America... Spying on Americans

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Tico, I predict you won't respond to this message, but will instead make a snide comment.

Cycloptichorn

That is indeed what you have been saying for a while now, Cyclops. You say we need to "respect treaties and the UN" ... I interpret that to mean you want us to be held hostage to the whims of Russia, China, and France with regard to whether we allow Iran to acquire nukes. Semantics.

That is indeed what you have been saying for a while now, Cyclops. You say we need to "respect treaties and the UN" ... I interpret that to mean you want us to be held hostage to the whims of Russia, China, and France with regard to whether we allow Iran to acquire nukes. Semantics.

Police forces are government organisations charged with the responsibility of maintaining law and order. The word comes from the French, and less directly from the Greek politeia, referring to government or administration; the word police was coined in France in the 18th century. The police may also be known as a constabulary, after constables, who were an early manifestation of police officers.

Quote:

That is indeed what you have been saying for a while now, Cyclops. You say we need to "respect treaties and the UN" ... I interpret that to mean you want us to be held hostage to the whims of Russia, China, and France with regard to whether we allow Iran to acquire nukes. Semantics.

This is a false and illogical interpretation, and you know it. We can't continue the discussion if you twist my words every time to mean something different.

They are not semantics, because there is no being 'held hostage.' The US can act at any time.

I specifically request you to answer the following:

1, I understand that it is in our best interests to keep Iran from having nukes. Do you contend that it is our right to do so?

2, If others are bound by treaties, are we bound by them as well? Or can we break them at will?

3, Do you agree that the idea of freedom and democracy are the greatests exports/tools we have for spreading freedom and democracy?

As a sign of good faith, I will answer one of your questions:

Is the US the world's policeman?

Quote:

Police forces are government organisations charged with the responsibility of maintaining law and order. The word comes from the French, and less directly from the Greek politeia, referring to government or administration; the word police was coined in France in the 18th century. The police may also be known as a constabulary, after constables, who were an early manifestation of police officers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police

What do you think? Where would we derive our authority to act as a policeman from? We have not been appointed by any governmental organization or given any sort of mandate by the people of the world.

We are not the world's policeman. We act in our own interests. Constantly. This is contrary to the concept of a Policeman.

Cycloptichorn

Tico wrote:
As I said earlier, I'm all for pursuing diplomacy with Iran, but what I'm talking about is what to do when push comes to shove. Saying "pretty please" won't work.

So, Tico, what do you consider "when push comes to shove?" Who's going to determine the "shove" in your scenario? You do a whole lot of jabber, but most of it doesn't make much sense in terms of definitions, limits, and foreign policy.

Well, if you're going to ask the question and answer it too, that's called masterbation.

And to clarify what I'm sure is your misunderstanding of my position here, I do not think the US is the world's policeman either, and we certainly ought to act in our own interests. And that's exactly what we would be doing when by preventing Iran from developing the technology to make nuclear weapons.

Sunday, March 19, 2006 4:23 p.m. EST
Cheney: Don't Listen to Kennedy


Sen. Ted Kennedy is the last person to listen to in matters of national security, Vice President Dick Cheney said Sunday.

Appearing on CBS' "Face the Nation," Cheney responded to host Bob Schieffer's remark that Kennedy, D-Mass., had said on the third anniversary of the Iraq war: "It is clearer than ever that Iraq was a war that we never should have fought. The administration has been dangerously incompetent and its Iraq policy is not worthy of the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform.

"President Bush continues to see the war through the same rose colored glasses he's always used. He assures the American people we are winning while the lives of our troops hang so perilously on the precipice of a new disaster."

Said Cheney: "I would not listen to Ted Kennedy for guidance and leadership on how we ought to manage national security. I think what Senator Kennedy reflects is sort of the pre-9/11 mentality about how we ought to deal with that part of the world. We used to operate on the assumption before 9/11 that a terrorist attack, a criminal act, was a law enforcement problem.

"We were hit repeatedly in the '90s and never responded effectively. When the terrorists came to believe not only could they strike us with impunity but if they hit us hard enough that we'd change our policy."

Cheney explained that "we changed all that on 9/11. After they hit us and killed 3,000 Americans here at home we said enough's enough, we're going to aggressively go after them - go after the terrorists where we can find them and go after those states that sponsor terrorism and go after people who provide them with weapons of mass destruction.

Righties still don't get it, but it wasn't Saddam that used those planes to crash into the twin towers or the pentagon. Why does it take so much repetition to get this straight with neocons? IT WAS AL QAEDA.

The same old 9/11 lies yet the delusional partisans still drink Cheney's kool-aid. Amazing!

Cheny is 100% correct in his opinion of Ted Kennedy.

Remember (which you don't or choose to igore), Kennedy voted NO on Afganistan, NO on Iraq. Yet he voted YES on Kosovo.

When he voted no on Afganistan, that was the point Cheny was referring to.

How can you be so blind to see this fat pig Kennedy as nothing but a partisen hack and a fraud.

this is not to suggest that Cheny is a Saint or was correct in his analysis of the Iraq situation.

However, do not be so naive or try to convince me that Kennedy is a voice of reason.

I heard on the radio today that there are about 3k chinese working at the Nuclear facilities in Iran in question. Still think a 'surgical strike' is the way to go?

Cycloptichorn

Remember (which you don't or choose to igore), Kennedy voted NO on Afganistan, NO on Iraq. Yet he voted YES on Kosovo.