War Hypocrisy

from JoeUser Forums

Just reading the news about Obama's covert wars in Yemen and other places in the Middle East and it really makes me laugh. Now that their boogeyman George W Bush is gone, It seems like Democrats have become rather fond of war, not only becoming huge proponents of protracted wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but new wars as well. Ironically enough, wars without congressional approval, such as in Libya and Yemen. At least evil and dastardly Bush took his cases for war to congress and even the UN. Whether we believe we were told the truth or agreed with the way it all went down with the Bush team, at least all the proper congressional authority and diplomatic channels were used and exhausted.

3,186 views 13 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top

I know it is not a surprise to you to find out that liberals are hypocritical.  I think Sgt "Know Nothing" schultz is the wrong DNC chair.  The really correct face of the democrat party is Weiner - the eternal liar.

Reply #2 from Stardock Forums Top

I did notice this when I heard about drone strikes in Yemen. And i thought Republicans were the war mongers. Obama's not only changing his opinions on Iraq, but he's adding new battlefields to our wars and spending lots of money we don't have in the process.

TouchTasks - Access tasks with ease on Windows touchscreens.
Reply #4 from Stardock Forums Top

TonyR,

Thanks for the article. I've wondered about the legitimacy of our getting involved in these new Middle East entanglements for some time now.

I know it is not a surprise to you to find out that liberals are hypocritical.
End of quote

No, no, surprise at all. This reminds me of something from Eric Voegelin, "Order and History".

"Socrates understood ....that a reform cannot be achieved by a well-trained leader who recruits his followers from the very people whose moral confusion is the cause of the disorder."

 

It seems like Democrats have become rather fond of war, not only becoming huge proponents of protracted wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but new wars as well.
End of quote

Yes, Obama owns a very messy and confusing foreign policy when it comes to Middle East events and it seems to be "follow the leader" time. However, neocons like Bill Crystal are pushing for these new wars as well. What's up with that?

Obama's not only changing his opinions on Iraq, but he's adding new battlefields to our wars and spending lots of money we don't have in the process.
End of quote

Have we the answers to the "W" questions? Why are we there? Who are we fighting for? What is the real goal? What do these people really want before we bleed and bankrupt ourselves to win it for them?

Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting myfist0, reply 3
End of myfist0's quote

You are going to need a lot of posts if you want to start posting all of his reversals! ;)

Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top

myfist0, I do believe the good Dr. is right, you are going to run out of pages or followers I am afraid, hehehe. Just don't forget some of the clasics like "Read my lips, no new taxes". I think someone could spend years collecting this nonsense, go figure.

Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting lulapilgrim, reply 4
Have we the answers to the "W" questions? Why are we there? Who are we fighting for? What is the real goal? What do these people really want before we bleed and bankrupt ourselves to win it for them?
End of lulapilgrim's quote
For the most part, they just want us to go away and take our democracy elsewhere. Colonialism did not work well in the past and it will not work at all in the Middle East. You cannot just go into a country of your choice and decide for them a new direction in life that is completely foreign to their beliefs. Unless of course you hold them through military occupation … then things are different as history has shown us.

 

Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top

Most apt lie for this thread. 

Politicians need to be sworn in for there promises speeches so when they are shown to full of shit we call legally hang them. Same old same old. When has a leader actually really changed anything significant from the direction of the previous administration?

Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top

Amazing Hypocrisy would be a better title I think. Myfist0 is right. Local politics may appear somewhat democratic and swap political sides and all. But the overall trend of the USG has just been a forwards pointing saw tooth wave always corrected to maintain the headlong charge ... wherever they are headed.

Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting myfist0, reply 8
When has a leader actually really changed anything significant from the direction of the previous administration?
End of myfist0's quote

ON the scale of "The Day the Earth Stood still", you are correct.  Most are just minimal changes from the previous.  However, your liberties were not removed with one piece of legislation, but with minimal changes.  20 years ago, do you really think the public would have stood for child molesters LEGALLY fondling children and mentally challenged adults?  20 years ago, would you be hauled off to jail for NOT doing something as simple as wearing a seat belt?  They start out small, but it never goes back.  It always results in fewer liberties and more reasons to arrest you - when they want to.

Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top

Back on topic (sort of)... I wonder why Obama "the warrior" is afraid of Syria? I've seen much more government violence against civilians there than I've seen from Libya. Protection for some? Democracy for some? Seems so.

Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting Nitro, reply 11
Back on topic (sort of)... I wonder why Obama "the warrior" is afraid of Syria? I've seen much more government violence against civilians there than I've seen from Libya. Protection for some? Democracy for some? Seems so.
End of Nitro's quote

Curious thing - Gadhafy liked him!  As far as I know, Bashar never voiced an opinion (but perhaps we should check where some of those campaign contributions came from -after all, talk is cheap, but bribes go a long way in DC).

Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top

I'm sure Momar <sp> has a different opinion of Obama now. The news cycle has been playing video of Syrian troops beating and kicking bound and blindfolded persons. Perhaps if the persons being beaten has weapons (like the Libyan rebels) then he would implement his "civilian protection program".

Probably just he doesn't want his Muslim friends to thing he might do something that might appear to benefit Israel, no matter how slight. How unlucky for the Syrians on the receiving end of a boot.