-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF Interim Thread of cunning stunts and desperate punts
- Thread starter Amir0x
- Start date
- Status
For real? You're saying that if you have a situation where you think that a certain action is the correct action but that the party you believe to be in the wrong will act in a negative matter that you would do what you deep down disagree with to appease the other side?Trurl said:
I can never agree with that. That right there is making decisions based on consequences and reward and not on beliefs or rational.
That said, I don't see why NATO needs to be expanded but I do see a reason why like minded countries should try and protect smaller countries who also wish to join the global stage. Whether it's NATO or something with another name matters not, but I do think that world democracies should try and protect emerging democracies from world players. That said, I also think we should have kept our fucking hands off countries that of their own free will decided to go the opposite route.
If you really think about it, it's the ideal liberal agenda but on a global scale. If you can't tell me why you think you should ally yourselves with a smaller country that wants to have the same freedoms and benefits as you do but is being held back by a larger country then you can't explain to me why one should support a minority in this country who wants to have the same freedom and opportunity as the white male majority.
It really makes you a hypocrite if you're for one and against the other and it makes your friendship and treaties with any like minded country basically worthless. Who wants to be an ally of a country that basically says if the going gets tough, right or wrong, we're outta here?
Stoney Mason
Banned
Juice said:
Pretty much. I think CBS is the only channel that provides no outlet for watching their material online.
soul creator
Member
The Lamonster said:
I was thinking it should be the new waterbottle.gif
The Lamonster
Member
ya we need to get that animated.gif ASAPsoul creator said:
mAcOdIn said:
Yes, we should support Georgia, but only to an extent. We arent and should not risk war with Russia. You are talking about the sort of hard headed idealism that led to Iraq.
We are already in 2 wars with Iran a possibility. Russia Occupies half of Georgia. How do you let a fractured country into NATO?
Lucky Forward
Member
60 Minutes - here's a one minute excerpt with links to more video:
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4460078n
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4460078n
My understanding (please correct me if wrong) is that Georgia struck first and that South Ossetia is very pro Russian. Even if Georgia was goaded into acting first, to you really want to be obliged to go to war on behalf of a small country that was reckless enough to start conflict with Russia over a province that doesn't want to be part of it anyway?mAcOdIn said:
The stance of allowing countries in after they have solved all territorial disputes might be reasonable, anything less is madness.
Um, no. This is not the same mentality that got us into war with Iraq, nowhere even close. What support there ever was for the US to come into Iraq by Iraqis was lost shortly after the first Gulf War, which I might add is actually a good parallel to Trurl's and I guess your views. We wanted to ally with segments of Iraq and promise them support, then saw that certain countries and some Americans didn't want us to go all the way, caved into demand and lost all of our supporters on the ground.StoOgE said:
This Iraq war has nothing to do with Iraq wanting to be in the same sphere as us, point me to where Saddam came to the US and said anything of the sort that ties into this line of thinking. Iran I might give you, but Afghanistan and Iraq have nothing to do with the line of thinking behind allying with Georgia and the Ukraine and maybe more-so with allying with Greece post WW2.
Trurl - I actually don't have much of a problem with Georgia losing S. Ossetia(spelling?) but I don't think that should affect it's standing with possibly joining NATO. I mean lets face it, there's lots of countries that have had to quell separatist groups within their own borders, and honestly I'm generally for the the separatists. Fighting to keep a border a border just because that's what it was in my opinion is fucking stupid, if they don't want to play your game I think they should be allowed to go. That said, I recognize the responsibility that a government has to maintaining itself and won't fault Georgia for the action anymore than I'd fault the UK, Spain, US and probably every other country out there.
viciouskillersquirrel
Member
I just saw this on FiveThirtyEight. I refreshed just to check that something wasn't glitching. Is this right?
~Devil Trigger~
In favor of setting Muslim women on fire
COLBERT WON THE EMMY!!!!!!!!!!!
maximum360
Member
General reaction following the McCain interview portion:
I know right? I guess in Iran's case we should just hurry up and nuke Israel for them so we don't have to fight.StoOgE said:
You guys are prime examples of why we need to let people fight in school. Shit, this is the same kind of thinking that has someone handing out lunch money to a bully to avoid a conflict because it's only a dollar fifty or not helping out a friend who was willing to stand up for himself. You'll live a long life but it will be a worthless one.
The Lamonster
Member
Awesome!~Devil Trigger~ said:
Have there been any Obama or McCain commercials during the Emmys?
Instigator
Banned
viciouskillersquirrel said:
I just saw this on FiveThirtyEight. I refreshed just to check that something wasn't glitching. Is this right?
That's almost a landslide.
But I'd rather the Obama campaign and the electorate keeps thinking it's a close race.
viciouskillersquirrel
Member
Would I be right in assuming that this is just a bit of Palin backlash? I hardly think it'll stabilise at these levels.AniHawk said:
mAcOdIn said:
What the fuck are you on about?
Sometimes war is a necessity, but as much as I support Georgia and Ukraine, letting either enter NATO is not in anyones best interests, including Georgia and Ukraine.
Look, Georgia fucked up when they went into South Ossetia. Russia baited them and they stepped in it. Russia called our bluff.
and yes, Iraq was idealistic. Saddam was a tyrant, but the world is full of them. We cant fight them all.
and no, the pragmatic thing is to intice Iran into giving up its aspirations for nukes. If that doesnt work we let Israel bomb the fuck out of them.
but continue using oversimplified analogies about high school bullies.
SpeedingUptoStop
will totally Facebook friend you! *giggle* *LOL*
We still got a month and a half left.
that said, GOOOOOOOOOOOOOBAMA
that said, GOOOOOOOOOOOOOBAMA
Stoney Mason
Banned
avatar299 said:
That's not Reagon-esque and there is no reason to believe that anybody has a firm grip on the results at this stage.
Explain to me when Iraq was explained as an idealistic war to the American people or world please.StoOgE said:
And there's no guarantee that there even would be a war over Georgia or the Ukraine just like there's no guarantee there won't be one by not letting them join. All you're doing is appeasing a bully because you're afraid of possible consequences.
That is in it's entirety a bullied mentality and it is a simple trait.
Stoney Mason
Banned
mAcOdIn said:
The whole post WMD justification for the war is that we are spreading democracy.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
How exactly are we being bullied by Russia?
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Just in:
U.S. Treasury Widens Scope of Bad-Debt Plan Beyond Mortgages
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=acqN7861mi6Y&refer=home
U.S. Treasury Widens Scope of Bad-Debt Plan Beyond Mortgages
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=acqN7861mi6Y&refer=home
mAcOdIn said:
except, we are antagonising Russia with our missile defense shield. Not unlike the cold war, Russia and the US are in a power struggle, and we are only willing to do so much. As great as it sounds, going to war with Russia over Georgia is grade A retarded.
Oh, and does "Saddam gassed his own people! He kills the kurds." The war was certainly sold on Saddam is evil.
Stoney Mason
Banned
mAcOdIn said:
After the fact it was the sole justification. Bush constantly says the war was justified even without wmd's because Hussein was a dictator unless I'm not understanding the argument you two are having.
SpeedingUptoStop
will totally Facebook friend you! *giggle* *LOL*
fixed.Stoney Mason said:
Okay, now that's just bullshit. :\Ether_Snake said:
4 point, but yup the point stands. I think McCain hit his peak after Palin and the convention. Barring a truly horrible debate performance from Bams or some nasty October surprise, I don't see the current state shifting too much toward McCain.AniHawk said:Four years ago at this time, Bush had an 8-10 point lead on Kerry according to Gallup.
Obama's got a 5 point lead from Gallup right now.
The Chosen One
Member
viciouskillersquirrel said:
I just saw this on FiveThirtyEight. I refreshed just to check that something wasn't glitching. Is this right?
Seriously why do you guys obsesses over 538's pseudo electoral math? It's totally unproven and swings too widely from one extreme to another. Last week it nearly had McCain winning in a landslide when the polls tightened a bit. Which was just silly because McCain never lead in a single Kerry state and some of the battle ground states like Colorado, New Mexico & New Hampshire were still extremely close.
Keylime
ÏÎ¯Î»Ï á¼Î¾ÎµÏÎγλοÏÏον καί ÏεÏδολÏγον οá½Îº εἰÏÏν
Reporting back in after my Camp Obama experience.
Our session was from 12:30 - 6:00. We had a guy who worked as a community organizer with Barack back in Chicago, which was awesome. Great speaker and did a crazy job of explaining the strategy of the campaign.
Essentially, it's all about power. He (quite controversially) described Barack Obama as a power-hungry, ruthless person. Going into detail about how he got his seat on the Illinois senate by getting all other candidates disqualified.
The reasoning for this power spiel was to show how Barack gains more power by empowering the people. Without an empowered organization, he is no better than any other politician. His strength is in teaching his followers how to obtain their own power, and through them, he attains his own. It's the embodiment of Barack's line "This election is not about me, it's about you." The guy did a great job, although I'm not quite sure everyone there was following along.
They taught everyone about how to connect with people while you're canvasing or phone banking, you need to be a great listener, not a great arguer. By finding out other people's self interests, you can relate and connect with the people and potentially sell them on your goals without even pitching them anything.
I found the community organizer guy an extremely effective speaker and I learned a lot about some of the core principles that drive Barack's campaign forward.
The second speaker broke down the New Jersey strategy for the campaign. While NJ is a firmly blue state (referred to as a safe state by the Field Director), the campaign was setting ambitious goals for voter turnout. He described the raw numbers of how many houses needed to be visited and the number of calls that needed to be made. He further broke into strategy as well as the specifics of what you'd need to do.
It ended with everyone going out to these tables and to sign up for events for their local districts. My district was not represented (as I drove quite a ways to get there), but they provided me the contact information I'd need to connect both with my local campaign office, as well as contacts out in Philadelphia. So I wasn't able to directly sign up for anything, however I have the information I'd need to get myself out there and will be reaching out to the Philadelphia office ASAP.
The people there were actually mostly of the older woman variety. I'd say about 3/4 people were 40-70 year old women. I was really only 1 of maybe 3 young folks there.
The experience was really cool, and hopefully I'll actually make a difference out in PA to ensure that bitch stays blue.
Our session was from 12:30 - 6:00. We had a guy who worked as a community organizer with Barack back in Chicago, which was awesome. Great speaker and did a crazy job of explaining the strategy of the campaign.
Essentially, it's all about power. He (quite controversially) described Barack Obama as a power-hungry, ruthless person. Going into detail about how he got his seat on the Illinois senate by getting all other candidates disqualified.
The reasoning for this power spiel was to show how Barack gains more power by empowering the people. Without an empowered organization, he is no better than any other politician. His strength is in teaching his followers how to obtain their own power, and through them, he attains his own. It's the embodiment of Barack's line "This election is not about me, it's about you." The guy did a great job, although I'm not quite sure everyone there was following along.
They taught everyone about how to connect with people while you're canvasing or phone banking, you need to be a great listener, not a great arguer. By finding out other people's self interests, you can relate and connect with the people and potentially sell them on your goals without even pitching them anything.
I found the community organizer guy an extremely effective speaker and I learned a lot about some of the core principles that drive Barack's campaign forward.
The second speaker broke down the New Jersey strategy for the campaign. While NJ is a firmly blue state (referred to as a safe state by the Field Director), the campaign was setting ambitious goals for voter turnout. He described the raw numbers of how many houses needed to be visited and the number of calls that needed to be made. He further broke into strategy as well as the specifics of what you'd need to do.
It ended with everyone going out to these tables and to sign up for events for their local districts. My district was not represented (as I drove quite a ways to get there), but they provided me the contact information I'd need to connect both with my local campaign office, as well as contacts out in Philadelphia. So I wasn't able to directly sign up for anything, however I have the information I'd need to get myself out there and will be reaching out to the Philadelphia office ASAP.
The people there were actually mostly of the older woman variety. I'd say about 3/4 people were 40-70 year old women. I was really only 1 of maybe 3 young folks there.
The experience was really cool, and hopefully I'll actually make a difference out in PA to ensure that bitch stays blue.
AniHawk said:Four years ago at this time, Bush had an 8-10 point lead on Kerry according to Gallup.
Obama's got a 5 point lead from Gallup right now.
But if you factor in the 8.2% of voters who won't admit to the polls they're not voting for Obama because he is black, and the 15.9% of voters who won't vote for Obama because he is a secret muslim...
he's down like 20%+ by my count
I don't give a fuck about what one guy says when talking about the government as a whole. It was sold to the American people and the world as Iraq posed an Imminent threat, what a few people on the sidelines say to support their agenda doesn't mean anything when I'm trying to describe why Americans let themselves be goaded into something. If it was sold as a humanitarian effort and that's what it took for Americans to rally behind a war we'd have every swinging dick in the military overseas.thekad said:
And I think that's what's wrong with politics on any level. If someone wouldn't support Georgia or the Ukraine then fine, but don't give lip service to them by saying "we support you but can't risk war with Russia." What kind of pussy shit is that? Just be honest and throw your hands in the air and say "not my problem" or some shit.
If my government says they support a country I want that to mean something in the same I hope the reverse is true. If not, then say it out front. If we won't support Georgia and don't think they're worth the risk then flat out tell Georgia we don't support them. That's all I want from my government and other world governments.
The war was sold as being vital to American security, so in that sense I would say it was mostly pragmatic in sales pitch. Colin Powell at the UN mostly made Hussein sound dangerous, and Tony Blair's dossier was built around Saddam Hussein being dangerous. THe point that he was evil was also pushed, but him being evil made him sound more dangerous.StoOgE said:
I'd definitely say that national security was the core rationale made in the argument before the war.
I shouldn't argue with you, though, since I basically agree with everything else.
:lolBut if you factor in the 8.2% of voters who won't admit to the polls they're not voting for Obama because he is black, and the 15.9% of voters who won't vote for Obama because he is a secret muslim...
he's down like 20%+ by my count
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked