Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: US Foreign Policy


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: US Foreign Policy Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/1/2006 4:11:13 PM   
CrappyDom


Posts: 1883
Joined: 4/11/2006
From: Sacramento
Status: offline
Okay Rich,

You have time to make ANOTHER post but can't put in writing what you have been whining about for the last couple posts?

Pathetic.

(in reply to WyrdRich)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/1/2006 6:16:28 PM   
WyrdRich


Posts: 1733
Joined: 1/3/2005
Status: offline
    Now I feel like you are calling me names again. 

    Perhaps you could explain to me why the NSA wiretapping program of the current (wartime) administration is such a threat to our individual liberty and privacy while the far more invasive monitoring approved by the previous President was no big deal?

     IF you can come up with a reasonable answer beyond "because Bush is an idiot," we can discuss another few examples.

(in reply to CrappyDom)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/1/2006 6:33:50 PM   
CrappyDom


Posts: 1883
Joined: 4/11/2006
From: Sacramento
Status: offline
Why don't you explain to me why Laura ran over a guy?  Or why Bush is right handed?

Or, do something really wacky and respond to the actual thread.

(in reply to WyrdRich)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/1/2006 6:50:39 PM   
WyrdRich


Posts: 1733
Joined: 1/3/2005
Status: offline
    Yeah, that is about the answer I expected.

     I forgot to mention earlier, when I quote you about that other thread, I also reserve the right to mention that you conceded it.

(in reply to CrappyDom)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/1/2006 6:54:28 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
Philosophy, if there has to be war with Iran couldn't our European "ALLIES" handle it and let the U.S. sit this one out?
As a TAXPAYER I'm getting a little tired of "rebuilding Iraq" instead of  "Rebuilding Alabama, Missisippi, and Louisiana.
I mean what good is having "ALLIES" if you can't depend on them?

(in reply to philosophy)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/1/2006 6:55:07 PM   
CrappyDom


Posts: 1883
Joined: 4/11/2006
From: Sacramento
Status: offline
Rich,

If you expected me to want to continue the same discussion, why didn't you?

As for what I "conceded" I have no idea what you are talking about unless you are refering to "the most idiotic OP ever" in which case, despite the abundance of stupidity on the internet, I stand by my opinion.

(in reply to WyrdRich)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/1/2006 8:02:28 PM   
WyrdRich


Posts: 1733
Joined: 1/3/2005
Status: offline
     But I was continuing the same discussion.  You asked me to state what hypocrisy I see in the Democrats and I provided you with an example to discuss.  Perhaps it is very hot in your part of the State as well, so I shall rephrase. 

    Hypocrisy is the act of claiming virtues you do not possess.  Democrats, claiming to care about privacy, attack President Bush for a wiretapping program.  Yet the precedent setting and far more invasive domestic surveillance program enacted by President Clinton went largely unremarked by them (no calls for impeachment that I recall).  I must conclude from this that Democrats only care about privacy when it suits them and therefore are a bunch of damn hypocrites.

    I invite you to explain where my logic might be flawed in this example.  Unless of course, you'd rather talk about whether attacks on the character of the First Lady are wrong all of the time or just when she's married to a Democrat.

   

< Message edited by WyrdRich -- 9/1/2006 8:03:54 PM >

(in reply to CrappyDom)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/1/2006 8:35:45 PM   
CrappyDom


Posts: 1883
Joined: 4/11/2006
From: Sacramento
Status: offline
Rich,

Let me see if I have this straight.  This is a thread about US foreign policy and after I posted some bits from an article describing the condition of the US military you replied:

quote:

You have now proved my point that Democrats/Liberals/the Left are willing to throw away every value they have ever espoused, every position they have ever taken, if they think they can hurt Bush by doing it.  Democrats for defense...   I love it


Since I wasn't sure what part of my post you found objectionable, I asked for clarification...and we end up here, talking about domestic policy.

I am not, nor was this thread talking about domestic policy.  When  you are ready to respond about US foreign policy and about why you think Democrats are being hypocritical, let me know.

(in reply to WyrdRich)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/1/2006 8:59:42 PM   
WyrdRich


Posts: 1733
Joined: 1/3/2005
Status: offline
     Crappy,

      To be a bit more precise, the OP dealt with the course of US foreign policy since WWII and whether that general course was likely to change with the next administration.  And then it wandered a bit.

       Democrat hypocrisy in foreign policy?  If they are so concerned about a nuclear North Korea, why are they not demanding hearings on just how North Korea aquired the technology?

(in reply to CrappyDom)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/1/2006 11:05:51 PM   
CrappyDom


Posts: 1883
Joined: 4/11/2006
From: Sacramento
Status: offline
I will take Democratic hypocracy over Republican hypocracy any day.

At least when Clinton invaded a place he had the decency to clean up his mess before he left office, something neither Bush Sr. nor Jr. seem capable of managing.

Raygun managed to get 384 Marines killed in Lebanon and cut and run like a typical Republican coward and then dealt arms to the very country and the terrorists that did it.  Bush Jr. managed to make that same country the most powerful in the ME and put us in a position where they can laugh at us and do whatever it is they want.

Iran holds all the cards and Bush gave them to them.  The only question is which side Bush is really on, sure doesn't seem to be America's. 


(in reply to WyrdRich)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/1/2006 11:16:27 PM   
CreoleCook


Posts: 321
Joined: 10/9/2005
Status: offline
no offense guys, but this ain't a pissin match... we ain't goin for distance or accuracy here.   Hipocracy is alive and well, and shown by the varied and well thought out responses by all involved. 

As for getting back on topic... yeah well...

CC

(in reply to CrappyDom)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/1/2006 11:22:13 PM   
CreoleCook


Posts: 321
Joined: 10/9/2005
Status: offline
Here's a thought... If Pro, is the opposite of Con, then whats the opposite of Progress?

answer) Congress.


(in reply to CrappyDom)
Profile   Post #: 72
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/2/2006 3:08:15 AM   
philosophy


Posts: 5284
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline
"Philosophy, if there has to be war with Iran couldn't our European "ALLIES" handle it and let the U.S. sit this one out?"

......i have no problem with Europe taking point if a war is justified.......but it is American paranoia that is driving the international community to conflict with Iran..........if it is in Americas best interest to declare war on another middle eastern state, shouldn't America take care of its own business? 

(in reply to CreoleCook)
Profile   Post #: 73
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/2/2006 3:11:11 AM   
philosophy


Posts: 5284
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline
   "Yet these are the rules of engagement our enemy has declared."

you merely confirm my point. If an enemy takes an action so unethical as to cause another country to go to war with it, then the second country is just being equally as immoral if it responds in the same way. There are rules of behaviour that govern not just individual actions but international ones too. America can't keep ignoring international law when it suits them but rely on it when it is in their interests......


(in reply to WyrdRich)
Profile   Post #: 74
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/2/2006 4:32:01 AM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
Seeks,

Criticising US foreign policy is not "America bashing" as you put it. Part of the reason why your Government has the mandate to act as it does can be found in your logic in making the giant leap to America bashing.

Regards

(in reply to caitlyn)
Profile   Post #: 75
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/2/2006 4:51:36 AM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
Also, yes, the current US Government (and their agents the British Government) can be seen as taking on the baton of imperialism.

But, what sort of defence is that? Aren't we supposed to be making progress? and becoming more civilised as we make progress? Iraq/Afghanistan etc is dragging us back 200 years.

Regards

(in reply to caitlyn)
Profile   Post #: 76
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/2/2006 5:50:31 AM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
Dtesmoac,

You're in good company as most of us don't know who we are, where are we and what our names are! We're too busy running around chasing houses and cars like madmen chasing water in the desert.

Your point on Socialism - I will add that France and Britain are nothing like socialist societies so I don't think we're in position to draw conclusions based on these two. Granted some socialist policies are based on self-interest - for example, protectionism around the national workforce - and this contradicts their international approach to world affairs. However, on balance, I personally would take socialism over what we have in Britain today. Both Britain and the US have third world countries hidden in the closet - New Orleans, various other inner-city parts of the US - how can this be right with the wealth that both nations create? Also, the high crime rates are evidence that once you scratch beneath the style surface there is something seriously wrong. I think you said in another post you've spent a fair amount of time over here so you'll be aware it's not all tea, scones and cosy chats about the shipping forecast.

I'm not sure you're right about the lack of a community spirit in Britain - granted, Thatcher and her government destroyed long-standing working class institutions and instilled individualism in order to concentrate much of the wealth of the nation in the South and around London. However, as a people, we've never really sort community in festivals/parades etc - we have a tradition of seeking community at football and down the pub - both are ingrained in British culture and community. Football is passed down from father to son and it's very much part of the social fabric - many Britons spend their wages on following their football team around the country and abroad - for example, Newcastle played Inter Milan recently in Italy and 15,000 Newcastle fans went to Italy to watch their team (and this is the rule rather than the exception) which is around 1 in every 20 people in the City - out of interest how many Dallas fans would make the journey to another part of the US to watch their Gridiron team? also, a large proportion of Brits would much rather be down the pub having a few pints with mates than prancing around towns making a show of ourselves at festivals. Just not our scene, Des. We're thinkers not exhibisionists :-)

Your point on many Americans - there was a post on here from someone who said the poorest people in America are more wealthy than Middle Class Europeans - comments such as these tell a story (obviously the poster missed the TV pictures of starving, dying Americans in New Orleans which to Europeans looked like hell on earth).

I tell you what though Des, I would like to think there are more idiots over there simply because there are more of you - more scientists, more obesity, more diversity, more idiots, more people who spend their evenings wrapping themselves up in cling film and smoothering themselves with fish oil, more everything. If not, and a large proportion of you are the planks that our right-wing media paints you as, then we're in a spot of trouble.

Your point on lowering the quality of education - well, when University is made accessible to all it is inevitable that there will be a fall in the standards the elites are used to as resources are re-directed away from the elites to wider society. It's simply a symptom of a more inclusive society and it can only be good - I for one would have been unable to go to University in Britain if I lived in the Britain of the 1960s and prior to that.

Regards

Regards


(in reply to WyrdRich)
Profile   Post #: 77
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/2/2006 6:13:06 AM   
Dtesmoac


Posts: 565
Joined: 6/22/2006
Status: offline
Gent  -  thought you would have picked up from the way I post that I'm British living in the USA for 2 years on a work assignment. So many of my observations are based on what I find in the USA as opposed to what I thought I would find. I think that the principle or theory of socialism is as you describe I just find that in the execution of it that self interest is normally at the core.

Communities as with the UK where in many areas the football team and the pubs have lost the "local community feel" there are many parts of US which do not have it. But I have been surpised at the extent of involvement and real effort and time that people put into their local events and the extent that the population supports them by truning out compared with what I have experienced in the UK. This is also not limited to the most remote inaccesible communities either. Some of the smaller towns near cities will have "festivals based on Apples or Cabbages or Pickles and the parade will be 2 hours long and there will be days of activities all of which are well attended and genuilly different from the UK expereience. I think it exhibts a "localised thinking" which existed in many parts of the UK in the 50 to 70s but now is limited to some villages. (This is a sweeping statement covering 300 million people in US and 60 million in UK  !!!!)

The death of the mining and steel industry in UK was linked to global economics as well as their use as a weapon by politically minded individuals - Scargill vs Thatcher.

I'm suprised there weren't more people queing up to leave Newcastle for a trip to Italy !!!!!  (Is that a comment about Newcastle or Italy  :)  )
D
 

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 78
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/2/2006 6:30:21 AM   
Dtesmoac


Posts: 565
Joined: 6/22/2006
Status: offline
popeye - is a friend someone that does everything you want them to or someone that sometimes doen't agree with you, warns you and peprahps offers a helping hand later if you run nito problems. Is there a difference between an Allie and a client state?

Many Europeans armies (even combined) do not have logistical support systems necessary to place adequate military resources into non European Warzones.

In Afghanistan the Airsupport called in by Britsh and other Nato troops on the ground is often provided by US planes. So in terms of will and capability Iran v Europe unlikely. Plus of course Japan relies totally on Iranian oil so any vehicles wouldn't travel very far.  :)

The inability of European Forces to act in global manner is in part a consequance of the US policy since WWII. As well as due to the way the European Union has developed i.e. Military Agression not part of remit. That then leaves NATO which is taking a bigger role in Afghanistan but is also non starter for Iran. US spends >$28,000 on reasearch per year per soldier, which is probably 4 to 5 times the European spend, which also explains the lower dependence on technology for european armies.  

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 79
RE: US Foreign Policy - 9/2/2006 6:52:10 AM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
Dtes,

On your community point - where I grew up in the 80s we did have galas, fayres etc and it's no coincidence that they disappeared during the Thatcher reign of individual ideals.

The motives behind the destruction of the mining industry were far more about the reduction of Trade Union power and laying the foundations for individualism than they ever were about the profitability of British coal - and, ultimately, Scargill was proved right.

I live in Manchester now Dtes and parts of this place make the North East look like Monaco - the North East is looking good these days. Never been to Italy but I'll bet it's no Sunderland on a cold, wet day beside Roker sea front!

Anyway, US foreign policy - while you've been over there have you managed to find out when the US Government plans to overthrow the British Government? Blair has given support to the Americans for his own overthrow so we're ripe for the taking - we have no oil but we have more wind farms than you can shake a stick at so I've not sure what they're waiting for.

Regards


(in reply to Dtesmoac)
Profile   Post #: 80
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: US Foreign Policy Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.078