Politics: Or other things that don't matter

[ascanius]

we have a pretty diverse group visiting this forum, so I wanted to get your takes on the Presidential nominees for the parties that matter. Don't like either of the two? Discuss your reasons why or name someone else.
Not a citizen? Its never too late to try and become one. Or you could just write your beliefs surrounding these two people or American politics in general.

[ascanius]

I can't say I'm a huge McCain fan. He certainly has some admirable qaulities: his no-nonsense stand on torture, his honesty/integrity, and his life story. But much of what he stands for is pretty status quo, and in a time of a worsening economy, higher food prices, and myriad of smaller social issues (health care [or lack there of lolz], Iraq/foreign policy, energy, environment, et cetera) status quo seems like the wrong direction.

For me the real kicker is health care. McCain believes people should have a choice in whether people should be protected by it, while Obama believes that everyone should have it (while only children are required to be under a plan). A choice seems nice, but when it comes to expensive emergency health care for the uninsured, taxpayers ultimately end up footing the bill. With 10 million uninsured Californians alone, its not hard to see covering the uninsured is not as costly and unnecessary a burden as it would be just to end up creating some kind of universal system.

[Preest]

I'm not a US citizen (100% Canadian) but I follow US politics very closely, mostly because I cant stand Bush and want to see him ousted in the worst way. So here's a run down of my point of view.

Obama - I jumped on the Obama bandwagon after he gave the speech on race relations in Phily. It was like for once there was a politician that will actually talk to you like a grown up. Also, he seems to have a vision for the future of the states that I find very palatable as opposed to the 100 years in Iraq that McCain seems to gravitate to. I mean when Obama talks about starting an Apollo/Manhattan type project for energy independence, that’s vision! Gotta love the audacity of hope!

I also like his willingness to talk to governments that are at odds with the states. The present method of trying to excommunicate and isolate “rogueâ€

[Atelo]

I don't follow politics much but I think that McCain will win because he wants to stay in Iraq longer than the rest of the candidates, plus the democrats seem divided between Obama and Clinton, and it will be tough for a divided party to win an election.

Preest, I hate the liberals too. Mainly because in my area with a lot of French people, the liberals *always* win every election. I can talk to every last person I know and they'll say they did not vote liberal, but somehow, miraculously, they win every time. French people run the voting process here.

[Preest]

Some clarification... I didnt mean I was a supported of the Liberal Party of Canada, but that I'm a liberal on the political spectrum. Also, Canadian political parties are a lot more closely aligned then in the states... I mean could you imagine a party that would vote down medical care for kids in Canada? Or would the Tories ever say that we'd be in Afghanistan for 100 years?

Never.

[Antilikos]

We have been in South Korea, Japan, and Germany for 50 or 60 years, I don't know why that is more palatable than the 100 years comment. I don't interpret his comments as meaning anything other than a presence for 100 years.

We jumped out of Vietnam at a point when we had finally figured out which end was up all due to public sentiment. After we bailed on the region and abandoned our blood oath commitments, millions of people were slaughtered. I do see an eerie similarity in the two conflicts in that regard. (We know what will happen over there if we jump ship in 60 days ala the Obama Plan.). We took out a dictator who didn't bat an eye at killing 5 or 10 thousand people in a single day using WMD's. He was presenting himself as having more WMD's and the world bought into it. Hindsight is 20-20 and I wish we hadn't bought into Sadam's hubris (which was aimed at Iran). Whats done is done and I believe McCain will be the Democrat to help get us out of Iraq without making matters worse.

Amadinajad (sp? Not worth my time checking for correctness!) continually postures and speaks as though he will destroy Israel as soon as he is capable of doing so. Mark my words, prior to him gaining the ability to do so Israel will make the point moot. http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/date ... 014623.stm

My greatest fear in this election season is that there is not enough protection for Obama. The second worst thing that could happen would be to have some nut job assassinate him. The worst thing would be for him to be become president and succumb to the Clinton Obstacle Disease. (We all know what happens to people who get in the Clintons way. He will be particularly vulnerable if he has a Clinton as VP.) I really hope I'm wrong here. I don't want Obama as Potus, but I even more so don't want our democracy threatened by the instability this would cause us as a country.

[Antilikos]

I said I wanted "other" but I will really vote for the Democrat who served in Vietnam. If the Democratic party ever splits up I'll probably start voting Libertarian.

[Preest]

I hope I dont come accross the wrong way but I'm bored and dont have anything else to do right now so I thought I'd comment on some of anti's poitns.

We have been in South Korea, Japan, and Germany for 50 or 60 years, I don't know why that is more palatable than the 100 years comment. I don't interpret his comments as meaning anything other than a presence for 100 years.

In south korea, japan and germany you didnt have mass ethnic cleansing after the conflict. The divisions between Sunni and Shia have taken place since the 8th century I believe. The social baggage in Iraq is unlike anything encountered before.

We jumped out of Vietnam at a point when we had finally figured out which end was up all due to public sentiment.

I watched a documentary on Robert Mcnamara called the fog of war, and he recalled meeting a top North Vietnamese general long after the war. They where talking about the different points of view they each had on the war and Mcnamara said to the general "You didnt win a single battle in Vietnam." to which the general replied, "It didnt matter". The north Vietnamese viewed both the US and prior French military action as an infringement on their sovereignty and they would fight to their last man to be free. Now I understand that the idea of a free individual in a communist system may sound alien, but thats how they viewed the conflict (as I understand it).

(We know what will happen over there if we jump ship in 60 days ala the Obama Plan.)

Do we really know what will happen? There has been so much ethnic cleansing already that the sunni/shia groups are already segregated. Plus, the people who have been saying if the US leaves Iraq, they will "follow us home" have been wrong on virtually every aspect of the war so far, so what makes them right on this account? The biggest threat I see if the US leaves is it will probably solidify Iran's power in the region.

We took out a dictator who didn't bat an eye at killing 5 or 10 thousand people in a single day using WMD's. He was presenting himself as having more WMD's and the world bought into it. Hindsight is 20-20 and I wish we hadn't bought into Sadam's hubris (which was aimed at Iran). Whats done is done and I believe McCain will be the Democrat to help get us out of Iraq without making matters worse.

I believe the only solution to Iraq's problems is political, meaning the dozens of sects/tribes have to get their shit together and realize that there is more prosperity in unity then division. Could the US presents be interfering with this process?

Amadinajad (sp? Not worth my time checking for correctness!) continually postures and speaks as though he will destroy Israel as soon as he is capable of doing so. Mark my words, prior to him gaining the ability to do so Israel will make the point moot. http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/date ... 014623.stm

Iran is another kettle of fish, the likes of which I'm not very familiar with. However, could it be possible that he's just mouthing the words to satiate the religious clerics within the Iran power structure? Also, there is a large portion of their population that are very moderate, much more so then the US ally of Saudi Arabia. Plus, Israel has somewhere around 350 nukes. If Iran even looked at Israel the wrong way, Israel could turn the entire country in to a parking lot.



So I hope I dont come across as condescending or rude, but I just love these exchanges of ideas. I think everyone benifits from discussions like this.

[Antilikos]

If Iran even looked at Israel the wrong way, Israel could turn the entire country in to a parking lot.

My point exactly. Once Israel perceives any ability on the part of Iran to make good on their promises we may have some bunker busting nukes being tested out.

[ascanius]

Its not fair to compare almost any war to any other, there are just too many different factors. Vietnam was almost as much a quagmire as Iraq is, but there were many drastically different components. For one, There is no group in Iraq (aside from the Kurds) who want us there, unlike in Vietnam the south was all for the Western world. At this point its a civil war that we can only hope to muffle at the expense of our own troops. Is it our fault for creating the civil war? Sure, but at this point we've exhausted all non-military ways of preventing/solving the problem. If they aren't willing to reason the matter, a military presence will only matter to the extent of how many soldiers we are willing to have killed for the unknown duration of the conflict.

As for our post WW2 military bases, they were the result of the complete and utter destruction of our enemies. If the world didn't mind us firebombing and nuking Iraqi cities (such as we did in WW2), I'm sure we could beat down the Sunni and Shiites enough that they would submit to some kind of peace. Until then, just patrolling cities and going from house to house isn't going to solve this kind of guerrilla war.

As long as Israel is supplied with the equipment and military hardware they need, Iran isn't our problem. They have both the will and the means to protect themselves, and will (as they have in the past) do what is necessary to protect themselves and their borders. In fact, a president that is soft on the Muslim world (as well as having many connections to it) may be just what the doctor order to solve many of the outlying issues in the middle east. The Pakistan and Israel/Palestine problems are both very serious issues that could use some delicate handling to prevent some very unwanted outcomes.