relax

Author Topic: Political Discussion  (Read 11222 times)

zeno

  • Guest
More on the list:
« Reply #45 on: October 13, 2005, 08:05:45 PM »
I got the following response to the dissemination of the above list titled "Something to Ponder".

Quote
Dear Zeno,

Thanks for this bit of interesting but tricky history. It does takes the chicken hawk argument to a more effective level. However, this approach is based on the notion that the Democrats are dovish while the Republicans are hawkish.

 

The implication here is that the hawkish Republicans have some nerve sending others to war when they themselves (with a few exceptions) avoided military duty; while the more peaceful Democrats probably got that way from their experience in the military. Tricky because (with some notable exceptions) the Democrats have failed to oppose and even supported the Republican’s militaristic imperial policy. The exceptions on both sides do not change the fact that both Republicans and Democrats together are supporting this war and the huge imperial military budget. We must never lose sight of the fact that during the presidential campaign, Kerry called for more troops to be sent to Iraq.      

Bill


To which I responded:

Quote
Bill,

 Thank you for your reply and clarification. Looking at that list, I felt a twinge of something, but just couldn't put my finger on it. It is indeed tricky. A friend of mine said that it could be argued that Bush jr. when avoiding his duties in the military may have been in fact doing the one good thing in his life (taking a stand as a conscientious objector in order to avoid killing people). :-)

I see now that it is not one party that is responsible for warring. There is, I believe a continuity of strife that is passed from one administration to the next regardless of outward appearances. Could it be argued that the United States has been at war more than it has been at peace since it's inception?
I hope to see you soon.

Zeno.

P.S.: Can I post your response to astorians.net where I also displayed the list? I can remove your name if you like. "http://astorians.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=554&start=30" I think that more people can benefit from this exchange. My arguments on the board are pretty passionate, and yet I believe they may be more often than not, fallacious and lacking correct information.


To which he replied:

Quote
You are free to pass on anything I write with my name attached. I try
very hard, to so express my thoughts that I would never have to apologize
or be ashamed (it ain't easy - the temptation to disrespect opponents is
strong and hard to resist).

As for the real USA as opposed to the fairy tales spun by politicians on
the Fourth of July, see the attached files.


Bill


To which I provide the following links if anyone is interested:

"A CENTURY OF U.S. MILITARY INTERVENTIONS:
From Wounded Knee to Afghanistan
Compiled by Zoltan Grossman"
http://www.zmag.org/CrisesCurEvts/interventions.htm

"After 9/11, U.S. policy built on world bases
- James Sterngold, Chronicle Staff Writer
Sunday, March 21, 2004"
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/03/21/MNGJ65OS4J1.DTL&type=printable

I hope this has been helpful,
-zero-

Telesphoros

  • Guest
Conspiracy theory
« Reply #46 on: April 17, 2006, 07:07:48 PM »
I found this to be rather intriguing.  Seems like a good way to revive an oldie but goodie thread.


 

Visit our sister site Jackson Heights Life