U.S. Presidential race - Democrat Discussion

[Grizzly Willy]

No, those people are dead. The people we kill now had nothing to do with it.

My point was that we have been attack on our own soil, contrary to Darenyon's post. I wasn't commenting on the persecution of those that carried out the attack, just that it has happened.

Isn't that reason enouph to not have war? Isn't 'war for peace' an oxymoron?

George Carlin says hi.

"Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity."

[Agoonga]

Samuel L. Jackson To Voters: 'Wake The up and vote for Obama

I gotta say I kinda agree with the message.

That was epic, lol

[starlord]

My point was that we have been attack on our own soil, contrary to Darenyon's post. I wasn't commenting on the persecution of those that carried out the attack, just that it has happened.


George Carlin says hi.

"Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity."

that was my point, i was being facetious. sorry.

[Llunai]

Republicans pull a video from 1998, where Obama endorses the system of equal opportunity, which is already put into place, which to an extent is working, and this is supposed to be newsworthy? Talk about grasping at straws...

Naturally, when the Democrats pull 15 year old Romney videos (or, hell, even two year old video) in which he actually directly and obvious contradicts his current stances, they are accused of demagoguing.

[Grizzly Willy]

that was my point, i was being facetious. sorry.

My apologies, I should have gotten that from the inclusion of "embassies".

[Felya]

Naturally, when the Democrats pull 15 year old Romney videos (or, hell, even two year old video) in which he actually directly and obvious contradicts his current stances, they are accused of demagoguing.

Or hell, from May......

[starlord]

Isn't that reason enouph to not have war? Isn't 'war for peace' an oxymoron?

Why did you think that? Have you seen Rambo 3?

thats what you implied. and we wouldnt have had a war if we werent attacked. you act like we woke up one day and decided "hey its be fun to start some wars, civilians are double points!"

[Llunai]

Or hell, from May......

Or from 3 hours ago.

Yeah.

[Felya]

thats what you implied. and we wouldnt have had a war if we werent attacked. you act like we woke up one day and decided "hey its be fun to start some wars, civilians are double points!"

No, I didn't imply anything about what lead to the wars. Rambo 3 shows a part of where that comes from in a very entertaining way.

[Wells]

After nearly 10 years of us having 2 wars in neighboring countries, drones bombing their neighbors, their growing or sustaining numbers, do not need the motivation of a cool jacket.

We could ask some the Al Qaeda's leadership.

Just gotta find any of them.

[Deleted]

[starlord]

No, I didn't imply anything about what lead to the wars. Rambo 3 shows a part of where that comes from in a very entertaining way.

i havent seen it, sorry. and while i agree that it would be nice if we could just ignore the terrorists, thats already been proven a disastrous strategy.

[Felya]

We could ask some the Al Qaeda's leadership.

Just gotta find any of them.

As soon as they figure out to not appoint any new leadership, we are screwed. Who do we kill!?

---------- Post added 2012-09-29 at 12:58 AM ----------

i havent seen it, sorry. and while i agree that it would be nice if we could just ignore the terrorists, thats already been proven a disastrous strategy.

No it hasn't. When was the last decade we did not either finance or participate in a war in middle east? In order to see how such a strategy is disastrous, we'd have to try it first.

[Wells]

i havent seen it, sorry. and while i agree that it would be nice if we could just ignore the terrorists, thats already been proven a disastrous strategy.

Depends on how you go about doing it. Too heavy a hand just makes things worse. Naturally people can't attack us without repercussions though.

[Spectral]

Is that rebuttal suppose to be targeted to a very small audience? There's not a lot of people that are going to wake the fuck up to drone strikes and think, "oh no, fuck this Obama guy!".

---------- Post added 2012-09-28 at 09:00 PM ----------

Depends on how you go about doing it. Too heavy a hand just makes things worse. Naturally people can't attack us without repercussions though.

I agree. I think the precision strikes are actually about the best way to handle the circumstance. Yes, there's still collateral damage, but it's far less than what's inflicted with either a ground invasion or indiscriminate bombing. I rather like the "nowhere to hide" part of it.

[Deleted]

Do you honestly, truly believe that you're arriving at the conclusion that these studies are correct because you're well informed about them and think they use the best methods possible and aren't just experiencing confirmation bias?

I don't hestitate admit I have no sound idea of how many innocents were killed.

No, but it seems that the general consensus is somewhere way above 0.04% of casulties being civilian. Around 300-600 civilians out of ~2,800 dead. 0.04% by the way is 1 person.

Yes, I saw the number and out of intuition and past experience the number seemed off. Further evidence confirmed this.

[starlord]

As soon as they figure out to not appoint any new leadership, we are screwed. Who do we kill!?

No it hasn't. When was the last decade we did not either finance or participate in a war in middle east? In order to see how such a strategy is disastrous, we'd have to try it first.

im sure everyone would love that, as soon as the terrorist groups are gone & the region is stable.

[Spectral]

No, but it seems that the general consensus is somewhere way above 0.04% of casulties being civilian. Around 300-600 civilians out of ~2,800 dead. 0.04% by the way is 1 person.

Yes, I saw the number and out of intuition and past experience the number seemed off. Further evidence confirmed this.

I agree and think this is a reasonable ballpark number to operate under for the purposes of discussion. The 0.04% is implausible on the face of it, and seems to be likely to be the result of a tautological definition of who is a combatant.

[Maneo]

Isn't that reason enouph to not have war? Isn't 'war for peace' an oxymoron?

---------- Post added 2012-09-29 at 12:37 AM ----------



Why did you think that? Have you seen Rambo 3?

War is part of the human condition.

People capacity for violence towards one another has no limits.

A world without war is nothing but a pipe dream.

From the classroom to the world stage, violence will always be used to resolve issues.

I would rather my country the U.S. be on the winning side, and would love to see us as a country fight wars like they are supposed to be fought. To be won!

[Felya]

im sure everyone would love that, as soon as the terrorist groups are gone & the region is stable.

There will always be terrorist, as long as we have military bases and bomb countries, who's people don't want us there.

I'm the sort that would attack the reason terrorist exist, instead the phantom threat that is a terrorist. I rather build homes painted red, white and blue in Pakistan, than bomb them.

---------- Post added 2012-09-29 at 01:13 AM ----------

War is part of the human condition.

People capacity for violence towards one another has no limits.

A world without war is nothing but a pipe dream.

From the classroom to the world stage, violence will always be used to resolve issues.

I would rather my country the U.S. be on the winning side, and would love to see us as a country fight wars like they are supposed to be fought. To be won!

Bull crap. We are pack animals, who's ability to kill without remorse is a mental illness. Look at the mental state of returning veterans and tell me war is part of the human condition.