Batgirl's political thoughts

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Other than doubling Gitmo, which seemed to more of a passing comment, where has Mitt expressed an opinion on torture. And why do you make that a litmus test when it doesn't affect your pocket book?

Do you really believe that's going to be a central issue of the next president's presidency? I don't.

I see the next president extricating us from Iraq and getting out of the nation building business.

I know this was directed toward Mike but I'm throwing more pennies in nonetheless.

I do NOT want another president who looks the other way, or even expresses a willingness to look the other way, while agents of the U.S. government commit acts of neglect, abuse, and torture. We have GOT to restore our image worldwide, and a Bush Lite (in this respect) is not the way to do it.

I think McCain would be a really good choice in this regard, since he's been on the receiving end of such treatment and would likely reverse policy immediately.

[JohnnyLingo]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

I know this was directed toward Mike but I'm throwing more pennies in nonetheless.

I do NOT want another president who looks the other way, or even expresses a willingness to look the other way, while agents of the U.S. government commit acts of neglect, abuse, and torture. We have GOT to restore our image worldwide, and a Bush Lite (in this respect) is not the way to do it.

I think McCain would be a really good choice in this regard, since he's been on the receiving end of such treatment and would likely reverse policy immediately.

This is probably a topic for another thread, and I know Mike has gone the rounds over Gitmo hundreds of times, but have you read the reports about this "torture"?

And frankly, I could care less about the world's opinion of us. The U.N. is utterly corrupt and everyone's going to hate us no matter what we do. Trying to please everyone is futile, IMO.

[MikeWaters]

how did we go from the shining city on the hill to the dark dungeon in the pit in 20 years?

Maybe we can't please everyone. But how about pleasing God?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

I know this was directed toward Mike but I'm throwing more pennies in nonetheless.

I do NOT want another president who looks the other way, or even expresses a willingness to look the other way, while agents of the U.S. government commit acts of neglect, abuse, and torture. We have GOT to restore our image worldwide, and a Bush Lite (in this respect) is not the way to do it.

I think McCain would be a really good choice in this regard, since he's been on the receiving end of such treatment and would likely reverse policy immediately.

Looked the other way?

I would imagine Bush has done more than any other president; the only fact is, the media has shed more light upon it than at any other time.

I do not expect nation states to act with the same purity as I do individuals. Nation states are mistakenly judged by human standards. History shows no nation has acted and in violation of the predictive limitations of Karl Popper, will ever act purely.

The shining statement on the hill is mere allegory, not meant for nation states. Nation states are inherently dirty.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

...everyone's going to hate us no matter what we do. Trying to please everyone is futile, IMO.

Hmmm.... I think I detect a pattern here.

[JohnnyLingo]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Hmmm.... I think I detect a pattern here.

Your Spider-sense seems to be working properly, then.

[Archaea]

For me, it's practical reality.

A nation state must act in its own self-interest first and foremost. Sometimes that means considering the opinion of other nation states, sometimes that means going it alone.

Whenver our nation can defer costs to other nations, I'm okay with that. As Newt Gingrich once stated, if we could solve our national debt by levying a tax on the Germans, everybody would favor that. So would I.

Nonetheless, I believe Mike is engaging in hysterical theatrics to paint our soldiers as routinely torturing prisoners or detainees. In fact, I wager as a super power, we are better than at any other time in the course of human events. I suppose he wants improvement and militarily that makes sense. That notwithstanding, I don't see the "torture" issue as that important in our international standing, especially if we don't let it be.

Our standing will always be challenged because we are competing with other powerful nations such as Russia, China and India, for world resources. Just look at oil prices as China vies for oil.

There will be tensions, we need our sectors strong and competitive. We need to broker for these resources and we must cautiously calculate the costs of securing oil, a vital resource, the single most vital resource in a modern economy. There will never be a society which can succeed without it.

So our nation's job is to secure the economy, secure our peoples, protect our friends and avoid unnecessary conflicts diverting our resources. Iraq is regretable and was unnecessary.

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

He will have to retract that statement. What I find terrifying is that the comment was met with overwhelming cheers and applause from the audience.

Well, we are talking about South Carolina.

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by Archaea

I see the next president extricating us from Iraq and getting out of the nation building business.

I don't see every candidate doing that. Romney hasn't said anything I know of that would lead me to believe he'll change Bush's policies on Iraq, or even nation building but maybe I've missed it. What happened to the Republican party that opposed Clinton's "nation building" tendencies?

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

how did we go from the shining city on the hill to the dark dungeon in the pit in 20 years?

Maybe we can't please everyone. But how about pleasing God?

You know, Mike, apart from moral rights and wrongs, there are good pragmatic reasons to not alienate the entire world, and even cultivate alliances. Lingo might as well come here and say schools ought to be segregated. That's how much credence what he says here deserves.