Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion The Water Cooler OT: politics

In reply to:

---

Sometimes one has to look at results... "shock and awe" did precisely that. Had We wanted to, Iraq could be a parking lot today. Some may see that as arrogance, but it IS true. As for world domination in oil... If that was our goal, you would know it. Kuwait could be a territory, just as Guam is... we liberated, held out the hand of friendship, and hoped it was accepted.

---

All I can say is wow. I think you've said enough for me.

Turbodog, Bigwill, Craigsub - Thanks for all the responses.

I have been thinking that I have been a bit out of line and selfindulgent. My purpose was to get information by entering the argument - but I think I am arguing too much instead of asking questions.

Honestly, I think going into Iraq was a BIG mistake and I have a hard time seeing why I should vote for Bush (this is a confession not an argument - I am offering no reasons here). But, if I am going to argue I need to know more.

So, anyway I will try to post my thoughts in the form of questions in the future. I don't want to be antagonistic, and I don't want to pontificate with my small collection of information.

I graduated from Jerry Falwell's college (now University) so I pretty well understand and empathize with the feelings behind conservative viewpoints. I think the truth is usually in the middle somewhere - so I need to hear what you guys have to say to feel like I am getting to a good understanding of our world and politics.

Anyway - more later.

Spiff... I said precisely nothing for you. I really love guys like you who love to take one small paragraph and try to make your case on it. So... let us examine this one paragraph.

1. Yes, We COULD have made Iraq into a parking lot. We did not. Instead, we are trying to bring a real democracy and self rule to the long suffering people there. Coalition forces have gone out of their way to avoid casualities. Britain ALSO could have made Iraq into nothing, and also showed restraint. We may not be perfect, but we are a good people. The "Shock and Awe" was intended to end the war quickly by making the Iraqi Army flee rather than fight to the death. There were a LOT of people predicting 500,000 Iraqi and 50,000 Coalition deaths ... Shock and Awe prevented that.

2. We are NOT controlling any oil in the mid-east.

3. And with Kuwait, after we liberated the country, we DID offer friendship. And for the most part, it wass accepted.

And to be clear, YOUR response was not a part of any form of polite dialogue....

Donald, Your posts have been well thought out. Having different viewpoints is a good thing...

As far as the war being a mistake... picture 5 years down the road, Hussein in power, and both Iraq and Iran with nukes... Everything we know is gone... Hussein killed millions of his own people... and power was all he cared about.

I fear war and feel for those killed immensely... and yes, I also understand anyone wanting to talk about the reasons why we are there...

Donald - Don't worry about it. This thread is just a long roundtable (long....round...don't know if that works) discussion. All views are welcome, as they enrich the overall dialog. Until recently, this has been a very civil political dialog....surprisingly. Therefore, please feel free to ask questions and/or make assertions. Just be prepared to back up the latter or you'll get torn up.

Gentlemen - Let's try to keep this thing going with a hint of civility. Otherwise, we'll have to put you two into time-out. Seriously, don't let this get personal. We are just talking politics here....we're all Axiom family here to some degree.....We're all just a bunch of extremist bible-beating selfish conservatives and bed-wetting socialist victimized liberals.

TD -- I tend to do things like review things I have said... just to make sure I am not taking it personally. I have been called "high and mighty" and "rhetorical" here... and have not called anyone names.

I DO state what I either think or know... (yes, there is some of both here) ... I have also not attacked Sen. Kerry, I have defended our President against false claims.

TD - Here is a specific. It was claimed earlier that job training was cut by $656 million dollars this year. Directly from the Department of Labor's own website, here are the job training figures:

2003 - $5.134 billion dollars.
2004 - $5.749 billion dollars.

Would someone PLEASE show how that is a cut ?

>>Would someone PLEASE show how that is a cut ?

Well sure. They wanted $1280 million increase, they only got $615 million increase, so that must be a $656 million cut, right ?

It's even worse up here in Canada. Seems like all the political parties aim their announcements at the "easily confused" portion of the electorate. Problem is that the "easily confused" demographic seems to be growing every year and now makes up the majority of the voting population.

Thirty years ago politicians needed to be a bit clever when they offered to give "something for nothing", with tricks like deficit financing in peacetime and "selling off assets to balance the budget". Now they just lie to our faces and get away with it. Maybe we need to reduce electoral terms to match our ever-decreasing attention spans. We could start with a 3 month term -- Bush would have been tossed out and then voted back in by now

That was another funny one. Bridgman, I spend enough time in Canada to really get an appreciation for what you go through up there. When people in Canada find out it is possible to get bypass surgery within 24 hours, they are just amazed.

I can also say no culture has EVER mastered self depracating humor as well as Canada...

"It's even worse up here in Canada. Seems like all the political parties aim their announcements at the "easily confused" portion of the electorate. Problem is that the "easily confused" demographic seems to be growing every year and now makes up the majority of the voting population."

That was funny! Same thing down here.

Seriously though, how about longer terms in office? Fewer election pressures might equate to better policy - less politicization, less of a focus on PR value, politicians less geared toward pleasing special interest groups, etc... Maybe 6-8 year terms for the president?