Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The world has turned upside down!!! (Re: McCain vs. Obama for President)
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 27 of 210 (469935)
06-08-2008 5:20 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Perdition
06-05-2008 7:57 PM


not true and not fair
McCain offers exactly the same type of "diplomacy" as Bush. Essentially, do as I say or we'll bomb you to death. To me, that sounds exactly like the mindset of the terrorists, and makes me very worried about the future.
That's neither true, nor fair. McCain's foreign policy positions are very different from Bush's when it comes to diplomacy and actions. First off, he has favored more diplomacy and bringing allies together, more like Bush's Dad. Secondly, although he does favor winning in Iraq, he isn't slow like Bush and his team to take the advice of the best the military has to offer for what are the recommendations for winning. McCain was dead-on accurate in his criticisms of Bush and Rumsfeld's strategy. He said before the invasion we needed a different plan. Once the invasion was underway, it's true he stood firm behind the troops, but you gotta understand the man. He did and would have done the same with a dem president.
Nevertheless, he continually argued for a change of strategy, from day one. With McCain, we have a shot on leaving Iraq with a palatable situation. Even if civil war breaks out, I trust McCain will have a better handle on when to, if at all, and how to and whom to throw our weight behind. He's a realist.
On Iran and the whole global situation, it's true McCain has a temper and will come off as better not mess with me or we'll bomb the heck out of you and the threat of that is a good thing, but McCain is more in the Colin Powell or former Colin Powell branch of the GOP foreign policy on stuff like this than Rumsfeld's. In other words, he's going to take a very pragmatic, non-ideological approach and not care for the politicking side of the military and State dept. It will be about getting the job done, and if you aren't up to snuff, McCain won't take 4 years to bring in a new crew.
Now, on other issues? Fact is McCain won't be able to get squat done since the dems control Congress, nor will the dems, and that suits me fine......best thing that can happen is Congress comes to accept limitations on their spending and ambitions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Perdition, posted 06-05-2008 7:57 PM Perdition has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Rrhain, posted 06-08-2008 11:54 PM randman has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 28 of 210 (469936)
06-08-2008 5:28 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by BMG
06-08-2008 4:45 PM


I could be wrong, but wasn't GW also labeled a fiscal conservative? What has McCain said or done to earn your approval?
Who labelled Bush as a fiscal conservative? You could tell from his campaign promises he wasn't. He talked of expanding federal spending in education and health care, for starters.
McCain isn't promising to be a compassionate conservative to use Big Brother to save you, and he's been pretty good at rejecting earmarks, though not perfect. Moreover, he promises to veto spending measures that have earmarks. If you ask me, he's by far the most fiscally conservative guy between he and Obama, and far more than Bush or even Bush's Dad.
About the only area he is not is the military, but if we can stabalize Iraq so we can withdraw or leave some bases WITHOUT COMBAT operations, I don't think McCain will increase the military. For starters, he won't get funding from Congress.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by BMG, posted 06-08-2008 4:45 PM BMG has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by BMG, posted 06-09-2008 2:32 AM randman has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 40 of 210 (470290)
06-10-2008 2:47 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by BMG
06-09-2008 2:32 AM


Bush in fact greatly increased domestic spending. He did not simply increase military spending.
McCain is not making promises on how a new government program can help you as Bush did and Obama is doing, and so the correct perception is to realize he is not going to continue to increase federal spending. Iraq is winding down in all likelihood.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by BMG, posted 06-09-2008 2:32 AM BMG has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Rrhain, posted 06-11-2008 1:19 AM randman has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 44 of 210 (470405)
06-11-2008 2:36 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by Rrhain
06-11-2008 1:19 AM


He is saying we can have bases there like we do in Germany for years to come after the peace is established, not constant combat ops, and he is right. Unless we are going to abandon the theater altogether, it makes sense to have a presence or may make sense, as a stabalizing factor like we have done in Europe.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Rrhain, posted 06-11-2008 1:19 AM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Jazzns, posted 06-11-2008 10:25 AM randman has replied
 Message 52 by Rrhain, posted 06-14-2008 4:53 AM randman has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 48 of 210 (470596)
06-11-2008 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Jazzns
06-11-2008 10:25 AM


Re: Except
Except we are at least somewhat liked in Europe and Japan. Most Iraqis want us out including many in government.
Japan and Germany didn't like us at all initially. As far as Al Sadr, we should have gotten rid of him a long time ago.
On referendums, I am all for that. If the Iraqi people want us to leave, fine. We go and wash our hands of the matter. Personally, I think we should demand that oil revenues be offset to pay for our presence until the Iraqi regime can take over completely.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Jazzns, posted 06-11-2008 10:25 AM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Jazzns, posted 06-12-2008 11:55 AM randman has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 50 of 210 (470776)
06-12-2008 3:13 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Jazzns
06-12-2008 11:55 AM


Re: Except
Looks to me like Al Sadr wants to form a Hezbollah type situation in Iraq where a militia and their leaders are essentially not subordinate to the democratic process and government. I don't think that's a recipe for stability. It may take a bloodbath but the rebellion needs to be put down. Our own first president, Washington, put down the whiskey rebellion. If the Iraqi government allows Sadr's militia to stay intact, the security situation may never stabilize.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Jazzns, posted 06-12-2008 11:55 AM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Jazzns, posted 06-13-2008 10:54 AM randman has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024