|
Rastor posted:Yes this. Even John Oliver did a whole segment about how there are legitimate concerns about Hillary, it's just that Trump is overwhelmingly worse. I agree with this, at least broadly. People who reflexively insist that Clinton can do no wrong, helped enable her in turning the whole email molehill into a mountain. Progressives should support her for president, but be critical of her, and be prepared to wage war on her after the election.
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 00:36 |
|
|
RZA Encryption posted:Apparently this guy introduced Trump at a rally: If only there was some word to describe a society or sub culture that excused and was tolerant towards sexual assault.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:You know the no-fly zone is to help brown people from being bombed right? Maybe but it's still a risky move considering the russian backlash. Maybe the us should focus on it's own bombing of civilians first. And can we stop pretending that the no-fly zone is for humanitarian reasons?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
Nessus posted:The Mexican War was pretty much "Hey, I think we can take Mexico." And then we did! When people talk about the Mexicans wanting "reconquista" and to take back the southwest American states, what is not mentioned is that they have a pretty good case that that territory was seized by force of arms and nothing else. Yeah they had as much claim to that land that we did. Remember that they had invited Anglos to settle because they couldn't get Iberos to do it. Also if anyone has claim to that land it's the natives that both the Anglo dominated USA and the Iberian dominated Mexico were fine genociding.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
America wishes invading Iraq was the worst foreign policy decision they ever made. That isn't a good place to be.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:america was on board with the iraq war, either for it or seeing it as an inevitiability anyway the protests against the Iraq War were larger than the largest protests against the Viet Nam war. I'm not pointing this out to insinuate anything about Hillary because it's pointless to criticize literally anything about her in this thread but this is a really wrong statement
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
Hell, I remember where I was when "Shock and Awe" started. I was driving with my dad back to Houston from Matagorta Bay and heard the news report on the radio. Edit: I'm so old 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:You know the no-fly zone is to help brown people from being bombed right? Don't worry though, it's the bad kind of Syrian. Fojar38 posted:Pacifism is the single most privileged ideology possible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
Monaghan posted:Maybe but it's still a risky move considering the russian backlash. Maybe the us should focus on it's own bombing of civilians first. Why isn't it, are the Russians not bombing non-ISIS civilian targets?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
U-DO Burger posted:I opposed the Iraq War, but I was also a kid in high school who reflexively opposed anything from Bush because Bush v. Gore made me very spiteful, so it's not as though it was an informed position based on sound reasoning and evidence. I think a lot of people like me who were incidentally right about the Iraq War don't really remember what 2003 was like and think that in hindsight the decision was really obvious and clear-cut. in hindsight though, reflexively opposing anything that bush did would have led to some pretty decent positions, even if inadvertently.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
A Winner is Jew posted:As I said before, best case is that her forign policy will be Obama 2.0, worst case her forign policy will be Bill 2.0. I believe the leftist concern is she'll be another LBJ
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
botany posted:Do you have something I can read on that? My understanding of the situation was that the vote was very much about the invasion, but if I'm misremembering I'd like to know. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-marburggoodman/five-myths-about-hillary-iraq-war-vote_b_9177420.html http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/opinion/20160705/evans-defending-clintons-iraq-war-vote http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/02/hillary_clinton_told_the_truth_about_her_iraq_war_vote.html
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
Monaghan posted:Maybe but it's still a risky move considering the russian backlash. Maybe the us should focus on it's own bombing of civilians first. In September there were 5 civilian deaths from US bombing in Syria. There was just shy of 900 from Russian/Syrian regime bombing IIRC. I'll try to dig up the SOHR stats real quick.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:08
|
|
|
Dexo posted:Jesus christ. To be a little bit critical of Hilldawg, what the gently caress would you expect a bunch of loving Reagan liches to do after Iran-Contra? Not lie and abuse power?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:08
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I agree with this, at least broadly. People who reflexively insist that Clinton can do no wrong, helped enable her in turning the whole email molehill into a mountain. Progressives should support her for president, but be critical of her, and be prepared to wage war on her after the election. sit on my Facebook posted:the protests against the Iraq War were larger than the largest protests against the Viet Nam war. I'm not pointing this out to insinuate anything about Hillary because it's pointless to criticize literally anything about her in this thread but this is a really wrong statement
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:08
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Yeah they had as much claim to that land that we did. Remember that they had invited Anglos to settle because they couldn't get Iberos to do it. Also if anyone has claim to that land it's the natives that both the Anglo dominated USA and the Iberian dominated Mexico were fine genociding. They also threw out Sam Houston (the man the city's named after) because he wasn't on board with the whole Confederacy thing. "If we must secede, let's just go back to being our own country," he said, BUT THEY WERE TOO HOPPED UP ON SLAVERY. I don't know as much about New Mexico/Arizona/Nevada though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:08
|
|
|
Sitting next to Trump supporters makes it easy to arzy. These guys are convinced Hillary is going to prison and seem to change their opinion on anything that agrees/disagrees with their world view at the drop of a hat. It's scary.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:09
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:A large majority of the country supported that vote based on the info available during that time you idiot. Especially New Yorkers, of which, she was a senator of. https://youtu.be/YENbElb5-xY Looks like people in WH knew long before 9/11 and our subsequent invasion of Iraq that if we were to destroy their government it would destabilize the whole region.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
HannibalBarca posted:Dare I hope that this can tip the NC Senate race? They haven't really had to bother hiding it for a while now, but Trump on the campaign trail has made them feel so secure that they want to shout it from the rooftops. They can admit that all they are doing is wasting time and money to prevent the country from doing anything unless they are at the helm and get cheered for it while the media does its best to normallize this childishly destructive behavior.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/samsteinhp/status/793210020599046144
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
sit on my Facebook posted:the protests against the Iraq War were larger than the largest protests against the Viet Nam war. I'm not pointing this out to insinuate anything about Hillary because it's pointless to criticize literally anything about her in this thread but this is a really wrong statement not quite - simultaneous protests against iraq got as high as 400k in NYC as well as multiple tens of thousands in other cities, whereas the moratorium march in DC had as many as half a million protesting vietnam still, large protests don't indicate how many people were against the war at its inception. polling indicates a majority of americans supported both vietnam and iraq for the first couple of years
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
To be fair to the Texan settlers, they also did not want to convert to Catholicism, but I imagine if they were told "you can keep your slaves but you have to submit to the Pope," they would have Poped up faster than a French king.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
sit on my Facebook posted:the protests against the Iraq War were larger than the largest protests against the Viet Nam war. I'm not pointing this out to insinuate anything about Hillary because it's pointless to criticize literally anything about her in this thread but this is a really wrong statement This is like suggesting that Trump's going to win because his rallies are really big. The people in this thread suggesting that there was complete support for the war are wrong, but it was like 70-80% of people polled at the time that thought it was the right decision. There was enough room for Democrats to try to make a stand if they really wanted to, but it wouldn't have been a politically popular move at the time. That said, there was absolutely no push back against the Bush administration's rhetoric either, so a lot of that support was based on extremely one-sided information. Part of the reason I don't blame Hillary Clinton (or anyone else in particular) for her vote is that I think the Democratic party as a whole shares some responsibility for how things went down.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:11
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I believe the leftist concern is she'll be another LBJ gently caress me I wish she had the balls and convictions to propose half of the reforms that LBJ did. A Fancy 400 lbs posted:In September there were 5 civilian deaths from US bombing in Syria. There was just shy of 900 from Russian/Syrian regime bombing IIRC. I'll try to dig up the SOHR stats real quick. Does this include civilian deaths from us arming rebel groups? Edit- again this is geopolitics between Russia and the United States. There's humanitarian crisis' all over africa but no, Syria is the focal point for SOME reason.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:11
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Texas history can be summarized as "We broke the rules of our free-land agreement because we really wanted to hold slaves. When the Mexican president finally got mad enough to invade us with his army, we died horribly until a ridiculous twist of fate let us jump them in camp in a swamp. Later, we joined America just in time to leave it and join the Confederacy!" Yes and remember Texas wasn't the only part of Mexico that wanted out. Santa Anna's reign was him putting down various rebellions. Mexico wasn't really a nation till after the French intervention.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:12
|
|
|
A lot lot lot of people, Democrats included, were still really rattled by 9/11 even in 2003. You might even say that they felt terrorized.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:12
|
|
|
Crabtree posted:To be a little bit critical of Hilldawg, what the gently caress would you expect a bunch of loving Reagan liches to do after Iran-Contra? Not lie and abuse power? TBF at the time W. and his admin wasn't seen as the warmonger war crimes type. (Least from my memory)
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
Here's SOHR's numbers for September: http://www.syriahr.com/en/?p=51682 quote:841 citizens including 206 children and 109 citizen women killed in raids by Russian and Syrian warplanes’ bombing and helicopters’ barrel bombs, 94 people including 11 children and 14 citizen women were killed in the shelling by rocket and artillery shells, missiles believed to be ground-to-ground and sniper fire and targeting by the regime forces, 23 persons including a woman were killed under torture in Syrian security prisons, quote:5 including a citizen woman were killed in bombing by warplanes of the international coalition,... 1 person was killed by the Syrian Democratic Forces
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
The Iraq War vote was a terrible thing but anyone unironically calling it the worst foreign policy decision in US history is a goddamn child with no grasp of history who is more interested in making sure you know Hillary Bad than actually discussing the reason why it was a terrible thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
One thing that I am kinda curious about is what whatever the internal "intelligence" the Congress members saw on Iraq was, that those that voted in favor often use as an excuse. I wonder how many of them were thinking "we are totally well-informed unlike those naive protesters, who would totally be on board if they only saw what we have access to!", only to find out that were just kinda dupes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:... what? Of course I do.  Can you give us an exact count of how many american friends you have? Cingulate posted:"If you're not with us, you're against us" I mean I knew you were a dumb rear end, but I didn't think you weren't also an intellectually dishonest dumb rear end until right now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:It requires bombing actual Syrians to set up first. Any ideology can be terrible in any specific situation. Pacifism is bad when it leads to allies or innocents dying to preventable things. Pacifism is nothing but a better sounding name for isolationism.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:16
|
|
|
Monaghan posted:gently caress me I wish she had the balls and convictions to propose half of the reforms that LBJ did. Yes I'm sure the reason Hillary doesn't propose sweeping reforms is because she lacks "balls" and convictions, and not because Republicans control the House while LBJ was working with full Democratic control of Congress.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:16
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:You know the no-fly zone is to help brown people from being bombed right? That may be the intention, but if it causes Russia to escalate things into a proxy war, welp - you probably end up with more dead brown people than you had before.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:16
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:This is like suggesting that Trump's going to win because his rallies are really big. The people in this thread suggesting that there was complete support for the war are wrong, but it was like 70-80% of people polled at the time that thought it was the right decision. There was enough room for Democrats to try to make a stand if they really wanted to, but it wouldn't have been a politically popular move at the time. This is the main thing that my link to the NYT editorial piece confirms and why it's super important to remember the context the nation was in when the vote went down.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:16
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:This is like suggesting that Trump's going to win because his rallies are really big. The people in this thread suggesting that there was complete support for the war are wrong, but it was like 70-80% of people polled at the time that thought it was the right decision. There was enough room for Democrats to try to make a stand if they really wanted to, but it wouldn't have been a politically popular move at the time. It was more like 60% right at the inception, with somewhere around 3/4s of Americans supporting giving the regime more time to comply with UN weapons inspectors, ranging from a few more weeks to a few more months. Support dropped to around ~50% pretty shortly thereafter. You are, however, also correct that it doesn't really matter what popular support for the war was because 1) lol if you think our elected officials decide matters of foreign policy based on public opinion and 2) manufactured consent
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:16
|
|
|
A Fancy 400 lbs posted:Here's SOHR's numbers for September: Yeah, United States foreign policy is extremely concerned about civilian life in the middle east...
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
Monaghan posted:Maybe but it's still a risky move considering the russian backlash. Maybe the us should focus on it's own bombing of civilians first. This is what I'm talking about. You really think its risky to propose a NATO no fly zone in Syria? This is a civil war that's been going on for so long without resolution and looks unwinnable by either side even with Russian aid. You know Turkey has troops in the region and Russia hasn't nuked them? They've even shot down a Russian jet! A no fly zone is not an air combat top gun zone where we start dog fighting Russia immediately. We aren't going to institute it without Russian cooperation but pushing them to negotiate on it is part of drawing down the conflict. Nothing about this is a particularly bold diplomatic move. gently caress China was against our intervention in Bosnia in the 90s and then we blew up their drat embassy and it didn't start a war. This really isn't a knife edge in Syria.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
Monaghan posted:
"Some reason" being as much as half a million dead and 12+ million refugees. Not everything is about the US. Russia wasn't even involved when the war started, and US involvement was rather limited.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 00:36 |
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I believe the leftist concern is she'll be another LBJ As long as she only sticks to his domestic policies sign me the gently caress up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 23:18
|
|