Well I don't want to be evil or stupid, so I guess I have to agree with you!
You bring up some good points . I don't think that any logical thinking person could honestly say that the US government is not responsible for alot of the anger that exist , but to say that "it's too easy to just pin this on the terrorist" ?! I think that you are confusing the issues . The terrorist deserve all the blame for any & all attacks that they have carried out anyware in the world! The US government deserves some of the critisism for their mastakes . One has nothing to do with the other . Blameing the US government for terrorism is a cowardly excuse , used by cowards . It's not like there has been one or two attacks . this is somthing that occures on a regular bases & according to most experts is going to continue for years to come . What about all of the good people in the middle east who live amongst these terrorist ? Isn't it about time to stop worrying about who started it & start facing the real issues . Terrorist are not doing anything constructive to solve any problems that exist . Basically we are talking about young children who are being brain washed by adults with warped minds . This is going to go on for generations to come . I think it's time to stop confusing the issues .upnorthkyosa said:
It's called sarcasm. Often when I write a socio-political post, I take my tongue and plant it firmly into my cheek. I am more than happy to bash on both sides of the aisle. The Christian Right and the Looney Left are easy to pick on. I just prefer to poke at the right since they usually fight back- the far lefties curl up into a ball and cry too easily.sgtmac_46 said:
1- I wasn't picking on you personally Sgt- don't take it as suchsgtmac_46 said:
).
Technically, they are a different class of people from "regular folks". They are icons. I am, as a MA Instructor, a role model on a small, almost individual scale. I affect my students, and sometimes their families by trying to be a positive influence on them. I don't get into politics or religion in class, since it is not relevant to training. The couple students that like to debate with me do so after class and it is all happy and friendly, no matter how spirited the debate might get. While I would like to think that I, at the most, influence my students to think for themselves and do the research, I do not kid myself into thinking that my words or actions can influence the way they look at policy or how they vote.Floating Egg said:We go on about entertainers (yes, I'm guilty of this as well) as if they're a separate class of people.
It's so easy to criticize them and knock them down because we don't agree with what they're saying, but I don't think they're any more or less sensible than the average person. Actors in particular are very empathetic on the whole, and this leads to a kind of unrestrained idealism.
Tom Cruise is still insane though.
Terrorism is a political activity like rape is about sex.upnorthkyosa said:
"Habib" heard wrong. Give me a list of those bombs, missiles and guns supplied by the US. Iraq signed an aid package with the Soviet Union in the early 1970's, who subsequently supplied 90% of Iraq's armament. The French took up the slack for the rest, providing Mirage fighters and exocet missiles. The best evidence the kook fringe has is some allegations that the US allowed dual-use sales (this provided by the Sunday Herald, which is place cited everytime this topic is brought up) and a more asinine allegation that we sold chemical weapons to Iraq. The reality is that Germany and their lax export laws had more to do with Iraq's chemical, biological and nuclear research than any other country on Earth. As for chemical weapons, we had no need to sell them to Iraq, as German companies had assisted Iraq (and Iran) in building chemical weapons plants to produce their own. This asinine assertion that we armed Iraq is smoke and mirrors.upnorthkyosa said:
Same way i'm sure the Israelis feel whenever they find out European nations and international organizations have been providing aid and support to Palestinian terrorists who blow up Israeli school children.upnorthkyosa said:
Access to oil and US involvement is far more complex than you allude to. The fact is that the US gets most of our oil from Canada, Mexico and Argentina. Saudi oil, for example, falls low on the list. Arab oil, while important to the US, is far more coveted and relied upon by Europeans and Asia (which explains their willingness to support any dictator at any price to keep it flowing). If oil were a concern, we would not have embargoed Iranian oil since 1979, despite it's often cheap market price. It's not just oil that's important to us.upnorthkyosa said:
The conflict has been going on far longer than that. Arabs still cite acts committed a thousand years ago as pretext for their holy war. Destroying the root of our enemy is the only cure for this problem. Only then can we consider curing some of the social ills that you have listed.upnorthkyosa said:
That's true, about the right fighting back. Most people on the right have no problem engaging in heated dialogue on this or any topic. The left is just as incline to call those that disagree with them fascists and then refuse to even deal with them. Knowing that both are wrong at times is useful, as it is clear that you do.DngrRuss said:
I wasn't assuming you were. I've always found your posts interesting and fairly reasonable.DngrRuss said:On to the somewhat serious response to the post:
1- I wasn't picking on you personally Sgt- don't take it as such
That is true. I never suggested you personally had, I was merely pointing out that many on the left whine about being called unpatriotic, and then call THEIR opposition fascists. They seem to miss the irony in that.DngrRuss said:2- I have not ever called conservatives "facists". I have called facists facists. A conservative is merely a conservative. I consider myself a fiscal conservative and a social liberal- thus my registry as an Independant. I think when anyone pulls out the "facist" argumment, they are bordering on losing the debate. If they throw out the "Nazi" card- debate over and you lose. Anytime I've heard the far left decry Bush as a Nazi, in my mind, whatever argument or position they had is lost. Bush is not a Nazi. To my knowledge, he has not advocated the extermination of some 6 million people of one ethnicity or another (though, admitedly, I haven't been in on the latest White House Staff Meetings, so I can't say for certain... ok, there goes the sarcasm again
Yes, some of us can disagree. There is a fringe, though, that believes that some day they can participate in a revolution and kill all the conservatives they disagree with so much. Some on the fringe view their fellow Americans as the REAL enemy, and they've said as much. How do you deal rationally with this nut group? Differing opinions I can live with. The belief that I am a bigger threat to America than terrorists (who some of them admire) is something else. Again, the nut fringe is on both sides, I admit. I don't like the beliefs of some far right conservatives. But it seems to me as if the Democratic party is trying to move FURTHER toward that fringe.DngrRuss said:
You don't have to accept every policy. But there is a big difference between hating the policy, and concluded that America is the great evil in the world, and that seems to be the angle played by MANY on the left.DngrRuss said:
Maher pretending to be a comedian (is that what he is?) doesn't stop him from inserting himself in to politics at every turn. As for Limbaugh, the best (and only) evidence the left has of his "hypocrisy" is his addiction to prescription drugs (i.e. oxycotin). Anyone who has dealt with prescribed oxycotin on a personal level will have an entirely different perspective on this issue. It's one thing to go down to skid row with the intent of buying crack cocaine, and then getting yourself addicted. It's another to begin taken a narcotic analgesic, as oxycotin is, by doctors prescription and then discovering, after you've been taking it at doctors direction, that it is physically addictive. It's one of the dirty secrets of the medical industry.DngrRuss said:
Keep in mind that during the entire Clinton administration, Limbaugh never once simulated his assassination on his radio show. If you want to look at political access in hyperbole, you might catch a little Air America (if you happen to live in one of the three markets where it actually airs).DngrRuss said:
If Rush Limbaugh and Strom Thurman are the best you have, we're in pretty good shape. It seems Limbaugh (and the now defunct Strom Thurman) are the only real easy targets for leftists. I think Limbaugh would appreciate the irony of being the lightening rod of the conservatives. Since he's not running for any elected position, and his ratings are are better than ever, I don't think he minds taking the heat.hardheadjarhead said:
But I thought all that was a lie when Bush said it. The House and Senate had access to the same intelligence information Bush had, nothing more or less. They came to the same conclusion, yet...Bush was lying? lol. Some people want it both ways.Tgace said:
The Poor folks at snopes. It's apparent that they wished these quotes weren't accurate, that's why they spent so much time trying to give them "context" (see spin). That context consisted of saying "Yeah, we said he had WMD and he needed to be dealt with...but we hope we can have a peaceful way to do it." It really changed none of the point of the quotes. They all acknowledged Saddam was a threat, they acknowledged widespread evidence that Saddam was trying to continue to build WMD, and they stated, unequivocally that he needed to be dealt with....just not by a Republican President that they hate.Tgace said:
What we should have done is filled a stern letter of protest to the UN...and maybe organized a march to show our solidarity and unity...and legalize medicinal marijuana.Tgace said:
