|
Mercnbeth -> RE: "Hey, Obama, What do you say - How many kids have you killed today?" (8/24/2009 1:05:38 PM)
|
quote:
Merc, first I am sorry if you felt I was suggesting you were targeting Obama personally and not his administration as a whole. My reason for asking was i dont recall you asking the same volume of questions of the previous administration, if you did I apologize in advance No need, but my feelings at the time were that any US troop deployment was wrong. To that end I distanced myself from any reference to supporting the troops. I see that rationalization as self gratifying but ultimately hypocritical. I appreciated that my position against the troop deployment of this and previous Administrations, provides comfort and hope to those who define victory simply - the end of US occupation. It is incredible that basic lesson of Vietnam is lost on those who have decided to put this nation, its people, and its resources in a similar situation where 'victory' isn't, and can't, be defined by a ceremony on carrier. If given the opportunity I'd want to ask one question about Afghanistan. How will we know when we 'won'?
This may come off as an attempt at humor or sound disingenuous; but I learned a valuable lesson about protecting the US from 'terrorists' from beth's attitude about household pests like ants who infested our house when we bought it. she educated me that people and a house can never expect to control the natural course of things. The best you can hope for is to establish a perimeter and defend it to the best of your ability and resources. So we hired an exterminator, he cleared out the big nests and 5 years later still come every couple of weeks to spray the perimeter. Works pretty good, but guess what, every so often some hard core ants get through; we suffer some losses and readjust our defensive parameters. I find that option a lot more economically and collaterally sustainable as opposed to carpet bombing my neighbors' lot and house in a foolish attempt to never see an ant in my house ever again.
quote:
I may differ a little as I see going after Bin Laden and those that hide him as legitimate. I saw the invasion of Iraq ( By a right wing US administration and a left wing UK administration ) as an unjust war carried out by using lies to the population. I remember a smilier case presented to me in college by the Jesuits, never ones to put their Catholic faith in front of the pragmatic lessons provided by debate. They asked; would there be need of 'god' if there were no suffering or evil and a 'Satan' didn't exist?
I always have that in mind anytime some caricature of an individual is presented to me to represent 'evil' or even just my 'enemy'. Not trying to generate any conspiracy theory, but there are more reasons for the US to keep bin Laden 'alive' then there are to produce his dead body for a CNN photo op. Whether you look at it as justification for military action in Afghanistan or if you want to avoid a dead 'hero' situation in the Muslim world; the status quo serves a political purpose.
I said it at the time and nothing has come to light to change it. Another US foray into Iraq was destined as soon as George II was elected to office. It was a son avenging his father; a modern day 'Greek Tragedy'. Were it not for 9/11 some other rationalization would come into play; inspection access, some wayward missile launched at a ship in harbor, a high-jacking, whatever, but is WAS going to happen.
quote:
The reality will always be that an incoming administration will always have to pick up the pieces of the outgoing one. I am surprised so many people on here seem to expect the democrats to achieve it in such a short time. Too many people hate to consider anything positive from the Reagan presidency so I'll go back further in time. FDR is more relevant anyway. Unlike Reagan, he too enjoyed a Congressional plurality similar to Obama. By August of their first terms; things did change dramatically and positively. Many actions taken by of FDR weren't even Constitutional and were overturned by the Supreme Court, but there positive impact and the sentiment that the Administration was "doing something" was obvious. The debate whether all his programs would have worked without the start of WWII is legitimate; however anyone living at the time saw immediate results, immediate efforts. Why can't we see the same things today?
Stipulating that 'Heath-care' is a problem and 46,000,000 only have the emergency room as an option for care 254,000,000 million don't have that as an issue. Employment, stability in the economy, hope for a future for their children to thrive are real concerns.
Meanwhile - what else could have been done with this much money?
|
|
|
|
