American infrastructure built during a war and on the cheap - I wouldn't put too much faith in it.GannonFan wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 8:37 amI'm sure there's more infrastructure (i.e. roads and stuff like that) there now than before we got there. And it's not anywhere near the hotbed of terrorism that it was 20 years ago when we decided to go in and clear that out. Whether it was worth it (the lives lost, the money spent, etc) will probably always be answered in the negative, but there's certainly been improvement in Afghanistan, despite the large amount of things not improving.
Disgraceful
Re: Disgraceful
Turns out I might be a little gay. 89Hen 11/7/17
- GannonFan
- Level5
- Posts: 18038
- Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
- I am a fan of: Delaware
- A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack
Re: Disgraceful
Versus the absolutely nothing they had there to begin with? The place was practically medieval before we got there - a good 1,000 years behind most of the world in terms of infrastructure and facilities. It's not like we broke into a Garden of Eden and spoiled it.Ibanez wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 9:54 amAmerican infrastructure built during a war and on the cheap - I wouldn't put too much faith in it.GannonFan wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 8:37 am
I'm sure there's more infrastructure (i.e. roads and stuff like that) there now than before we got there. And it's not anywhere near the hotbed of terrorism that it was 20 years ago when we decided to go in and clear that out. Whether it was worth it (the lives lost, the money spent, etc) will probably always be answered in the negative, but there's certainly been improvement in Afghanistan, despite the large amount of things not improving.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
-
- Level5
- Posts: 23236
- Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
- I am a fan of: SIU
- A.K.A.: houndawg
- Location: Egypt
Re: Disgraceful
GannonFan wrote: ↑Tue Feb 08, 2022 3:37 pmWas it? You can trace the political vitriol that has plagued our politics since then precisely to his Presidency. Of course, Clinton didn't turn things sour politically all on his own, he had plenty of help in that department in a true bipartisan effort, but he and his style certainly paved the way for the scorched earth politics we are struggling with now. A lot of the economic gains during his Presidency were almost all the result of the peace dividend coming out of the Cold War and the USSR's collapse, as well as the rise of the internet. And you can argue that his letting Al Gore take the lead on dealing with the new Russian Federation and the bungling of that effort helped to lead to the conditions that let a leader like Putin emerge. Again, can't lay all the blame on the Presidency for how Russia turned out, the Russians still had plenty of say in that, but it was hardly a foreign policy success story. And I went a whole paragraph without mentioning that he went into a deposition, took an oath, and then lied in a vain attempt to protect his image. He was a really good public speaker, though, and was certainly charismatic.
The father of the political vitriol to which you refer is Newt Gingrich. You must be young not to remember that
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
- GannonFan
- Level5
- Posts: 18038
- Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
- I am a fan of: Delaware
- A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack
Re: Disgraceful
I was in college, more than old enough to witness Newt. And Newt was just the equal and opposite reaction to Clinton. The new-modern Presidency, as we've come to know it, started with Clinton. Reagan and Bush the first (and certainly the three Presidents in the 70's) were all from the WWII age or just after it, a different generation that did things differently (not necessarily better, just different).houndawg wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 11:37 amGannonFan wrote: ↑Tue Feb 08, 2022 3:37 pm
Was it? You can trace the political vitriol that has plagued our politics since then precisely to his Presidency. Of course, Clinton didn't turn things sour politically all on his own, he had plenty of help in that department in a true bipartisan effort, but he and his style certainly paved the way for the scorched earth politics we are struggling with now. A lot of the economic gains during his Presidency were almost all the result of the peace dividend coming out of the Cold War and the USSR's collapse, as well as the rise of the internet. And you can argue that his letting Al Gore take the lead on dealing with the new Russian Federation and the bungling of that effort helped to lead to the conditions that let a leader like Putin emerge. Again, can't lay all the blame on the Presidency for how Russia turned out, the Russians still had plenty of say in that, but it was hardly a foreign policy success story. And I went a whole paragraph without mentioning that he went into a deposition, took an oath, and then lied in a vain attempt to protect his image. He was a really good public speaker, though, and was certainly charismatic.
The father of the political vitriol to which you refer is Newt Gingrich. You must be young not to remember that
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
-
- Level5
- Posts: 23236
- Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
- I am a fan of: SIU
- A.K.A.: houndawg
- Location: Egypt
Re: Disgraceful
Newt wasn't the reaction to anyone, Newt was the vanguard of weaponized party politicsGannonFan wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 11:57 amI was in college, more than old enough to witness Newt. And Newt was just the equal and opposite reaction to Clinton. The new-modern Presidency, as we've come to know it, started with Clinton. Reagan and Bush the first (and certainly the three Presidents in the 70's) were all from the WWII age or just after it, a different generation that did things differently (not necessarily better, just different).
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
- GannonFan
- Level5
- Posts: 18038
- Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
- I am a fan of: Delaware
- A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack
Re: Disgraceful
Such the drama queen. It's like you forgot the 1992 election and the two years that came after it. You, or JSO can't remember, like to mock Trump, rightfully, for getting thumped in the popular vote, but Clinton was one of the few Presidents ever to never achieve 50% of the electorate - there were always more voters who didn't want him as President than those who did. Heck, in 1992, 14 million more voters wanted someone else. And then they ran the administration like they had an overwhelming mandate. All Newt did in 1994 was to focus the party just like Clinton focused the Dems in 1992, but I don't remember Newt using a catchy pop song like the Clinton machine. But it was the same thing - pick a charismatic leader, pillory the opponent, and ride that to victory. Maybe you could say Bush did that in 1988 with the Willie Horton smear, but Dukakis was so wooden and tone deaf he probably would've lost on his own anyway.houndawg wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 12:13 pmNewt wasn't the reaction to anyone, Newt was the vanguard of weaponized party politicsGannonFan wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 11:57 am
I was in college, more than old enough to witness Newt. And Newt was just the equal and opposite reaction to Clinton. The new-modern Presidency, as we've come to know it, started with Clinton. Reagan and Bush the first (and certainly the three Presidents in the 70's) were all from the WWII age or just after it, a different generation that did things differently (not necessarily better, just different).
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
- SDHornet
- Supporter
- Posts: 19443
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:50 pm
- I am a fan of: Sacramento State Hornets
Re: Disgraceful
There was justification in going into Afghanistan (root out terrorism and all that), our mistake was staying longer than needed (should have bailed after OBL was offed) and then having no exit strategy/plan (or just a disastrous execution of that plan).GannonFan wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 8:37 amI'm sure there's more infrastructure (i.e. roads and stuff like that) there now than before we got there. And it's not anywhere near the hotbed of terrorism that it was 20 years ago when we decided to go in and clear that out. Whether it was worth it (the lives lost, the money spent, etc) will probably always be answered in the negative, but there's certainly been improvement in Afghanistan, despite the large amount of things not improving.
Re: Disgraceful
I know..but our involvement and the Afghanis failure to take the opportunity netted the US nothing. It was a tremendous waste of blood and treasure for it to revert.GannonFan wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 11:27 amVersus the absolutely nothing they had there to begin with? The place was practically medieval before we got there - a good 1,000 years behind most of the world in terms of infrastructure and facilities. It's not like we broke into a Garden of Eden and spoiled it.
Turns out I might be a little gay. 89Hen 11/7/17
-
- Level5
- Posts: 23236
- Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
- I am a fan of: SIU
- A.K.A.: houndawg
- Location: Egypt
Re: Disgraceful
You're full of shit as a Christmas turkey.GannonFan wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 1:44 pmSuch the drama queen. It's like you forgot the 1992 election and the two years that came after it. You, or JSO can't remember, like to mock Trump, rightfully, for getting thumped in the popular vote, but Clinton was one of the few Presidents ever to never achieve 50% of the electorate - there were always more voters who didn't want him as President than those who did. Heck, in 1992, 14 million more voters wanted someone else. And then they ran the administration like they had an overwhelming mandate. All Newt did in 1994 was to focus the party just like Clinton focused the Dems in 1992, but I don't remember Newt using a catchy pop song like the Clinton machine. But it was the same thing - pick a charismatic leader, pillory the opponent, and ride that to victory. Maybe you could say Bush did that in 1988 with the Willie Horton smear, but Dukakis was so wooden and tone deaf he probably would've lost on his own anyway.
Gingrich, until then a run-of-the-mill Chicken Hawk, first went scorched-earth in his '78 campaign against Virginia Shapard and never took his foot off the throttle until he left Congress.
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
-
- Level5
- Posts: 23236
- Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
- I am a fan of: SIU
- A.K.A.: houndawg
- Location: Egypt
Re: Disgraceful
Our mistake was deciding to rob Iraq first when we knew OBL was in Afghanistan.SDHornet wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 4:09 pmThere was justification in going into Afghanistan (root out terrorism and all that), our mistake was staying longer than needed (should have bailed after OBL was offed) and then having no exit strategy/plan (or just a disastrous execution of that plan).GannonFan wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 8:37 am
I'm sure there's more infrastructure (i.e. roads and stuff like that) there now than before we got there. And it's not anywhere near the hotbed of terrorism that it was 20 years ago when we decided to go in and clear that out. Whether it was worth it (the lives lost, the money spent, etc) will probably always be answered in the negative, but there's certainly been improvement in Afghanistan, despite the large amount of things not improving.
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
-
- Level5
- Posts: 23236
- Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
- I am a fan of: SIU
- A.K.A.: houndawg
- Location: Egypt
Re: Disgraceful
My dad didn't get shot in the Khyber Pass because he had a red beard. The Afghans on the survey crew said they were too superstitious to kill somebody that had one because it was near a date when some Muslim clerics dyed their beards with henna in honor of somebody.GannonFan wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 11:27 amVersus the absolutely nothing they had there to begin with? The place was practically medieval before we got there - a good 1,000 years behind most of the world in terms of infrastructure and facilities. It's not like we broke into a Garden of Eden and spoiled it.
Last edited by houndawg on Fri Apr 15, 2022 2:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
Re: Disgraceful
You might want to pick up a history book and read what real weaponized party politics was like back in the18th and 19th centuries. For the modern day version, you need to go no further than James Carville. He is the modern day version of scorched earth party politics.houndawg wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 12:13 pmNewt wasn't the reaction to anyone, Newt was the vanguard of weaponized party politicsGannonFan wrote: ↑Thu Apr 14, 2022 11:57 am
I was in college, more than old enough to witness Newt. And Newt was just the equal and opposite reaction to Clinton. The new-modern Presidency, as we've come to know it, started with Clinton. Reagan and Bush the first (and certainly the three Presidents in the 70's) were all from the WWII age or just after it, a different generation that did things differently (not necessarily better, just different).
-
- Level5
- Posts: 23236
- Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:14 pm
- I am a fan of: SIU
- A.K.A.: houndawg
- Location: Egypt
Re: Disgraceful
Newt was ahead of him.Baldy wrote: ↑Fri Apr 15, 2022 7:29 amYou might want to pick up a history book and read what real weaponized party politics was like back in the18th and 19th centuries. For the modern day version, you need to go no further than James Carville. He is the modern day version of scorched earth party politics.
The best way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - Noam Chomsky
- GannonFan
- Level5
- Posts: 18038
- Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:51 am
- I am a fan of: Delaware
- A.K.A.: Non-Partisan Hack
Re: Disgraceful
It's always been weaponized. Heck, even for the period that houndy is talking about Newt, just look at Jimmy Carter. People forget because he was such a bad President and because when they think of him now they just think of the frail old dude building Habitat homes, but his dismantling of the Kennedy machine in '76 was a masterclass in political warfare. So basically, it's been going on for a long time.Baldy wrote: ↑Fri Apr 15, 2022 7:29 amYou might want to pick up a history book and read what real weaponized party politics was like back in the18th and 19th centuries. For the modern day version, you need to go no further than James Carville. He is the modern day version of scorched earth party politics.
Proud Member of the Blue Hen Nation
- BDKJMU
- Level5
- Posts: 27897
- Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
- I am a fan of: JMU
- A.K.A.: BDKJMU
- Location: Philly Burbs
Re: Disgraceful
And now an innocent goat herder according to the WaPo.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/20 ... tion=alertLotfi Hassan Misto, 56, whose family identified him as the victim of a Hellfire missile attack on May 3, was a former bricklayer who lived quietly in this town in northwest Syria, according to interviews with his brother, son and six others who knew him. They described a kind, hard-working man whose “whole life was spent poor.”
The operation was overseen by U.S. Central Command, which claimed hours after the strike, without citing evidence or naming a suspect, that the Predator drone strike had targeted a “senior Al Qaeda leader.” But now there is doubt inside the Pentagon about who was killed, two U.S. defense officials told The Washington Post.
“We are no longer confident we killed a senior AQ official,” one official said.
BTW, no one ever got punished for that one (yeah, this was probably mentioned on another thread back in Dec 21’).
And yet on the Ukraine thread we’ll have moralists complaining about a Russian missile strike killing civilians.
..peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard..
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions...But you have to go home now. We have to have peace…
..I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace.