2004 Elections: Democratic Party Contenders

I would submit that the UN without the US is about like a television without electricity.
----------
The Bird is correct.

CI-- We were trying to play nice. :wink:

I'm just trying to conceptualize how the others see the US's imperialist tactics within the world community.

Timber, how much $ do you think our wonderful allies are going to be able to kick into this thing? I don't see Poland, Estonia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Tonga (!), Iceland, etc.. as nations with full bank accounts. I would guess most of them are along on the safari becasue the US is paying them! I also don't see the US able to maintain anything resemblinng the neccesary troop strength without conscription, and to say that will prove unpopular is an understatement.

The UN has already committed to humanitarian assistance--which is people and money.

The US Draft Resolution, from what I last read, looks like it will pass with the UN.

That should solve things.

Sofia, That you might agree with the draft resolution confuses me. Isn't it the international community that must approve it? I think Germany and France already declined the "invitation."

CI--
From what I last read, it seemed the UN countries said it may pass. Maybe I'm a little behind in the papers.

I'll venture out and get more current news. I thought France, for one, said they would abstain, rather than have another nasty round with the US.

Is this wrong, or updated differently?

(another attempt to return this thread to the track)

The difference between Democrats and Republicans?

Democrats want to fall in love with their nominees.

Republicans just fall in line.

The only thing timber has come close to getting right is that if Democrats don't fall in line behind thier candidate, whoever that may happen to be, they hand the WH back to the Cabal.

Gore ain't in the game; neither is Clinton.

And won't be.

Gephardt is far from done, although MHO is he'll never be higher than fourth. Labor Secretary, I'm thinking.

Dean has mo'; Kerry has dough; Clark is the X factor. Any of the three is plenty capable of punking the Dim Son.

All the rest are window dressing.

"I would submit that the UN without the US is about like a television without electricity."

Of course, if most Americans' TVs were without electricity (and they may soon be, thanks to deregulation) we'd all be better off.

TV's still useless.
If ya don't want to watch it, ya don't need to leave it sitting on your credenza, collecting dust.

...and PDiddie's statement about "Democrats wanting to fall in love" with their candidates explains a lot. No wonder the Dems here completely overlook their candidate's foibles, and lies-- Love is blind. That's a hell of a way to pick a President.

I would submit that the US without the UN is like Napoleon Inc.

I agree with ya PDiddie, that Clinton and Gore are unlikely participants. I really figure Hillary is busy building her '08 challenge. I don't see Clark as a real factor yet, though late entrants can succeed ... its rare, and he really has little groundwork laid, but it could happen. As to Gephardt, I think he's shot any chance he had at the nomination, and I expect he will turn on Dean as he sees himself slipping further behind ... something which will not serve in his interest re a cabinet position in a proposed Dean Administration. And while Kerry has money, he has lost all momentum ... Dean's Media presence really has clouded the others. At this point, I give it to Dean, as Lieberman just doesn't have the fight in him to stay the course, IMO. That's a shift in my position, as I had earlier felt Kerry and Lieberman were the heavyweights, but Dean is in command ... only he himself can derail his train at this point, as I figure it. Of course, I wouldn't put it past Dean to derail his own train, one way or the other. Its a long way till November of next year.

A valid observation, blatham. The scary part is that with better logistic and communication capability, Napoleon would have enjoyed far greater success and suffered far less inconvenience at the hands of those in opposition to him. The US possesses nearly unimagineable capability in both logistics and communication. I really don't fault "The World" for perceiving the US as an arrogant, unstoppable juggernaught. While the arrogance part might be open to discussion, the unstoppable juggernaught part is a clear perception of reality, and almost implies the arrogance attributed. Not untill The European Union gets its act together, if ever it does, will there be a global presence equal to The US.

It's a matter of doing the simple math to see that the EU will never compete on the "superpower" arena any time soon. Our military spending is second to none, and their trying to "catch" up is impossible. Their social programs are eating up most of their budgets, and they're not about to shift it into any military complex that'll even come close to the US.

AS a matter of fact, the rest of the EU countries are complaining that France and Germany's deficit spending exceeds the requirements for participation.

CI said--

Their social programs are eating up most of their budgets, and they're not about to shift it into any military complex that'll even come close to the US.
-----------
I concur.

As compared to the US, where the Military (including teh Iraq debacle) budget is eating up money that could be spent on social programs. Frankly I would rather have butter than guns.

hobibitybobbityboo-- (I love your name.)

I think we'd all rather spend our money on butter...health insurance, education...

...until somebody bombs Pearl Harbor, or flies planes into the twin Towers...

The vast majority of people in this country have one thing in common. We'd rather die than be subordinated to the will of others. Some peoples seem to capitulate easily. The basic strain running through most Americans is about freedom, and personal rights. Why do you think National Security is the #1 voting issue in most of our elections?

We have that big military for a reason.

Who is trying to subordinate us to their will? The only group that seems out to destroy freedom and democracy is the current administration. It seems most americans are happily allowing their wills to be subordinated.

I posted this in another forum, but it is also relevant here.

Gunsmoke and Mirrors
September 14, 2003
By MAUREEN DOWD

WASHINGTON

This is how bad things are for George W. Bush: He's back in
a dead heat with Al Gore.

(And this is how bad things are for Al Gore: He's back in a
dead heat with George W. Bush.)

One terrorist attack, two wars, three tax cuts, four months
of guerrilla mayhem in Iraq, five silly colors on a terror
alert chart, nine nattering Democratic candidates, 10 Iraqi
cops killed by Americans, $87 billion in Pentagon
illusions, a gazillion boastful Osama tapes, zero Saddam
and zilch W.M.D. have left America split evenly between the
president and former vice president.

"More than two and a half years after the 2000 election and
we are back where we started," marveled John Zogby, who
conducted the poll.

It's plus ça change all over again. We are learning once
more, as we did on 9/11, that all the fantastic technology
in the world will not save us. The undigitalized human will
is able to frustrate our most elaborate schemes and lofty
policies.

What unleashed Shock and Awe and the most extravagant
display of American military prowess ever was a bunch of
theologically deranged Arabs with box cutters.

The Bush administration thought it could use scientific
superiority to impose its will on alien tribal cultures.
But we're spending hundreds of billions subduing two
backward countries without subduing them.

After the president celebrated victory in our high-tech war
in Iraq, our enemies came back to rattle us with a
diabolically ingenious low-tech war, a homemade bomb in a
truck obliterating the U.N. offices, and improvised
explosive devices hidden in soda cans, plastic bags and
dead animals blowing up our soldiers. Afghanistan has
mirror chaos, with reconstruction sabotaged by Taliban
assaults on American forces, the Afghan police and aid
workers.

The Pentagon blithely says that we have 56,000 Iraqi police
and security officers and that we will soon have more. But
it may be hard to keep and recruit Iraqi cops; the job pays
O.K. but it might end very suddenly, given the rate at
which Americans and guerrillas are mowing them down.

"This shows the Americans are completely out of control,"
First Lt. Mazen Hamid, an Iraqi policeman, said Friday
after angry demonstrators gathered in Falluja to demand the
victims' bodies.

Secretary Pangloss at Defense and Wolfie the Naif are
terminally enchanted by their own descriptions of the
world. They know how to use their minds, but it's not clear
they know how to use their eyes.

"They are like people in Plato's cave," observed one
military analyst. "They've been staring at the shadows on
the wall for so long, they think they're forms."

Our high-tech impotence is making our low-tech colony
sullen.

"It's 125 degrees there and they have no electricity and no
water and it doesn't make for a very happy population,"
said Senator John McCain, who recently toured Iraq. "We're
in a race to provide the services and security for people
so the Iraqis will support us rather than turn against us.
It's up for grabs."

Senator McCain says that "the bad guys" are reminding
Iraqis that America "propped up Saddam Hussein in the 80's,
sided with Iraq in the Iraq-Iran war, told the people in
Basra in '91 we'd help them get rid of Saddam and didn't,
and put economic sanctions on them in the 90's."

He says we have to woo them, even though we are pouring $87
billion - double the amount designated for homeland
security - into the Iraqi infrastructure when our own
electrical grid, and port and airport security, need
upgrading.

"If anyone thinks the French and Germans are going to help
us readily and rapidly," he says, "they're smoking
something very strong."

Mocking all our high-priced, know-nothing intelligence,
Osama is back in the studio making his rock videos.

The cadaverous caveman has gone more primitive to avoid
electronic detection, operating via notes passed by
couriers.

We haven't forgotten all Mr. Bush's bullhorn, dead-or-alive
pledges.

But he's like a kid singing with fingers in his ears,
avoiding mentioning Saddam or bin Laden, or pressing the
Pakistanis who must be protecting Osama up in no man's land
and letting the Taliban reconstitute (even though we bribed
Pakistan with a billion in aid). He doesn't dwell on
nailing Saddam either.

His gunsmoke has gone up in smoke.


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/14/opinion/14DOWD.html?ex=1064539939&ei=1&en=d609301ecb6a9d7d

CI, can you please fix your link so it doesn't spppprrrreeeaaaaaadddd out over the page?