Politics: A new beginning

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
Dean's

Hank Chianski irl insight. My next door neighbors (for 5 years) have so little idea of my political leanings that that they invited me to a learn about Govenor Dean party last night, with a state rep. See! I can function in society, in large part because my socks allow me to work out politcal issues anon.

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I don't answer hypotheticals, but I think you are comparing to Iraq. I'll answer accordingly.
There were humanitarian reasons for taking out Sadamm. Do you differentiate because thet were put forth as the 4th or 5th reason?

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." How was that a hypothetical? I was asking if you thought Dean's explanation (which cites Iraq) failed to address the apparent contradiction underscored by the story's headline. Seems pretty concrete to me.

In response to your question, I agree that there were humanitarian reasons to invade Iraq, but I believe the humanitarian component was not a major factor in starting the tanks rolling (cf. the 50 Marines who were sent to Liberia last year).

But perhaps the view from my ivory tower is misleading. Do you think it was a major factor? In absence of the ominous WMD threat, would the gassing of the Kurds, the suppression of the Shi'ites, the rape squads, etc etc, have prompted or justified a unilateral military intervention?

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Hank Chianski irl insight. My next door neighbors (for 5 years) have so little idea of my political leanings that that they invited me to a learn about Govenor Dean party last night, with a state rep. See! I can function in society, in large part because my socks allow me to work out politcal issues anon.

Wow. I didn't know we were neighbors. Your avatar doesn't do you justice.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
But perhaps the view from my ivory tower is misleading. Do you think it was a major factor? In absence of the ominous WMD threat, would the gassing of the Kurds, the suppression of the Shi'ites, the rape squads, etc etc, have prompted or justified a unilateral military intervention?

2 questions:
justified? you can't take the position Iraq was not "justified" but Bosnia was, can you? unless you mean did Bush "justify it," rather than was it justified.
prompted? probably not.

I think the question you really meant to ask was, do we (I) think that the WMD reason (Iraq) was equal to the humanitarian reason (Bosnia).
I do not think they are equal. I think the WMD reason* outweighs the humanitarian reason. First, we protect ourselves.

*as believed at the time, not as apparently turned out.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I can function in society, in large part because my socks allow me to work out politcal issues anon.

This is why there have been many great rightist socks, but there never has been, nor will ever be, a truly great lefty sock.* Rightism is about unbridled Id, which is more fun to watch than unbridled Superego. Or, to put it another way, the tygers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

*The above is retracted if Litingrate was a sock. No, wait, no it isn't, because Lit was a moderate.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
This is why there have been many great rightist socks, but there never has been, nor will ever be, a truly great lefty sock.* Rightism is about unbridled Id, which is more fun to watch than unbridled Superego. Or, to put it another way, the tygers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

*The above is retracted if Litingrate was a sock. No, wait, no it isn't, because Lit was a moderate.

Is there a translator that can help with this?

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Is there a translator that can help with this?

Yes. "It's no fun to watch a sock mope and wring his hands about how there are no easy solutions and it's all about compromise between competing values. Thus, right-wing socks are fun; left-wing socks are earnest and boring."

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Yes. "It's no fun to watch a sock mope and wring his hands about how there are no easy solutions and it's all about compromise between competing values. Thus, right-wing socks are fun; left-wing socks are earnest and boring."

if only Fluffy hadn't made that PT boat comment, and be forced away in shame.......

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
2 questions:
justified? you can't take the position Iraq was not "justified" but Bosnia was, can you? unless you mean did Bush "justify it," rather than was it justified.
prompted? probably not.

Yeah, I should have left the "justified" out. I'm not very up on these things, but I would assume there are many places in today's world where a humantarian intervention would hypothetically be just.

I was hoping to focus more on the actual political calculus of sending american troops. Since Somalia it appears that our country has a clear predisposition against humanitarian intervention. Not saying that's good or bad, just saying that "Iraq is in a humanitarian crisis" would not have gotten the attention that the mushroom cloud smoking gun did

I think the question you really meant to ask was, do we (I) think that the WMD reason (Iraq) was equal to the humanitarian reason (Bosnia).

Sort of. Dean's point was that a humanitarian situation such as Bosnia may justify the unilateral use of military force. Dean's calling card is his criticism of the Iraq war, which had a humanitarian component but was largely sold on the basis of security concerns. I do not find these two things inconsistent on their face, and wasn't sure if that was based on my natural affinity for Dean as a Dem.

I suppose I should add a disclaimer here that Dean isn't my horse in this race, yet. But I'm not sure anyone cares. Or, to put it another way, I'm fairly sure no one does.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience

Sort of. Dean's point was that a humanitarian situation such as Bosnia may justify the unilateral use of military force. Dean's calling card is his criticism of the Iraq war, which had a humanitarian component but was largely sold on the basis of security concerns. I do not find these two things inconsistent on their face, and wasn't sure if that was based on my natural affinity for Dean as a Dem.

I suppose I should add a disclaimer here that Dean isn't my horse in this race, yet. But I'm not sure anyone cares. Or, to put it another way, I'm fairly sure no one does.

I really can't even put mental energy into the guy anymore. i think the people on this board with kids, largely have 3 or 4 year olds. By 2008, Atticus and Ty will agree with me that a guy who yelled at ref's and the other team during kid's soccer games cannot be president. I feel it more important than the whole natural born citizen thing.
And I know I'm full of shit here alot, and the above sounds stupid, but just remember, and think how you feel once you see it.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
". . . unilateral military intervention?

The mantra lives! The mantra lives!

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
In response to your question, I agree that there were humanitarian reasons to invade Iraq, but I believe the humanitarian component was not a major factor in starting the tanks rolling (cf. the 50 Marines who were sent to Liberia last year).

Don't you recall all the conservatives who urged that we intervene in Haiti for humanitarian reasons?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Don't you recall all the conservatives who urged that we intervene in Haiti for humanitarian reasons?

I don't urge that we intervene. I'm just saying Dean can't say he was against Iraq, but for Bosnia because of humanitarian reasons, can he?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Yes. "It's no fun to watch a sock mope and wring his hands about how there are no easy solutions and it's all about compromise between competing values. Thus, right-wing socks are fun; left-wing socks are earnest and boring."

I can't think of a fun right-wing sock. Just for Fun? Fluffy? Noooo. They are predictable and irrational. It's hard to do a good sock on the P board at all.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Yes. "It's no fun to watch a sock mope and wring his hands about how there are no easy solutions and it's all about compromise between competing values. Thus, right-wing socks are fun; left-wing socks are earnest and boring."

The values that the left currently holds are those for which the right (rightly) believes compromising is not an option, and will not be until the left moves back towards the JFK model.