Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Beric, Dec 10, 2009.
I particularly liked this quote:
My one question is whether he actually believes it, or if it's just political. Be great if he did.
I'd like to meet a single politician who believes everything s/he says. It's all snake oil and I have yet to see any politician, including Obama, do anything to make me think otherwise.
I'd be more inclined to give my money to Bernie Madoff for him to invest than to trust a politician.
Obama should hurry up and get us out of these wars. I don't distinguish much between Afghanistan and Iraq. The cost is astronomical and we are achieving very little. Time to stop being the global police and focus on our own problems.
Iraq and Afghanistan ARE our own problems. Take care of the problems and we're better off.
Or are you disagreeing with Obama?
I think part of it's political. After the Nobel furore, he almost had to come out with all guns blazing.
While I disagreed with entering Iraq, I find it disheartening that Americans don't want to be held accountable for our messes. We prefer to cut and run and let the country fall into shambles. I bet Iraq and possibly Afghanistan will end up like Vietnam. The north waits until we leave and then comes in to invade the south. The insurgency is waiting in both countries for the US to leave. As soon as we leave, they'll strike. While I agree and we should reduce our "world police" duties, we can't just run away from something we already created. Let's clean up our mess and then get out and stop being world police.
Just my opinion.
The insurgency will wait forever. It doesn't matter when we leave.
True, but it doesn't mean I have to like the American public's attitude of cut and run when we start losing a battle. If we were beating the crap out of the insurgency, I bet the American public attitude would be different.
Yes, but the stakes of WWII were far higher.
The number of soldiers lost was small in comparison to what would have happened had we lost.
If we were beating the crap out of them we would have been out of their by now, of course the public attitude would be different
Agreed, we had a lot more to lose back in WWII then what we have in Iraq( if anything). But, I was looking at it from a pure numbers perspective. To make 4000 casualties such a huge deal during 4 years of occupation pales in comparison of how many causalities were back in WWII in one year. About 60% of the casualties of 4 years in Iraq were lost at Pearl Harbor alone.
PS: I am not trying to be insensitive to the deaths of these soldiers. It is always the biggest price to pay in a war. Just saying how the media and with the public following, " OMG the death toll hit 4000!!! That is a lot!!!!!!!!!" Which in reality isn't when it is compared to the wars of past. In comparison, we're doing a pretty good job of killing the enemy and keeping our casualties down.
Its not cut and run, its "holy crap, we've been here 9 years and there are only 100 al quada left in the country, pack her home."
the real scary politician is the one that believes everything he says.
south korea and north korea are technically still at war... so talking about peace isn't quite the right choice
and only the president and a few others realize how far we're invested in those places and how we cannot leave no matter how much the public wants it. It's just not as simple as leaving.
We're there for a while, I suspect.
I was always optimistic growing up. I thought I would live to see world peace, or at least national peace. But it will really never happen. At least not for several more generations.
World peace? Only in dreams. It'll never happen.
which is more than political. It's universally sad. I have no issues with my fellow man, but I can see and entirely understand pure hatred and issues that are world wide.
If only all people thought exactly as I do...