Joe Lieberman

dbermanmd · Mar 13, 2007

Below is a quote from a speech Joe Lieberman gave yesterday

"There is something profoundly wrong when opposition to the war in Iraq seems to inspire greater passion than opposition to Islamist extremism. There is something profoundly wrong when there is so much distrust of our intelligence community that some Americans doubt the plain and ominous facts about the threat to us posed by Iran. And there is something profoundly wrong when, in the face of attacks by radical Islam, we think we can find safety and stability by pulling back, by talking to and accommodating our enemies, and abandoning our friends and allies. Some of this wrong-headed thinking about the world is happening because we're in a political climate where, for many people, when George Bush says "yes," their reflex reaction is to say "no." That is unacceptable."

I would vote for him in a heartbeat. This is also the reason, I think, that he will never be the Democratic nominee for President or even Vice-President --- heck the Democrats had to cancel a political debate just because Fox News was going to cover it. I think there are a lot of people that think like this - even a number who will not admit that deep down they fear the potential downside radical Islam presents us.

I think there is little difference between him and Rudy Giuliani - both are social liberals, both are for lack of better terminology pro-war on terror. I think there is a decent chance to see a Rudy/Joe ticket in '08. Imagine a Democrat and a Republican running on the same ticket - both pro-abortion, for reasonable gun control, for social programs, both with tons of real life experience....

Just thinking "out loud" here.

desynch · Mar 13, 2007

Liberals.. winning the war on terror with hugs and letters.

malorn · Mar 13, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Mar 13 2007, 01:22 PM) [snapback]404934[/snapback]</div>

Below is a quote from a speech Joe Lieberman gave yesterday

"There is something profoundly wrong when opposition to the war in Iraq seems to inspire greater passion than opposition to Islamist extremism. There is something profoundly wrong when there is so much distrust of our intelligence community that some Americans doubt the plain and ominous facts about the threat to us posed by Iran. And there is something profoundly wrong when, in the face of attacks by radical Islam, we think we can find safety and stability by pulling back, by talking to and accommodating our enemies, and abandoning our friends and allies. Some of this wrong-headed thinking about the world is happening because we're in a political climate where, for many people, when George Bush says "yes," their reflex reaction is to say "no." That is unacceptable."

I would vote for him in a heartbeat. This is also the reason, I think, that he will never be the Democratic nominee for President or even Vice-President --- heck the Democrats had to cancel a political debate just because Fox News was going to cover it. I think there are a lot of people that think like this - even a number who will not admit that deep down they fear the potential downside radical Islam presents us.

I think there is little difference between him and Rudy Giuliani - both are social liberals, both are for lack of better terminology pro-war on terror. I think there is a decent chance to see a Rudy/Joe ticket in '08. Imagine a Democrat and a Republican running on the same ticket - both pro-abortion, for reasonable gun control, for social programs, both with tons of real life experience....

Just thinking "out loud" here.
[/b]
Click to expand...

I would vote for Rudy/Joe in a heartbeat. If only it would be true. 2 great leaders!

dbermanmd · Mar 13, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(desynch @ Mar 13 2007, 02:27 PM) [snapback]404938[/snapback]</div>

Liberals.. winning the war on terror with hugs and letters.
[/b]
Click to expand...

you honestly think they would not be aggressive in the war on terror?

efusco · Mar 13, 2007

If it were accurate, it would be "profoundly wrong"....Let's disect Lieberman's quote a little. And, mind you, I like Joe Lieberman.

"There is something profoundly wrong when opposition to the war in Iraq seems to inspire greater passion than opposition to Islamist extremism.[/b]
Click to expand...

An attempt to connect the war in Iraq to Islamic extremism. There was not such a connection. While certainly the insurgent movement has overtones of Islamic extremism they do not relate to national security at home.

There is something profoundly wrong when there is so much distrust of our intelligence community that some Americans doubt the plain and ominous facts about the threat to us posed by Iran.[/b]
Click to expand...

Umm, we don't. We've been encouraging talks and efforts in Iran. The Bush admin has been obstinant in refusing to speak to Iran at all, instead forcing them to dig in by giving ultimatums. Iran won't give in to those ultimatums because they'll lose face to the rest of the Arab nations. The US should compromise, discuss, and negotiate. When and if those discussions don't bear fruit then we will be on more solid ground both at home and with the international community when we move forward with military power, sanctions, etc....notice that those are the things we didn't do with Iraq and we are not in that quagmire. Let me repeat, this liberal democrat recognizes the threat from Iran and thinks we need to start doing something to mitigate it. It appears, however, that the Bush administration would prefer to let it fester as a means of justifying another invasion of a soverign nation.

And there is something profoundly wrong when, in the face of attacks by radical Islam, we think we can find safety and stability by pulling back, by talking to and accommodating our enemies, and abandoning our friends and allies.[/b]
Click to expand...

Once again, an attempt to connect unrelated issues. Iraq is certainly ugly now and full of radical Isalmists that were not there before we invaded. And by providing a fine tool for their recruiting they are likely more dangerous to us than before the war, our best hope of stopping the spread of that particular fungus is to take away the source of it's growth...our presence in Iraq. Again, before someone pretends they don't know where I stand, this can't be done all at once. It needs to be controlled with a transition of power. We also have to accept that there will, likely, be a continuation of the civil war and unrest that's going on now and we need to do our level best to attenuate that mess. But to sit there and pretend that we're doing some good just to avoid leaving is silly. We're doing no good, we're allowing the enemies of the US to strengthen and to brew discontent amongst Iraqis and others in the middle east that previously didn't feel that way about the US. To me that is the real threat.
Furthur, if we want to take the fight to the terrorist then why haven't our efforts in Afganistan been greater and our pressure on Pakistan redoubled to destroy the remnants of the Taliban and to seek out and kill OBL? I'm sure it's the liberal's fault.

Some of this wrong-headed thinking about the world is happening because we're in a political climate where, for many people, when George Bush says "yes," their reflex reaction is to say "no." That is unacceptable."[/b]
Click to expand...

The problem is not a reflex action so much as Bush's insistance on saying yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes in the fact of facts telling him that the answer is, indeed, "No". To his credit he's been a bit smarter over the past few months and has softened his rhetoric a bit. But the 20k troop boost is an unfortunate mistake that hopefully won't have to many untoward consequences.

To me this is nothing more than an example of how both the dems and repubs are just plain messed up inbred political mutants. There's that video on YouTube of the democrat bashing the 'liberals' who opposed the funding of the Iraq war. Clearly this is divisive even within the individual parties, but I can't help but feel this is an effort by Lieberman to grab some of those moderate swing voters on the republican side who inwardly know that the war is wrong but couldn't bear to see their vote go to someone staunchly opposed to it. It's all politics and has nothing at all to do with real life.

fshagan · Mar 13, 2007

A Rudy/Joe ticket would certainly appeal to a lot of people, especially if the worst possible scenario comes true for the Democrats: success in Iraq. Only Hillary has staked out a position that will allow her to gracefully back away from the opposition to the war, since she has been smart enough not to call for immediate withdrawal (John Edwards) or given a timetable (Obama).

It remains to be seen if Rudy can survive Iowa, where his pro-choice stance, including public funding of abortions for the poor, will be an issue. But all the front-running Republicans suffer on that issue; Romney is now "pro-life", but it wasn't until this campaign that he was, and there's a tape of him saying he's in full support of Roe and "settled law" and has been since his mother voted to uphold an abortion law. Rudy actually looks better than Romney, as Rudy has never changed his position and doesn't appear to be pandering. McCain is falling in the polls because he is seen as the Uber-Pandabear this time out.

So a Rudy/Joe ticket would be a very good thing for the Republicans, but I'm not so sure it works as well for the conservative movement, which has been on the skids since Reagan finished his second term. I keep hoping Fred Thompson will declare, and he moved a bit closer to it on Sunday.

dbermanmd · Mar 14, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Mar 13 2007, 03:03 PM) [snapback]404958[/snapback]</div>

If it were accurate, it would be "profoundly wrong"....Let's disect Lieberman's quote a little. And, mind you, I like Joe Lieberman.
An attempt to connect the war in Iraq to Islamic extremism. There was not such a connection. While certainly the insurgent movement has overtones of Islamic extremism they do not relate to national security at home.

Umm, we don't. We've been encouraging talks and efforts in Iran. The Bush admin has been obstinant in refusing to speak to Iran at all, instead forcing them to dig in by giving ultimatums. Iran won't give in to those ultimatums because they'll lose face to the rest of the Arab nations. The US should compromise, discuss, and negotiate. When and if those discussions don't bear fruit then we will be on more solid ground both at home and with the international community when we move forward with military power, sanctions, etc....notice that those are the things we didn't do with Iraq and we are not in that quagmire. Let me repeat, this liberal democrat recognizes the threat from Iran and thinks we need to start doing something to mitigate it. It appears, however, that the Bush administration would prefer to let it fester as a means of justifying another invasion of a soverign nation.
Once again, an attempt to connect unrelated issues. Iraq is certainly ugly now and full of radical Isalmists that were not there before we invaded. And by providing a fine tool for their recruiting they are likely more dangerous to us than before the war, our best hope of stopping the spread of that particular fungus is to take away the source of it's growth...our presence in Iraq. Again, before someone pretends they don't know where I stand, this can't be done all at once. It needs to be controlled with a transition of power. We also have to accept that there will, likely, be a continuation of the civil war and unrest that's going on now and we need to do our level best to attenuate that mess. But to sit there and pretend that we're doing some good just to avoid leaving is silly. We're doing no good, we're allowing the enemies of the US to strengthen and to brew discontent amongst Iraqis and others in the middle east that previously didn't feel that way about the US. To me that is the real threat.
Furthur, if we want to take the fight to the terrorist then why haven't our efforts in Afganistan been greater and our pressure on Pakistan redoubled to destroy the remnants of the Taliban and to seek out and kill OBL? I'm sure it's the liberal's fault.

The problem is not a reflex action so much as Bush's insistance on saying yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes in the fact of facts telling him that the answer is, indeed, "No". To his credit he's been a bit smarter over the past few months and has softened his rhetoric a bit. But the 20k troop boost is an unfortunate mistake that hopefully won't have to many untoward consequences.

To me this is nothing more than an example of how both the dems and repubs are just plain messed up inbred political mutants. There's that video on YouTube of the democrat bashing the 'liberals' who opposed the funding of the Iraq war. Clearly this is divisive even within the individual parties, but I can't help but feel this is an effort by Lieberman to grab some of those moderate swing voters on the republican side who inwardly know that the war is wrong but couldn't bear to see their vote go to someone staunchly opposed to it. It's all politics and has nothing at all to do with real life.
[/b]
Click to expand...

a lot of nuanceing here my good doctor. You do not think that if we leave Iraq the bad guys will not follow us home? And if you want to allow Iran to become a nuclear power that is your right. it is part and parcel of your thought processes - seeing evil and thinking it good, or at the minimum enabling our enemies to become stronger and more deadly. How many Americans need to die before you decide the threat is real?

eagle33199 · Mar 14, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Mar 14 2007, 07:55 AM) [snapback]405278[/snapback]</div>

a lot of nuanceing here my good doctor. You do not think that if we leave Iraq the bad guys will not follow us home? And if you want to allow Iran to become a nuclear power that is your right. it is part and parcel of your thought processes - seeing evil and thinking it good, or at the minimum enabling our enemies to become stronger and more deadly. How many Americans need to die before you decide the threat is real?
[/b]
Click to expand...

LOL... He responds with a good analysis of a speech, taking it apart sentence by sentence, and all you can come back with is the same old rhetoric and personal attacks? Come up with something new, Berman!

efusco · Mar 14, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Mar 14 2007, 07:55 AM) [snapback]405278[/snapback]</div>

a lot of nuanceing here my good doctor. You do not think that if we leave Iraq the bad guys will not follow us home? And if you want to allow Iran to become a nuclear power that is your right. it is part and parcel of your thought processes - seeing evil and thinking it good, or at the minimum enabling our enemies to become stronger and more deadly. How many Americans need to die before you decide the threat is real?
[/b]
Click to expand...

I do think the potential for the 'bad guys' to expand and eventually 'follow us home' does exists (where it didn't previously)...I think I alluded to that in my post, if it wasn't clear that's my fault b/c I intended to say that indeed there is certainly going to be a worse situation in Iraq whether we stay or go...it's a matter of controlling the severity of the badness as best as possible at this point.

Dude, bump the needle on your record player...you keep repeating your "Iran nuclear power mantra" and I keep telling you that I absolutely don't want them to become a nuclear power. But the US sitting around refusing to try to diplomatically resolve the situation is allowing them to expand their nuclear capability. We're creating a situation where the only option will be war...maybe that's what you want. But to think that there are no other options is purely ignorant.

My thought process is "seeing evil and thinking it's good"....please, use your brilliance and show me a quote that even remotely implies that.... I'll wait patiently for your answer otherwise I'll accept such a statement as diversion and an admission that you don't have a clue what you're talking about and that you admit defeat on this topic.

Just for reference, here's what I said, in part:
"Let me repeat, this liberal democrat recognizes the threat from Iran and thinks we need to start doing something to mitigate it. It appears, however, that the Bush administration would prefer to let it fester as a means of justifying another invasion of a soverign nation."
Yea, that sounds just like I see evil and call it good. If you'd abandon your tired rhetoric for just a minute and try a little independent thought you might be able to see a little more clearly.

dbermanmd · Mar 14, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Mar 14 2007, 10:05 AM) [snapback]405314[/snapback]</div>

I do think the potential for the 'bad guys' to expand and eventually 'follow us home' does exists (where it didn't previously)...
[/b]
Click to expand...

9/11

FBear · Mar 14, 2007

The rest of America does not know Rudy like New Yorkers know Rudy. He was in his last term as Mayor not particularly well liked becuase of his abrasiveness, & his my way or the highway attitude. The only thing, and this is really the sad part, that saved his a** was 9/11. He was always good at crisis management. Lest we not forget, against recommendations of every one from the police chief to the head of the fire department, told him he was nuts for locating the Office Emergency Management on the 13th floor of 7 World Trade Center. But he's Rudy and is all knowing and all seeing and he wanted the office where he wanted the office and everyone be damned. Look what happened the building was evacuted and then lost due to fire losing a brand new 25 million dollar facility. The office is now located in Brooklyn several hundred feet under ground where everyone else said it should have been located in the first place. If you think Bushie is secretive Rudy makes him look like Mary Poppins. People had to sue him becuause he would never release even the smallest piece of information requested under the Freedom of Information Act. By the way he lost in court every time and wound up releasing the information and looking like an idiot at the same time. I really don't look forward to him back in political life.

dbermanmd · Mar 14, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(FBear @ Mar 14 2007, 03:41 PM) [snapback]405577[/snapback]</div>

The rest of America does not know Rudy like New Yorkers know Rudy. He was in his last term as Mayor not particularly well liked becuase of his abrasiveness, & his my way or the highway attitude. The only thing, and this is really the sad part, that saved his a** was 9/11. He was always good at crisis management. Lest we not forget, against recommendations of every one from the police chief to the head of the fire department, told him he was nuts for locating the Office Emergency Management on the 13th floor of 7 World Trade Center. But he's Rudy and is all knowing and all seeing and he wanted the office where he wanted the office and everyone be damned. Look what happened the building was evacuted and then lost due to fire losing a brand new 25 million dollar facility. The office is now located in Brooklyn several hundred feet under ground where everyone else said it should have been located in the first place. If you think Bushie is secretive Rudy makes him look like Mary Poppins. People had to sue him becuause he would never release even the smallest piece of information requested under the Freedom of Information Act. By the way he lost in court every time and wound up releasing the information and looking like an idiot at the same time. I really don't look forward to him back in political life.
[/b]
Click to expand...

as a gotham city guy - rudy was and is amazing. he would make an EXCELLENT President. yes he made some mistakes - but heck, i guess liberals dont - hillary voting to support the war seems like a much greater offense to me seeing how it cost 4,000 american lives and hundreds of billions of dollars wasted. Rudy makes a $25 million mistake and you harp on it - jeez - how much did bill not taking out obl cost us? or perhaps you can tell us of an instance in which rudy lied under oath. perhaps you think that rudy committed adultry -- which should put him in good standing with democrats unless of course it was only oral sex :lol:

rudy was amazing - real life experience - superior leadership under huge stress - pro-abortion -- my kind of old school "scoop jackson democrat"

eagle33199 · Mar 14, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Mar 14 2007, 02:50 PM) [snapback]405584[/snapback]</div>

hillary voting to support the war seems like a much greater offense to me seeing how it cost 4,000 american lives and hundreds of billions of dollars wasted.
[/b]
Click to expand...

I'll have to remember this quote for all of your future Iraq/Iran arguments.

mojo · Mar 14, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Mar 13 2007, 01:22 PM) [snapback]404934[/snapback]</div>

Below is a quote from a speech Joe Lieberman gave yesterday

"There is something profoundly wrong when opposition to the war in Iraq seems to inspire greater passion than opposition to Islamist extremism. There is something profoundly wrong when there is so much distrust of our intelligence community that some Americans doubt the plain and ominous facts about the threat to us posed by Iran. And there is something profoundly wrong when, in the face of attacks by radical Islam, we think we can find safety and stability by pulling back, by talking to and accommodating our enemies, and abandoning our friends and allies. Some of this wrong-headed thinking about the world is happening because we're in a political climate where, for many people, when George Bush says "yes," their reflex reaction is to say "no." That is unacceptable."

I would vote for him in a heartbeat. This is also the reason, I think, that he will never be the Democratic nominee for President or even Vice-President --- heck the Democrats had to cancel a political debate just because Fox News was going to cover it. I think there are a lot of people that think like this - even a number who will not admit that deep down they fear the potential downside radical Islam presents us.

I think there is little difference between him and Rudy Giuliani - both are social liberals, both are for lack of better terminology pro-war on terror. I think there is a decent chance to see a Rudy/Joe ticket in '08. Imagine a Democrat and a Republican running on the same ticket - both pro-abortion, for reasonable gun control, for social programs, both with tons of real life experience....

Just thinking "out loud" here.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Liebermans concern for "abandoning our friends and allies" is a code reference to Israel and probably the most important part of his speech.
Lieberman shares the neocon philosophy of defending Israel through preemptive wars.
Personally I would love to have Russ Feingold as the first Jewish-American President or Vice President.

dbermanmd · Mar 15, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mojo @ Mar 14 2007, 07:02 PM) [snapback]405701[/snapback]</div>

Liebermans concern for "abandoning our friends and allies" is a code reference to Israel and probably the most important part of his speech.
Lieberman shares the neocon philosophy of defending Israel through preemptive wars.
Personally I would love to have Russ Feingold as the first Jewish-American President or Vice President.
[/b]
Click to expand...

israel does not need american protection - what it wants is freedom to defend itself from outside interferance.

who would finegolds running mate be, david duke how many Jewish friends do you have - i am sure you can tell me the exact figure. hey, can you also decode radio signals, perhaps body language :lol: did you vote for lieberman when he was vp candidate? How did that make you feel?

Wildkow · Mar 17, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Mar 14 2007, 07:05 AM) [snapback]405314[/snapback]</div>

. . .
My thought process is "seeing evil and thinking it's good"....please, use your brilliance and show me a quote that even remotely implies that.... I'll wait patiently for your answer otherwise I'll accept such a statement as diversion and an admission that you don't have a clue what you're talking about and that you admit defeat on this topic.

. . .
[/i][/b]
[/b]
Click to expand...

You have constantly sided with Iraq and against America for the war. That's the one I can think of right off the bat. Their list of atrocities is undeniable and monumental. You have denied that were wishing any harm to Americas and everyday they sought to shoot down our servicemen enforcing the UN mandated â€œNo-Fly-Zoneâ€ which is undeniable and well documented. What do you think Saddam wanted with the unrefined Yellow-Cake from Africa or where ever and the five tons of weapon grade refined Yellow-cake found there? Also how do you answer the Bi-partisan 9/11 Committeesâ€™ finding that Saddamâ€™s whole intent just prior to the invasion was to get the sanctions lowered so that he could resume his quest for nuclear weapons? Evil/Good â€“ Good/Evil see my new topic itâ€™s and honest intellectual foray into this malady possessing most far left liberals and some mainstream liberals also!

Wildkow

Wildkow

fshagan · Mar 17, 2007

Here's an interesting thought ... with the move of so many primaries to early February, including socially liberal California, the Republican candidate could very well be someone like Rudy.

One prediction is that we could have an open convention, with no candidate with enough delegates to secure the nomination on the first round of balloting. That hasn't happened since the 1950's, IIRC, and could be very exciting.

Godiva · Mar 17, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(FBear @ Mar 14 2007, 02:41 PM) [snapback]405577[/snapback]</div>

The rest of America does not know Rudy like New Yorkers know Rudy. He was in his last term as Mayor not particularly well liked becuase of his abrasiveness, & his my way or the highway attitude. The only thing, and this is really the sad part, that saved his a** was 9/11. He was always good at crisis management. Lest we not forget, against recommendations of every one from the police chief to the head of the fire department, told him he was nuts for locating the Office Emergency Management on the 13th floor of 7 World Trade Center. But he's Rudy and is all knowing and all seeing and he wanted the office where he wanted the office and everyone be damned. Look what happened the building was evacuted and then lost due to fire losing a brand new 25 million dollar facility. The office is now located in Brooklyn several hundred feet under ground where everyone else said it should have been located in the first place. If you think Bushie is secretive Rudy makes him look like Mary Poppins. People had to sue him because he would never release even the smallest piece of information requested under the Freedom of Information Act. By the way he lost in court every time and wound up releasing the information and looking like an idiot at the same time. I really don't look forward to him back in political life.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Sounds like the perfect successor to Bush. Those that voted for Bush would just love to vote for Rudy.

I won't be one of them.

efusco · Mar 17, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Mar 17 2007, 03:26 AM) [snapback]407339[/snapback]</div>

You have constantly sided with Iraq and against America for the war.[/b]
Click to expand...

I thought the war was for Iraq, not against it...am I mistaken?
I've constantly said that the invasion of a soverign nation that posed not threat and was not known to harbor terrorists that threaten the US was wrong. You argue that it was right b/c Sadaam was a bad guy....my questions as to why we don't invade every nation who's leader we deem a 'bad guy' go unanswered in any satisfactory manner.

That's the one I can think of right off the bat. Their list of atrocities is undeniable and monumental.[/b]
Click to expand...

Darfor, N.Korea, China, Sudan, and the list of undeniable atrocities goes on and on most far worse than anything Sadaam ever did. That does not mean we can start invading randomly.

You have denied that were wishing any harm to Americas and everyday[/b]
Click to expand...

No I haven't. They (meaning Sadaam, not the innocent civilians to whom we're delivering the gift of democracy I assume you mean) may have wished it upon us, but there was no means and no immenent potential for such means. Many countries in the world wish harm upon us, but wishing doesn't make it so.

they sought to shoot down our servicemen enforcing the UN mandated "No-Fly-Zone" which is undeniable and well documented. [/b]
Click to expand...

Certainly they did (though not daily and not with any weapons with the potential to actually hit us), so we sould take out each individual strike zone...it's hardly grounds for invasion.

What do you think Saddam wanted with the unrefined Yellow-Cake from Africa or where ever and the five tons of weapon grade refined Yellow-cake found there?[/b]
Click to expand...

And it would take them what, 2 decades or more to develop the means of refining it and another decade to build a weapon...is that too little time to try any sort of diplomacy or to let the UN work? I consider Pakistan who already has nukes a hell of a lot bigger threat than Iraq. Oh, and if they developed the weapon they still had no means of delivering it anywhere...they'd also have to find a warhead to get it even to Israel. yea, that's a imminent threat.

Also how do you answer the Bi-partisan 9/11 Committees' finding that Saddam's whole intent just prior to the invasion was to get the sanctions lowered so that he could resume his quest for nuclear weapons?[/b]
Click to expand...

See above.

Evil/Good â€“ Good/Evil see my new topic it's and honest intellectual foray into this malady possessing most far left liberals and some mainstream liberals also![/b]
Click to expand...

As much as I itch to read each and every one of your deeply insightful and balanced posts I'm just not caught up enough with other stuff to look at it.

But, and finally, in no way have you shown me an example of seeing something evil as good. I see bad things and put them into perspective as to how bad they are. Good and evil are not black and white. Sadaam was a bad guy. His desire for nukes and other WMD was bad. His intent toward Israel was bad. But none of it reaching a level that justifies the VERY bad situation we've allowed to develop in Iraq right now and definately not enough to justify the increased evil intent toward the US that our actions have fomented.

Wildkow · Mar 18, 2007

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Mar 17 2007, 02:22 PM) [snapback]407544[/snapback]</div>

I thought the war was for Iraq, not against it...am I mistaken?
I've constantly said that the invasion of a soverign nation that posed not threat and was not known to harbor terrorists that threaten the US was wrong. You argue that it was right b/c Sadaam was a bad guy....my questions as to why we don't invade every nation who's leader we deem a 'bad guy' go unanswered in any satisfactory manner.

Darfor, N.Korea, China, Sudan, and the list of undeniable atrocities goes on and on most far worse than anything Sadaam ever did. That does not mean we can start invading randomly.

No I haven't. They (meaning Sadaam, not the innocent civilians to whom we're delivering the gift of democracy I assume you mean) may have wished it upon us, but there was no means and no immenent potential for such means. Many countries in the world wish harm upon us, but wishing doesn't make it so.
Certainly they did (though not daily and not with any weapons with the potential to actually hit us), so we sould take out each individual strike zone...it's hardly grounds for invasion.

And it would take them what, 2 decades or more to develop the means of refining it and another decade to build a weapon...is that too little time to try any sort of diplomacy or to let the UN work? I consider Pakistan who already has nukes a hell of a lot bigger threat than Iraq. Oh, and if they developed the weapon they still had no means of delivering it anywhere...they'd also have to find a warhead to get it even to Israel. yea, that's a imminent threat.

See above.

As much as I itch to read each and every one of your deeply insightful and balanced posts I'm just not caught up enough with other stuff to look at it.

But, and finally, in no way have you shown me an example of seeing something evil as good. I see bad things and put them into perspective as to how bad they are. Good and evil are not black and white. Sadaam was a bad guy. His desire for nukes and other WMD was bad. His intent toward Israel was bad. But none of it reaching a level that justifies the VERY bad situation we've allowed to develop in Iraq right now and definately not enough to justify the increased evil intent toward the US that our actions have fomented.
[/b]
Click to expand...

You sided with pre-war Iraq and that is what I meant but you knew that . I donâ€™t think your views rise from some nefarious intent or pure partisan reasons but it is done by you and many others on this forum.

Your assessment of Iraq as no threat to the USA or did not harbor terrorist is naive and has been proven wrong by many throughout the political spectrum including bipartisan committees.

We have given 30-50 million people a chance at liberty and freedom from tyranny. Why on earth you and otherâ€™s on this forum donâ€™t think that is a good thing I have no explanation. As far as the other countries you mentioned are concerned and what we should do about them, I have only this . . .

â€œNo one is free when others are oppressed. â€œ (author unknown)

Many politicians are in the habit of laying it down as a self-evident proposition that no people ought to be free till they are fit to use their freedom. The maxim is worthy of the fool in the old story who resolved not to go into the water till he had learned to swim. Thomas Macaula

You can only protect your liberties in this world by protecting the other man's freedom. You can only be free if I am free. Clarence Darrow:

The USA was founded in the name of democracy, equality and individual freedom, but is failing to deliver the fundamental promise of protecting rights for all. Amnesty International

As far as China is concerned. . .

The Bush administration continues to coddle China, despite its continuing crackdown on democratic reform, its brutal subjugation of Tibet, its irresponsible export of nuclear and missile technology... Such forbearance on our part might have made sense during the Cold War when China was the counterweight to Soviet power. It makes no sense to play the China card now when our opponents have thrown in their hand. â€“ Bill Clinton

But, and finally, in no way have you shown me an example of seeing something evil as good. I see bad things and put them into perspective as to how bad they are. Good and evil are not black and white. Sadaam was a bad guy. His desire for nukes and other WMD was bad. His intent toward Israel was bad. But none of it reaching a level that justifies the VERY bad situation we've allowed to develop in Iraq right now and definately not enough to justify the increased evil intent toward the US that our actions have fomented.[/b]
Click to expand...

How many years have we sat around discussing the greys of Saddam and Iraq while the threat increased and people suffered? Really what did anyone expect other than the situation was going to get worse before it (I hope) eventually gets better in Iraq? While there is no way of measuring the intent of evil people or good people I can also say that a breath of fresh air was taken by many people around the world who are oppressed knowing that the USA in one limited fashion of the other is still intent on Freedom and Liberty for all as expressed by our forefathers. That is up until this century where it has been abandon almost entirely by the Left and seriously neglected by the Right.

Wildkow

Joe Lieberman

dbermanmd New Member

desynch Die-Hard Conservative

malorn Senior Member

dbermanmd New Member

efusco Moderator Emeritus
Staff Member

fshagan Senior Member

dbermanmd New Member

eagle33199 Platinum Member

efusco Moderator Emeritus
Staff Member

dbermanmd New Member

FBear Senior Member

dbermanmd New Member

eagle33199 Platinum Member

mojo Senior Member

dbermanmd New Member

Wildkow New Member

fshagan Senior Member

Godiva AmeriKan Citizen

efusco Moderator Emeritus
Staff Member

Wildkow New Member

About PriusChat

Quick Navigation

Like us on Facebook

Buy us a beer!

Useful Searches

Joe Lieberman

dbermanmd New Member

desynch Die-Hard Conservative

malorn Senior Member

dbermanmd New Member

efusco Moderator Emeritus Staff Member

fshagan Senior Member

dbermanmd New Member

eagle33199 Platinum Member

efusco Moderator Emeritus Staff Member

dbermanmd New Member

FBear Senior Member

dbermanmd New Member

eagle33199 Platinum Member

mojo Senior Member

dbermanmd New Member

Wildkow New Member

fshagan Senior Member

Godiva AmeriKan Citizen

efusco Moderator Emeritus Staff Member

Wildkow New Member

efusco Moderator Emeritus
Staff Member

efusco Moderator Emeritus
Staff Member

efusco Moderator Emeritus
Staff Member