Doug Feith - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

cmac2012 · #16 02-12-2007, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricSilver

"We have no intention of attacking Iraq" was the line from the White House prior to "Iraq War, the Sequel."

Iran is doing for the Iraqis exactly what the U.S. did for the Afghans when the Russians invaded Afghanistan.

What would you do if some force hostile to America invaded Canada, and you were next on the hit list. Would you supply aid and weapons to Canada, or do nothing, and simply wait to be invaded -- or nuked -- as some of the insane Neocons are suggesting we do to Iran.

Amazing to me that some of the ambitious power hawks in our gubmint just completely disregard human nature.

cscmc1 · #17 02-12-2007, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricSilver

"We have no intention of attacking Iraq" was the line from the White House prior to "Iraq War, the Sequel."

Iran is doing for the Iraqis exactly what the U.S. did for the Afghans when the Russians invaded Afghanistan.

What would you do if some force hostile to America invaded Canada, and you were next on the hit list. Would you supply aid and weapons to Canada, or do nothing, and simply wait to be invaded -- or nuked -- as some of the insane Neocons are suggesting we do to Iran.

Which begs to ask, what would you do if your POTUS?

Damnit, I said I was out of this one... nevermind.

cmac2012 · #18 02-12-2007, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cscmc1

Woah! Just suggesting a premise... yikes! I'll duck out now and leave you guys to your thread. FWIW, I was simply parroting what I've been reading on various news outlets all day. Didn't mean to ruffle any feathers!

I am a hotheaded bastid, ain't I? No need to duck out. The more the merrier.

Honus · #19 02-12-2007, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cscmc1

...What would you, the naysayers, do in the POTUS' shoes assuming you took over tomorrow? It looks like Iran's been supplying explosives and materials. What's the best course of action now?...

Personally, I don't appreciate the term "naysayers." It implies that those of us who point out the utterly heinous and incompetent job that Bush is doing are being negative. Good grief. How bad does a president have to be before we are allowed to slam him?

As for what I would do about Iran that would be different than Bush's approach:

I would not call them bad names or link them to Iraq and North Korea as part of an imaginary Axis of Evil simply because the phrase fits nicely within a State of the Union speech.

I would have assumed that when we invaded Iran's immediate neighbor and bitter rival that it would get involved by supporting its Shiite brothers and sisters in Iraq. I would have had the military plan for that to happen.

I would not pose for photo ops in the Oval Office with the leader of one of the groups getting the weapons from Iran (http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/12/sciri-iran/).

When deciding what level of resources and attention to devote to the problem of Shiites being armed by Iran, I would make sure that I don't take too much away from my efforts to figure out who is arming the Sunni insurgents, especially since most of the violence seems to be coming from them. So, you say focusing on the Sunnis makes it harder to score political points against Iran? Too bad.

I would quit the saber rattling, since all that does is strengthen the bad guys in Iran.

I would, shudder the thought, talk to Iran.

I would try to preserve some shred of credibility, although it's probably about 4 years too late for that. I don't think many people are buying our story on Iran, especially when the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs doesn't seem to buy it. (http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/12/pace-iran-iraq/)

That's all I got right now. If I actually knew what I was talking about, I could probably come up with a longer list of ways that Bush is blowing it.

cscmc1 · #20 02-12-2007, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

I am a hotheaded bastid, ain't I? No need to duck out. The more the merrier.

That's cool. I told myself I wouldn't get sucked into these threads anymore anyway. I had a few free minutes at work and couldn't resist, but now I'm home and have many, many better things to do... and thus, I am officially out. No hard feelings!

EricSilver · #21 02-12-2007, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cscmc1

Which begs to ask, what would you do if your POTUS?

Damnit, I said I was out of this one... nevermind.

I would shelve my ego, and use a different type of force.

Step One: Instead of fighting, American troops, along with those from other countries, i.e. Russia, Iran, and other regional powers, would be utilized to reconstruct the damage that was done.

Step Two: I would structure a deal in which Iraqi oil can be purchased (trying to steal it was such a bad thing) at a mutually agreeable price over a long term period.

Step Three: Commit the rest of my presidency to making Americans (and Western Civilization in general) understand that the world hates us because:

1.) We are Greedy. We believe that the earth is ours and we are entitled to whatever is in it, regardless of whomever else may be in possession of it.

2.) We Don't Respect the Inherent Humanity in Other People. If they look different, or their customs are different, or they do not manufacture and utilize mechanized technologies, they are "inferior" and the American hiding in them needs to be liberated. Rather than understand and accept them for what they you are, we try to "convert" them to our values and beliefs.

3.) We are Hypocrites. We boast of our rights and freedoms, while simultaneously trampling on those of others. Indeed, our proudest, most cherished freedom is the ability to destroy others. Think about it: Would we be such pompous *********s if we did not possess nuclear weapons -- and any if other country could b*tch-slap us whenever we got out of line? I think not.

I'll stop it here. Sorry for venting, but this subject, and state of the world, really pisses me off.

Botnst · #22 02-12-2007, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricSilver

I would shelve my ego, and use a different type of force.

Step One: Instead of fighting, American troops, along with those from other countries, i.e. Russia, Iran, and other regional powers, would be utilized to reconstruct the damage that was done.

Step Two: I would structure a deal in which Iraqi oil can be purchased (trying to steal it was such a bad thing) at a mutually agreeable price over a long term period.

Step Three: Commit the rest of my presidency to making Americans (and Western Civilization in general) understand that the world hates us because:

1.) We are Greedy. We believe that the earth is ours and we are entitled to whatever is in it, regardless of whomever else may be in possession of it.

2.) We Don't Respect the Inherent Humanity in Other People. If they look different, or their customs are different, or they do not manufacture and utilize mechanized technologies, they are "inferior" and the American hiding in them needs to be liberated. Rather than understand and accept them for what they you are, we try to "convert" them to our values and beliefs.

3.) We are Hypocrites. We boast of our rights and freedoms, while simultaneously trampling on those of others. Indeed, our proudest, most cherished freedom is the ability to destroy others. Think about it: Would we be such pompous *********s if we did not possess nuclear weapons -- and any other country could b*tch-slap us whenever we got out of line? I think not.

I'll stop it here. Sorry for venting, but this subject, and state of the world, really pisses me off.

Best wishes on your candidacy.

B

cmac2012 · #23 02-12-2007, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricSilver

I would shelve my ego, and use a different type of force.

Step One: Instead of fighting, American troops, along with those from other countries, i.e. Russia, Iran, and other regional powers, would be utilized to reconstruct the damage that was done.

Step Two: I would structure a deal in which Iraqi oil can be purchased (trying to steal it was such a bad thing) at a mutually agreeable price over a long term period.

Step Three: Commit the rest of my presidency to making Americans (and Western Civilization in general) understand that the world hates us because:

1.) We are Greedy. We believe that the earth is ours and we are entitled to whatever is in it, regardless of whomever else may be in possession of it.

2.) We Don't Respect the Inherent Humanity in Other People. If they look different, or their customs are different, or they do not manufacture and utilize mechanized technologies, they are "inferior" and the American hiding in them needs to be liberated. Rather than understand and accept them for what they you are, we try to "convert" them to our values and beliefs.

3.) We are Hypocrites. We boast of our rights and freedoms, while simultaneously trampling on those of others. Indeed, our proudest, most cherished freedom is the ability to destroy others. Think about it: Would we be such pompous *********s if we did not possess nuclear weapons -- and any other country could b*tch-slap us whenever we got out of line? I think not.

I'll stop it here. Sorry for venting, but this subject, and state of the world, really pisses me off.

Sounds good to me.

Botnst · #24 02-12-2007, 06:35 PM

Please, oh please draft a candidate to run on that platform!

B

cmac2012 · #25 02-12-2007, 06:51 PM

Hard to get to the bottom of your meaning, often. The danger of regular sarcasm.

EricSilver · #26 02-12-2007, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Please, oh please draft a candidate to run on that platform!

B

Here is my crystal ball for 2008:

Biden-Obama. The only winnable Democratic ticket.

Botnst · #27 02-12-2007, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricSilver

Here is my crystal ball for 2008:

Biden-Obama. The only winnable Democratic ticket.

With Biden on top, there's a chance. IMO the Obama thing is going to wear thin as his inexperience begins to show. Like it does with Edwards.

I've always respected Biden's opinion on foreign policy. he is probably as astute as anybody in Congress and has some really good ideas. I hate it when he has to do what candidates do: pander to the base.

If Biden loses it, it wont be in a debate. It will be some off-hand remark that he will feel the need to over-explain. The Obama thing wasn't the first.

B

cmac2012 · #28 02-13-2007, 01:29 AM

I called his office in '03 to try to leave a message urging him to get in the race. Had a nice chat with the uhh, receptionist.

Maybe he can overcome the Obama remark. It wouldn't hurt if Obama was his running mate, all right. Could be a nice ticket.

But the guy doesn't know when to shut up sometimes.

kip Foss · #29 02-13-2007, 10:38 PM

Just watched a very interesting 'Frontline' episode on PBS about how the White House manipulated the New York Times into printing a story so that the White House could then cite the story as the truth. Most of this had to do with WMD in Iraq but also with the outing of Ms. Plame the CIA operative. There will be 3 more episodes on this series. They will be well worth watching.