Bush supporters' aftermath thread

Ya gonna head that way, bill?

Nah, timber. The war stuff is understood. The need for standing armies is understood. The need to train ordinary folks to pull the trigger and commit what is otherwise the prime sin of taking a life, is understood.

But you guys have headed south now. Your economy is dependent upon war and upon the marketing of war products and services both to your government and to the rest of the world. Your government and military are now inextricably tied in with these industries. You've become the world's militarist power. All of which works towards plentiful mythological justification for what you're up to - totally aside from the realities I note in paragraph two.

But it's worse than that. Now you are institutionalizing torture and setting up gitmo gulags. I think you my friend, but on this stuff, I'm going to bang my drum.

Each time someone foolishly suggests one has to do something themselves to believe in it, yes. Do you have adopted children? Or do you think they don't really deserve parents? Do you volunteer your home as a domestic abuse center? Or do you think the victims of that crime don't really deserve help?

PDiddie has been making a complete a$$ of him/herself with that line of insult for days now. I'm just trying to push him/her over the logic hurdle that's blocking coherent thought on the matter. :wink:

and your just the one to do it.

Thanks Dys.

In PDiddie's defense, I think he meant that a person must be willing to do it himself or herself. Not that they must necessarily do it themselves.

let me re-phrase

" Idealists operate as if the world can be a better place; Realists operate in the world as it is; Those who are without hope operate as if the world must remain as it is. "

Idealism and Realism are not mutually exclusive.

You are well over the logic hurdle yourself , unfortunately you took a heavy tumble on the way. You suggest parity of destructive action with failure to take nurturing action. Should I assume you are also unable to distinguish between apples and oranges ?

No, you should assume you're failing to comprehend fairly simple examples, and should probably refrain from lashing out until you figure it out. Hint: action (the lack thereof) is the operative word in your paraphrases as well. Apples need not be oranges to demonstrate this. If you're not being deliberately obtuse, perhaps you should go back and read the original moronic post before volunteering to defend it.

Bill,

I understand your examples and am aware of their defects It is you who obtusely refuse to understand Pdiddie's clearly stated point. Freeduck has already translateed for you so I shall desist.

PDiddy set out purposely to insult every capable pro-war person who hasn't signed up to fight themselves for the second time in a matter of days... by suggesting they are hypocrites. Last time; it was such a blatant violation of the TOS is was deleted. This suggestion is presented in the form of a Non Sequitur argument, as my examples illustrate. If you or FreeDuck want to be counted in agreement with the moronic sentiment that's fine with me. But don't confuse your agreement with the sentiment as logic. It isn't.

I'm not offering agreement or disagreement, but if you want to rip apart his point, make sure it is the point that was intended or your effort is wasted.

I'm quite sure, FreeDuck.

I happen to have recently made the same argument you have-- I don't like categories, but no matter --this is the new political model the "experts" are cramming down our throats.

Realism/Idealism--a primer.

Might be interesting reading. They are now perplexed because they had Bush pegged as a Realist (natch), and now they think Iraq (Can you believe it?) was Idealistic??!! Half my class fell out of their chairs.

Most of the "pro-war" folks here that I know of are either currently in the military, or are veterans. None of us, I think, are pro-war after all we know a little first-hand about the horrors of it. War is a terrible thing and only fools desire it, look forward to it. It is wasteful of lives and property, and too often strips away the thin veneer of civilization that we strive so hard to build up. No matter how justified it is, it still imposes costs that are frightfully high.

Fools desire it, and greater fools believe that they can avoid it by denial. We want to believe that no one would begin a war without the greatest provocation, but that isn't so. Hitler wasn't provoked, nor did the United States do anything to radical Islamic terrorists to cause them to to hate America. They are True Believers in the Righteousness of their Cause, and the evil satanic forces of Democracy. From our point of view they're nuts, homicidal maniacs who can not be allowed to go about murdering thousands of innocent people. They declared war on us back in the mid-1990's and we were so busy dreaming of utopia that most of us didn't even notice.

This is a different sort of war that we are now involved in, just as the Cold War was different than WWII and previous conflicts. The U.S. military has been preparing for this sort of shift in doctrine, but we're still learning. So far the results have been spectacular. Afghanistan is well on its way to being free of those who favored a radical islamic dictatorship. The dictatorship of Iraq was deposed in short order, and the effort to rebuild the country has progressed in spite of the efforts by die-hard terrorists who hate the very idea of liberty and human dignity. Libya has abandoned it's nuclear program, and is now trying to conform itself to the standards expected of civilized nations. The tensions between India and Pakistan are less today than they were a few years ago. For the first time in a decade there is real hope for peace between Israel and the Palestinians. There is hope alive today that free and open democratic elections may take root in countries that have never seen them before.

There has been a cost for those gains. We've lost over a thousand fine patriotic young men and women ambushed by baby-killers. Our national debt has increased dramatically to pay for the military effort. The cost in gold and lives is not ended now, but we've gotten good value for the cost. When this war is over, and we are victorious, there may be peace for a time, but history makes us believe that this is no more the War to End All Wars, than was The Great War at the beginning of the 20th century. You don't get nothing for nothing. Without risk there is no progress.

Well said Asherman and welcome back. We've missed you.

Foxy:-

I wouldn't get too carried away with Asherman's post if I was you.It is very slipshod and naive and contributes nothing new to anything.The first two sentences are at odds with each other which is a sure sign of impulse typing.If he thinks he is one of the "we" who are striving to build up the "thin veneer of civilisation" he is kidding himself.All he seems to have done is read a few articles written by "journalists" pandering to populist sentiment.
What does "frightfully high" actually mean apart from denigrating our command of language.Has he a working definition of the difference between "fools" and "greater fools".He then goes on to "want to believe" something that "isn't so".He may want to believe in Santa Claus.

"Hitler wasn't provoked" is a ridiculous thing to say.
The German people were provoked into electing him by the economic situation resulting from WW1,a circumstance we managed to learn from after WW2.And the idea that Islamic terrorists have no cause is equally ridiculous.They have a cause from their point of view and they have suicide missions to demonstrate how strong they feel it.
Asherman is still dreaming up utopias.The bald assertions in para three are plenty proof of that.The jury is out on all of them.Asherman's logic suggests that surveillance of Libya is a waste of manpower.
And the jury is still out on whether the US have "gotten(sic) good value".
Then just to unwind the whole thing study the use of the word "victorious" and the concluding sentence which is a traditional justification for war.

There's plenty more too."Most of us" for example.
I hope I'm not included in that.Auberon Waugh used the august columns of The Daily Telegraph to call for a new crusade back in the early '90s.His early death was probably brought on by severe wounds on active service in the Middle East and the facilities he was there to defend are a key component in the current struggle.All that will be news to Asherman.

Now that I know you are a lady my advice is to forget all this stuff and concentrate on your domestic duties.It is men's sad task to deal with any threats to your well being and to die if necessary in that accomplishment.

I wouldn't have posted this had you not praised Asherman's message from the armchair.I feel a mite protective of ladies who go by the name of foxfyre.Man makes history-woman IS history.If you want something to exercise your mind how about healthy diet and efficient management of your money supply.I'm sure Mr Bush would second that.Do you think his wife tipped the balance in the election.Some of us do.

Mr. tongue-in-cheek Spin-de-us, well done.

If blatham is correct in saying-

"Your economy is dependent on war..." then there's a choice.It must be-

a)No war-goosed economy.
b)War-boom boom.

Its a bit stark that Major General.

Well you do not have to appreciate Asherman's point of view. You do not have to believe he has his facts straight. I personally have not agreed with every point Asherman has ever made. But to the best of my recollection, this is the first time Asherman has EVER been accused of making a slipshod post. I would study up on his credentials before coming to that conclusion.