View Single Post
Old 09.17.2012, 11:09 PM   #78
!@#$%!
invito al cielo
 
!@#$%!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: mars attacks
Posts: 42,683
!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses
Pookie - 'Merica is an imperialistic country. It was since its inception-- the colony of an empire. It got its independence mainly so it could expand unfettered and bleed the slaves while eating the indians. I have no illusions about that. I don't expect the president of an imperialistic state to be a saint or to bring us "Paradise Now!" The best I can expect for he/she to be less terrible than the previous one-- and that he is.

The whole issue of Iraq is a lot more complicated pf course-- BUsh negotiated the agreements but his party was very much for staying in Iraq
Cheney: http://thinkprogress.org/security/20...raq/?mobile=nc
Bush's national security advisor: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...bFK_story.html
McCain: http://thepage.time.com/2011/12/14/r...ccain-on-iraq/

is that enough to show the difference you think?

here's mccain on iran: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg

oh, how funny he was with his little hands. You've also read Willard's latest statements on the Middle East I'm sure.

The issue for me is not whether we're going to meddle-- yes, American foreign policy is shit, I'm not arguing that-- I grew up in Latin America for fucks sakes. I live in what used to be Mexico (so does Suchfriends). Shit's absurd. We embargo communist Cuba but buy everything in communist China (this goes to the issue of votes and horse trading I was talking about earlier). The thing is, these things aren't done by supreme decree-- these things are negotiated and fought over for years--decades-- sometimes centuries like the slavery issue.

The election is not about whether this country is going to be run by saints-- in the foreign policy arena, it's about whether we're going to meddle with some semblance of rationality or by trying to fulfill the apocalyptic prophecies of a former cokehead.

And on that front I agree with Ikara Cult -- killing with precision, if you're intent on killing anything or anyone, is better than killing with daisy cutters and carpet bombing and destroyed water lines and invasion forces. Do I approve morally? No. Do I think this is the lesser of two evils? Yes I do. And lesser matters when it comes to "evll".

ON the domestic agenda, no contest-- President Willard would bring more austerity of the kind that's wrecking the British economy and social fabric. He would most certainly roll back the clock on gay rights (his church was the main player behind Prop 8), and would continue the policies that keep making the poor poorer and the rich richer. Women's rights? Ha ha ha. And universal health care? Forget the fuck about it-- he's washed his hands off his own work in Massachusetts. Teabaggers would run the budget-- look at Willard's fucking running mate.

So yeah, I get enraged when people say "it's the same". It's not the fucking same. The world is not clearly divided between the goodies and the baddies--we're all assholes of varying degrees, some worse than others, and the choice matters because it moves the needle of what's "normal" a little bit to one side or the other. And that counts for something today and in the long run.
!@#$%! is offline   |QUOTE AND REPLY|