If you really believe that, then you know nothing about conservatives.
You… actually think it’s the Baathists that are trying to kill us at this stage in the game? Wow…just wow.
That’s a good question, worthy of debate for sure. If I were a citizen of Russia or Cuba or North Korea or even Venezuela, I’d welcome any and all support in overthrowing the tyranny ruling my country. As for what the US should do now, or next, that’s a complicated question. I don’t know for sure. Too many variables to consider.
Why are you so pessimistic about the abilities of the Iraqis to sustain a democracy afer we leave? Seems like they’re doing a great job right now. And their army has done a great job in taking the lead in Basra.
From what I’ve read the Iraqis are good people who unfortunately have not had the good fortune that we’ve had in the US. They want pretty much the same things that everyone else wants. And they’ve moved away from the Islamists at breakneck speed. Most of the insurgents of 2004 are fighting alongside us right now. They appreciate democracy more than most of us, because they’ve lived under tyrannies.
I’ve been watching them and what they do all my life. “Conservative” is a polite word for “evil, ignorant, stupid, and foolish”, in my opinion. Conservatives are virtually always on the wrong side; morally, practically, and factually. They are the bottom of the moral and intellectual barrel. Name an issue, and they are the bad guys and have been for longer than I’ve been alive. The conservatives are the ones that oppose(d) civil rights, equal rights for women, gay marriage, evolution, abortion, and on and on; they are the ones that support(ed) segregation, homophobia, creationism, the subjugation of women . . . and the Iraq war.
No, I never said that. Read the title of the thread.
I think you’re confusing social conservatives with libertarian, small government conservatives. Which is fair enough, I didn’t distinguish which group I was referring to. Anyway, I’m in the latter group. I don’t think you’ll find much libertarian conservative resistance to any of the causes you mentioned. And the concept of social conservative is pretty murky. There probably should be a better word for them. Anyway, it’s easy to be a social conservative statist by today’s definitions.
If you want to get an idea of what today’s conservatives are about I’d suggest listening to some of Hugh Hewitt’s podcasts. If you can find a hint of racism or contempt for the little man please let me know. I won’t recommend a specific podcast because I’d be accused of cherry picking. Choose any you like.
Not really. One group prefers tyranny and greed and malice through government and business; one prefers just tyranny and malice through business; they don’t want government getting in the way of them crushing people. Libertarianism is the anarchy of the right; sociopathy as a political ideology.
And those small government types are exactly the sorts who inflicted all that evil on Iraq, and did their best to cripple them so they couldn’t recover.
Lying is the norm in such matters. I pay attention to what they do, not what they say.
And it’s especially the norm among anyone morally debased enough to be a conservative.
OK. I’m calling “whoosh” here. I mean, come one…Hugh Hewitt? You can’t be serious.
I am glad someone swallows all the crap the government feeds us. Congrats.
Saddam was a bad guy but women wore western clothes and held jobs. They were over half the students in the universities. How have women fared since our occupation?
Millions have fled and are living in nearby countries. They were the educated
The government we back provides no services and runs what we allow. It is a sham. The conditions in Iraq have deteriorated horribly. Plumbing,electricity and water are at best sporadic. unemp[loyment is 65 percent. We blew the infrastructure apart and paid billions to have some of it fixed. Most is not. The Iraqis are being occupied by foreigners and like it as much as you would.
“The Emperor Clothes is becoming sort of Pied Piper?” WTF? My goodness ol’ “socialist” Obama has got him so frightened he’s practically pissing himself.
I just reviewed the entire page and found only insults and name calling from the leftists. This is not a debate. I’m out of here.
I just can’t stop reading the title as “What happened to the reputation of the Necrons”. (Time to bring back the R-Undead designation?)
Well, distrust became loathe when Bush made the Axis of Evil speech. Iran was the first country to give us flyover rights to bomb Afghanistan after 9/11 and then he slapped them in their face. Iran is IMO the best hope for that region. It’s time to recognize Persia as a strong influence. Besides, we should be more worried about Sunnis. At the end of the day, a Shi’ite power bloc is probably good for everyone as Muslims are a majority Sunni. This of course is not a good development for Israel with an Iranian backed Hezbollah.
Sounds good to me.
There goes Der Trihs again unable to distinguish his own opinion from facts.
This entire thread has been a series of posted opinions where the random fact was only cherry picked to make a point. No one has seriously addresssed the actual point of the OP in quite a while.
So I am not sure why you are selecting one poster for scorn–especially one who was honest enough to place at least “in my opinion” into his text.
Knock it off.
= = =
With all the pointless hostility already expressed in this thread, with no attempts to answer the question, I suspect that it has a very short future, anyway.
[ /Modding ]
:dubious: Great job? Iraq is a failed state. The government is thoroughly corrupt and thoroughly ineffectual, even in Baghdad. It’s hardly a government at all. People do better relying for security and protection on the strongest local militia.
:mad: :dubious: It is not a polite word!
:dubious: Hugh Hewitt? Author of, If It’s Not Close, They Can’t Cheat? If that’s what todays conservatives are about, there is no reason whatsoever for anyone to take them seriously.
One of those variables is the possibility that if you were a citizen of one of those places, you might be a regime-supporting kool-aid drinker. Or you might be a family man with an unarticulated yearning for change of some sort, but not the kind that would put you and your family at the risk of physical harm to achieve.
Lincoln Chaffee, a Republican (but not a neo con), was the only Senate Republican to vote against authorization. Why? He went to CIA on his own and asked them explain the need, and wrote in his recent book that they gave really unconvincing evidence. He said he could tell that even they didn’t really believe there was a need to invade.
What happened to him? He got voted out of office.