Victory for Clinton in Iraq

[rmcrobertson]

Hey, if you don't like dissent and democracy, go someplace where they don't have them. Iraq and North Korea are nice, this time of year. Oh yeah--probably better beaches in Cuba.

 

[heretic888]

Our part in that celebration, at best, is small. Posted by michaeledward

NO, IT'S NOT SMALL. WE MADE IT HAPPEN!! IT WAS US, WE DID IT!!! BUT FOR THE U.S. IT WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED!!
STOP BELITTLING YOUR COUNTRY AND ITS LEADERS AND SOLDIERS. THEY HAVE DONE IT, DONE IT ALL...WITHOUT THE U.N., WITHOUT THE FRENCH, WITHOUT THE GERMANS, WITHOUT THE NAYSAYERS AND CRITICS AND WITHOUT THE WHINERS.
"OUR PART IN THAT CELEBRATION.." IS THE BEST AND THE BIGGEST PART BECAUSE WITHOUT US THERE WOULD BE NO CELEBRATION.

Gee, it's hard to get your attention.

Gee, and people wonder where I come up with the "sociocentrism, jingoism, and nationalism" arguments.

Y'know, in Lawrence Kohlberg's theory of moral reasoning, the logic you're using falls squarely into the sociocentric stage: "my country right or wrong". Its also the moral stage he equates generally to pre-adolescents.

Piaget, too, for that matter.

 

[Blind]

Our part in that celebration, at best, is small. Posted by michaeledward

NO, IT'S NOT SMALL. WE MADE IT HAPPEN!! IT WAS US, WE DID IT!!! BUT FOR THE U.S. IT WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED!!
STOP BELITTLING YOUR COUNTRY AND ITS LEADERS AND SOLDIERS. THEY HAVE DONE IT, DONE IT ALL...WITHOUT THE U.N., WITHOUT THE FRENCH, WITHOUT THE GERMANS, WITHOUT THE NAYSAYERS AND CRITICS AND WITHOUT THE WHINERS.
"OUR PART IN THAT CELEBRATION.." IS THE BEST AND THE BIGGEST PART BECAUSE WITHOUT US THERE WOULD BE NO CELEBRATION.

Gee, it's hard to get your attention.

You should put it on a T-shirt and wear it around !! You could probably sell it in China too when they "liberate" Taiwan.

 

[Tgace]

Beats me. Probably has to do with who you're asking.

Typically, Democratic passivity during the past ten or so years is what I would call compliance and cowardice.

Typically, Republican aggression during the past ten or so years is what I would call jingoism and warhawk-ism.

Neither are being particular true to their political ideologies, if you ask me. Republicans are supposed to be isolationist, non-interventionist and fiscally conservative. Democrats are supposed to actively take place in the furthering of human rights and civil liberties.

I haven't seen any of that. Just money-backed arrogance.

That I can agree with!

 

[Sapper6]

thank you for the clarification Michael

when people aren't clear, that leads to speculation...not always a good thing :idunno:

 

[loki09789]

The nice thing about these boards ... is that responses lead to responses. You may find the reverse is also an interesting way to look at items.

It's all about that 'point of view'. Which are you seeing it from?

The other nice thing about these boards, or at least this one, is that they are an archive of responses....so if we go back and track the form and tone of the responses to TGace posts from you, what would we find? Topical remarks? Comments that ignore issues/topics presented and split hairs over terminology or inferred insensitivity? Please.

This is neither the place or within 'friendly discussion' ideology to go back through and make a list of those responses. Besides, you wrote 'em. You should know what you said.

 

[michaeledward]

It's all about that 'point of view'. Which are you seeing it from?

The other nice thing about these boards, or at least this one, is that they are an archive of responses....so if we go back and track the form and tone of the responses to TGace posts from you, what would we find? Topical remarks? Comments that ignore issues/topics presented and split hairs over terminology or inferred insensitivity? Please.

This is neither the place or within 'friendly discussion' ideology to go back through and make a list of those responses. Besides, you wrote 'em. You should know what you said.

Oh, that point of view, I guess.

Thanks.

Mike

 

[ghostdog2]

Hey, if you don't like dissent and democracy, go someplace where they don't have them. Iraq and North Korea are nice, this time of year. Oh yeah--probably better beaches in Cuba.
posted by rmcroberts

The first time I've heard " Love it or Leave " from a liberal. Now that's progress.

Actually, not bad suggestions. If we keep up the good work, I should be able to get a Big Mac on my way to the Halliburton job site. Now that's real progress.

 

[ghostdog2]

Gee, and people wonder where I come up with the "sociocentrism, jingoism, and nationalism" arguments. posted by H888

I don't wonder where you come up with those arguments, I think it's clear they come from your dislike for your country and a childish petulance when things go well for her.
Given a choice between America and anyone else, you take the side of anyone else.

Oh, and references to Kohlberg are as superficial as he was.

cheerio

 

[Cryozombie]

Moderator Note.

Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level.

Please review our sniping policy.

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=314

Feel free to use the Ignore feature to ignore members whose posts you do not wish to read (it is at the bottom of each member's profile). Thank you.

-Technopunk
-MT Moderator-

 

[OUMoose]

I don't wonder where you come up with those arguments, I think it's clear they come from your dislike for your country and a childish petulance when things go well for her.
Given a choice between America and anyone else, you take the side of anyone else.

I think it's fair to say most people on the boards don't think it's "going well for her". War is never a good thing, no matter how you cut it. Sometimes it is a necessary evil which must be endured, but I doubt its enjoyable for any party involved.

Also, no one here has said anything about disliking their country. Quite on the contrary actually, as they're fighting (albeit a non-violent form) for what they believe in. In their minds, something is wrong, and in yours everything is fine. That's BOTH of your rights as an american. No one HAS to be right, and you can agree to disagree. Lowering yourself to name calling and broad generalizations, however, is not helping your side of the discussion. That being said, is there any chance we can forget the finger pointing and get on with the conversation? :idunno:

 

[heretic888]

I don't wonder where you come up with those arguments, I think it's clear they come from your dislike for your country and a childish petulance when things go well for her.
Given a choice between America and anyone else, you take the side of anyone else.

In other words: my country right or wrong. Terrific job of disproving me there.

Oh, and on a side note, by no means do I think thing are going well for the United States. We are embroiled in at least two wars, have yet to catch the terrorist leader behind 9/11, social security is falling, No Child Left Behind is poised to be extended to the upper high school level, and our populace is too busy watching the likes of American Idol to realize we have a neocon puppet in office. Not going well at all.

Oh, and references to Kohlberg are as superficial as he was.

"Superficial"?? How is a referencing one of the more prominent moral developmental psychologists in the last three decades "superficial"?? Furthermore, how is Kohlberg's research itself "superficial", considering it has received general cross-cultural validation??

Of course, this assumes one has actually read and understand Kohlberg's work. Me thinks not likely.

Laterz.