My Rant Considering Today's Political Climate

[.V.]

Guys, don't let it get out of hand and don't let it spill over into other threads.

Political discussions sometimes tend to get ugly.

[KayakJones]

He tasks me, he TASKS me, and I shall have him!

[Firehawk]

I love Kayak, back in the old days when he'd argue politics, it was just great.

I'm not as well educated on history as Motivated seems to sound, but one thing I would like to say and then others can opinionate, or spew forth their comments, or purge their breath at my regurgitation of information.

I believe the reason we haven't won this war is because we have to fight against these insurgents with our hands tied due to politics and such. They are fighting with no rules except what they beleive is God's will, which is to kill all infidels using any and all means necessary. You know how your coach might write something on the blackboard just before a must win game? He will usually write something like "whatever it takes". Well, that's on their blackboard, and we have something like "do what you can as long as you don't step on UN toes or any other country's toes" or what have you.

So when I hear that someone says "these wars are unattainable because we have encouraged this kind of hatred" or something along those lines, I just don't believe that. I think the only reason we haven't won in Iraq already and nailed Bin laden is because we play by rules, ALOT of rules, nothing more.

Just so we're clear and so Motivated doesn't think I misquoted him, this is the sentence I'm referring to:

"Our wars and goals are at times unattainable and unwinnable because we have provoked this massive sense of revenge and hatred by supporting these regimes."

I disagree 100% on that reason, but I do agree that our wars are unattainable at times, because of the rules we play by.

[Motivated]

Originally Posted by Firehawk

I love Kayak, back in the old days when he'd argue politics, it was just great.

I'm not as well educated on history as Motivated seems to sound, but one thing I would like to say and then others can opinionate, or spew forth their comments, or purge their breath at my regurgitation of information.

I believe the reason we haven't won this war is because we have to fight against these insurgents with our hands tied due to politics and such. They are fighting with no rules except what they beleive is God's will, which is to kill all infidels using any and all means necessary. You know how your coach might write something on the blackboard just before a must win game? He will usually write something like "whatever it takes". Well, that's on their blackboard, and we have something like "do what you can as long as you don't step on UN toes or any other country's toes" or what have you.

So when I hear that someone says "these wars are unattainable because we have encouraged this kind of hatred" or something along those lines, I just don't believe that. I think the only reason we haven't won in Iraq already and nailed Bin laden is because we play by rules, ALOT of rules, nothing more.

Just so we're clear and so Motivated doesn't think I misquoted him, this is the sentence I'm referring to:

"Our wars and goals are at times unattainable and unwinnable because we have provoked this massive sense of revenge and hatred by supporting these regimes."

I disagree 100% on that reason, but I do agree that our wars are unattainable at times, because of the rules we play by.

That's fine that you you disagree (especially maturley), but I believe the methods by which you think we are limited, is what makes us more American.

We were a nation of liberty before 1913 when government got too big (income taxes, federal reserve, foriegn intervention --- or hell you could go earlier to TR)...

But I think how we deny alleged terrorists habeous corpus - we spit on our founding fathers. Your're right, to US, mid-east politics is irrational. Everyone, depending on their national experience, has their own vision of 'freedom' and ours is not quite compatiable with the sectarian and racial hodgepodge that makes Iraq a middle eastern Yugoslavia of sorts (a term I coined Kayak -- I have to put these disclaimers for him).

To me, we've provoked and strengthened this hatred through Western Cold War meddling. We had a much larger foe -- the USSR -- and we were both using other nations as pawns (ie Iran, Iraq, Vietnam, Korea) and starting proxy wars using these chess pieces (aka other countries) to fight and spread either democracy or communism (often times radical visions of both). So we'd support ultra rightwing military dictatorships in some countries (like Iran under the Shah...read about his SAVAK secret police) and USSR would support leftist socialist regimes. It was a doctrinal tug of war.

Now once the USSR fell and these countries regain their independece (either from our rightwing dictatorships or USSR's commie regimes) they are still left with a bad taste in their mouth for America.


As I once wrote in an essay last year (I Kayak -- me!):
History is plaguing America. Past Cold War era policies are coming back to bite it decades after the fact. For instance, grudges with Iran remain tightly held, stemming from America’s secret coup of a popular prime minister and support of the dictatorial monarchy. The same is with much of South America and some of Asia, where America’s past covert military actions have angered their long tired peoples, who then instill and support anti-Western leaders. The politics of many yesterdays has created the enemies of today. These bin Ladens, Ahmadinejads, and Jongs, minor in a singular sense, collectively dictate the balance of war and peace. The unplanned blowback of America’s past policies makes war and violence likely to continue.

Thank you for reviving this post Firehawk.

[Motivated]

Originally Posted by KayakJones

He tasks me, he TASKS me, and I shall have him!

It's quite funny -- judging my your post history you were a RATIONAL man at one point. lol What happend?!

And we agree on Second Amendment Rights and gun laws and such.

And be clear, I'm far from a left-winger (it seems I have to state things twice for you)...I'm a Conservative-Liberatarian -- registered Republican.

If you've studied IR, then I'm more considered a 'neo-realist' in the theory of intl. relations.

You can't pidgeonhole or butcher my views into some grossly misguided idealism if I clearly state them, no? So here they are.

[.V.]

I will not say it's unwinnable. I do say however that it's not being fought right. You can not fight a war from washington, you have to turn it over to the generals in the field with the simple instructions, "win and come home". And I do agree with firehawks opinion that "whatever it takes" is required.

Many of my family and friends are military people and according to them (those that have been there) when the 3rd ID went through, it was WON. But then we backed off to be PC. And the insurgents started back up.

The idea in war is to break things and kill people. If you don't do that...you lose, plain and simple. You do not win by being politically correct, respecting their beliefs, and winning hearts and minds. You win by destroying their capacity and will to fight.

If we don't do that, then we should come home. I too am a conservative libertarian. That means that if we don't have a very compelling interest in another part of the world, we should not be there. We do have that compelling interest but am not living up to our responsibility to WIN AND COME HOME. It's not the military's fault though. It's the politicians. As I see the progression of our current war, I sometimes feel bad that I'm a 2x GWB voter...but on the other hand, how much worse off would we be if we had someone else?

My opinions and I'll not speak further on this topic because of what happens in these threads.

Have a great day guys and keep it respectful like Firehawk did.

[Firehawk]

I also am a 2 X's GWB voter and I also feel bad sometimes that I voted him in a 2nd time. I'm not happy at all with the way things have turned out. I don't understand currently why all of our manufacturing is allowed to venture across the sea. I work as an engineer in the auto industry in Michigan so I'm feeling the pressure and fear of my job placed in jeopardy. I believe unless something is put in place to prevent all this outsourcing, my job will eventually be lost too (white collar).

Motivated, I'd like to hear what your answer is for what we're doing. Should we not be fighting, should we have stayed out of it completely? I'd like to hear what you think. I'm going to be as honest as I can here and I know i'll catch some flak but it's worth it. I do not believe that we're in Iraq just because we want to save the inncoent folks there from a dictator. I think alot of it has to do with oil and I am not really against that because I think if the US loses it's presence in the middle east, we'll be put into a trap and be humbled by other middle eastern countries, since we all know that oil is so key to the world and to the US. Yes we have reserves, but in strategy games you try to get others' resources before you use your own up. What I'm most angry with are all the rules we have to play by.

I also feel the same way as you do, Motivated, about gun laws and taxation. And, as things stand now, I'll be voting Democrat this next election. I think it is time for smaller government. We need to go that route for awhile. Big business is taking over all of the mom/pop shops out there which is really hurting the middle man.

[Motivated]

Originally Posted by Firehawk

I also am a 2 X's GWB voter and I also feel bad sometimes that I voted him in a 2nd time. I'm not happy at all with the way things have turned out. I don't understand currently why all of our manufacturing is allowed to venture across the sea. I work as an engineer in the auto industry in Michigan so I'm feeling the pressure and fear of my job placed in jeopardy. I believe unless something is put in place to prevent all this outsourcing, my job will eventually be lost too (white collar).

Motivated, I'd like to hear what your answer is for what we're doing. Should we not be fighting, should we have stayed out of it completely? I'd like to hear what you think. I'm going to be as honest as I can here and I know i'll catch some flak but it's worth it. I do not believe that we're in Iraq just because we want to save the inncoent folks there from a dictator. I think alot of it has to do with oil and I am not really against that because I think if the US loses it's presence in the middle east, we'll be put into a trap and be humbled by other middle eastern countries, since we all know that oil is so key to the world and to the US. Yes we have reserves, but in strategy games you try to get others' resources before you use your own up. What I'm most angry with are all the rules we have to play by.

I also feel the same way as you do, Motivated, about gun laws and taxation. And, as things stand now, I'll be voting Democrat this next election. I think it is time for smaller government. We need to go that route for awhile. Big business is taking over all of the mom/pop shops out there which is really hurting the middle man.

IF you feel the way I do about gun laws and taxes, voting Democrat will kill you. I highly suggest you check out Ron Paul... Ron Paul 2008 — Hope for America and my videos on YouTube:

YouTube - 2008 ELECTION - FOUGHT IN 1964
YouTube - INFAMOUS DAISY SPOT - RON PAUL STYLE

Now - dont get me wrong you all...I'm a firm believer of a STRONG national defense...but using our defense as offense is stupid. Our military is the strongest, most powerful the world has ever seen. You don't send a wrecking ball to knock on someones door and that is what we are doing in Iraq.

They belong here, where they can DEFEND not OFFEND.

There is a huge lobby that was for the invasion of Iraq before GWB's tenure as President. They've been begging to invade Iraq on the grounds of him violating UN resolution (as he did) but so does Israel and so do we.

In my opinion, the invasion of Iraq was a stupid mistake on behalf of the Bush administration. They overtook the Taliban (which was RIGHTEOUS, al-QUEDA HAD A CLEAR PRESENECE IN AFGHANISTAN) and saw how fast that was...and went into Iraq to have a clear position on Iran and Syria... Iraq did crumble as fast as Afghanistan, but didnt recover as fast (Afghansitan is also somewhat failing now too)...

We've wanted Iran since 1979 and we and many Zionist lobbies, oil lobbies, or stupid big business pseudo-military lobbies all want war with Iran. It is not an easy thing. So you see intentional mistranlsation's of Mr. Ahmadinjad's words and saying how he vows to 'wipe Israel off the map,' when he was actually quoting Khomeni saying how he wishes the evil zionist regime of Israel should be wiped off the map... Saying the GOP or democratic party should be destroyed is not the same as being anti-American or wishing the destruction of the state.

So it all goes back to Iran...whos spat with we started and NEED to fix for sucess in Iraq. I say and always will say we made friends with the wrong semitic group in the Middle East.

And about your job, what youre witnessing is the horrible by product of us losing our sovreignity and national borders... This globalization wants no borders of North America...

I want free trade and a free market, but I want America to be America...under a constituion we all agree upon. Not some gross, bordlerless EU that forces unionship (see Dutch) and currency. I dont want a North American union.

***
Iraq, sadly, is a waste of time right now. My father is a marine, and I feel so much for those who lost their families. I beleive they did die for our freedoms because such irresponsible govt. behavior has begun the FREEDOM MOVEMENT...where good hearted and well meaning candidates like Ron Paul (and future ones like myself) seek office to make a change.

Saddam did a great job at keeping his opposition at bay (if youre such a realist and dont believe in playing by the rules, Saddam is justified)... Almost every politcal decsion made was a failure in Iraq. Iraq is not a MILITARY failure...our military RARLEY fails, its just the politicians running the show who do.

Basically its a huge quagmire... as Cheny said in 1994 (boy his views have changed). Here is the circle of stupidity:

Iraq is majority Shia.
Minority Sunni.

Sunnis = world majority.
Shia = world miniority.

These sects grew from a conflict that concerned the follwoing question: "who would suceed Muhammad after his death" Sunnis were more democratic, Shias were more famailial. Fighting between the schism grew and hatred ensues today...as Sunnis would kill Shia heads and Shia heads would kill Sunni heads of power.

Saddam = Sunni, hates terrorists who don't like his secular state and want to overthrow it.
Saddam = hates Shias. Kills them, even fights Iran (and we help him do it)
(and this is all in a nutshell)...
Shias of Iraq = Hate Saddam, are killed by him.
Iran = Shia nation btw.

Meanwhile we back the Sunni Saudi-Arabia where the Wahabi movement takes place and preaches fundamentalism. We give them arms which are funneled to Wahabis like bin Laden.

So we liberate Iraq and want democracy. Majority rules --- oh oh.... Shias rule over Sunnis. We create a 'revenge government.' Shias go kill Sunnis on street. Sunnis kill shias on street.

Iran and Syria (according to many) sends Shia resistances fighters and arms to battle the Sunni insurgents.

Meanwhile, those we fund in Arabia send Sunni militants to battle the Shia revenge govt.

Not only that but you threaten the terroritorial integrity of many nations (namley the new Iraq) with Syria, Iran, and Turkey bordering it (as Cheney says).

And -- you know what Cheny explained best in 1994.
YouTube - Cheney '94: Invading Baghdad Would Create Quagmire C-SPAN

I think I answered most of the things you addressed.

Excuse spelling - this was a quick draft.


And about the fuel...please we dont need it. Let them have their oil. We're americans the most progressive people on the planet. We couldve had alternatvie fuel if big business saw it fit. We just need good voters who elect good people into power.

Thats all. TRUE democracy without unjust lobbies will suceed if WE let it.

Check out Ron Paul. Ron Paul 2008 — Hope for America

[KayakJones]

Originally Posted by Motivated

Now - dont get me wrong you all...I'm a firm believer of a STRONG national defense...but using our defense as offense is stupid. Our military is the strongest, most powerful the world has ever seen. You don't send a wrecking ball to knock on someones door and that is what we are doing in Iraq.

They belong here, where they can DEFEND not OFFEND.

And herein lies the fatal flaw in your rationale. A rationale from a self described politician in training. As you appear to be an ardent student of world history how is possible that you have completely forgotton lessons learned from World War II? By your statements one easily arrives at the conclusion that you would have had the Nazi fleet outside New York harbor and the Imperial Japanese navy approaching San Fransisco bay before activating our military.

[Motivated]

Originally Posted by KayakJones

And herein lies the fatal flaw in your rationale. A rationale from a self described politician in training. As you appear to be an ardent student of world history how is possible that you have completely forgotton lessons learned from World War II? By your statements one easily arrives at the conclusion that you would have had the Nazi fleet outside New York harbor and the Imperial Japanese navy approaching San Fransisco bay before activating our military.

Now, if my opinions were carefully noted, I spoke of Woodrow Wilson -- did I not?

World War II was born from poor action in World War I. I don't believe in appeasment. Hitler could've been stopped RIGHTEOUSLY when he violated the treaties (overbearing ones might I add) placed on him by the victors of WWI.

We shouldve stayed neutral in WWI...that is when we were at our PEAK sucess. (READ KISSINGER's DIPLOMACY -- First CHAPTER) Our military was the strongest in the world as were our markets. Let Europe handle its petty nationalistic squabbles and wars. We'll trade both sides (we were, but siding more with Brit)...

As you know, we sought entry in such a 'noble battle'... Look up Lowell Thomas......and Lusitania and such... so we get bombed by Germans (of course, it was quite logical for them to bomb us) and scream "KILL THE HUNS."

The same huns we were trading ammunitions too and Brit was crying about?

So fighting in WWI, the adoption of the Fed and income tax all screwed us up and what our ideals were. The whole idea that TR and WW espoused (spreading liberty not through example, but through actioN) has gotten us into too much trouble.

So, no, I don't support appeasment. Appeasment creates the monsters we worry about 'coming into our harbors.' But I don't support pre-emptive war, just like Israel attacked Egpyt, just like we attacked Iraq.

Gulf War could be justified internationally.
Iraq War just the same on PAPER.

But the means and ideals we were brought into such a war don't justify the lives lost. We came in under the guise of "hey, this guy did helped the boys who did 9-11 -- lets kill him and put democracy," not something Americans are less passionate about (you know the truth) like "he violated no fly zones, commited crimes against humanity (so do we, see Gitmo), he broke UN law (you know the very same one USA and Israel break and dont respect).

So when Hitler invaded Czechs....thats when he shouldve been stopped -- not by us, but by his European watchers who have somethign to lose.

Don't try and draw a parallel between Hitler and Saddam - I know how your kind work. Youre similar to Mr. Hannity, you just try to keep people on some sort of defense, and just pick snippets of words without stating much yourself.

You cant draw Saddam-Hitler parallel because they are totally different situations, with totally different leaderships, and totally different governemnts in a toally different place, reigion, time, peoples, and religion.





My main point comes to this: CONGRESS SHALL DECLARE WAR ON BEHALF OF THE OPINION OF THE AMERICAN POPULACE. WE SHALL NOT BE LED TO WAR BASED ON FALSE ACCUSATIONS OR LIES (LUSITANIA, MAINE, WMDS) --- all that jazz. AMERICA DID NOT WANT TO FIGHT IN WWI OR WWII UNTIL WE WERE LED INTO IT THROUGH LUSITANIA AND PEARL HARBOR (both which were argubaly provoked).

Thats my main point. Get out of the UN. Get out of entangling alliances. We have our own law book -- the constitution and it overrides all bullcrap imposed on us -- IF WE FOLLOW IT (and it very rarley is followed)

[Motivated]

And I would please like an apology for accusing me of forgery.

And I would also like another one for calling me a Democrat, especially one of the conspiracy theory lot.

Thank you.

[Firehawk]

I'm sure you'll make a fine politician, what with all the wordiness lol. Just kidding.

Anyways, It's nice to see someone that wants to make a change. Unfortunately, no politician does it alone. You have too many checks and balances. You need a 2/3 congress that agrees with all of your views. I would suspect that any young politician would be as fiery as you sound, but somewhere along the line, I don't know if it's the millions of dollars flashed before them or not, they get corrupted, or they just have to get caught in the current and go with things.

What makes you think you can really change things? Convince me, as I am a concerned voter who does not read the history books as indepthly as you do (I would probably represent most of middle America there).

PS. I'm sorry, but I'll require you to deadlift 400+ before I vote for you, too.

[Motivated]

Originally Posted by Firehawk

I'm sure you'll make a fine politician, what with all the wordiness lol. Just kidding.

PS. I'm sorry, but I'll require you to deadlift 400+ before I vote for you, too.

LOL Someday, itll be 400. I'm at 310x1 now >_<

[TomG]

Motivated, it's nice to see someone thinking of entering politics. There is a lot of good that can be done and I find the common drivel that all politicians are dishonest and self-serving tiring and harmful to us as a country.

I am also glad to see your arguments are using facts and staying, mostly, away from the inflamatory statements such as calling up Nazi Germany, as you did in your first post, other than in an historical setting. I say "mostly" because in your argument with your detractor, you said, "I know how your kind work." Come on, that's brain dead. Stick to the facts, son.

I especially liked your Shia/Sunni explanation. The lazy thinking, uninformed kneejerking of politicians, voters, and media drove/drives me crazy.

You are a student of history, you said. That's good, and it shows. Let me caution you not to get all your information from one source or group of sources. For example, don't get all your information from Ron Paul recommended sources. I'm not saying you do - just being cautionary. Also, you gave some very good historical background of today's problems but how far back you go for that historical background is your choice. You go back a hundred or two hundred years, but remember some of the people you are discussing have memories ten times that long and when it comes down to it we must live/survive in what we have now. That makes for a necessary unfairness and lopsidedhood in our future history.

Keep it up. If I got into this thread it would take up too much of my time, so I'll try to sit back and enjoy it.

[KayakJones]

Originally Posted by Motivated

And I would please like an apology for accusing me of forgery.

And I would also like another one for calling me a Democrat, especially one of the conspiracy theory lot.

You'll get nothing.......and like it!
And by the way, think of how succesfull you could be as a brain sugeon, or delving into nuclear physics or such. This country needs another career politician about as much as mankind needed pubic lice.
PS, I did not accuse you of forgery, I accused you of thievery. And only then after your own admission of such.