• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who

LowDown

Curmudgeon
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
14,185
Reaction score
8,767
Location
Houston
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
...are the cowboy neocons now?

Ask Pres. Obama and he'll tell you his policies are nothing like Bush's policies. He doesn't torture prisoners! and so on. Of course, neither did Bush for the most part, and Obama never asked Congress to make waterboarding and other procedures illegal, so he can resume doing that any time he likes.

But the President speaks with forked tongue. In all the important ways his policies are Bush's policies. What a bunch of hippo crates these guys are!

hippo crate.jpgHippo crate.

The secretary of state boiled with moral indignation, American pride and war bluster. The defense secretary huffed that America has “moved assets in place” and is “ready” to punish the strongman. And though the president says he has yet to decide whether to attack, leaked details of the coming military action were all over the newspapers: Within “days,” US Navy ships will launch a barrage of Tomahawks at selected targets.

Have George W. Bush and his band of cowboy neo-cons retaken the White House?

If only. This time the secretary of state is John Kerry, who launched a political career opposing the Vietnam War. The defense secretary? Chuck Hagel, who revived his career by quitting his party after the Iraq war
 

AtlantaAdonis

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
2,316
Reaction score
630
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I'm generally a peacenik but I am willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt.

He was a community organizer and not an oil magnate from a family with a history of making obscene profits from war. He removed Ghadaffi without spending trillions and killing lots of children. He has been trying to close Gitmo though the Republican brass won't let him. Oh, and he has no connections to Halliburton.
 

NoC_T

Imposition of miscellany
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 30, 2011
Messages
11,593
Reaction score
2,379
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Obama supports torture. We know this already. Incontrovertible fact. A breaker of pre-election promises. Same again.
 

Bob N

Weekend Political Pundit
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
3,848
Reaction score
1,801
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Benny Avni seems to know everything before it begins. Interesting. :?

...are the cowboy neocons now?

Ask Pres. Obama and he'll tell you his policies are nothing like Bush's policies. He doesn't torture prisoners! and so on. Of course, neither did Bush for the most part, and Obama never asked Congress to make waterboarding and other procedures illegal, so he can resume doing that any time he likes.

But the President speaks with forked tongue. In all the important ways his policies are Bush's policies. What a bunch of hippo crates these guys are!
Well both Presidents never tortured anyone to my knowledge. There was people in the military that were torturing people in Afghanistan during the Bush era.

But so far Syria looks like something that is going to be an airstrike - and that's if it does go down - but I believe there will be no boots on the ground.
 

LowDown

Curmudgeon
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
14,185
Reaction score
8,767
Location
Houston
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I'm generally a peacenik but I am willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt.

He was a community organizer and not an oil magnate from a family with a history of making obscene profits from war. He removed Ghadaffi without spending trillions and killing lots of children. He has been trying to close Gitmo though the Republican brass won't let him. Oh, and he has no connections to Halliburton.

Benefit of the doubt? You mean your principles go under the bus for Zero.

He cheered on the people who removed Ghadaffi, people who will be killing lots of children. And US ambassadors.

The Republicans are standing in his way on GITMO? So are the Democrats. Not a single blue state will agree to take those prisoners.

And a connection with Halliburton is bad only because left wingers falsely demonized Halliburton so much.

But don't get me wrong. I don't necessarily think Obama would be wrong to do this, especially if what it really amounts to is a proxy fight with Iran. But then that comes out of my principles, not yours.
 

Starbuck

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Messages
881
Reaction score
255
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Both parties have been different flavors of the same ice cream since the end of WWII.

The OP is generally correct. . . all of the Clinton era (eek Bush era) policies have remained relatively unchanged. Surely we now have a wider range of marriage and relationship options in some states, but on the whole our economic, drug, immigration, anti-terrorist and foreign policy has remained unchanged.
 

Starbuck

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Messages
881
Reaction score
255
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
There were at least two viable third party options this election cycle, not that they garnered any media attention.
 

AtlantaAdonis

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
2,316
Reaction score
630
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Benefit of the doubt? You mean your principles go under the bus for Zero.

He cheered on the people who removed Ghadaffi, people who will be killing lots of children. And US ambassadors.

The Republicans are standing in his way on GITMO? So are the Democrats. Not a single blue state will agree to take those prisoners.

And a connection with Halliburton is bad only because left wingers falsely demonized Halliburton so much.

But don't get me wrong. I don't necessarily think Obama would be wrong to do this, especially if what it really amounts to is a proxy fight with Iran. But then that comes out of my principles, not yours.

I hate war but recognize that sometimes it is necessary. What I am opposed to is wars for profit that won't benefit anyone. I'd trust a community organizer who helped those less fortunate over someone who has connections with oil and the Carlyle Group.
 

Velvet Elvis

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2012
Messages
4,954
Reaction score
2,195
Location
Midwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I'm generally a peacenik but I am willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt.
Well, ya know...there's ALWAYS going to be those people who give 0bama a break, solely based on the color of his skin.

I hate war but recognize that sometimes it is necessary. What I am opposed to is wars for profit that won't benefit anyone. I'd trust a community organizer who helped those less fortunate over someone who has connections with oil and the Carlyle Group.
So you were OK with Hussein gassing those Kurds? You were totally fine with the rape dungeons, the public starvation, the direct threats to the United States and her allies? You don't think those people are at least a little better off? Furthermore, when we went into Iraq we had support from our allies. Where's the support for going into Syria? UK? Russia?

The only reason 0bama is considering airstrikes in Syria is because he's already got the reputation of being all the other world leaders' bὶtch. Sooner or later, he's gotta send a message that he really does have a pair.
 

Diogenes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
4,980
Reaction score
3,059
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Well, ya know...there's ALWAYS going to be those people who give 0bama a break, solely based on the color of his skin.


So you were OK with Hussein gassing those Kurds? You were totally fine with the rape dungeons, the public starvation, the direct threats to the United States and her allies? You don't think those people are at least a little better off? Furthermore, when we went into Iraq we had support from our allies. Where's the support for going into Syria? UK? Russia?

The only reason 0bama is considering airstrikes in Syria is because he's already got the reputation of being all the other world leaders' bὶtch. Sooner or later, he's gotta send a message that he really does have a pair.

Well said. The administration posturing reminds of a chimpanzee I once watched beating his chest in a zoo. It's what Clinton did for 8 years, and it only convinced the opposition to try something bigger on 9/11.
 

calamity

Privileged
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
160,900
Reaction score
57,797
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Neo-Clown game plan: Block everything Obama tries to do that they don't agree with; pass that what they do like, and then argue that Obama is just like George Bush.
 

Penderyn

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 18, 2011
Messages
1,618
Reaction score
276
Location
UK, Cymru mostly.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
We didn't give Cameron the benefit of the doubt. Pester your representatives to be honest for once: we did.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
94,178
Reaction score
46,609
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Somebody somewhere opposed a war, therefore that person must oppose all military action forever! We're being invaded? You can't try to defend our nation, you were opposed to Vietnam!
 

Velvet Elvis

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2012
Messages
4,954
Reaction score
2,195
Location
Midwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Somebody somewhere opposed a war, therefore that person must oppose all military action forever! We're being invaded? You can't try to defend our nation, you were opposed to Vietnam!

No...but you can't condemn one war for being "useless," and then campaign for starting another one that's far MORE useless.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
94,178
Reaction score
46,609
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
No...but you can't condemn one war for being "useless," and then campaign for starting another one that's far MORE useless.

What if I don't perceive the other one to be useless?
 

Penderyn

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 18, 2011
Messages
1,618
Reaction score
276
Location
UK, Cymru mostly.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
What if I don't perceive the other one to be useless?

Do any Americans even begin to realise how complex the situation in Syria IS? The various booted two left feet that have buggered up so much of the Middle East should be retired NOW.
 
Top Bottom