2012 US Presidential Election discussion.

J

jackliu

Banned Idiot
TerraN_EmpirE said:
I don't think that's funny.
The Events in Bengazi and what happened is a deadly serious issue. and the Recent Email Links Bring a lot into question regarding the Event and it's postscript. Had this happened a year ago this might have been treated in a diffident manor. Had a event like this happened on Bush's Watch and the president make the same claims the Dems would be Crying foul.
A American Embassy was attacked in a premeditated manor. US forces were in range too react and did nothing, 4 men were Assassinated. The American President Knew it was the result of a Terrorist attack. Emails Have been leaked showing it too have been known Yet he and his Staff and the Sec of State and the VP claimed it too have been a the result of some over zealous protesters? It raises Questions of the Administration's policy's And if it were not for the single Fact that this is A election Time It would be treated with some more respect.
Click to expand...

Brainwashed response as usual, I don't expect anything else from you though...

So let's analyse the situation.

US funded various groups to take down Gadaffi, those groups includes any and all of those who have a beef with Gadaffi, and yes... those includes the ones that hate USA as well, the enemy of my enemy is NOT my friend.

After Gadaffi is killed, some of the group turn on their anger to US, attacked US embassy and did the act. However those groups does not represents the majority of views of Libyans.

So what do you think Obama should do?

1. Go flip out about Ambassador killed and immediately launch drone/Tomhawk strikes... against who? No one has been identified in the killing, so if you want to attack, you have to randomly attack Lydia, which will include innocent being killed, which would tipped the favor to extremists even more. Say bye bye for the oil royalty that they worked soooooo hard to get.

2. Instead Obama kept it cool, didn't do anything drastic, waited for more intel before responding, as a result the relation between US and Libya is still good right now, they still have a chance to became a US client state, and we still have a chance to get their oil... or block the oil flow to China. (But hey!!!! He didn't play the macho man, so let's call him fail)

Seriously, I am not a fan of Obama but what he did, is just about the best outcome you wold hope for the US interest. But for you... I guess you see politics as some kind of sport, your team do whatever it takes to attack the other team and of course, you follow their guidelines. So much for brain and critical thinking these days....
 
Subedei

Subedei

Banned Idiot
jackliu said:
So much for brain and critical thinking these days....
Click to expand...


i, too, was surprised, at first, then not, by the degree of parroting of particular news sources here. ultimately, it's unrealistic -unfortunately- to expect any significant proportion of folks to invest the resources required to develop independent bases of information, form independent lines of thought, and express independent ideas, analyses, and interpretations. i suppose we could call this, "the art of thinking". i'm guessing someone's already written a book, or two, with that title.

if politics is truly serious, doesn't it deserve serious intellectual consideration, and not just intense emotional reaction?

here's an example of how i attempted to demonstrate independent thinking graphically with a well-known, and controversial anti-american symbol. notice the caption.

View attachment 7013
 
Last edited:
AssassinsMace

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
It's the same as Donald Trump's October surprise. Trump likes to wrap himself in the American flag but he fails to uphold an important American value that you're innocent until proven guilty. He's declared Obama guilty of something without any sort of proof and he expects Obama to prove himself innocent. If he does not provide evidence of innocence then he's automatically guilty of it even though there's no proof whatsoever of accused crime. The Colbert video wasn't making fun of those killed in Libya. It was making fun of making up conspiracies with no proof and expecting Obama to answer every one of them and if he does not, he's guilty.

I remember when the whole Chandra Levy scandal was the talk of the country, people were already declaring Gary Condit guilty and even going to the extreme of speculating as if true what happened, i.e. Condit hired someone to take Chandra Levy's body out on a boat and dumped her body in the ocean. I simply posted a comment on a news site... "Innocent until proven guilty." I was more viciously attacked in there more than ever from any anti-China poster in any of these military forums. You can tell some of these people were displacing their own lives into the Levy family as if Chandra Levy was a personally close relative. And what happens is Chandra Levy's body was found near her apartment. There goes that belief US congressman Gary Condit with all his influential connections had the power to have her body disposed of never to be found as people were saying was fact. Since I dared to say, "innocent until proven guilty," does that mean I'm for murdering Chandra Levy? And I bet many of those that were offended by my post still believe Gary Condit is guilty. Not because they believe he killed her but because they don't want to admit to themselves they were wrong.

Guilty until you prove yourself innocent... If you defend that, then you don't believe in basic human rights.
 
Last edited:
Subedei

Subedei

Banned Idiot
AssassinsMace said:
Guilty until you prove yourself innocent... If you defend that, then you don't believe in basic human rights.
Click to expand...

The most dangerous part of this, to me, is the way in which self-righteousness has become a fundamental element of American political thought. Both in the national political discourse, and the international arena, Americans DEMAND that the most severe interpretations of the law be applied to members of perceived "out-groups" while also allowing and DEMANDING that the most tolerant interpretations are allowed to govern and adjudicate the speech and actions of their chosen "in-group". This is true of members of both parties, and both perspectives, both Liberal and Conservative (since it seems we acknowledge only two). In a nutshell, it's tribalism. And, it leads to nowhere.

I've often suggested that the current two party arrangement of this, supposedly pluralist, republic, is leading, and can only lead, to a state of polarity. I think that day has come. The whole Democrat vs Republican, Conservative vs Liberal, construct is a false-dichotomy, and we've seen here what happens to processes of critical thought and analysis when false dichotomies are adhered to uncritically. Polarity is not a state from which to achieve either stasis or evolution, only inevitable exhaustion. That's the wisdom of the Taijitu, the Yin/Yang symbol (which my avatar is is the basis of), in which each of the equal opposites contains an element of the other that contributes to a degree of dynamism. It isn't a duality, or a polarity, at all. The only dynamism within the contemporary American political discourse is the repeated head-on collisions of two diametrically opposed ideologies. This will continue until either one or both sides are exhausted. Then what?

Some of us here understand that this is a staged performance, and that all actors are scripted by one director. We know that the fundamental question is, what's really going on that this show is intended to distract us from. From time to time we catch glimpses. But, then, the never-ending parade of Hollywood movies, sports, reality-tv, etc., eventually drown out the sources of useful information, maintaining the calm of the incurious. Funny thing is, it's been this way for the last 13,000 years, or so. It gives me solace to refer to the opening verse from Dickens' A Tale Of Two Cities. Someone noticed a similar state of affairs a few centuries ago, wrote about it, and wasn't deemed crazy! Maybe there's hope?
 
Last edited:
J

jackliu

Banned Idiot
Subedei said:
The most dangerous part of this, to me, is the way in which self-righteousness has become a fundamental element of American political thought. Both in the national political discourse, and the international arena, Americans DEMAND that the most severe interpretations of the law be applied to members of perceived "out-groups" while also allowing and DEMANDING that the most tolerant interpretations are allowed to govern and adjudicate the speech and actions of their chosen "in-group". This is true of members of both parties, and both perspectives, both Liberal and Conservative (since it seems we acknowledge only two). In a nutshell, it's tribalism. And, it leads to nowhere.

I've often suggested that the current two party arrangement of this, supposedly pluralist, republic, is leading, and can only lead, to a state of polarity. I think that day has come. The whole Democrat vs Republican, Conservative vs Liberal, construct is a false-dichotomy, and we've seen here what happens to processes of critical thought and analysis when false dichotomies are adhered to uncritically. Polarity is not a state from which to achieve either stasis or evolution, only inevitable exhaustion. That's the wisdom of the Taijitu, the Yin/Yang symbol (which my avatar is is the basis of), in which each of the equal opposites contains an element of the other that contributes to a degree of dynamism. It isn't a duality, or a polarity, at all. The only dynamism within the contemporary American political discourse is the repeated head-on collisions of two diametrically opposed ideologies. This will continue until either one or both sides are exhausted. Then what?

Some of us here understand that this is a staged performance, and that all actors are scripted by one director. We know that the fundamental question is, what's really going on that this show is intended to distract us from. From time to time we catch glimpses. But, then, the never-ending parade of Hollywood movies, sports, reality-tv, etc., eventually drown out the sources of useful information, maintaining the calm of the incurious. Funny thing is, it's been this way for the last 13,000 years, or so. It gives me solace to refer to the opening verse from Dickens' A Tale Of Two Cities. Someone noticed a similar state of affairs a few centuries ago, wrote about it, and wasn't deemed crazy! Maybe there's hope?
Click to expand...

There is a documentary called The Trap by Adam Curtis. In it, he argue that all of what you see is not an accident, it is really designed from the top down. How they want to control media, influence people's opinion, dump down people's intelligence etc...

I agree with him, ever since the Iraq war, I been severely disillusioned with US politics, because it shows you that just how easily the government can manipulate the public into doing whatever they want to do. All of this is because the general public have no ability to do critical thinking, and when you do some research why they can't do critical thinking... the answer is the dumping down of the media, and when you look closer at the media itself, you will find just how closely it is connected with the government positions, how they are holding up the system. It is ALL a giant circle that works extremely well to maintain the status quo.

So the next question is, if the government can do whatever it want through all this processes, do we really have a democracy???? Or is it a democracy anymore when the people itself are robots, so when they choose, they are not choosing from an open ended list, instead they are given a multiple choice answer of A B C D, in which all of it are the WRONG answers, but yet, they choose anyway, and truly believe their decision are free.

So in the end, what kind of nation do we really have?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
made_at_wwwtxt2piccom-1.jpg
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
jackliu said:
Brainwashed response as usual, I don't expect anything else from you though...

So let's analyse the situation.

US funded various groups to take down Gadaffi, those groups includes any and all of those who have a beef with Gadaffi, and yes... those includes the ones that hate USA as well, the enemy of my enemy is NOT my friend.

After Gadaffi is killed, some of the group turn on their anger to US, attacked US embassy and did the act. However those groups does not represents the majority of views of Libyans.

So what do you think Obama should do?

1. Go flip out about Ambassador killed and immediately launch drone/Tomhawk strikes... against who? No one has been identified in the killing, so if you want to attack, you have to randomly attack Lydia, which will include innocent being killed, which would tipped the favor to extremists even more. Say bye bye for the oil royalty that they worked soooooo hard to get.

2. Instead Obama kept it cool, didn't do anything drastic, waited for more intel before responding, as a result the relation between US and Libya is still good right now, they still have a chance to became a US client state, and we still have a chance to get their oil... or block the oil flow to China. (But hey!!!! He didn't play the macho man, so let's call him fail)

Seriously, I am not a fan of Obama but what he did, is just about the best outcome you wold hope for the US interest. But for you... I guess you see politics as some kind of sport, your team do whatever it takes to attack the other team and of course, you follow their guidelines. So much for brain and critical thinking these days....
Click to expand...
Sorry Jacklieu, trying to paint people with differing views as not being able to critically think does not say much for your own skills.

The fact is, the issue here is not about attacking Libya. It is about why a US Ambassador on the 11th anniversary of 911, went to an ubndefended consulate, where the secutiry people on the ground had been begging for more security and were denied, and then the Security Strike Team which was there was taken out two weeks before.

In addition, once the attack began and the Emminent Threat System was activated and people in Africa Command, Tripoli, Eurpoe, the State Department, the CIA, and the White House situation room had real time video of the event, requests for help from the Mobile Strike Team on the ground at the annex a mile away, were denied. To the point that the Navy SEAL there dispobeyed orders and mounted a relief group that saved the last five people there...thought too late to save the Ambassador and the State Department Comm Specialist, Sean Smith.

And then, at the Annex, when they came under attack, pradotor drones were in the air, and AC-130s were only two hours away. It is now reported that one of the SEALS killed wa on the roof top lazing the mortar positions. You do not laze an enemy position unless there are assets in the air that can attack that position...yet no attack was authorized.

Then, the Obama administration for over two weeks blamed it on an obscure video that had only three hundred hits when iot was blamed. No. this is not brainwashing, these are the facts from insiders who are sickened by what happened and are reporting it...none of which we would have had without them coming forward and testifying before congress, and now speaking to the press.

This administration and this President have a lot to answe for. Why the Security was denied. Why the requess for help during the attack were denied. And why they covered it up and tried to blame it on that video when the facts now show they knew all along iot was the video.

We are still waiting for those answers. To call anyone who puts these facts together and thebn questions what happended incapable of critical thought is simply ludicrous given what has come out.

I hopep we get the answrs. The families of the dead deserve tham, and the American people deserve them. but it is clear that this administration intends (at least at this point) to try and skate past the elections before those answers are given.

There are so many conflicting stories coming out of the administration over this from the White HOuse, the CIA, the State Department and from the Military that an independent council almost has to be appointed. but that does not stop the President from holding a press conference and answering questions.
 
J

jackliu

Banned Idiot
Jeff Head said:
Sorry Jacklieu, trying to paint people with differing views as not being able to critically think does not say much for your own skills.

The fact is, the issue here is not about attacking Libya. It is about why a US Ambassador on the 11th anniversary of 911, went to an ubndefended consulate, where the secutiry people on the ground had been begging for more security and were denied, and then the Security Strike Team which was there was taken out two weeks before.

In addition, once the attack began and the Emminent Threat System was activated and people in Africa Command, Tripoli, Eurpoe, the State Department, the CIA, and the White House situation room had real time video of the event, requests for help from the Mobile Strike Team on the ground at the annex a mile away, were denied. To the point that the Navy SEAL there dispobeyed orders and mounted a relief group that saved the last five people there...thought too late to save the Ambassador and the State Department Comm Specialist, Sean Smith.

And then, at the Annex, when they came under attack, pradotor drones were in the air, and AC-130s were only two hours away. It is now reported that one of the SEALS killed wa on the roof top lazing the mortar positions. You do not laze an enemy position unless there are assets in the air that can attack that position...yet no attack was authorized.

Then, the Obama administration for over two weeks blamed it on an obscure video that had only three hundred hits when iot was blamed. No. this is not brainwashing, these are the facts from insiders who are sickened by what happened and are reporting it...none of which we would have had without them coming forward and testifying before congress, and now speaking to the press.

This administration and this President have a lot to answe for. Why the Security was denied. Why the requess for help during the attack were denied. And why they covered it up and tried to blame it on that video when the facts now show they knew all along iot was the video.

We are still waiting for those answers. To call anyone who puts these facts together and thebn questions what happended incapable of critical thought is simply ludicrous given what has come out.

I hopep we get the answrs. The families of the dead deserve tham, and the American people deserve them. but it is clear that this administration intends (at least at this point) to try and skate past the elections before those answers are given.

There are so many conflicting stories coming out of the administration over this from the White HOuse, the CIA, the State Department and from the Military that an independent council almost has to be appointed. but that does not stop the President from holding a press conference and answering questions.
Click to expand...

Straight out of the mouth of Ramoney campiang Jeff well done.

Let's analyze the situation, let's say if Romany is the president, what is his job? Is he response for every single detail of policy out there? Does he micro management the security level for our 200 embassies and 100+ bases all over the world down to how many guards should be assigned, what weapons should they take?

NO, he doesn't it, it is NOT his job to micro manage all of those tiny details, those jobs gets delegated to local officials who often have nothing to do with political party affiliations whatsoever, it is them who decides where to beef up security, what message to receive, to read to accept etc...

Ask yourself, do you really believe Obama is so evil that he wants the ambassador to get killed? That he wants the embassy to get attacked? If so, how will he benefit from this?

This is not something to be debated of Democrats vs Republican, because it benefits no party, so why is it that one party tries to hard to make this none issue an issue?

As for Obama's response, It seems you are upset of how he responded, that he is not macho enough to quickly identify the bad guys to punish them. I said it already so I'll just copy and paste here again.

So what do you think Obama should have done right after the attack?

1. Go flip out about Ambassador killed and immediately launch drone/Tomhawk strikes... against who? No one has been identified in the killing, so if you want to attack, you have to randomly attack Lydia, which will include innocent being killed, which would tipped the favor to extremists even more. Say bye bye for the oil royalty that they worked soooooo hard to get.

2. Instead Obama kept it cool, didn't do anything drastic, waited for more intel before responding, as a result the relation between US and Libya is still good right now, they still have a chance to became a US client state, and we still have a chance to get their oil... or block the oil flow to China.

Seriously, I am not a fan of Obama but what he did, is just about the best outcome you wold hope for the US interest. But for you... I guess you see politics as some kind of sport, your team do whatever it takes to attack the other team and of course, you follow their guidelines. So much for brain and critical thinking these days....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top