quote:

Personally I find ascribing those deaths to Obama to be somewhat distasteful

quote:

ORIGINAL: Starbuck09

One of the reason you could not use nuclear weapons Mernbeth is that it would draw an immediate response from the other nuclear powers of the world. I agree with both the war in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan.However I would not agree with them if the price for initiating them was to instigate a third world war.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Starbuck09

One of the reason you could not use nuclear weapons Mernbeth is that it would draw an immediate response from the other nuclear poweres of the world.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth


That assumes those in power wouldn't have turned over the 9/11 perpetrators, or if you believe conspiracy theories, gave evidence of US self flagellation. However if they did there would have been zero deaths, either of "innocents" or US troops. Again - seems to be a better alliterative, albeit in hindsight, than the path President Bush pursued, and is being followed to the letter by the current Administration of President Obama as well as the Democratic majority Congress.

Appreciating that since the color is not 'blue' you too are a 'hawk' on Afghanistan and Iraq. Hey - just don't look in any mirrors and you won't even notice the hypocrisy of that position.

quote:

Now see, you just don't have the ability to recognize sarcasm when you see it. Obviously based on all the reference he's a war monger who, with the ability to change the current status quo, instead escalates the war in Afghanistan and has no withdraw plan for Iraq. Sorry if you didn't understand. Next time I'll put it as 'pacifist' to help you out.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Starbuck09

I don't know why it is not a hot topic mercnbeth. I presume because the people who agree with the war are happy that Obama is prosecuting them as best he can and those that disagree are somewhat embarrased.

quote:

And again, what Obama is doing is no surprise, it is exactly what was promised.

quote:

The Iraq withdrawal was pushed back slightly but is still proceeding.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

Personally I find ascribing those deaths to Obama to be somewhat distasteful

Stella, it is the price you pay when you are commander in chief. The original quote goes back to LBJ; yet he was not President when the first troops were deployed either. It was either Eisenhower, or Kennedy; depending on your political affiliation and agenda. However that was never an issue that the protesters of the time considered. Should it be now?

quote:

So the logic of this thread is that: if you are lead down a certain path and a new leader can't find a quick way back from that path, all new deaths since the new leader took over have nothing at all to do with the old leader that initiated the whole thing?

quote:

The logic of this thread is that things seemed dull so he thought he'd stir them up.

Hence the pointlessness of its "debate."

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife
And killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people in the process, not to mention establishing the acceptability of using nuclear weapons.

quote:



How about millions.

Colloquially, this is called the "glass parking lot" solution: use every available nuclear weapon we have, non-stop, on every middle eastern nation that exists except Israel. Anyone who protests, we look for any signs of foreign blood, and if we can, we fly them back to their ancestral homeland with the next load of bombs. Continue until there's no one left to oppose us.

(in reply to rulemylife)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

The logic of this thread is that things seemed dull so he thought he'd stir them up.

Hence the pointlessness of its "debate."

I would never refer to the ongoing US casualties as a "dull" topic for discussion, but that's just me.

As a corollary, I'd find it interesting that the focus on causalities, both the local innocents and the US soldiers is absent not only from these CM threads, but on the news services as well. Meanwhile, the casualties reported go on, and the traumatized troops return to the US. For what?

Sorry if that's not a topic worthy of discourse. Although I understand that circumstances have changed the political climate since January. I'm just surprised how they've changed so dramatically and are now so accepting of the ongoing wars.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

It has been pointed out that the political threads have been a bit boring and single focused. I agree. Lets move to another topic.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

Well okay, Candidate Obama ran on the hawk platform and he's simply living up to his campaign promises of continuing the occupation of Iraq, and escalating the war in Afghanistan. Glad we've cleared that up. See, my confusion was that video of him distinguishing himself from both Hilliary Clinton and McCain indicating he was against the occupation of sovereign nations and would end the war immediately. My apologies for being confused. I need to listen more closely to the VIDEO from the campaign.

quote:


I guess the only question remaining to discuss is how many more US soldiers need to be deployed and become casualties in "slightly"?

quote:

Meanwhile, I'll assume that the Nancy Pelosi referenced "good disruptors" and "angry protesters" that used to advocate the end of both the war in Afghanistan and the occupation of Iraq were paid instigators of the Democratic Party since with the change in Washington, they are no longer evident.

quote:

However, unlike Obama, I didn't run for President on the pacifist, USA is bad to intervene, "I'm Sorry!", I'll withdraw immediately platform.
ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

And if bin Landen wasn't the perpetrator and/or planner, no matter. The action would have sufficed to insure we wouldn't be in Iraq or Afghanistan today and not one soldier or the family of soldiers, would have had to suffer as they have since 9/11. ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:



So your basic strategy seems to be: Kill a whole lot of people whether they had anything to do with the terrorist attack on 9/11 in order to show the world that if we are attacked, we will do what the world has avoided doing since the end of WWII, employing the nuclear option. This would have made the world frightened of us to the point where they would have done anything we said. Just what video games have you been playing?

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales
So your basic strategy seems to be: Kill a whole lot of people whether they had anything to do with the terrorist attack on 9/11 in order to show the world that if we are attacked, we will do what the world has avoided doing since the end of WWII, employing the nuclear option. This would have made the world frightened of us to the point where they would have done anything we said. Just what video games have you been playing?

quote:

Actually, from a pure realpolitik perspective, this can work. We'd need to seriously ramp up our military, and tamp down everything else to the point that we looked kinda like North Korea, but we could spend the next 20-30 years wiping every other culture off the face of the Earth and get away with it.

[ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth