" is somehow a negative thing.

    you think that is the way they see it? that we are just freedom-bringers bearing gifts to islam? come on man, you're smarter than that.

    way to twist my words though. freedom is a negative right, not a negative thing. it's not like a right to bear arms or a right to do x, y, and z. it's more a denial of someone else's right to interfere with you in some way. and in that sense, to people in iraq (as the last few years have shown) they see what's going on as trading lack of freedom under an islamic dictator for lack of freedom under christian invaders.

    how come when islam blows something up, you say it's about the violence of their religion, but when america invades iraq you deny that there is any way they can perceive it on religious terms?

    as to the other parts of bush's legacy, those points aren't all far left talking points. there are a LOT of right wingers and conservatives that are very uncomfortable with his wire-tapping programs and similar measures. bush's legacy is questionable regardless of success in iraq. success in iraq makes it a mixed bag from history's perspective at best. failure makes his legacy a disaster.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    soulsinging wrote:
    you think that is the way they see it? that we are just freedom-bringers bearing gifts to islam? come on man, you're smarter than that.
    no no, Its my personal opinion that freedom is better then living under an Islamic dictator. its sad, but I'm sure many muslims would actually prefer the latter.
    soulsinging wrote:
    way to twist my words though. freedom is a negative right, not a negative thing. it's not like a right to bear arms or a right to do x, y, and z. it's more a denial of someone else's right to interfere with you in some way. and in that sense, to people in iraq (as the last few years have shown) they see what's going on as trading lack of freedom under an islamic dictator for lack of freedom under christian invaders.
    I disgree. being free can never be used in a negative sense. we are human beings, not to be controlled by anyone other then our own minds.
    soulsinging wrote:
    how come when islam blows something up, you say it's about the violence of their religion, but when america invades iraq you deny that there is any way they can perceive it on religious terms?

    are we bombing in the name of jesus? are we air dropping bibles? I dont get what you are saying.

    conservative Islam says people should die if they are now followers of the great allah.

    death is never an option even for the most extreme side of Christianity.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    jlew24asu wrote:
    no no, Its my personal opinion that freedom is better then living under an Islamic dictator. its sad, but I'm sure many muslims would actually prefer the latter.

    perhaps. i see that as their choice though and i also see it as a large reason why iraq is an inevitable failure. we simply cannot force them to be what we want. it's why we failed in vietnam. the south vietnamese mostly WANTED a unified vietnam, even if it was communist.
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I disgree. being free can never be used in a negative sense. we are human beings, not to be controlled by anyone other then our own minds.

    you're not much of a philosopher. you can't see negative without equating it to "bad thing" which is not at all the sense in which i have been using it. when i see freedom is a negative it means "absence, not presence." a right to bear arms can be described in positive terms... i am allowed carry a gun. a right to health care means i am allowed to have a doctor. a right to freedom is... i am allowed to... what? do what i want? even the most liberal libertarian is not comfortable saying freedom is a right to do ANYTHING you want. it is defined as the absence of restraint from others. in that sense it is a negative. it is not the presence of a bundle of rights or allowed actions, it is the absense of restraint.
    jlew24asu wrote:
    death is never an option even for the most extreme side of Christianity.

    that is not true and you know it. there are people murdering abortion doctors and starting crusades. violence can and has been part of christinianity. just not as common as it is in islam.
  • puremagic
    puremagic Posts: 1,907
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I agree. this is purely hypothetically. but if the Iraq issue is fixed. I think everyone would put the focus on the Israel issue and the Iran problem might go away. and depending who is the next president, we might actually become friends with Iran. but if Iran goes forward with getting a nuke bomb that wont help anything.



    little extreme dont ya think? if Iraq is a success he most certainly will be looked at favorably. but not the best or the worst.


    If its true, then why is it extreme? Bush's legacy is Commander-in-Chief to a failed Iraq policy. Bush's legacy as the Decider is failure to uphold his Oath of Office as the President of the United States and the Constitution. Bush's legacy both as the Commander-in-Chief and the Decider is the selling out of a CIA agent (treason), the illegal prisoner of war tactics (war crimes) and the fleecing of the American taxpayers (corruption and favoritism). Lesson that he ignored - it's the Office, not the occupant- and he and his Administration has diminished the Office and in doing so, the character of the United States abroad and at home and for that he will be viewed as a failed President with a really, really nice library.
    SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
  • Thecure
    Thecure Posts: 814
    polaris wrote:
    uhh ... would the middle east be what it is today without western intervention? ... that's a more suitable topic ...

    the only way bush can be seen more favourably in the future is if we all continue to ignore the travesty that is his administration ... my2hands said it quite well ...

    how would any any nation be without western intervention?
    People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid."
    - Soren Aabye Kierkegaard (1813-1855)

    If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me."
    - Alice Roosevelt Longworth (1884-1980)
  • Thecure
    Thecure Posts: 814
    jlew24asu wrote:
    for trying to appear intelligent, you should work on your writing skills. your thread title and question need work

    i wrote the title as a joke becuase some other person wrote a thread about what happen to intelligent discussion on the board. sorry if the joke did not work.
    People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid."
    - Soren Aabye Kierkegaard (1813-1855)

    If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me."
    - Alice Roosevelt Longworth (1884-1980)
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    soulsinging wrote:
    perhaps. i see that as their choice though and i also see it as a large reason why iraq is an inevitable failure. we simply cannot force them to be what we want. it's why we failed in vietnam. the south vietnamese mostly WANTED a unified vietnam, even if it was communist.
    after all this time in Iraq it seems clear that freedom is not something they value. or frankly, know what to do with.
    soulsinging wrote:
    you're not much of a philosopher. you can't see negative without equating it to "bad thing" which is not at all the sense in which i have been using it. when i see freedom is a negative it means "absence, not presence." a right to bear arms can be described in positive terms... i am allowed carry a gun. a right to health care means i am allowed to have a doctor. a right to freedom is... i am allowed to... what? do what i want? even the most liberal libertarian is not comfortable saying freedom is a right to do ANYTHING you want. it is defined as the absence of restraint from others. in that sense it is a negative. it is not the presence of a bundle of rights or allowed actions, it is the absense of restraint.
    not ANYTHING you want. but free to think how you want. freedom of expression, speech, religion, etc. I want no restraint from others in that regard. but im not going to get into a philosophical pissing match with you. I see nothing negavitive with freedom, even in the terms you try to portray it. with freedom comes responsibility. hoping people understand that is a big assumpution im willing to make.


    soulsinging wrote:
    that is not true and you know it. there are people murdering abortion doctors and starting crusades. violence can and has been part of christinianity. just not as common as it is in islam.

    wow so a few doctors get murdered and now its somehow in the same ballpark as conservative Islam?

    we are talking something like 0.00001% of death used in the name of jesus

    to something like 25% of conservative Islam in the world


    crusades ended 1000 years ago.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    jlew24asu wrote:
    after all this time in Iraq it seems clear that freedom is not something they value. or frankly, know what to do with.

    which is why i see failure in iraq as pretty much inevitable and a huge mistake and a solid indicator bush will not be remembered any more fondly than lbj.
    jlew24asu wrote:
    not ANYTHING you want. but free to think how you want. freedom of expression, speech, religion, etc. I want no restraint from others in that regard. but im not going to get into a philosophical pissing match with you. I see nothing negavitive with freedom, even in the terms you try to portray it. with freedom comes responsibility. hoping people understand that is a big assumpution im willing to make.

    *sigh* let your emotions rule the argument then. you see negative in the same sentence of freedom and apparently your brain turns off. what you just described is exactly what i described: no restraint from others IS a "negative" right in a philosophical sense. it's not saying freedom is a negative thing or a bad thing. it is saying that freedom cannot be described in terms of what it allows you to do, it can only be described in terms of what others cannot prevent you from doing.

    i agree freedom demands responsibility. i just wrote a rather long diatribe about it to ffg.
    jlew24asu wrote:
    wow so a few doctors get murdered and now its somehow in the same ballpark as conservative Islam?
    we are talking something like 0.00001% of death used in the name of jesus
    to something like 25% of conservative Islam in the world
    crusades ended 1000 years ago.

    i didn't say it was in the same ballpark. you claimed that not even the most extreme branch of christiniaty accepts violence, which is flat out wrong.
  • Cosmo
    Cosmo Posts: 12,225
    I suppose it all depends upon how you define 'Success'.
    If the Middle East becomes this region of Free Democracies and embrace Israel's right to soverignty... but, the total costs were 250,000 American soldier's lives and a 3 Trillion Dollar debt left for our kids and grandkids to pay... maybe a success from the view point of the Arabs... from your grandkids strapped with paying for their well being... I don't know. You'll have to ask them.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    soulsinging wrote:
    which is why i see failure in iraq as pretty much inevitable and a huge mistake and a solid indicator bush will not be remembered any more fondly than lbj.



    *sigh* let your emotions rule the argument then. you see negative in the same sentence of freedom and apparently your brain turns off. what you just described is exactly what i described: no restraint from others IS a "negative" right in a philosophical sense. it's not saying freedom is a negative thing or a bad thing. it is saying that freedom cannot be described in terms of what it allows you to do, it can only be described in terms of what others cannot prevent you from doing.

    i agree freedom demands responsibility. i just wrote a rather long diatribe about it to ffg.



    i didn't say it was in the same ballpark. you claimed that not even the most extreme branch of christiniaty accepts violence, which is flat out wrong.

    again we end with an ok ok ok. ;)
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    jlew24asu wrote:
    again we end with an ok ok ok. ;)

    yeah. it's starting to scare me :) i think general this is a reflection of two people with opposing ideologies nonetheless willing to admit reality sometimes gets in the way and forces concessions from the ideal.
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    1. if the middle east shows immense progress in the generations to come, it sure as hell wont be because cowboy georgie laid waste to Iraq, slaughtered its civilians, and set up a permanent occupying structure all based on lies and the trauma from 9/11


    some of you guys are just flat out full of shit and literally repeat line for line right wing talking points.

    it is like your fax machine is hooked into foxnews and you read line for line whats comes across your desk

    shit, 30% view his presidency as succesful right now. you know what. they are all fucking idiots. period. no nicer way to say that one.

    no wonder my country is going to shit
  • Cosmo
    Cosmo Posts: 12,225
    For Iraq: Kiddies... we need to weigh reality against wishes. In order to turn our wishes into realities.. we need to take a realistic assessment of our wish.
    What do the Arabs want? Isn't that what we should be asking? It seems as if we are telling them to be more like us instead. Maybe we should figure out what they want and help them to achieve THEIR wishes.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    my2hands wrote:
    1. if the middle east shows immense progress in the generations to come, it sure as hell wont be because cowboy georgie laid waste to Iraq, slaughtered its civilians, and set up a permanent occupying structure all based on lies and the trauma from 9/11


    some of you guys are just flat out full of shit and literally repeat line for line right wing talking points.

    it is like your fax machine is hooked into foxnews and you read line for line whats comes across your desk

    shit, 30% view his presidency as succesful right now. you know what. they are all fucking idiots. period. no nicer way to say that one.

    no wonder my country is going to shit

    another fox news reference, saying everyone who disagrees with you are fucking idiots.

    yup, always great to debate with far lefties.
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    Drowned Out wrote:
    Only far left liberals think these....:

    Torture
    WMD
    Record Deficit
    domestic spying
    patriot act
    Gitmo
    destruction of habeous corpus
    cia black prisons

    ....are unacceptable and damaging to his legacy?


    it is flat out scary what some of my felow countrymen think and believe

    these things are not "liberal" issues. they are fucking HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES

    jesus h christ



    and to those saying "well torture maybe needed if a dirty bomb is in chicago". STOP WATCHING "24" AND THE REPUBLICAN DEBATES. this is not the reality of the situation. torture has been used on detainees posing ZERO fucking threat. i repeat, these toture methods have already been used on detainees that pose/posed NO THREAT
  • 810wmb
    810wmb Posts: 849
    my2hands wrote:
    it is flat out scary what some of my felow countrymen think and believe

    these things are not "liberal" issues. they are fucking HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES

    jesus h christ



    and to those saying "well torture maybe needed if a dirty bomb is in chicago". STOP WATCHING "24" AND THE REPUBLICAN DEBATES. this is not the reality of the situation. torture has been used on detainees posing ZERO fucking threat. i repeat, these toture methods have already been used on detainees that pose/posed NO THREAT


    you have proof of that?
    i'm the meat, yer not...signed Capt Asshat
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    jlew24asu wrote:
    another fox news reference, saying everyone who disagrees with you are fucking idiots.

    yup, always great to debate with far lefties.

    dude, seriously. you repeat word for word the right wing talking points. ask around, they will tell you the same.

    and yes, when it comes to some of these black and white clear cut isses such as the patriot act and torture, anyone that justifies them or doesnt see them as harmful are just flat out fucking idiots. period. sorry, thats just the way it is.

Categories