So long as putin is the one committing them?So you have no answer, no problem with Trump supporting torture and war crimes?
You've not read the article.The funniest part about this article is that they thought putting Trump's mouth on a bust of Caesar was an "own".
<snipped>
No - the eat babies and kick puppies was YOUR idea - not mine. Perhaps you know something about him you're not sharing? Apparently he's your boogeyman, but you have yet to come to terms with which Jungian compartment Trump resides in.So he's your boogeyman. You aren't credible.
I don’t understand. Why would we support war crimes by Putin or anyone else?So long as putin is the one committing them?
Probably not.
After all, trump's minions in the House are holding up aid for Ukraine.
The contents of the article literally don't even matter.You've not read the article.
There's nothing at all "funny" in Kagan's piece.
I'm sorry. I meant what I wrote (in the post to you) to be addressed to the poster you were responding to.I don’t understand. Why would we support war crimes by Putin or anyone else?
What author? You don't know that whatever pic you're talking about was inserted by the article's author. For all you know, it could be part of wapo advertising. Or something else.The contents of the article literally don't even matter.
It's just hilarious that the author thinks the first picture depicting Trump as a Caesarian figure is a own. Trump is going to extricate us from the corrupt plutocratic Republic? Uhmmm wtf I love Trump now.
How do you know?The contents of the article literally don't even matter.
The author of the article. He's an interventionist liberal, by the way, and has a track record of supporting every foreign war in the middle east that have cost and displaced millions of lives. Frankly, I don't care what this piece of garbage has to say about Trump's moral character.What author? You don't know that whatever pic you're talking about was inserted by the article's author. For all you know, it could be part of wapo advertising. Or something else.
Why not respond to the very real idea of a dictatorship, should trump be reinstalled in the Oval Office?
I wasn't going to post about this but I couldn't let it go. This was in "The Washington Post" today. It doesn't belong in the "Breaking News" forum since it is an opinion piece. It is also behind a paywall so many people would have trouble gaining access to it. But I didn't want to read it and fail to mention it on Debate Politics because I found it so chilling. I wanted to know if other members had also read it and what they thought about it.
"A Trump Dictatorship is increasingly inevitable. We should stop pretending." by Robert Kagan
LOL....Robert Kagan is no liberal. An interventionist, yes, but no liberal.The author of the article. He's an interventionist liberal, by the way, and has a track record of supporting every foreign war in the middle east that have cost and displaced millions of lives. Frankly, I don't care what this piece of garbage has to say about Trump's moral character.
I think the democratic process should be followed and if the American people vote for Trump then he should hold office.
Why not read the article and critique a point or two made by Robert Kagan?
He is literally a leading intellectual on global liberal interventionism, specifically in the middle east. Neoconservatives ARE liberals.LOL....Robert Kagan is no liberal. An interventionist, yes, but no liberal.
So, you didn't read the article, and you've rejected it wholesale because you mistakenly assumed Robert Kagan is a liberal?
No, neoconservatives are not liberals. (In your mind, maybe, but not in reality.) Unless you can prove this claim....He is literally a leading intellectual on global liberal interventionism, specifically in the middle east. Neoconservatives ARE liberals.
Black is WhiteNeoconservatives ARE liberals.
American conservatism is literally completely inspired by the classical liberal philosophers of post-enlightenment Europe. They believe in free trade, free markets, individual rights, open borders and freedom of movement, and foreign wars for democracy building. They are philosophically influenced by liberalism and the politics they practice are liberal. How else could they possibly be more liberal?No, neoconservatives are not liberals. (In your mind, maybe, but not in reality.) Unless you can prove this claim....
Back to your wholesale rejection of the article - which you have yet to read! - simply because you believe, mistakenly, the author is somehow a liberal: well, now I know who and what you are.
That's very clever. Consider reading a history book.Black is White
Up is Down
Fascism is Communism
Lies are Truth
Trump is a benevolent conservative who only wants whats best for this country
Kagan isn't identified as a liberal. If you want your claim he is a liberal to be taken seriously, you have to prove that Kagan is considered a liberal. That means you copy and paste excerpts from credible sources to which you provide the links.American conservatism is literally completely inspired by the classical liberal philosophers of post-enlightenment Europe. They believe in free trade, free markets, individual rights, open borders and freedom of movement, and foreign wars for democracy building. They are philosophically influenced by liberalism and the politics they practice are liberal. How else could they possibly be more liberal?
<snipped>
Quote from an article this dude wrote in 2006:Kagan isn't identified as a liberal. If you want your claim he is a liberal to be taken seriously, you have to prove that Kagan is considered a liberal. That means you copy and paste excerpts from credible sources to which you provide the links.
If or when you don't do this, your claim (Robert Kagan is a liberal!) will remain what it is now: just your opinion. But not fact.
In the meantime, you might read the article and comment on it. That would help establish some semblance of credibility on your part.
I imagine many conservatives, MAGA GOPers, Libertarians, Independents, et al talk about "liberals".Quote from an article this dude wrote in 2006:
"Russia and China are the greatest "challenge liberalism faces today": "Nor do Russia and China welcome the liberal West's efforts to promote liberal politics around the globe, least of all in regions of strategic importance to them. ... Unfortunately, al-Qaeda may not be the only challenge liberalism faces today, or even the greatest."
This guy sure does talk about liberalism a lot for not being a liberal. He also says he supports liberal interventionism, claims to want to build liberal democracies in the middle east, and voted for Hillary Clinton.
This guy hates Trump because Trump ostensibly does not support turning the entire middle east into a parking lot. He has some similar things to say about other anti-war candidates like Ron Paul. He's a piece of garbage and I don't care what he has to say about anything.
Yes I was mocking the way people feed in negatives.No - the eat babies and kick puppies was YOUR idea - not mine. Perhaps you know something about him you're not sharing? Apparently he's your boogeyman, but you have yet to come to terms with which Jungian compartment Trump resides in.
Have you read Kagan's wapo article yet?I imagine many conservatives, MAGA GOPers, Libertarians, Independents, et al talk about "liberals".
But talking ABOUT "liberals" doesn't MAKE you one.
Good luck finding those excerpts from credible sources that prove Robert Kagan is a liberal.
If we're talking trump, his sneering at McCain's military service was despicable.Yes I was mocking the way people feed in negatives.
How they are so willing to believe the worst . You know that's how brainwashing starts. I'm not telling you to like the guy hate him, but hate him for something real.
Well considering he classifies himself as a liberal interventionist and then has multiple quotes lamenting how some countries refuse liberal democracy, I think it's safe to assume he is indeed a liberal.I imagine many conservatives, MAGA GOPers, Libertarians, Independents, and Democrats talk about "liberals".
But talking about "liberals" doesn't make you one.
I know. Thank you.That's very clever.
I do. I have. Mostly history that I haven't actually been living through, day to day, for many years. I don't need to read a history book for that. I just pay attention, and my level of attention is well above average.Consider reading a history book.
Where does he classify himself as a liberal? You've provided no quote, no link to a quote that says this.Well considering he classifies himself as a liberal interventionist and then has multiple quotes lamenting how some countries refuse liberal democracy, I think it's safe to assume he is indeed a liberal.
Anyway I'm going to stop replying now. You don't seem to understand what liberalism is or the historical genesis of it as a political philosophy. You seem far more interested in pop politics so I'm going to leave you to that drama.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?