View Single Post
Old 08-30-2005, 02:35 AM   #45
Peter
 
Peter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK, Middlesbrough
Posts: 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by edible_eye
nor will you ever hear them state such inclinations as plainly as you just did. remember john kerry's statement regarding "global tests"? that wasn't empty rhetoric - rather an indication of his party's view.No president, through all of American history, has ever ceded -- and nor would I -- the right to preempt in any way necessary, to protect the United States of America
It's easy to quote someone out of context. If America was right to "pre-emptively defend" then they can prove it, pass the global test and get multilateral support, right?

I know it's easier to just quote a bit of what someone says out of context, but ... Kerry said the reverse that he wouldn't ever hand the decision to the UN.

Quote:
Originally Posted by edible_eye
democrats seek to have the area behind their ears scratched by the leaders of other nations. they need to be coddled and praised in order to make decisions. and a democrat in the white house WILL mean more foreign influence on american policy. once again - refer to kerry's "global tests" statement. or, even more recently, shall we turn to the democratic judges in the supreme court who turned to foreign law while debating what is and is not appropriate concerning juveniles and the death penalty? it's not childish - it's their platform, unless of course you're implying that the democratic party is childish for their beliefs?
Democrats believe that multi-lateral action works better than unilateral, actually, for the most part the conservatives seem to agree (based on what's happening elsewhere in the world with American foreign policy). I see nothing wrong with looking to other countries to see how they do things and pinching their ideas, other countries do this with the US and the US do this with other countries, to suggest otherwise is silly. Now that the full Kerry quote is out, I expect you to stop saying Kerry wants to hand sovreignty to the UN, and start saying that you think it's disgusting that Kerry wants the US to have to prove, to answer to the rest of the world, I don't care what spin you put on it, but to say that the democrats and Kerry have stated they want to hand over US sovereignty to the US is a fat lie and I don't discuss lies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by edible_eye
i thought we were. you know - your opinion, my opinion.
Yes, but there's that respect thing again.


Quote:
Originally Posted by edible_eye
obsessed? perhaps we're quibbling semantically, but i'd call it disgust. and to be sure, i WISH there were poignant strong points i could bring up on bush's behalf. in truth, he has let me down time and again. however, given the chance to do it all over again - bush vs. kerry - i'd still vote for him.
I get the feeling that half the reasons you're so against what you believe is the left is probably due to name-calling and negative politics, and this happens on both sides of the saddening polerisation of US politics. (Hey, this can be what the British guy is useful for).

I have noticed that conservatives aren't actually that fond of Bush but go along with the Neocons because they still think Bush warts and all is better than the alternative. I'll be interested to see if someone more conservative and small government is put forward for the next election now that Bush can't run anymore.

Quote:
Originally Posted by edible_eye
i like this line mainly because you used the word "implore". that's a cool word used fairly often in britain-speak, i think. as for the rest of it - if you can forgive certain elements of my often abrasive personality (when i chat politics) then perhaps we'll trade ideas as time goes on. if not, well...
Well, I don't mind the odd abrasiveness, I just think that when you're browbeating other posters, it'll just mean only one voice gets heard or wants to talk and where's the fun in that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soul_Immortal
This is just my opinion, but:

Americans know better about American politics.
Hey, you'd be entitled to that opinion, but c'mon, you know that isn't true, most people regardless of nationality don't care about talking politics. Only Americans who are interested in American politics know more about American politics. Since your media is available globally, them dirty foreigners who are interested in American politics are going to know more it about the average American who, of course, isn't interested in the subject.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Binkie
Let's put it this way, how many people have tried the shoe-bomb idea since TSA started doing random shoe checks at the airport? If nothing else, it puts people at ease knowing that there are at least SOME measures, however trivial you may view them as, at preventing an attack of that nature. I'd say random bag checks are more helpful than the ol' thumb up the ass. Don't like airport security? Take the train. Don't like train security? Take the bus. Most people would agreeably like to see security measures stepped up after an attack on the transit system as opposed to the government standing with their arms crossed, respecting your liberties and the liberties of all those who were killed when a bomb on a subway train blew up.
That's spurious reasoning, would you like to buy this rock?, it stops tigers attacking. Well, you don't see any tigers attacking do you? Show me the captured or killed terrorists resulting from the TSA illegally gathering data on US citizens, show me the terrorists captured or killed where part of the investigation was the library information of a terrorist or terrorist sympathiser. Or the number of bomb-laden shoes.

Now I bet some of the increased security works and can't be proven except over a period of time and you can't take that risk, but random searches simply do not work, they don't even work as a deterrant since the chances are so low and you can get by it by simply using a different bomb container, or bombing the place they moved the security guys in from.

How far do you go?, do you go until any form of mass transit is unusable to people who like the forth amendment? Are you about to say, "Enjoy the constitution, get out of America"?, where is the line?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Binkie
I still like the story one reporter tells about a muslim summit that happened in New York shortly before the first World Trade Center attack. He was sitting in on it to do a story on what went on there when he realized that group members from such great organizations like HAMAS and the Islamic Jihad were there, attending and actively fund raising. When he called the FBI immediately, they essentially replied, "We don't know what you're talking about, or what you've been smoking."

The FBI really had no idea that these groups were here in the US. That changed after the first World Trade attack, but obviously enough wasn't being done. They changed that again after 9/11, so we'll see if that does the trick this time around. If it doesn't, the hell with the Patriot Act, but thus far there have been more terror cells broken up in major cities in the last 4 years than there were in a decade or two prior. By god, if my library record confidentiality agreement has to be comprimised for that, so be it.
How the heck will that help?, the terrorists use false names and have already got books, removing the privacy of an American citizen in a library does not stop a terrorist from blowing up an American building.
Peter is offline   Reply With Quote