Responses (7)
|
Anonymous
(7/7):
Cool post I like it...
(report)
|
|
Anonymous
(7/8):
Here it is. The macho "go it alone" B.S. that got us into the quagmire that is Iraq is out of the question!!!!!! We took our evidence to the UN before we invaded Iraq, and it was judged insufficient to warrant an attack but we did it anyway! And we have been unwilling to admit that they were right! This time we listen to the other powerful nations of the world. Japan, China, and Russia especially have interests in preventing nuclear war in their neighborhood. Also England, France, Germany, and all the other nations involved in the UN need to decide how to deal with Korea. And we need to listen to them and act in harmony with the international accord. But that probably won't happen as long as we have a dunce for a president!
(report)
|
|
Anonymous
(7/13):
So why hasn't the mouthy conservative who created this post responded to the position I stated, in Anonymous(7/8)?
(report)
|
|
Anonymous
(7/14):
From the mouthy conservative - Have you stated a position here??? Oh wait a minute... I see we'll just wait. The hoodlum in the alley just cocked the baseball back and is about to take a swing at your head. You want to wait to see what he does or stop and check with the neighbors because they may not want violence in their back yard. I'll bet those neighbors won't even come out to see if your Ok when your laying there bleeding. So you are not one of the Liberals that complaining about Bush taking the diplomacy route for the last 3 years. Good I'll hate you less now!
(report)
|
|
Anonymous
(7/14):
WHAT ??? Diplomacy! You call slaughtering thousands of Iraqi's diplomacy? You call sacrificing our courageous sons for nothing diplomacy? I am saying we don't need a trigger happy leader ready to go to war with the slightest excuse, so he can pose as the heroic "mission accomplished" leader while accomplishing nothing but more death and destruction. Since my earlier post, the Japanese have already stated that they are considering attacks on North Korea. Great! Let them have the problem. Diplomacy is exactly what we need, not more useless slaughter.
(report)
|
|
occaeco
(7/15):
I disagree with you and the Korea situation is a tricky one. I fancy myself as a conservative and in fact probably have a better grasp of what one is considering my background. I will be the first to admit though I can't stand government interference so what I really am is a Libertarian but none the less still a conservative. So naturally any action against another state should be carefully thought out and ultimately in the end should be warranted. I felt a long time ago that Iraq was a mistake guess and sure enough eventually George Bush does admit the invasion of Iraq was from false information, but will argue our presense is still necessary for the impoverished land. This may be true, but I feel a sovereign nation like Iraq should regulate its borders with out exterior intervention, especially when they pose little threat to us. Hello now Weapons of Mass Destruction. Is there really much more we need to discuss? Sure we could, but that should be enough. I do feel that the N. Korean quagmire certainly needs to be dealt with and I am not so sure the so called "liberal" that you foolishly attack don't think the same thing. Let us not use this site as a means to bash on people. More or less anyone that disagrees with you is a liberal and that is absurd. Did you know that the U.S. practiced isolationism for decades? It doesn't get much more conservative than that folks.
(report)
|
|
SemperFidelis
(7/15):
Well put! Leadership take courage and Bush, Blair and a few others have it...similar to Churchill. A victory in A and another one in I have made it clear.
However, John Paul II is correct that war is a failure of humanity. The attacks on Israel by Hezbullah and Iran show that failure. KJI and Korea also reveal that sad failure.
(report)
|
|
|
Responses (2)
|
Anonymous
(7/14):
Your understanding of the issues is clearly very limited. Although you seem to think--as most chic neoconservative thinkers do--that the issue is extremely black and white, it is not. You seem to have a concept of waffling ingrained in your media-addled neurons. As more facts are revealed, and diplomatic relations change, the facts will change. Should our beliefs change as issues change? Of course. You don't seem to understand this. We don't live in a newsprint-clear world.
So I respectfully refrain from answering this, due to the sheer implied stupidity of the question.
(report)
|
|
Anonymous
(7/20):
From the original mouthy conservative (the poster). There was so much promise in your opening lines. I really felt like you were leading up to worth while point... The point is that our leader have to make decisions base on what they know right now. They don't have the luxury to see what happens next. Unfortuanatly some times you start down a path and you have to keep going. I just want all the Bush Basher to reflect on this minute and understand why a specific patch is being chosen. I do understand the depth of this debate that is why I'm trying to push everyones buttons here. There are no stupid questions, only stupid answers.
(report)
|
Related Posts
|
Liberals!!! state your position
