Welcome to Tech Support Forum home to more then 136,000 problems solved. Issues have included: Spyware, Malware, Virus Issues, Windows, Microsoft, Linux, Networking, Security, Hardware, and Gaming Getting your problem solved is as easy as:
1. Registering for a free account
2. Asking your question
3. Receiving an answer

Registered members:
* Get free support
* Communicate privately with other members (PM).
* Removal of this message
* See fewer ads.
* And much more..

 





Want to know how to post a question? click here Having problems with spyware and pop-ups? First Steps
Go Back   Tech Support Forum > The Conversation Pit > The Political Scene
User Name
Password
Site Map Register Donate Rules Blogs Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-14-2006, 01:38 PM   #1 (permalink)
Member, Networking Team
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,040
OS: Windows Server 2003


Remember when partisan politics stopped at the water's edge?

Comments made recently but former VP Al Gore opened my eye to somthing. Read this article below and lets then talk about the comments made by the former Vice President...

Quote:
Remember when partisan politics stopped at the water's edge?

WASHINGTON (USATODAY.com) — Back in the old days of American politics —the late 1940s — Arthur Vandenberg, a respected Republican senator from Michigan, coined the phrase that partisan politics should end at the water's edge.
What he had to say is instructive as the nastiness of the current partisan debate over the war in Iraq threatens to divide the country and embolden the enemy.

Here are Vandenberg's words:

"To me, 'bipartisan foreign policy' means a mutual effort, under our indispensable, two-party system, to unite our official voice at the water's edge so that America speaks with one voice to those who would divide and conquer us and the free world."

Vandenberg went on to say that there should be full, open and honest debate of foreign policy within the country. But the goal of such debate, he said, was not to score political points, but to reach a position of unity that could be presented to the world.

Few would argue with that. However, over the past few weeks, it would appear that debate over the course of the war in Iraq has thrown the Vandenberg adage out the window.

Democrats, buoyed by public opinion polls that show American support for the war in Iraq dwindling, have launched a heavy assault against President Bush and his arguments used to persuade members of Congress to authorize the war and topple the regime of Saddam Hussein. Some Democratic opponents have stopped just short of accusing Bush of treason.

"Instead of providing open and honest answers about how we will achieve success in Iraq and allow our troops to begin to come home, the president (has) reverted to the same manipulation of facts to justify a war we never should have fought," said Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.

Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have shot back that such attacks are politically motivated, give comfort to the enemy and undercut the morale of the troops in combat.

"I think people ought to be allowed to ask questions," Bush said Thursday in South Korea. "It is irresponsible to say that I deliberately misled the American people when it came to the very same intelligence they looked at and many of them came to the same conclusion I did ... What bothers me is when people are irresponsibly using their positions and playing politics."

Thus, Americans had to watch their president defend his policies while standing on foreign soil.

The Vandenberg adage apparently was forgotten by former president Bill Clinton, who Tuesday spoke to Arab students at the American University of Dubai, in the United Arab Emirates, and pronounced the U.S. invasion of Iraq a "big mistake."

"Saddam is gone, but I don't agree with what was done," Clinton said. "The American government made several errors ... one of which is how easy it would be to get rid of Saddam and how hard it would be to unite the country."

Many might agree with Clinton's view, but a former American president going overseas and criticizing his own government used to be considered a no-no.

In an editorial Friday, the New York Daily News, hardly a friend of the Bush administration, said Clinton's "utterly disgraceful, shame-on-America remarks in Dubai the other day could only have made it sufficiently plain to many millions of Middle Easterners, both those who are with us and those who are not, that the United States cannot be counted on to stand behind the historic mission that toppled the butcher Saddam Hussein."

Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, expressing dismay at the partisan tone of the debate over Iraq, stood up in the Senate last Tuesday and reminded his colleagues of Vandenberg's words.

"I worry the partisanship of our time has begun to get in the way of the successful completion of our mission in Iraq," he said.

Lieberman's speech was largely ignored by the media.
newhouse1390 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Bookmark on Thread SoupReddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2006, 08:00 AM   #2 (permalink)
Manager, The Conversation Pit/Analyst, Security Team
 
bry623's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: NW Territory circa 1787
Posts: 10,464
OS: winxp pro sp2


Send a message via MSN to bry623
Ever since 2000, the dems have felt the need to have any kind of a victory against Bush that they can. It is the #1 rule in their book. The #2 rule is to acheive victory at any cost. Bush has been untouchable and it just kills them that they do not have anything to get over on him. It's sad and pathetic and only strengthens the republican base.

From an historical standpoint, guys like Joe Leiberman, John McCain, Evan Byah, Dick Gephardt, Lincoln Chaffe, Ben Nelson and any "moderate" politician should form there own all inclusive moderate party. That would shake things up! I'd consider voting for Leiberman.
__________________
Scarlet and Gray in L.A. 9/13/08


bry623 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Bookmark on Thread SoupReddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2006, 08:55 AM   #3 (permalink)
Asst. Manager, The Conversation Pit
 
yustr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Connecticut shore/California Desert
Posts: 4,747
OS: PCLinuxOS, XP Pro

My System

I agree with the second part of bry's post - that a moderate party needs to be formed. Except that we have allowed our representatives to build a system that practically precluded doing so...shame on us.

As for Vandenberg's opinion that fair, open, honest debate should lead to a unified position, I agree. But this wasn't the case in the 1960 in Viet Nam or the Cold War. And it's far from the case now in Iraq.

Look at the two wars W has going: Afganistan & Iraq.

Afganistain: Bin Laden was behind the 9/11 attacks. The Taliban is hiding and supporting Bin Laden. Turn him over or we take you out. Open, honest, not much to debate. Result = a united America.

Iraq: No WMD, No welcome, Manipulation of facts, partial truths, spin, suppression of opinions counter to the predetermined one, changing rational, 2500 deaths, no recognizable strategy, corruption, profitterring, non-compete contracts, mercinaries, limited rebuilding, etc. Not open. Not honest, No real debate. Result = a fractured America.

Blaming the demo's for not "getting behind the President" is bogus. Place the blame (if you must) on W, Cheney and Rumsfeld and Rove who orchestrated the whole thing. Not getting behind something that's wrong, is the right thing to do. I just wish more of them had the testicular fortitude to do it.
__________________
I didn't mean to say it. But I meant what I said. J. McMurtry

In Vino Veritas


yustr is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Bookmark on Thread SoupReddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2006, 12:20 PM   #4 (permalink)
Member, Networking Team
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,040
OS: Windows Server 2003


Quote:
I agree with the second part of bry's post - that a moderate party needs to be formed. Except that we have allowed our representatives to build a system that practically precluded doing so...shame on us.

As for Vandenberg's opinion that fair, open, honest debate should lead to a unified position, I agree. But this wasn't the case in the 1960 in Viet Nam or the Cold War. And it's far from the case now in Iraq.

Look at the two wars W has going: Afganistan & Iraq.

Afganistain: Bin Laden was behind the 9/11 attacks. The Taliban is hiding and supporting Bin Laden. Turn him over or we take you out. Open, honest, not much to debate. Result = a united America.

Iraq: No WMD, No welcome, Manipulation of facts, partial truths, spin, suppression of opinions counter to the predetermined one, changing rational, 2500 deaths, no recognizable strategy, corruption, profitterring, non-compete contracts, mercinaries, limited rebuilding, etc. Not open. Not honest, No real debate. Result = a fractured America.

Blaming the demo's for not "getting behind the President" is bogus. Place the blame (if you must) on W, Cheney and Rumsfeld and Rove who orchestrated the whole thing. Not getting behind something that's wrong, is the right thing to do. I just wish more of them had the testicular fortitude to do it.
yustr, I like the comparison of the two wars and I must say that this is the argument that most on the left make. However regardless of the disagreements you have with the war in general, we must come together to fight this enemy. You may not have thought that there were any WMD's (though it has been proven in the past) and you may have thought that the war was based on lies...blah blah blah... we don't here enough of this on the news. But back to the point. We are involved and we are facing terrorists in Iraq and we must hold true to the principle of bringing to justice those who committed those despicable acts on 9/11. We now have young men and women dying in the sands of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan and our nation is being torn apart and made weaker because of the Democrats manic obsession to bring down our commander in chief. This is no political game anymore we have Americans fighting hard everyday. No matter our political differences we have to come together and win in Iraq. WE CANNOT LOOSE!

yustr, were the comments made by Al Gore appropriate?
newhouse1390 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Bookmark on Thread SoupReddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2006, 07:23 PM   #5 (permalink)
Asst. Manager, The Conversation Pit
 
yustr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Connecticut shore/California Desert
Posts: 4,747
OS: PCLinuxOS, XP Pro

My System

Quote:
Originally Posted by newhouse1390
... However regardless of the disagreements you have with the war in general, we must come together to fight this enemy. ..
No we do not. Wrong is wrong. And blindly following a President down a destructive path is the opposite of true patriotism.

Exactly what enemy are you talking about? What threat did/does Iraq pose to the US? None. The didn't in 2001 and they certainly doesn't now. Except perhaps as a breeding ground and training center for more terrorists. Notice that the Taliban is starting to use the IDE and roadside bombs that they probably learned how to build in Iraq.


Quote:
But back to the point. We are involved and we are facing terrorists in Iraq and we must hold true to the principle of bringing to justice those who committed those despicable acts on 9/11.
As usual your logic amazes me. Neither Iraq nor anyone inside of Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. Also, the US has killed many thousands of Iraqies. How many of these were invlolved in the 9/11 plot? And we have what 10,000 troops in Afganistan where Bin Laden might be. And 135,000 in Iraq where we know he's not. How many do we have in Pakistan where he likely is? It's been over 1600 days since that tragic morning. Are we any closer to "bringing to justice" the criminals who did this?

Quote:
... No matter our political differences we have to come together and win in Iraq. WE CANNOT LOOSE!
We have already lost.We have lost our ability to influence the world through our good acts. We have lost the respect of our friends. We have lost any hope of being the broker of peace in the Middle East. We have lost any hope of stemming the rising tide of radical Muslim extremism. We have lost 2500 of our sons and daughters. We have lost my friend. We have lost big time.

Quote:
yustr, were the comments made by Al Gore appropriate?
I'll find the speech and give you my opinion. Do you have a link to the text? All I'm finding is conservatives blasting him. I refuse to blindly defend him.
__________________
I didn't mean to say it. But I meant what I said. J. McMurtry

In Vino Veritas


yustr is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Bookmark on Thread SoupReddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2006, 06:46 AM   #6 (permalink)
Manager, The Conversation Pit/Analyst, Security Team
 
bry623's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: NW Territory circa 1787
Posts: 10,464
OS: winxp pro sp2


Send a message via MSN to bry623
Quote:
Originally Posted by yustr
No we do not. Wrong is wrong. And blindly following a President down a destructive path is the opposite of true patriotism.

Exactly what enemy are you talking about? What threat did/does Iraq pose to the US? None. The didn't in 2001 and they certainly doesn't now. Except perhaps as a breeding ground and training center for more terrorists. Notice that the Taliban is starting to use the IDE and roadside bombs that they probably learned how to build in Iraq.
The Bush doctrine clearly states that if you pose a threat, you will be dealt with accordingly. The UN passed resolutions and the Congress gave the president their approval

Quote:
Originally Posted by yustr
We have already lost.We have lost our ability to influence the world through our good acts. We have lost the respect of our friends. We have lost any hope of being the broker of peace in the Middle East. We have lost any hope of stemming the rising tide of radical Muslim extremism. We have lost 2500 of our sons and daughters. We have lost my friend. We have lost big time.
With an attitude like that, we might as well hide behind our oceans like we did in the 19th century. Whose respect did we lose? France respected us from D-Day to VE day and that's it. After Afgahanstan and Iraq, Libya wised up and decided to get with the program. And BTW, we lost 2753 people to "radical Muslin extremism".
__________________
Scarlet and Gray in L.A. 9/13/08


bry623 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Bookmark on Thread SoupReddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2006, 01:51 PM   #7 (permalink)
Member, Networking Team
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,040
OS: Windows Server 2003


Quote:
We have already lost.We have lost our ability to influence the world through our good acts. We have lost the respect of our friends. We have lost any hope of being the broker of peace in the Middle East. We have lost any hope of stemming the rising tide of radical Muslim extremism. We have lost 2500 of our sons and daughters. We have lost my friend. We have lost big time.
You know the terrorists knew that the American left would sink to a level so low that they would give up even though they were winning. This is a joke. You sir are dead wrong. You undermin the mission that our troops are working hard to do. You make up a false therory that we are loosing in Iraq. We have liberated 50 million people, brought a democratic nation to a dangerous rego=ion of the world. We are winning and making progress every day.

Quote:
What threat did/does Iraq pose to the US? None. The didn't in 2001 and they certainly doesn't now.
Enough for John Kerry one of the liberalist senators in the US Congress to vote for the war.

By saying Iraq had posed no threat to the US, you are saying also that Iraq did not do anything support the actions of the 911 attacks.

Let me remind you somthing that happened in WWII. Japan attacked the US. Not only did we attack Japan but we finished the job and went into Europe and stopped Germeny.

Let me say that the War on Terror is going to go on much longer than 5 years and go to many more countries than just one. Terrorists are around the world and we will take down any government that supports Terrorism. Iraq was just one of them. Brace yourself, we are fighting WWIII. We are in for the long haul.
newhouse1390 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Bookmark on Thread SoupReddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2006, 12:33 PM   #8 (permalink)
Member, Networking Team
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,040
OS: Windows Server 2003


Quote:
Originally Posted by yustr
We have already lost.We have lost our ability to influence the world through our good acts. We have lost the respect of our friends. We have lost any hope of being the broker of peace in the Middle East. We have lost any hope of stemming the rising tide of radical Muslim extremism. We have lost 2500 of our sons and daughters. We have lost my friend. We have lost big time.
Many liberals long ago lost the nerve to wage war--or even to defend themselves. It is unfortunate that you think the battle has already been lost, even though there are still Americans risking their lives everyday for a mission that you have already deemed unachievable.
__________________
Because you can read this thank a teacher, because it's English thank a soldier.

Last edited by newhouse1390 : 02-27-2006 at 12:36 PM.
newhouse1390 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Bookmark on Thread SoupReddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2006, 04:00 PM   #9 (permalink)
Asst. Manager, The Conversation Pit
 
yustr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Connecticut shore/California Desert
Posts: 4,747
OS: PCLinuxOS, XP Pro

My System

What we've lost is the ability to be a leader. A leader where other people follow because they see the wisdom of our actions and the benevolence of our motives. Sure we can force people to toe the line whether because of economic or military might, but winning in the long run requires convincing people of differing histories and experiences that our way is the best way. This president has failed miserably. His vision is fundamentally flawed – assuming he has one – which I doubt. As Iraq deteriorates into civil war there's not a single word from the neo-cons on their failed plan. What's next?

There is no enemy of any consequence to the United States. There never was. The terrorists that we've recruited and trained – and don't fool yourself, that is exactly what George and Dick and Rummy have done by their idiotic and predetermined takeover of a country – will quickly decide that we are not worth their wrath because Bush has made the US impotent in the shaping of the world. But, you are right, as we continue to occupy, maim and kill Muslimwomen and children in a failed attempt to "win" and as we continue support Israel at all costs - there will continue to be dead American sons and daughters and grieving parents.

We made it up. It's all a bunch of lies. The facts speak for themselves. All of the rational for the war have been rendered false. Talk only of facts, not beliefs. I don't give a !@#$ who thought what. Facts. No WMD. No welcome. No harmony. No liberty. How more strongly can I say it. It was all based on lies. The Iraqis know it. Al-qaeda knows it. The outcome is entirely predictable. If you've read these pages you know that some of us were predicting this years ago.

What we've lost is the moral high ground. It will likely take generations to recover – if we ever do. The US is no longer the beacon of peace and freedom that so many looked to for so many years. This president has destroyed in 3 short years what took thousands of lives and decades to forge. I have no doubt historians will looks back at these years as a turning point in US history. It will be seen as a time where the people of the US were first hoodwinked and then led down the slope toward irrelevance . The shame is that we are on this path because of ineptitude and arrogance on the part of our president (and his handlers) and the cowardice of our Representatives.
__________________
I didn't mean to say it. But I meant what I said. J. McMurtry

In Vino Veritas


yustr is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Bookmark on Thread SoupReddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2006, 05:44 PM   #10 (permalink)
Member, Networking Team
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,040
OS: Windows Server 2003


Your concerns are heard and are very depressing to say the least. Unfortunately you represent a group of pessimistic persons who do not see a bright future for the United States and for the people of Iraq. I can always see a brighter tomorrow for all of the freedom seeking people in the Middle East. I am an optimist.

I believe that it is the fundamental principle of freedom that the United Stated is a beacon for, and it is the United States that other countries look up to, even today. Look at all of the people that cross into our country daily form Mexico and Cuba. These people know that the United States is the best place for any person to live work and raise their family. We are the most productive people on earth. I do not think that we have lost our influence. Otherwise you would not have all of these Iraqi’s fighting daily to secure their country and their newly discovered freedom. History has proven this cause is the right one and that freedom will always prevail. The Iraqis will win, with the US along their side.

It is unfortunate that you do not see evil in the world. But that’s ok it s a problem that many liberals have. Let me tell you, this is WWIII that we are fighting today. This is a fight that should have been taken place long ago. Unfortunately during the Clinton years we sat on our tails and did not confront the evil that hit us on 9/11. Now we are in this fight for the long haul.

From Copenhagen to Samara, the radical Islamists are on the offensive. From Tehran to Damascus, the dictators are trying to regain the upper hand in the Middle East. From Moscow to Beijing, the enemies of liberal democracy are working to weaken the United States. Across the world, the forces of terror and tyranny are fighting back. Are we up to the challenge?

The paragraph above tells us that we are fighting a war against civilization(s). This evil exists in many places of the world Iraq and Afghanistan are only the beginning in what is going to be a very long and drawn out battle. You need to recognize that there are possibly millions of terrorists that hate us and want to kill us. Terrorists brought this war to our shores and now it is our job to fight back. This was never going to be a one step process, despite what some politicians make it out to be. War is a terrible thing, and I am one who does not like war and only supports it when it is absolutely necessary. But you achieve peace through strength, not through appeasement. This is a War on Terrorism and those who aide and support them. America has risen to the challenges in the past and is now up and on its feet and looking out to hunt down the evil doers that wish to provoke fights with free and peaceful nations. We are not going to rest until we have won.

This is history in the making and I have the full confidence in this President to successfully protect us and wage this war. It is my foresight that tells me history will look back at this time and say that with all of the pressures made by politicians and all of the scandals that a media threw out, The President held true to his principle and stood firmly up to what he knew to be right, and America, and the world are better off because of it.
__________________
Because you can read this thank a teacher, because it's English thank a soldier.
newhouse1390 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Bookmark on Thread SoupReddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2006, 05:48 PM   #11 (permalink)
Member, Networking Team
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,040
OS: Windows Server 2003


President Bush, my leader has shown himself to be neither showman, nor follower, nor poll-driven politician. He is a person with passion for our country and its people. He has had to make courageous and difficult decisions. At times, offending both the right and left wishes, doing what he deemed in the best interest of our nation. With his faith projected, a trusted, compassionate leader, he reminds us, “Americans are a free people, who know that freedom is the right of every person and the future of every nation. The liberty we prize is not America’s gift to the world; it is God’s gift to humanity.” His vision seen in word and action looks to the sky and to our neighbors and sees how the future could be different. Thankfully, both confidence and humility are characteristically shown in his person. As a leader, he placed good and capable people around him, not always having to be the one to take credit for the positive taken place. President Bush has shown that his purpose is larger than those that preach partisanship and his actions have shown this to as true.

Many Democrats partisans have no appreciation for President Bush’s direction. Obstruction and useless rhetoric displayed as they purposely place hunger for power over what is good for the nation. In communion with France and Germany, many Democrats demand that UN is in control of America’s military interest. In contrast, our president’s words, “Whatever action is required, whatever action necessary, I will defend the freedom and security of the American people.” How comforting to know that he will consult, but leadership is what we will see, not desiring the next to clean up the mess.

President Bush is a proven leader, a compassionate and genuine man. Through the fire tested, how thankful our nation should be.
__________________
Because you can read this thank a teacher, because it's English thank a soldier.
newhouse1390 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Bookmark on Thread SoupReddit!
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2006, 07:03 PM   #12 (permalink)
Asst. Manager, The Conversation Pit
 
yustr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Connecticut shore/California Desert
Posts: 4,747
OS: PCLinuxOS, XP Pro

My System

I guess we'll just have to disagree on this and let history be the judge.
__________________
I didn't mean to say it. But I meant what I said. J. McMurtry

In Vino Veritas


yustr is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Bookmark on Thread SoupReddit!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:17 PM.



Copyright 2001 - 2008, Tech Support Forum

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81