BrainKing - Keskustelualueet (Politics)

Valvoja(t): Vikings

Politics

Forum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics.

All standard guidelines apply to this board, No Flaming, No Taunting, No Foul Language,No sexual innuendos,etc..

As politics can be a volatile subject, please consider how you would feel if your comment were directed toward yourself.

Any post deemed to be in violation of guidelines will be deleted or edited without warning or notification. Any continued misbehavior will result in a ban or hidden status, so please play nice!!!

*"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned."

Lista keskustelualueista
Sinulla ei ole oikeutta kirjoittaa tälle alueelle. Tälle alueelle kirjoittamiseen vaadittu minimi jäsenyystaso on Brain-Sotilas.

Moodi: Kaikki voivat lähettää viestejä

21. Maaliskuu 2011, 05:44:52

Übergeek 바둑이

näytä tämän käyttäjän viestit | Näytä keskustelusäie | linkki

Otsikko: Re: The Empire strikes back

Muokannut Übergeek 바둑이 (21. Maaliskuu 2011, 05:53:43)

Artful Dodger:

> I notice you didn't disagree that he's the weakest president in history.

> and who ordered those strikes? Bush? Oh wait. Obama is president now. Guess he did it.

Isn't that a contradiction? He is so weak that he orders bombing Lybia.

Well, I suppose that what some people call "weakness" others might call restraint.

If it were Bush, he would be talking no UN backing, full scale shock and awe, followed by 500,000 troops, only to find a weak, spent army and no WMDs. Now, there is a proof of strength if I ever saw one.

Of course, to point to the fact that interfering in Lybia is against one of the main principles of the UN Charter is a moot point because the UN ceased to mean anything in the 1970s. Whatever happened to the UN not inerfering in the internal affairs of a nation?

Well, Obama is trying to play the "we support democracy" game. I wonder if he would do the same with Saudi Arabia? Oops! I forgot that this country that does not even allow women to run for elections (something that Lybia allowed under Ghadafi) is one of our favorite allies. Then there is Pakistan, and a few other favorites in the Middle East. I suppose that democracy is in the eye of the beholder.

21. Maaliskuu 2011, 12:08:31

Mort

näytä tämän käyttäjän viestit | Näytä keskustelusäie | linkki

Otsikko: Re: These aren't my words, they are the words of many of his critics and many of those are on the left. He "acts" the part when necessary. But he's an ineffective and incompetent president.

Muokannut Mort (21. Maaliskuu 2011, 12:29:10)

Artful Dodger: But you said.... "And the comments just keep rolling in. I like this one best!"

So I guess you have some thought that feels calling Obama Marxist is appropriate. Yet Marxism in itself (just like Socialism) covers a great many ideologies. Just like someone could say they are Republican yet also a member of the Tea Party

... But that as much seems to a dogmatic cry based on the cold war divisions. ie propaganda.

21. Maaliskuu 2011, 16:25:40

Mort

näytä tämän käyttäjän viestit | Näytä keskustelusäie | linkki

Otsikko: Re:here's reason and rationale behind the label.

Artful Dodger: Yes there is.... using 50 year old fears based on the cold war stereotyping like that used by McCarthy to cause hate and fear within the people listening/reading in the USA seems to be the current right wing approach to any debate on matters currently in the news.

Yes.. I know what a thesis is... I also know when someone is constantly using stereotypes of no particular substance and posting such (propaganda) as a means to say they are right.

eg... the claims that the "left" are all abandoning Obama.. where is actual figures supporting such claims.. is it like the Daily Mail article you posted as quoted from some blogger that only told a fraction of the truth of the articles he was quoting from?