the Afghanistan poll

[Boffo]

• Tweet

in or out, anything else would just be jaw flap to appease.....somebody

[makesenseplease]

in or out, anything else would just be jaw flap to appease.....somebody

America has the same choices given to every other superpower stupid enough to invade Afghanistan--


WIN OR GO HOME

[Hollybaere]

America has the same choices given to every other superpower stupid enough to invade Afghanistan--


WIN OR GO HOME

What could the US troops do that would be considered as "winning" in your opinion?

[ivanm]

What could the US troops do that would be considered as "winning" in your opinion?

The Afghan war has the same trait as the Vietnam war, porous borders.  I say it is a no-win situation there and that we need to come
home.  Their president is simply using us and our resources to keep himself in office. Short of nuclear annihilation, I doubt there is a winning proposition for us in Afghanistan.

[IM2]

Ivanm,

Shut the hell up. You supported Bush when he did what he did. You supported his underresourcing Afghanistan and running when he had Bin Laden cornerned and could have ended all fighting. You supported Iraq which did not have to be fought, so then just spare us all your opnion of why Obama is fighting this war.

[ivanm]

Ivanm,

Shut the hell up. You supported Bush when he did what he did. You supported his underresourcing Afghanistan and running when he had Bin Laden cornerned and could have ended all fighting. You supported Iraq which did not have to be fought, so then just spare us all your opnion of why Obama is fighting this war.

Whoa little one.  I voted for Obama because I hoped that he and the Dems were less apt to get us into another war.  I have never supported the reasons given for invading Iraq although I do think that SH and his goons needed to be taken down. Bush senior had good support for the initial challenge to SH's aggression during Gulf I but Bush Jr. had only minimal support for Gulf II, and rightly so as he fed the world a line of shit that was not true to a great extent.

As to my supporting the underresourcing of Afghanistan and the rest of that blather, I don't know what you are referring to.

As to my shutting up, you have been in the mob too long. Instead of crawling my frame you need to expose your own ignorance about the Afghanistan effort.  If I remember correctly Obama wants to start the drawdown this year and I think that is long overdue.  He did not make the mess over there, so I am not blaming him for it.  Hey idiot, your bully tactics won't work with me any more than your socialist Democrats' bully tactics worked in the last Congress. 

[IM2]

ivanm,

I will do to you what I feel like.  There was no socialism in the last congress, its rhetoric like this that caused the shooting in Arizona.

[ivanm]

ivanm,

I will do to you what I feel like.  There was no socialism in the last congress, its rhetoric like this that caused the shooting in Arizona.

You can't see it because you are part of it.  There are degrees of socialism and the slippery slope to the more perverse kind, communism,
is what bothers many of us.

I think the term socialism is used rather loosely at times and a more accurate adjective should be used.  This comes about because socialistic governments are known to be large in terms of manpower and budget, and the many laws that are needed to carry out their gimmee programs tend to interfere with personal liberties. Authoritarian may be more appropriate in many cases but people tend to use the popular words
such as socialism, which happens to be a very authoritarian form of government.

[johnhp]

I think the term socialism is used rather loosely at times and a more accurate adjective should be used. 

And you are guilty of this more than anyone on this board.

This comes about because socialistic governments are known to be large in terms of manpower and budget, and the many laws that are needed to carry out their gimmee programs tend to interfere with personal liberties. Authoritarian may be more appropriate in many cases but people tend to use the popular words
such as socialism, which happens to be a very authoritarian form of government.

France, Sweden, Germany, social democracies all, are authoritarian?

[notoc]

There are degrees of socialism and the slippery slope to the more perverse kind, communism,

In the same way that any degree of gun control is a slippery slope to their universal confiscation?

Every society requires a degree of socialistic behaviour if it is to survive and prosper ... as you well know me, I am a commodity trading capitalist ... who understands that there is no such thing as a free-market. I willingly(ish) pay taxes, some of which finance the defence of my country, which makes me what ... a communist or a socialist?

The two terms are certainly not interchangeable, no matter what you and Karl Marx might say to the contrary.

[ivanm]

In the same way that any degree of gun control is a slippery slope to their universal confiscation?

Every society requires a degree of socialistic behaviour if it is to survive and prosper ... as you well know me, I am a commodity trading capitalist ... who understands that there is no such thing as a free-market. I willingly(ish) pay taxes, some of which finance the defence of my country, which makes me what ... a communist or a socialist.

The the two terms are certainly not interchangeable, no matter what you and Karl Marx might say to the contrary.

Socialism in its basic form is a term to describe and economic order, just as capitalism describes an econonic order.  It is my understanding that socialism is  a basic element of communism, but that doesn't make all socialistic countries communist.
 
Democratic socialism is the term used for the Euro countries that employ socialistic measures.  It has been shown in the past that the socialist economy in England did not perform well up against other economices, and Maggie Thatcher was instrumental in moving towards  more free-market or capitalism in certain basic industries.  I have the opinion that socialistic elements of an economy, that controlled by the government, are inherently inefficient.  To me it is a relative thing in that if you want people to perform and to excel econonically then the best policy is for the bureacrats to stay out of the way.

[makesenseplease]

The Afghan war has the same trait as the Vietnam war, porous borders.  I say it is a no-win situation there and that we need to come
home.  Their president is simply using us and our resources to keep himself in office. Short of nuclear annihilation, I doubt there is a winning proposition for us in Afghanistan.

The next country that uses nuclear weapons will face a rude awakening.

We used them once, but now everyone has them.

Does anyone seriously think the world will let us do that again with no consequences.

As the old school hunters used to say,  "ain't no fun when the rabbit has a gun."

[ivanm]

The next country that uses nuclear weapons will face a rude awakening.

We used them once, but now everyone has them.

Does anyone seriously think the world will let us do that again with no consequences.

As the old school hunters used to say,  "ain't no fun when the rabbit has a gun."

Not unless we use it in a defensive manner.  I do look for low yield nukes to be used someday.  In fact, the daisy cutter has the power of a low yield nuke but does not present the radiation hazards.  It is my understanding that it is a propane bomb that will scrub a square mile pretty clean.  I think we used a few early on in Afghanistan.

[makesenseplease]

Has anyone ever wondered why we did not use nuclear weapons on Korea and Viet Nam?

[ivanm]

ivanm,

I will do to you what I feel like.  There was no socialism in the last congress, its rhetoric like this that caused the shooting in Arizona.

It apparent to me that you don't even know the meaning of the word.