Palin: "War with Russia, a possibility"

rugcat · Sep 13, 2008

Joe270 said:
If the USA is the 'Great Satan' which the left portrays, then why on earth would they want to assume power of it? Since any action or inaction by the US can be spun negatively, the leftists would still make just as many mistakes as the conservatives, so the problems will persist so long as the USA exists.

So what's the leftists true plan for the USA?

Sorry Joe. Straw man.

Want to talk about actual things the US has done, and debate whether or not they've been justified?

Closing one's eyes to one's country's faults is not true patriotism. Acknowledging those faults so they can be corrected is not calling us The Great Satan.

Joe270 · Sep 13, 2008

Closing one's eyes to one's country's faults is not true patriotism. Acknowledging those faults so they can be corrected is not calling us The Great Satan.

I don't have my eyes closed to my country's faults, and I don't say conservatives do.

I'm saying the left always blames the USA, no matter what the USA does.

If you want to bandy about examples, fine.

End of Cold War--Russian arms and weapons flood into Africa and the mid-east.

The end of complete nuclear destruction doesn't get us any kudos, nor the fact that the Chinese would have sold those arms and weapons just as quickly.

Eastern Africa-- American food aid destroys the agrarian foundations, putting the people into perpetual dependence.

Of course, there would be no people left for said dependence.

Israel-- The US supports an oppressive occupation of Palestinian lands.

Of course, the land is historically Israel, the Palestinians are historically Syrians, Egyptians, and Jordanians, and history has shown the Jews have suffered horrifically without their homeland. . .

Darfur--the US won't go in to implement regime change. . .

Iraq--the US went in to implement regime change. . .

Afghanistan--the US doesn't have enough troops, they don't matter because they don't have oil.

Doesn't matter that the Taliban are no longer in power, murdering women in soccer stadiums for entertainments and blasting ancient statues to kingdom come, and that Al Queda doesn't have that staging area any longer.

That's just a few, lord knows there's lots more. There are two sides to every story, sure, but the left always highlights the negative.

Bravo · Sep 13, 2008

rugcat · Sep 13, 2008

Joe270 said:
I'm saying the left always blames the USA, no matter what the USA does.

If you want to bandy about examples, fine.

Well, if by the left, you mean the far left, I'd agree with you. Just like the far right is equally nuts.

But I'm left -- some here would consider me far left, but i think I' a pretty mainstream liberal in many ways. So here's my take on some of your examples:

Eastern Africa-- American food aid destroys the agrarian foundations, putting the people into perpetual dependence.
No one I know is against food aid. In fact, aid to Africa, especially in the area of AIDS, is one of the few things I give Bush full credit and props for.

Israel-- The US supports an oppressive occupation of Palestinian lands.

I support Israel. I believe that the militant wing of the Palestinians, a very substantial presence, are dedicated to destroying Israel. What I don't believe in is in supporting Israel's actions reflexively, in every case. They have indeed treated the Palestinians badly, and helped to turn a bad situation into an impossible one. They have my support, but they are not blameless.

Darfur--the US won't go in to implement regime change. . .

Iraq--the US went in to implement regime change. . .

First, the Orwellian speak of "implementing regime change" is insulting to language and truth. We invaded Iraq, overthrew Saddam Hussein, and set off a civil war that resulted in the death of many thousands of people. We did so not for any humanitarian purpose, but because we believed it was in our own national interest. (That Bush Doctrine. remember.)

It was a naked exercise in power, and if another country had done such a thing, we would have denounced it to the skies. And yes, as a member of the left, I denounce that war unreservedly.

Darfur has no impact on our own interests. It has no oil, no strategic importance. And as a result, the very neocons who prate about the sacred mission of establishing democracy and overthrowing a tyrant could care less about it. That's what angers those of us on the left so much.

Afghanistan--the US doesn't have enough troops, they don't matter because they don't have oil.

Every liberal I know favored going into Afghanistan, removing the Taliban, and flushing out Bin Laden. The complaints are about the incompetence with which it's been handled, which has little to do with political parties.

And Joe, for one who gets so upset over those who lump conservative beliefs into one little box, you seem to have quite a distorted view of liberal ideas yourself.

AncientEagle · Sep 13, 2008

Joe270 said:
I don't have my eyes closed to my country's faults, and I don't say conservatives do.

I'm saying the left always blames the USA, no matter what the USA does.

If you want to bandy about examples, fine.

End of Cold War--Russian arms and weapons flood into Africa and the mid-east.

The end of complete nuclear destruction doesn't get us any kudos, nor the fact that the Chinese would have sold those arms and weapons just as quickly.

Eastern Africa-- American food aid destroys the agrarian foundations, putting the people into perpetual dependence.

Of course, there would be no people left for said dependence.

Israel-- The US supports an oppressive occupation of Palestinian lands.

Of course, the land is historically Israel, the Palestinians are historically Syrians, Egyptians, and Jordanians, and history has shown the Jews have suffered horrifically without their homeland. . .

Darfur--the US won't go in to implement regime change. . .

Iraq--the US went in to implement regime change. . .

Afghanistan--the US doesn't have enough troops, they don't matter because they don't have oil.

Doesn't matter that the Taliban are no longer in power, murdering women in soccer stadiums for entertainments and blasting ancient statues to kingdom come, and that Al Queda doesn't have that staging area any longer.

That's just a few, lord knows there's lots more. There are two sides to every story, sure, but the left always highlights the negative.

I'm a Democrat, so I guess that makes me what is usually referred to as a (GASP!) Liberal, or a part of "the left." As such, I've just been tagged with a lot of beliefs that I may or may not subscribe to. Yes, we do not have enough troops in Afghanistan, haven't had from the beginning, and consequently are still struggling there when we should have been able to lock that country down a long time ago. My opinion only, based on 30+ years of military experience, but still, just my opinion. Which I damn well have a right to. And you have a right to denigrate if you wish.

And I don't "always highlight the negative." That's right-wing crap. This country has plenty of positives. But it isn't disloyal to point out its short-comings, and if I didn't already have the natural-born right to do that as a citizen, I sure as hell earned it as a soldier.

The rest of this isn't worth my raising my blood pressure over, so I'll let it drop.

AncientEagle · Sep 13, 2008

benbradley said:
Rather than start Yet Another Palin Thread, I'll tack this story here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/u...93&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

Worth reading.

InfinityGoddess · Sep 13, 2008

AncientEagle said:
But it isn't disloyal to point out its short-comings, and if I didn't already have the natural-born right to do that as a citizen, I sure as hell earned it as a soldier.

I agree with this. The US is far from perfect, and really what we liberals really want to do is take what's good about this country and make it better. I get extremely offended when anyone in my family says "If you don't like it, move to another country". Excuse me? But I love this country enough that I want to take what's wrong with it and make it better and thus reinstate our moral standing in the world.

Joe270 · Sep 13, 2008

No one I know is against food aid. In fact, aid to Africa, especially in the area of AIDS, is one of the few things I give Bush full credit and props for.

Bravo would disagree with you here.

And Joe, for one who gets so upset over those who lump conservative beliefs into one little box, you seem to have quite a distorted view of liberal ideas yourself.

I'm not upset in the least. I'm also not lumping conservative beliefs into a box, like you have where conservatives are thoughtless, ignorant apes who hop up and down to the beat of a drum.

I also support my view of the liberal left as blaming the USA far too much for anything and everything that is wrong in the world.

I hope that you, my friend, can see that some of that cricism is unfounded.

That's what started this war or words, that liberals think and conservatives don't. At least my posts demonstrate that some conservatives have the capacity to think, which you didn't give them credit for in the post I cited.

Monkey · Sep 14, 2008

I'm responding here, because lately I've been leaning damned far to the left.

Joe270 said:
I'm also not lumping conservative beliefs into a box

No, you're lumping liberal beliefs into a box.

I also support my view of the liberal left as blaming the USA far too much for anything and everything that is wrong in the world.

Just an example of the box...

I hope that you, my friend, can see that some of that cricism is unfounded.

Are you saying that you're making unfounded criticisms of everyone with "leftist" political leanings just to start a ruckus?

At least my posts demonstrate that some conservatives have the capacity to think

That's not what I got out of it.

Cranky · Sep 14, 2008

Um, on the topic of Palin's interview, I'll say that I'm disappointed to see how much editing was done. Time restraints, bah. I think the media thrives on making people (not just Palin) look as foolish or extreme as they can. Interesting how much clarity is lost with this creative editing. They do it to everyone, too, though the stakes are higher with politicians.

What I got out of it was actually some measured responses to the questions she was asked, along with the typical ducking and weaving I would expect from a politician.

Bring on the debates, and toss the scripts!

rugcat · Sep 14, 2008

Joe270 said:
That's what started this war or words, that liberals think and conservatives don't. At least my posts demonstrate that some conservatives have the capacity to think, which you didn't give them credit for in the post I cited

Actually, this is what started the war of words.

donroc said:
I may be wrong, but my perception is my reality. From my POV, it appears that what divides most republicans and the right from many democrats and the left is that the former are more likely to see the enemy (actual or potential) in international relations (Islamic radicalism, NK, Russia, Iran, Castro for starters) as they/them and the latter sees the enemy as more likely to be the USA (us).

You are basically expanding and reiterating this view. My original post on this subject did not come out of nowhere; it was in response to that comment.

Joe270 said:
I'm also not lumping conservative beliefs into a box, like you have where conservatives are thoughtless, ignorant apes who hop up and down to the beat of a drum. . .

I also support my view of the liberal left as blaming the USA far too much for anything and everything that is wrong in the world.

How is what you're doing any different from what you're saying that I'm doing?

Individuals, as always, cannot be neatly categorized. But there are some themes that run through conservative beliefs, and one of the most striking to me is anti intellectualism. The denigrating of the worth of intelligence and higher education. The exaltation of mediocrity -- every conservative candidate promotes themselves as just a regular guy or gal, and paints their liberal opponents as "elitists." GBW famously declared he doesn't do nuance, as if that's a good thing.

And here's something to ponder: Every bit of progress we've made through the years toward being a civilized nation has been bitterly opposed by the conservatives of their day, and supported by progressives.

The abolition of slavery. The right of black men to vote. Civil rights legislation, and the Voting Rights Act. The right of women to vote, and before that basically any rights at all as compared to men.

The availability of contraceptives. Before 1936, it was legally obscene to send birth control information through the mails. The right for gay people, not to marry as the struggle is now, but simply to be able to have sex without being imprisoned.

It was conservatives that wanted to ban teaching evolution in the classroom, which has morphed into the demand we teach creationism (or it's bastard stepchild, intelligent design) along side evolution, as if they are both equally valid scientific theories.

The right of workers to organize into unions and use collective bargaining to improve working conditions. Union organizers were not only opposed, many were killed. Social Security. Medicaid, to provide basic medical care for the impoverished elderly.

These are just off the top of my head, but every one was anathema to conservative thinking.

billythrilly7th · Sep 14, 2008

It's truly amazing that people take "Perhaps so" and have morphed it into...

"Palin Threatens War With Russia."

And "War With Russia A Possibility!"

Well duh.

On the thread title. Of course it is if a NATO ally is attacked.

And on the first one.

Well, there the left goes again.

Thank you.

aruna · Sep 14, 2008

These are just off the top of my head, but every one was anathema to conservative thinking.

Excellent points, rugcat. Today I watched the movie Amazing Grace, the incredible true story of Willaim Wilberforce and his tireless fight to abolish slavery in Britain.

Today it is hard to fathom that normal thinking people could have actually supported slavery and that the fight took so many years, and so ,uch incredible effort and passion; that he was seen as a dangerous radical and shouted down in Parliament; but without him it might have taken decades before the slave trade was abolished. In this case the conservative forces were like a mountain that had to be moved.

BTW I highly recommend that movie.

donroc · Sep 14, 2008

rugcat said:
Actually, this is what started the war of words.

You are basically expanding and reiterating this view. My original post on this subject did not come out of nowhere; it was in response to that comment.

How is what you're doing any different from what you're saying that I'm doing?

Individuals, as always, cannot be neatly categorized. But there are some themes that run through conservative beliefs, and one of the most striking to me is anti intellectualism. The denigrating of the worth of intelligence and higher education. The exaltation of mediocrity -- every conservative candidate promotes themselves as just a regular guy or gal, and paints their liberal opponents as "elitists." GBW famously declared he doesn't do nuance, as if that's a good thing.

And here's something to ponder: Every bit of progress we've made through the years toward being a civilized nation has been bitterly opposed by the conservatives of their day, and supported by progressives.

The abolition of slavery. The right of black men to vote. Civil rights legislation, and the Voting Rights Act. The right of women to vote, and before that basically any rights at all as compared to men.

The availability of contraceptives. Before 1936, it was legally obscene to send birth control information through the mails. The right for gay people, not to marry as the struggle is now, but simply to be able to have sex without being imprisoned.

It was conservatives that wanted to ban teaching evolution in the classroom, which has morphed into the demand we teach creationism (or it's bastard stepchild, intelligent design) along side evolution, as if they are both equally valid scientific theories.

The right of workers to organize into unions and use collective bargaining to improve working conditions. Union organizers were not only opposed, many were killed. Social Security. Medicaid, to provide basic medical care for the impoverished elderly.

These are just off the top of my head, but every one was anathema to conservative thinking.

Ah, but, rugcat, I never said ALL for either side.

rugcat · Sep 14, 2008

donroc said:
Ah, but, rugcat, I never said ALL for either side.

I understand that. And I said "Individuals, as always, cannot be neatly categorized" We have no differences as far as that's concerned.

Palin: "War with Russia, a possibility"

rugcat

Lost in the Fog

Joe270

Bravo

Socialitest

rugcat

Lost in the Fog

AncientEagle

Old kid, no need to be gentle.

AncientEagle

Old kid, no need to be gentle.

InfinityGoddess

Goddess of Infinity

Joe270

Monkey

Is me.

Cranky

rugcat

Lost in the Fog

billythrilly7th

aruna

On a wing and a prayer

donroc

Historicals and Horror rule

rugcat

Lost in the Fog