Red State Views

[Cut-Throat]

Ok, but cheap shots are ok against president Bush?

I see how it works now :

We're just making up for 8 years of cheap shots at Clinton when he was president plus 6 years' worth after he retired.

You have to love the Left! Remember, when Clinton was in office it "wasn't fair" to criticize a sitting president. Now that he's out of office we can't criticize him because he's not the sitting president.

All I can say is wow.

What are you talking about? - He actually was impeached by right wing zealots for lying about an affair! By those standards Bush should now be in prison!

 

[lets-retire]

Cut-Throat--As the nation's chief law enforcement officer Clinton should have been thrown in jail for the obvious lie under oath.  I would have to spend 5 years in prison if I committed perjury and I would not be allowed to be in law enforcement ever again.

As far as president Bush goes, he might have lied, but he might have been misinformed.  It can't be proved either way, so get over it.  Since even Bill "the god" Clinton believed Iraq had MWD's, I would tend to believe the latter. 

Vagabond-Clinton did more to harm national security than anyone since the Viet Nam war.  He showed the terrorists that all you have to do is kill a couple of American and we will go home, look at Somalia.  Once you lose the initiative it is very difficult to get it back.  Not only do we have to get the initiative back, we must prove we will do what is necessary to win the war.  The terrorists want sheep, they want the easy target.  If you prove to them that you are a hard target they will leave you alone.  I doubt this country has the will power to prove to the bad people of the world that we have what it takes to be a hard target.  You don't believe me go the the bad part of town and act like a coward.  You'll be beaten and robbed quickly.  Go to a different town's bad part and act like you fear nothing.  You will be left alone.

To the Original Poster--Have you ever noticed how the media always quote the dumbest people around. Look at the aftermath of a tornado. Normally the people interviewed share a common brain between about five people. I would have a tendency to think this is the cse in this situation, looking at the media source. It is rather left leaning.

 

[brewer12345]

Way to pound out those Fox "News"/Republican party talking points, lets.

 

[Cool Dood]

Way to pound out those Fox "News"/Republican party talking points, lets.

C'mon, like you don't ever hammer away at New York Times "truths."

 

[farmerEd]

  You don't believe me go the the bad part of town and act like a coward.  You'll be beaten and robbed quickly.  Go to a different town's bad part and act like you fear nothing.  You will be left alone.

Really? Gee, we went to IRAQ (bad part of town), acted liked we feared nothing (Remember "Bring 'em on"?)...have the soldiers in IRAQ been  left alone?

>>Vagabond-Clinton did more to harm national security than anyone since the Viet Nam war.

Really: How many Americans where killed by terrorists under Clinton? How about Bush?


>>Have you ever noticed how the media always quote the dumbest people around.  Look at the aftermath of a tornado.  Normally the people interviewed share a common brain between about five people.

Yea...and they are usually living in a trailer in a red state...

 

[lets-retire]

Way to pound out those Fox "News"/Republican party talking points, lets.

I know it's hard to believe that people can learn from their experiences instead of listening to a few congressmen/representatives to form their opinions.  I sweated, bled and cursed enough through training and actual operations to know these points are correct and they are mine from personal experience.

 

[brewer12345]

C'mon, like you don't ever hammer away at New York Times "truths."

Uh, not that I am aware. You'll note that the thread I (unfortunately) started about reports of US military personnel killing civilians didn't include a condemnation or statement that there was solid proof it had happened (though I suspect it has happened repeatedly due to the nature of the situation).

You bring up an interesting point, though. No matter how independent we may believe we are in our beliefs, the influence of the media is pretty pervasive.

 

[lets-retire]

Really? Gee, we went to IRAQ (bad part of town), acted liked we feared nothing (Remember "Bring 'em on"?)...have the soldiers in IRAQ been  left alone?

>>Vagabond-Clinton did more to harm national security than anyone since the Viet Nam war.

Really: How many Americans where killed by terrorists under Clinton? How about Bush?


>>Have you ever noticed how the media always quote the dumbest people around.  Look at the aftermath of a tornado.  Normally the people interviewed share a common brain between about five people.

Yea...and they are usually living in a trailer in a red state...

You forgot the second half of my statement...we must prove we will do what is required to win.  Until that happens we are still viewed as a soft target.  Remember going ot the bad part of town they don't know you and you just have to maintain.  Once you get robbed and beaten up it is much more difficut to overcome that problem.  Clinton let us get beaten up in Somolia.

When were the plans drawn up and the people trained to attack the towers?  It all stems from projecting an unwillingness to complete a job if it requires a the death of a few Americans.

 

[saluki9]

Yea...and they are usually living in a trailer in a red state...

Ah, the left's other favorite tactic. When all else fails, just characterize conservatives as uneducated morons.

 

[brewer12345]

When were the plans drawn up and the people trained to attack the towers?  It all stems from projecting an unwillingness to complete a job if it requires a the death of a few Americans.

Bullshit.  You are talking about trying to protect an unprotectable target at a time (pre 9/11) when people were much less willing to surrender their civil liberties than many of us seem to be today.  The attack on 9/11 stemmed from a bunch of radical fundamentalists being willing to trade their lives for Merkin lives and getting through the net.  The same thing (a successful attack of some sort) could easily happen again.  It is just a matter of time and there is little the gummint can really do about it besides make it tougher for these things to succeed.  The US is too open and too large a target.  Interfering in other sovereign nations' affairs without the cooperation of the est of the world will just exacerbate the problem.

But I am genuinely curious: what do you think is a successful course of action for the US in Iraq?  Aside from "staying", what do you think needs to be done and can it realistically be accomplished?  I have to say that I don't really see any way it can end well, although I would love for it to turn out OK.

 

[brewer12345]

Ah, the left's other favorite tactic.  When all else fails, just characterize conservatives as uneducated morons. 

Well, gosh, they just make it so easy, starting with the president and working on down...

 

[saluki9]

Ah, the left's other favorite tactic. When all else fails, just characterize conservatives as uneducated morons.

Well, gosh, they just make it so easy, starting with the president and working on down...

According to the rules relating to political disagreements on the internet it is now appropriate to post the following

BTW: Brewer, I respect your opinion so I'm not calling you a hippie

 

[Cut-Throat]

Nothing wrong with Hippies - They got us out of Vietnam and they never wanted us in Iraq. So far they are batting 1000 percent!

I say go with the Hippies! 8)

 

[saluki9]

Nothing wrong with Hippies - They got us out of Vietnam and they never wanted us in Iraq. So far they are batting 1000 percent!

I say go with the Hippies! 8)

Wonder what they thought about WWI and WWII

although I'm sure they had a different name for them back then

 

[sgeeeee]

. .
So you can stereotype "red state" people, call them "deep thinkers" and make fun of their opinions and suggest that anyone that feels that way is a "moron," but those aren't "cheap shots, they are thoughtful comments.  . . .

But I didn't do any of those things.

 

[dusk_to_dawn]

No argument from me, there. The thing I disliked the most about Clinton was the executive branch power grab once he was in office. Pretty much every President has done the same thing, but it doesn't get any less repugnant with repetition.

The thing I disliked about Clinton is how he attacked Iraq citing WMDs as the reason for doing so.

In his words Dec. 1998 <<Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.>>

 

[Cool Dood]

Clinton lied! Clinton LIEEEEEEEEEEEEEDDD!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[setab]

. .
So you can stereotype "red state" people, call them "deep thinkers" and make fun of their opinions and suggest that anyone that feels that way is a "moron," but those aren't "cheap shots, they are thoughtful comments.  . . .

But I didn't do any of those things.   

You are correct.  I was using "you" way too broadly.  My bad.  Once again, I apologize.  My major concern is that there is little rational discussion of issues amidst all the name calling.  Both sides, and I mean both sides have resorted to denigrating the guy who won last by calling him and his supporters stupid.  I don't think that is constructive either way.  The left perceives the right to be arrogant and stupid; the right, on the other hand. perceives the left to be arrogant and immoral.  I happen to think both sides are correct at any given moment, at least about the arrogance, but as someone who lives in the middle of the red states, I resent the assertions from both directions.  I am not stupid because I am religious and believe there are absolute values that are important.  Nor am I unAmerican because I question the total erosion of the Bill of Rights by the current Administration.  Secret courts, midnight roundups of alleged terrorists etc. are anathema.  But neither side is discussing any of this because they are both too busy hating each other personally.  Sad.

setab

 

[lets-retire]

When were the plans drawn up and the people trained to attack the towers?  It all stems from projecting an unwillingness to complete a job if it requires a the death of a few Americans.

Bull****.  You are talking about trying to protect an unprotectable target at a time (pre 9/11) when people were much less willing to surrender their civil liberties than many of us seem to be today.  The attack on 9/11 stemmed from a bunch of radical fundamentalists being willing to trade their lives for Merkin lives and getting through the net.  The same thing (a successful attack of some sort) could easily happen again.  It is just a matter of time and there is little the gummint can really do about it besides make it tougher for these things to succeed.  The US is too open and too large a target.  Interfering in other sovereign nations' affairs without the cooperation of the est of the world will just exacerbate the problem.

But I am genuinely curious: what do you think is a successful course of action for the US in Iraq?  Aside from "staying", what do you think needs to be done and can it realistically be accomplished?  I have to say that I don't really see any way it can end well, although I would love for it to turn out OK.

You, sir, are correct they were an unprotectable target. If Clinton had stood his ground instead of running when a few Rangers and Delta personnel were killed, I believe the terrorists would not have been so embolden as to strike at the mainland. What was his response to the bombing of our land at teh embassies in Africa? He lobed a few missles at Bin Laden. That in itself told Bin Laden that Clinton and presumabely the American people had lost the fearlessness to be the world leader.

What needs to be done is training of the Iraqi military and police forces to get then up to speed. They are a young force and still in the learning stages. Unfortunately it takes a long time to fully train someone up to task. Yes it can be accomplished, but it will take time. I find it ironic that people are compalining about how inept the Iraqi forces are. These are the same people who preach that a child doesn't know what is right or wrong and patience needs to be practiced.

 

[dusk_to_dawn]

Clinton lied! Clinton LIEEEEEEEEEEEEEDDD!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now wait just a minute there Cool Dood. Some people aren't going to take too kindly to you calling Clinton a liar, especially the ones that want a Clinton clone in office. Maybe he was listening to John Kerry too much.

Kerry in 1997 <<In my judgment, the Security Council should authorize a strong U.N. military response that will materially damage, if not totally destroy, as much as possible of the suspected infrastructure for developing and manufacturing weapons of mass destruction, as well as key military command and control nodes. Saddam Hussein should pay a grave price, in a currency that he understands and values, for his unacceptable behavior.

This should not be a strike consisting only of a handful of cruise missiles hitting isolated targets primarily of presumed symbolic value. But how long this military action might continue and how it may escalate should Saddam remain intransigent and how extensive would be its reach are for the Security Council and our allies to know and for Saddam Hussein ultimately to find out. ...>>

Sounds like Kerry saw a WMD problem all the way back in 1997.

 

[Cut-Throat]

Who cares who lied? - You all Lie!

Bush is incompetent and panders to the christian right - that has put this country in the ditch!

I'm tired of this christian right crap! - The GOP senate wasted its time today debating a Gay marriage amendment.

It's time for some sensible Democratic Government!

 

[alphabet soup]

Saluki, man, give it up...you're bailing water out of a sinking ship ( the neofascist republican party.)

And I say good riddance to bad rubbish!

 

[bosco]

If you prove to them that you are a hard target they will leave you alone. I doubt this country has the will power to prove to the bad people of the world that we have what it takes to be a hard target. You don't believe me go the the bad part of town and act like a coward. You'll be beaten and robbed quickly. Go to a different town's bad part and act like you fear nothing. You will be left alone.

anybody remember Barry Goldwater's 1964 campaign, where he made the analogy of Russia being the schoolyard bully and all that needed to be done was to "stand up to the bully" and he would back down?

I remember my dad (nobody hated the Russians more than him--he and his parents had to flee to Canada from Russia in 1930) saying "I don't know...I can remember several times when the schoolyard bully cleaned somebody's clock pretty good."

What needs to be done is training of the Iraqi military and police forces to get then up to speed.

under Nixon, this strategy was called "Vietnamization." Didn't work too good either....

The more things change, the more they stay the same....

 

[lets-retire]

Bosco--Your absolutely correct if the bully is bigger/stronger/meaner than you are you will get beat up. But in this case WE are bigger/stronger, but not really meaner, but we can win.

The big difference between Vietnam and Iraq is Iraq is not supported by Russia, North Vietnam was. The Vietnamese also were hiding in Cambodia, a place we didn't want to go. So we did secret incursions there, but quickly went back to Vietnam. The Iraq insurgents are supported by criminals and terrorists, not a major world power.

 

[laurence]

That support was rather small, but more to the point, who was the major power that supported the American Colonies during the Rev. War? Yet we managed to kick out the most powerful empire the world had ever known! In fact, only about a third of people in the new world were in support of the rebellion, a similar number to who supports the insurgency in Iraq! When the people don't want you there, and your not willing to employ Stalin's methods (thank goodness), you are fighting a real uphill battle.