WHO's hat is in the ring?

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by Schatten

You say that like it's a bad thing...

I think it is. When looking at the opinon expressed,, its hard NOT to look at the source.

First, the source of the opinion is obviously Isralie, NOT American. Even though she "claims" to live in the US. Whatever. If she does, she obviously has Isralie interests as her number 1 priority. Not American. Flying a foriegn flag and claiming a location of Jerusalem, Israel is sort of a clue. Its an indcator of SPECIAL INTERESTS, In short,the view is already skewed, slanted or biased.

Necon, meaning neconservatve, or someone of the extreme rightwing, or simply, an extremist. Or in otherwords, see's things in only one direction, or one dimentional. In short, more bias.

Warhawk, meaning all to eager to send American's overseas to kill brown people wearing head rags and praying to some diety named Allah 8 times a day.


This isnt meant as a personal attack, but rather an assesment of poltical views that contribute to the opinion expressed, which i think is a load of ****. That is my opinion, or is somebody allergic to others opinions?

Anyway, sandbox is all your's, i got better things to do then argue with a foreign national about American politics.

[Enigma]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady
And Powell has become a wimp in the fight against America's enemy, Islam.

I admit, I missed this earlier in the thread.....

So, America's enemy is Islam, eh? Right.

As for all the things said about Mr. Powell, I strongly disagree. Thats the nicest way I can put it.

[Schatten]

Appearently the Sarcasm Dectector Mk VI hasn't made any inroads in California yet...

Thanks for the definitions of all those things as you see them, but they're a little off. Neoconservatism isn't precisely an extreme right-wing ideology. Although that's the subtext when the media uses it. Two of the most influencial neocons of the past 30 years were Jeane Kirkpatrick and Ronald Reagan, they got their starts in the Democratic party. That's where the "neo" in the word comes from, they were the new conservatives and changed how conservativism in general was. Being a neocon isn't necessarily a Bad Thing, no matter what the press would have you believe, it's simply become a convenient boogeyman label for people who are opposed to the current administration.

As for the Warhawk thing, no one was eager to go kill "brown people who pray to Allah" until they attacked our country. A lot of my former classmates and friends served in the little Balken Field Trip in the mid '90s, and their job was partially to protect Muslims from Serbs and Croats. So the argument that we're always looking to pick a fight with Muslims is bunk, they picked the fight with us this time around.

I'm not going to touch the stuff about the Avon Lady's Israeli interests, I'm sure she can manage that fine on her own.

It is sort of ironic that you brought the Israel thing up though since one of the time honored ways for people opposed to neoconservative movement, like Pat Buchanan, to attempt to put down the movement has been to point at the number of Jewish neocons. When you look at it from a fundamental level though it makes sense since many American Jews were Democrats and have since switched over, so yes they're the very definition of neocons.

Also as far as the war we're fighting now is concerned Israel is fighting the same fight as we are, we're both being attacked by radical Islam so I don't see how (since we're allies and all) an Israeli viewpoint is somehow not valid when it comes to said war. It'd be like ignoring the British point of view during WWII.

America's enemy is radical Islam yes, I may have missed something but I don't see any planes packed full of PO'd Swedes or Bulgarians slamming into any buildings around here. Before everyone jumps on my back about that one, radical wahabi style Islam is also mainstream Islam's enemy too. It's a heck of a thing when people are afraid to even define the enemy, let alone when said enemy isn't bashful at all about saying that they're ours.

[Enigma]

Being a neocon isn't necessarily a Bad Thing, no matter what the press would have you believe, it's simply become a convenient boogeyman label for people who are opposed to the current administration.

I would suggest that the current administration isnt Republican, conservative, or neocon, but a hijacking of all such things.

no one was eager to go kill "brown people who pray to Allah" until they attacked our country.

Using that logic, I beleive we should be bombing and occupying Saudi Arabia, being that the vast majority of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi's....

Also as far as the war we're fighting now is concerned Israel is fighting the same fight as we are, we're both being attacked by radical Islam so I don't see how (since we're allies and all) an Israeli viewpoint is somehow not valid when it comes to said war. It'd be like ignoring the British point of view during WWII.

How many Israeli's died in Iraq last year? I odnt meant to suggest the Israeli voice is invalid, just that I question this logic...

America's enemy is radical Islam yes

This I can agree with. Its when people "accidently" leave off the "Radical" that I get annoyed.

[U-533]

I have just received proof that my statement of Ill. Senator Obama being a Muslim was wrong.
He was Muslim, he now claims to be Christian.

I apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused any individual.

Thank you.

This apology brought to you by the fact that everyone is wrong sometimes and I just happen to be man enough to admit it. Any similarity between anyone else claiming to man enough is purely coincidental.
Tax,Tag, Title,and Dealer prep are extra.

[Konovalov]

Bravo to those that have retracted/corrected false or misleading statements surrounding Senator Barack Obama.

[Schatten]

Using that logic, I beleive we should be bombing and occupying Saudi Arabia, being that the vast majority of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi's....

Given the internal state of Saudi Arabia right now that isn't such a bad idea...I'm kidding! (mostly)

How many Israeli's died in Iraq last year?

How many Americans died in Gaza, Lebanon or the West Bank? Troops I mean? If we're fighting a global war against radical Islamic terrorism then we should walk the walk and give Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. the big stick as well. But that won't happen because of politicial reasons, at least not until Hamas follows through on its threats to hit us directly.

From a purely military point of view I know several officers who'd give various and sundry bits of their anatomy to have the Golani on their flank in Anbar Province or the Duvdevan doing intelligence gathering for them in Sadr City. But again, politically it ain't going to happen.

[Enigma]

Well, thats because there is no global war on terrorism. Kind of my point, really. No Americans died there because it wasnt their war. Just as no Israeli soldiers die in Iraq, because thats our lovely little war.

Isreal is in much greater danger ever day from terrorists, much more so than the US. Yet it's our leaders who keep suggesting we have to occupy Iraq otherwise we will be fightijng terrorists in the frozen foods aisle of a supermarket in Boise, Montana.

[Schatten]

Why would anyone want to go to Boise though?

I don't think there's any immediate threat to our frozen food aisles, but killing crazy people that hate us elsewhere is better than risking having to fight them here no matter how remote the threat to our commercial meccas (pun intended) is.

I can agree with you on the Africa thing though, we should have had troops in the Sudan years ago.

Actually we should have fully supported the ones we did have in Africa in '93 too. Since that fiasco (on a political level) the military has been understandably gunshy about getting involved in Africa only to have interest and support dissapear almost as soon as their boots hit the ground.

Oh and I think Condi would make a decent President too.

[geetrue]

Originally Posted by Schatten

Also as far as the war we're fighting now is concerned Israel is fighting the same fight as we are, we're both being attacked by radical Islam so I don't see how (since we're allies and all) an Israeli viewpoint is somehow not valid when it comes to said war. It'd be like ignoring the British point of view during WWII.

America's enemy is radical Islam yes, I may have missed something but I don't see any planes packed full of PO'd Swedes or Bulgarians slamming into any buildings around here. Before everyone jumps on my back about that one, radical wahabi style Islam is also mainstream Islam's enemy too. It's a heck of a thing when people are afraid to even define the enemy, let alone when said enemy isn't bashful at all about saying that they're ours.

Great thought for the day … What did happen to our allies?
This is no phony war, remember the first few days of 9/11 …

I do … the enemy is still out there and they are still mad about our cheer leaders
showing too much skin and our business interest in all of the world from Boeing to
Intel to GM to investment banking being better than their meager efforts …
Not to mention laser warfare weapons that can knock out any threat in the sky by
the time they can figure out how to fire a missile that far. They can read, they know
it’s coming, they want anything money can buy that can protect them or to destroy
Israel …

All that leaves is a bunch of angry people with five (5) billion dollars in poppy seed
money to spend on anything they want … that includes a way to make America fall
to it’s knees and give up on Israel being our friends. That’s why they try to turn us
against each other. Hatred is real …

You have to ask yourself … why did they get so mad at the truth when the Pope
brought it up recently … They are angry and they did make people bow down to
their swords to take over that part of the world and they still do this in Sudan.

Almost 1,400 years of a prophet with a vision to take over the world …
they will not stop till someone stops them. Long after I am gone I am afraid.

Sorry U-533 I just didn’t feel like starting my own thread … I borrowed yours …
Forgive me.

[sonar732]

Yet another topic hijacked. Let's stand on the U.S. 2008 Presidental Race...granted, yes, a canidates stance on how the war on terror will be faught sways the votes...but we are going off the deep end.

[baggygreen]

Okay, so which of the candidates and potential candidates would be most likely to wimp out and withdraw all american troops from everywhere to pander to the vocal minority, and which of them is most likely to do what is both right and needed to secure (lets face it) the western world for the 21st century?

[Schatten]

Originally Posted by baggygreen

Okay, so which of the candidates and potential candidates would be most likely to wimp out and withdraw all american troops from everywhere to pander to the vocal minority, and which of them is most likely to do what is both right and needed to secure (lets face it) the western world for the 21st century?

Too early to say, but right now I'm not seeing anything approaching real leadership from either side of the aisle. Most of them have their heads down and are waiting to see how Iraq pans out, if it works they'll say they were behind it all along, if it doesn't they'll say they've been against it all the time.

I think the only potential canidate that truly understands terrorism at all on a viceral level is Guilianni, but he has some electability issues even among Republicans.

Actually I'd like to see some more from Romney on the issues, he's an interesting guy and I like what I've seen so far about most of his stands, but more info would be a good thing. The Mormon thing could hurt him from two really divergent groups, the hard right religious wing in the Republican party, and the hard left secular wing in the Democratic. Although having both those groups annoyed at you could be a plus with the soft, nougaty mass in the middle as well.

So basically: Too early to say just yet.

[baggygreen]

I wasnt even aware good old rudy was even considering it?!

[Schatten]

Originally Posted by baggygreen

I wasnt even aware good old rudy was even considering it?!

Half the time he isn't sure, but he formed one of those exploratory deals. Doesn't mean he'll wind up running, but he's never come out and said he definately won't soooo...

We'll see.