Obama’s overseas adventures
July 23rd, 2008 5:00 pm · 57 comments
Joe Klein from Time gets it right about why Obama hasn’t seen a bump in the polls during his well-covered overseas trip to the Middle East:
People may be thinking, what on earth is Obama doing over there when we have so many problems back home? Why isn’t he talking about the economy? No doubt, the Obama staff figured they needed this week abroad to establish the image of Obama as a potential Commander-in-Chief…and, no doubt, he will turn to the economy–a Democratic strength, according to the polls–when he gets home. But I wouldn’t be surprised if Obama is paying a price for vamping about overseas while banks are cratering, gas prices soar and people are getting really, really nervous about their futures.
As a campaign strategy, Obama’s trip has been successful from this perspective: The media’s focus is off John McCain and drilling domestically for more oil and back on Obama. For weeks McCain had his hands on the agenda as he tried to exploit his advantage among voters when it comes to energy policy (F&M’s poll this summer showed nationally voters favored McCain on the oil issue), and Obama needed to make the press pivot the spotlight back onto him.
He did so, though, by going to Iraq, Jordan and Israel while we’re still paying $4 a gallon at the pump in America. The economy is the number one issue for voters, and Obama appears this week to be campaigning for the non-existent electoral vote in the Middle East and later in Europe. He doesn’t appear to be addressing OPEC, urging them to boost oil production, isn’t saying much about inflationary costs and isn’t talking about whether the feds ought to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Obama’s there, I think, because McCain forced Obama’s hand. The Republican and the national GOP had started poking at Obama’s apparent unwillingness to visit Iraq, and their strategy apparently worked.
Later, Obama’s going to Europe to deliver a speech or two. And the upcoming sight of Obama speaking to thousands of enthusiastic Europeans may backfire as some independent voters who could care less about who Germany supports in the presidential election might find the messianic, rock star image of Obama a turn off.
Share and Enjoy:
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Tags: Iraq · Oil · Republicans · Economy · President Barack Obama · John McCain
There are currently 57 comments on this blog postView Topic | Comment on this bloglee41
7/23/08
11:19 PM | McCain complained about Obama not going to Iraq and Afghanistan for weeks. So Obama goes to Iraq and Afghanistan and then McCain supporters complain about Obama being overseas???????? |
ArtVandolay
7/24/08
6:46 AM | QUOTE(lee41 @ Jul 23 2008, 11:19 PM) [snapback]414780[/snapback] McCain complained about Obama not going to Iraq and Afghanistan for weeks. So Obama goes to Iraq and Afghanistan and then McCain supporters complain about Obama being overseas????????
I did not see any complaints about the trip, but why not question it and discuss the risks Obama takes? I wonder if Americans will see the German multitudes fawning (like Gil Smart) and that helps them see through the phoniness. People will realize that he is NOT the President and the script he is playing out is trying to ride the wave of JFK's and Ronald Reagan's speeches there.
It's doubtful he will measure up in the long run.
PS: It was funny to see Obama sauntering off a plane, with a hand in his pocket, sunglasses on, all Euro style. And he was chewing Gum! Guess one of the script writers forgot to tell him to lose the gum.
|
justplainjoe
7/24/08
7:06 AM | QUOTE(ArtVandolay @ Jul 24 2008, 06:46 AM) [snapback]414817[/snapback]
PS: It was funny to see Obama sauntering off a plane, with a hand in his pocket, sunglasses on, all Euro style. And he was chewing Gum! Guess one of the script writers forgot to tell him to lose the gum.
as opposed to the geniuses of the mccain camp who had poor mccain trying to 'splain away yet another gaff about the "surge"in front of a grocery store display case of........CHEESE!!!!
nexy he come to lancaster and explain phil gramm while standing in front of a pile of bull shite.LOL
|
AngelFace
7/24/08
9:58 AM | QUOTE(lee41 @ Jul 23 2008, 11:19 PM) [snapback]414780[/snapback]
McCain complained about Obama not going to Iraq and Afghanistan for weeks. So Obama goes to Iraq and Afghanistan and then McCain supporters complain about Obama being overseas????????
Oh, PLEASE! That's a great one-liner, but hardly the point, when the point is the media bias that doesn't even COVER McCain's MANY trips to visit troops, but sends the anchors for all three networks and FAWNS ALL OVER OBAMA FOR A WEEKS as if this is JFK, he is ALREADY president, and as if he is the 2nd coming.
I am a 3rd party voter. I think McCain is tepid, lukewarm, milquetoast, and a panderer, but I think Obama is an empty suit. But you have to admit the blatant, starry eyed love affair the media is having with this supposed messiah. |
podunk
7/24/08
10:18 AM | Not to mention the actual coverage. Remember McCain's visit was scrutinized because he had snipers on the roof and hundred soldiers who cleared out the market before he arrived. Have you read any mention about Obama and the security he required? I can bet it was very heavy.
Remember (the media doesn't like that) that Hillary was choosen to be the queen and was picking her cabinet. Now that didn't turn out as expected, so the media doesn't have much choice but to get behind the king and do their service for him. Funny how just heard an interview on the radio and this German woman was impressed with Obama because he understood Muslims!! |
Shawn
7/24/08
10:51 AM | QUOTE(podunk @ Jul 24 2008, 10:18 AM) [snapback]414912[/snapback] Not to mention the actual coverage. Remember McCain's visit was scrutinized because he had snipers on the roof and hundred soldiers who cleared out the market before he arrived. Have you read any mention about Obama and the security he required? I can bet it was very heavy.
Ummm, McCain brought that upon himself. Wasn't he quoted as saying the market he visited in Iraq was just as safe as any market in America? Or, something like that?
Later...Shawn
|
usedmeat
7/24/08
11:22 AM | QUOTE Remember (the media doesn't like that) that Hillary was choosen to be the queen and was picking her cabinet. In what alternate universe do you live?
True that the media had Hillary and Rudy chosen before the first primary but you mustn't watch MSNBC to see the constant barrage of smear from the likes of Matthews and Oberman.
Comments like Hillary pimping out Chelsea or her laugh and etc.
How about the constant calls for her to drop out of the race because she was ruining the Anointed one's chances? That despite she was only a few delegates behind and neither, to this day, have enough pledged delegates to get the nomination out right.
Or facts like super delegates in states that overwhelmingly went for HRC endorsing Obama. Like our own Bob Casey Jr. Male candidates went to the Democrat party convention with far fewer delegates than HRC and had their names on the list for nomination. Nobody called for them to drop out. Can you say misogyny?
|
podunk
7/24/08
11:32 AM | I think he said it was getting safer to walk freely around Baghdad. Not comparing to America. I also recall the Democrats (especially Obama) using those remarks and McCain's visit to insist the surge was not working and things were not getting better. Guess they were wrong. |
Shawn
7/24/08
11:53 AM | QUOTE(podunk @ Jul 24 2008, 11:32 AM) [snapback]414964[/snapback] I think he said it was getting safer to walk freely around Baghdad. Not comparing to America. I also recall the Democrats (especially Obama) using those remarks and McCain's visit to insist the surge was not working and things were not getting better. Guess they were wrong.
Ok, I had to look it up. This is what he said:
"There are neighborhoods in Baghdad where you and I could walk through those neighborhoods today."
He forgot to mention that his "walk" was flanked by 22 soldiers, 10 armored Humvees, and two Apache attack helicopters. That is what brought media attention to his little stroll through the market.
Is the surge working? Are things getting better? By what definition? At what cost? Intersting that things seemed to get worse in afghanistan about the same time as the surge. I wonder what will happen in Iraq once we shift focus back to Afghanistan?
Later...Shawn |
InterestRP08
7/24/08
12:05 PM | It's funny how these candidates are touring the world... Doesn't anyone else see a real problem with this? I don't care what either of them do, because I would go more crazy if I did.
Obama was checking up on the Middle Eastern Union progress, and now he's making promises to the European Union. I smell North American Union right around the corner.
Both of these guys are rats. |
hahaha
7/24/08
12:07 PM | As seen by the recent flood of politicians visiting Iraq, once could assume it is much safer. The Iraqi people are not stupid. They finally admitted enough was enough and started to turn against Al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda has now fled to Afghanistan to continue their terrorism. They could be there for many years. Just ask the Russians.
QUOTE I smell North American Union right around the corner.
Good!! People need to realize that it is a new environment. A new world history has begun. Retreating backwards will not solve anything. |
AngelFace
7/24/08
12:13 PM | QUOTE(usedmeat @ Jul 24 2008, 11:22 AM) [snapback]414954[/snapback]
In what alternate universe do you live?
True that the media had Hillary and Rudy chosen before the first primary but you mustn't watch MSNBC to see the constant barrage of smear from the likes of Matthews and Oberman.
Comments like Hillary pimping out Chelsea or her laugh and etc.
How about the constant calls for her to drop out of the race because she was ruining the Anointed one's chances? That despite she was only a few delegates behind and neither, to this day, have enough pledged delegates to get the nomination out right.
Or facts like super delegates in states that overwhelmingly went for HRC endorsing Obama. Like our own Bob Casey Jr. Male candidates went to the Democrat party convention with far fewer delegates than HRC and had their names on the list for nomination. Nobody called for them to drop out. Can you say misogyny?
Yes I can! And thank YOU for saying it first!!! |
dragonrider
7/24/08
12:53 PM | QUOTE(podunk @ Jul 24 2008, 10:18 AM) [snapback]414912[/snapback] Not to mention the actual coverage. Remember McCain's visit was scrutinized because he had snipers on the roof and hundred soldiers who cleared out the market before he arrived. Have you read any mention about Obama and the security he required? I can bet it was very heavy.
Remember (the media doesn't like that) that Hillary was choosen to be the queen and was picking her cabinet. Now that didn't turn out as expected, so the media doesn't have much choice but to get behind the king and do their service for him. Funny how just heard an interview on the radio and this German woman was impressed with Obama because he understood Muslims!! Remember how CBS snipped out one wrong answer by McCain and put in another good answer becuase ooops someone made a mistake. |
mam0412
7/25/08
9:36 AM | QUOTE Joe Klein from Time gets it right about why Obama hasn’t seen a bump in the polls during his well-covered overseas trip to the Middle East.
What a smear article. Do you suppose the polls haven't shown the bump because the week isn't over yet? Don't you think the poll results might not show up until next week?
|
usedmeat
7/25/08
10:10 AM | QUOTE(mam0412 @ Jul 25 2008, 09:36 AM) [snapback]415474[/snapback]
What a smear article. Do you suppose the polls haven't shown the bump because the week isn't over yet? Don't you think the poll results might not show up until next week?
It takes time for the pollsters to word the questions to get the desired results (Obama ahead of McCain) they want you to read about. 
|
dragonrider
7/25/08
11:24 AM | QUOTE(usedmeat @ Jul 25 2008, 10:10 AM) [snapback]415499[/snapback] It takes time for the pollsters to word the questions to get the desired results (Obama ahead of McCain) they want you to read about. Yeah , its all great left wing conspiracy to steal the election from the republicans when we know how high in the polls the present commander and chief is. Next it will be the communist college professors out stirring up the electorate to steal another presidency from the republicans. Those poor weak republicans. Wonders how they have won so many elections when everyone in the media is against them. Wonders how they can lead a country when every word they speak is distorted. Wonders how they stand up to such constant onslaught. BS give it a rest no one believes the vast left wing media anymore. |
InterestRP08
7/25/08
11:47 AM | QUOTE(hahaha @ Jul 24 2008, 12:07 PM) [snapback]414990[/snapback] Good!! People need to realize that it is a new environment. A new world history has begun. Retreating backwards will not solve anything.
Are you dense???? IT DOESN'T BENEFIT US!!!!!!
|
podunk
7/25/08
7:01 PM | Of course not.... what was hahaha thinking?
With the right leader and the right plan it surely could benefit us.
Oh wait, I said right leader. Forget it...... |
P. Floyd
7/25/08
8:11 PM | QUOTE(Shawn @ Jul 24 2008, 11:53 AM) [snapback]414981[/snapback]
Ok, I had to look it up. This is what he said:
"There are neighborhoods in Baghdad where you and I could walk through those neighborhoods today."
He forgot to mention that his "walk" was flanked by 22 soldiers, 10 armored Humvees, and two Apache attack helicopters. That is what brought media attention to his little stroll through the market.
Is the surge working? Are things getting better? By what definition? At what cost? Intersting that things seemed to get worse in afghanistan about the same time as the surge. I wonder what will happen in Iraq once we shift focus back to Afghanistan?
Later...Shawn
I'd bet he had a bullet-proof vest on also. Although, there are many American cities (Detriot, DC, etc) where it is needed too.
|
lee41
7/28/08
10:09 AM | QUOTE The presumptive Democratic nominee jumped to a significant 9-point lead over GOP rival John McCain - his largest lead since the Gallup Poll began tracking the general election horse race in March.
Obama tops McCain, 49% to 40%, among registered voters nationwide, Gallup's daily tracking poll conducted from Thursday to Saturday revealed.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2...john_mccai.html
|
Shawn
7/28/08
10:15 AM | QUOTE(InterestRP08 @ Jul 25 2008, 11:47 AM) [snapback]415557[/snapback]
Are you dense???? IT DOESN'T BENEFIT US!!!!!!
Given the current threats of terrorism, which are getting greater every day as we meddle in the Middle East, it is of the utmost importance and benefit that we remain in good standing with as many foreign governments as possible. Without their help, it will be virtually impossible to track down terrorists, and foil their plots. We need the cooperation of the governments, particularly european ones, of the countries terrorists are using to plan and operate. If we attempt to go it alone, we are doomed.
Later...Shawn
|
mam0412
7/28/08
10:53 AM | QUOTE(lee41 @ Jul 28 2008, 10:09 AM) [snapback]416356[/snapback]
See. This thread was started on a smear. Now the polls show the bump. They surely wouldn't have last week.
|
InterestRP08
7/28/08
11:59 AM | QUOTE(Shawn @ Jul 28 2008, 10:15 AM) [snapback]416358[/snapback] Given the current threats of terrorism, which are getting greater every day as we meddle in the Middle East, it is of the utmost importance and benefit that we remain in good standing with as many foreign governments as possible. Without their help, it will be virtually impossible to track down terrorists, and foil their plots. We need the cooperation of the governments, particularly european ones, of the countries terrorists are using to plan and operate. If we attempt to go it alone, we are doomed.
Terrorism (def.)
- Webster: "the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion"
- Oxford English: "Government by intimidation carried out by the party in power"
So how much longer do you believe what you are being coerced into? Until you are both broke and completely disenfranchised?
|
Shawn
7/28/08
12:04 PM | QUOTE(InterestRP08 @ Jul 28 2008, 11:59 AM) [snapback]416434[/snapback]
Terrorism (def.)
- Webster: "the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion"
- Oxford English: "Government by intimidation carried out by the party in power"
So how much longer do you believe what you are being coerced into? Until you are both broke and completely disenfranchised?
Something used as a means of coercion doesn't necessarily work as coercion. Particularly if you can undermine those means.
Later...Shawn
|
dragonrider
7/28/08
1:13 PM | Once we have the One World Government terrorism will be a problem of the past. |
Shawn
7/28/08
1:17 PM | QUOTE(dragonrider @ Jul 28 2008, 01:13 PM) [snapback]416494[/snapback] Once we have the One World Government terrorism will be a problem of the past.
Why? I don't think one has anything to do with the other. As long as there are people out there who don't have the power, and are willing to kill to get it, there will always be terrorism.
Later...Shawn
|
InterestRP08
7/28/08
2:06 PM | Oops. I forgot most people here are living in the dark. |
Shawn
7/28/08
2:13 PM | QUOTE(InterestRP08 @ Jul 28 2008, 02:06 PM) [snapback]416540[/snapback] Oops. I forgot most people here are living in the dark.
So enlighten oh great wise one. Are you suggesting it is easier to track down and foil terrorist plots without the help and cooperation of foreign governments?
Later...Shawn
|
dragonrider
7/28/08
2:56 PM | QUOTE(Shawn @ Jul 28 2008, 02:13 PM) [snapback]416546[/snapback]
So enlighten oh great wise one. Are you suggesting it is easier to track down and foil terrorist plots without the help and cooperation of foreign governments?
Later...Shawn
Hands Shawn a 60 W light bulb. |
InterestRP08
7/28/08
3:21 PM | No, Shawn.
It's people like you realizing you are being suckered into believing that a government is going to protect you from terrorism. What you don't understand is that it is the governments that create the terrorism to take away your civil liberties and your money.
That'll be worth more than your light bulb when you realize the truth of it. |
Shawn
7/28/08
3:37 PM | QUOTE(dragonrider @ Jul 28 2008, 02:56 PM) [snapback]416582[/snapback] Hands Shawn a 60 W light bulb.
"Sometimes the lights all shinin on me;
Other times I can barely see."
Later...Shawn
QUOTE(InterestRP08 @ Jul 28 2008, 03:21 PM) [snapback]416599[/snapback] No, Shawn.
It's people like you realizing you are being suckered into believing that a government is going to protect you from terrorism. What you don't understand is that it is the governments that create the terrorism to take away your civil liberties and your money.
That'll be worth more than your light bulb when you realize the truth of it.
I don't believe the government is going to protect me from terrorism. In fact, I believe that the current stance of our government has put us at higher risk of terrorist attacks. I also don't approve of taking away civil liberties in the name of anti-terrorism. I think you have mistaken me for someone else. My statement was simply that it helps to track down terrorists and uncover terrorist plots when you have the cooperation of foreign governments. The world as a whole could benefit from such cooperation. Where I differ with you is in your paranoia that our government is pursposfully behind terrorist attacks on this country. There are no facts to support that stance.
Later...Shawn
|
podunk
7/29/08
7:00 AM | QUOTE The presumptive Democratic nominee jumped to a significant 9-point lead over GOP rival John McCain - his largest lead since the Gallup Poll began tracking the general election horse race in March.
Obama tops McCain, 49% to 40%, among registered voters nationwide, Gallup's daily tracking poll conducted from Thursday to Saturday revealed.
then we have this:
http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2008/...-for-mccai.html
QUOTE Republican presidential candidate John McCain moved from being behind by 6 points among "likely" voters a month ago to a 4-point lead over Democrat Barack Obama among that group in the latest USA TODAY/Gallup Poll. McCain still trails slightly among the broader universe of "registered" voters. By both measures, the race is tight.
The Friday-Sunday poll, mostly conducted as Obama was returning from his much-publicized overseas trip and released just this hour, shows McCain now ahead 49%-45% among voters that Gallup believes are most likely to go to the polls in November. In late June, he was behind among likely voters, 50%-44%.
|
InterestRP08
7/29/08
7:22 AM | QUOTE(Shawn @ Jul 28 2008, 03:37 PM) [snapback]416611[/snapback] My statement was simply that it helps to track down terrorists and uncover terrorist plots when you have the cooperation of foreign governments. The world as a whole could benefit from such cooperation. Where I differ with you is in your paranoia that our government is pursposfully behind terrorist attacks on this country. There are no facts to support that stance.
No, I'm not paranoid. If you look, you can plainly see who the terrorists are. What you need the cooperation of foreign governments for is the facilitation of free trade among citizens, not to chase people all over the globe. Of course that kind of cooperation would benefit the whole world.
There are plenty of facts to support who the true terrorists are, you just have to look. Have you ever heard of the Carlyle Group? You'd be surprised to learn a bit about them and how they have destroyed most countries sovereignty.
Also, here's an interesting link that watches how and what corporations profiteer off war - usually by helping start it and then funding both sides: http://www.corpwatch.org/section.php?id=176
|
Shawn
7/29/08
8:55 AM | QUOTE(InterestRP08 @ Jul 29 2008, 07:22 AM) [snapback]416824[/snapback] No, I'm not paranoid. If you look, you can plainly see who the terrorists are. What you need the cooperation of foreign governments for is the facilitation of free trade among citizens, not to chase people all over the globe. Of course that kind of cooperation would benefit the whole world. There are plenty of facts to support who the true terrorists are, you just have to look. Have you ever heard of the Carlyle Group? You'd be surprised to learn a bit about them and how they have destroyed most countries sovereignty. Also, here's an interesting link that watches how and what corporations profiteer off war - usually by helping start it and then funding both sides: http://www.corpwatch.org/section.php?id=176
I know who the Carlyle Group is, and I pretty much agree with your assessment of them. Don't even get me stared on the PNAC. I also recognize that corporations are profiteering. That is essentially what Iraq is all about. However, that doesn't negate that there are terrorists outside of the Carlyle group that want to kill Americans. They are well organized, and planning attacks as we speak. With the help and cooperation of foreign governments we can uncover such plots and make efforts to keep them from coming to fruition.
Later...Shawn
|
InterestRP08
7/29/08
9:05 AM | QUOTE(Shawn @ Jul 29 2008, 08:55 AM) [snapback]416857[/snapback] I know who the Carlyle Group is, and I pretty much agree with your assessment of them. Don't even get me stared on the PNAC. I also recognize that corporations are profiteering. That is essentially what Iraq is all about. However, that doesn't negate that there are terrorists outside of the Carlyle group that want to kill Americans. They are well organized, and planning attacks as we speak. With the help and cooperation of foreign governments we can uncover such plots and make efforts to keep them from coming to fruition.
Where we seem to disagree is that you think there are terrorists that want to kill Americans, and I do not.
|
Shawn
7/29/08
9:10 AM | QUOTE(InterestRP08 @ Jul 29 2008, 09:05 AM) [snapback]416861[/snapback]
Where we seem to disagree is that you think there are terrorists that want to kill Americans, and I do not.
I'm not sure why you would think that, but if that is the case, then I think you might be in need of a light bulb as well.
Later....Shawn
|
InterestRP08
7/29/08
9:54 AM | QUOTE(Shawn @ Jul 29 2008, 09:10 AM) [snapback]416864[/snapback]
I'm not sure why you would think that, but if that is the case, then I think you might be in need of a light bulb as well.
Later....Shawn
There are not people out there to hurt us because we are American. That is ludicrous. I want to see evidence of that. And not something broadcast by any major network.
|
Rural Conservative
7/29/08
11:16 AM | QUOTE(InterestRP08 @ Jul 29 2008, 09:54 AM) [snapback]416900[/snapback]
There are not people out there to hurt us because we are American. That is ludicrous. I want to see evidence of that. And not something broadcast by any major network.
Something tells me that you won't believe any evidence that is given. Proof of your unwillingness to believe any further evidence is your unwillingness to accept any information that's been covered by the MSM. If I remember correctly, you're one of those who thinks 9/11 was a government hoax, and that, in my experience with persons of a similar mindset, means that all attempts at rational discussion are pointless.
I for one do not trust the MSM entirely, but neither do I think everything they cover is a lie. That's just madness.
|
InterestRP08
7/29/08
11:47 AM | QUOTE(Rural Conservative @ Jul 29 2008, 11:16 AM) [snapback]416947[/snapback]
Something tells me that you won't believe any evidence that is given. Proof of your unwillingness to believe any further evidence is your unwillingness to accept any information that's been covered by the MSM. If I remember correctly, you're one of those who thinks 9/11 was a government hoax, and that, in my experience with persons of a similar mindset, means that all attempts at rational discussion are pointless.
I for one do not trust the MSM entirely, but neither do I think everything they cover is a lie. That's just madness.
What something told you that? I think that's a poor excuse. There is plenty of factual information out there that is easily accessible. It's not that I won't believe anything, but most people have a habit of showing something/anything the mainstream media says and taking it as golden fact. Then, arguing over some msm article or quote is absolutely pointless.
So, anything but mainstream?
|
Shawn
7/29/08
12:10 PM | QUOTE(InterestRP08 @ Jul 29 2008, 09:54 AM) [snapback]416900[/snapback]
There are not people out there to hurt us because we are American. That is ludicrous. I want to see evidence of that. And not something broadcast by any major network.
I'm not really sure what you are trying to say. What kind of evidence would convice you? It is almost like asking for evidence that bank robbers want to rob banks because they hold large sums of money.
Maybe its just a semantics thing. Perhaps there aren't people out there that want to hurt is because we're American. Rather they want to hurt Americans because it furthers an agenda and is a means to an end. Either way the end result is the same.
Later...Shawn
|
mam0412
7/29/08
12:43 PM | QUOTE(InterestRP08 @ Jul 29 2008, 09:54 AM) [snapback]416900[/snapback]
There are not people out there to hurt us because we are American. That is ludicrous. I want to see evidence of that. And not something broadcast by any major network.
I can't believe I'm going to agree with the conspiracy theorist, but in this case I do - at least partially. I do not believe Bush when he says things like, "They hate us because of our freedoms". I do not believe that at all. It's Bush rhetoric and nothing else. More Bush fear tactics. I do think they have a problem with our arrogance and always trying to control them. McCain's 100 years? They absolutely would hate us for that. Even Malicki has objected to a permanant US presense in Iraq.
Ah Shawn, just read your last post. Yes, I think it's a semantics issue. |
Rural Conservative
7/29/08
1:11 PM | QUOTE(Shawn @ Jul 29 2008, 12:10 PM) [snapback]416976[/snapback]
Maybe its just a semantics thing. Perhaps there aren't people out there that want to hurt is because we're American. Rather they want to hurt Americans because it furthers an agenda and is a means to an end. Either way the end result is the same.
There is an element within the Muslim world which seeks the eradication of the "Infidel." There's a lot more to this, so please don't anyone come out and say I'm not covering all the bases here, because I know I'm not, but I only have time to hit on a couple angles because I want a powernap before I go to work.
In any event, this element has existed since the birth of Islam, or at least close to it. Infidels include Christians, and America and Europe, are considered Christian regions by those within this extremist element.
While I think that these extremists hate America, I do not think it is because of the freedoms Americans enjoy, but rather, I believe it is because they believe America to be a Christian nation (whether we view ourselves as such or not), and therefore we represent everything "Infidel."
These extremists hate anyone who does not wish to embrace their particular variety of Islam, and since we fall into that category, they hate us. Simple as that.
One important point is that the extremists in question will find an excuse to kill anyone who does not share their views, not just Americans. They kill muslims of other sects, hindus, buddhists, and so on.
Like all politicians, our current president wants to rally others to his cause. For that reason, he will use rhetoric to paint his cause in the best light. This is not said as an attack against him or his policies, but rather, it is an observation. I believe that whomever we get as our next president will behave similarly, though perhaps with a different end in mind.
|
dragonrider
7/29/08
1:39 PM | [quote name='Rural Conservative' date='Jul 29 2008, 11:16 AM' post='416947']
. If I remember correctly, you're one of those who thinks 9/11 was a government hoax, and that, in my experience with persons of a similar mindset, means that all attempts at rational discussion are pointless.
Yeah I have the sameexperience talking to conservative evangelical christians. |
bigstew
7/29/08
5:01 PM | QUOTE(InterestRP08 @ Jul 29 2008, 09:54 AM) [snapback]416900[/snapback]
There are not people out there to hurt us because we are American. That is ludicrous. I want to see evidence of that. And not something broadcast by any major network.
You can't be serious.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_Berlin_discotheque_bombing
Let's not forget the achille lauro.
I went back to pre bush era, so that you can see that killing americans is a favorite and honored activity among terrorists. And it's because they were americans.
|
justplainjoe
7/29/08
5:49 PM | QUOTE(Rural Conservative @ Jul 29 2008, 01:11 PM) [snapback]417016[/snapback]
In any event, this element has existed since the birth of Islam, or at least close to it. Infidels include Christians, and America and Europe, are considered Christian regions by those within this extremist element.
While I think that these extremists hate America, I do not think it is because of the freedoms Americans enjoy, but rather, I believe it is because they believe America to be a Christian nation (whether we view ourselves as such or not), and therefore we represent everything "Infidel."
c'mon man, they see christianity as a !profanity! religion. please dude, how many coats do you own. see , they have no problem with mennonites and brethren and other real christians.
it is the christians who kill them that they have the problem with.
stop killing people in the name of christianity and the problem is solved.
christians shouldn't be killing people anyway and those who do are anti christian.
simple isn't it,?
except the message of the christ has been hijacked by those who kill.
and people choose killing over christ because their faith is weak.
|
dragonrider
7/29/08
6:39 PM | Real Christians, and who discerns which are real Christians and which are fake christians, Brethren and Mennonite, I have heard enough about them since I have returned to Pa to know that not all Brethren and Mennonite are real Christians. Real Christians don't run Puppy Mills and Own slum apartments. |
Scout
7/29/08
6:51 PM | QUOTE(dragonrider @ Jul 29 2008, 06:39 PM) [snapback]417131[/snapback] Real Christians, and who discerns which are real Christians and which are fake christians, Brethren and Mennonite, I have heard enough about them since I have returned to Pa to know that not all Brethren and Mennonite are real Christians. Real Christians don't run Puppy Mills and Own slum apartments.
Real Christians also don't question the validity of someone else's relationship with God, nor do they judge people. Love the sinner and encourage them to develop a deeper relationship with God. If a Christian never sinned, he/she would be perfect ... and the rest of us would probably stone him for being different 
|
InterestRP08
7/29/08
8:54 PM | QUOTE(bigstew @ Jul 29 2008, 05:01 PM) [snapback]417116[/snapback] You can't be serious. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_Berlin_discotheque_bombingLet's not forget the achille lauro. I went back to pre bush era, so that you can see that killing americans is a favorite and honored activity among terrorists. And it's because they were americans.
I have the same to say to you. You can't be serious. The discotheque bombing was NEVER conclusive as to who did it! Ronald Reagan went ahead and punished an entire country of people while crooked politicians walked around unscathed!
Bad example. But, you won't be able to find any good examples. They are almost ALL staged by profiteers! Some of who work for our government, most, though, fund our government.
|
bigstew
7/29/08
9:15 PM | QUOTE(InterestRP08 @ Jul 29 2008, 08:54 PM) [snapback]417169[/snapback]
I have the same to say to you. You can't be serious. The discotheque bombing was NEVER conclusive as to who did it! Ronald Reagan went ahead and punished an entire country of people while crooked politicians walked around unscathed!
Bad example. But, you won't be able to find any good examples. They are almost ALL staged by profiteers! Some of who work for our government, most, though, fund our government.
I guess you missed this:
QUOTE
And the sole murder on the achille lauro was an american in a wheelchair.
Guess they were coincidences.
|
InterestRP08
7/29/08
10:06 PM | QUOTE(bigstew @ Jul 29 2008, 09:15 PM) [snapback]417177[/snapback] I guess you missed this: And the sole murder on the achille lauro was an american in a wheelchair. Guess they were coincidences.
Miss what? You must have missed this:
"Gaddafi rejected both Eastern (Soviet) communism and Western (United States) capitalism and claimed he was charting a middle course for his government.[21]
In the 1980s, Libya increasingly distanced itself from the West, and was accused of committing mass acts of state-sponsored terrorism. When evidence of Libyan complicity was discovered in the Berlin discotheque terrorist bombing that killed two American servicemen, the United States responded by launching an aerial bombing attack against targets near Tripoli and Benghazi in April 1986.[22]"
Using common sense, one can see that Gaddafi tried to run Libya, was interferred upon, and a nightclub blew up where 2 servicemen were. So where is the rest of the evidence? Oh, the evidence that probably the CIA intercepted some message saying good job? Sorry, NOT evidence. The CIA is one of the world's biggest mafia's. That bomb was used to start something with Libya. It's all good now, though. Check out connie shaking Libya's hand.
|
Rural Conservative
7/29/08
10:43 PM | QUOTE(justplainjoe @ Jul 29 2008, 05:49 PM) [snapback]417123[/snapback]
c'mon man, they see christianity as a !profanity! religion. please dude, how many coats do you own. see , they have no problem with mennonites and brethren and other real christians.
it is the christians who kill them that they have the problem with.
stop killing people in the name of christianity and the problem is solved.
christians shouldn't be killing people anyway and those who do are anti christian.
simple isn't it,?
except the message of the christ has been hijacked by those who kill.
and people choose killing over christ because their faith is weak.
Ok, then explain to me why the extremists within Islam have historically killed others within their own faith. While you're at it, explain why they go after Buddhists and Hindus as well. Islamic extremists have been out to kill anyone else who disagrees with them since long before the first crusades, so using the "they hate Christians because Christians attack them" argument is both lame and historically un-sound.
You took one little point that you wanted to prove, ignored everything else I said, and went off a cliff with it. Good job.
|
dragonrider
7/30/08
2:26 AM | QUOTE(Rural Conservative @ Jul 29 2008, 10:43 PM) [snapback]417196[/snapback]
Ok, then explain to me why the extremists within Islam have historically killed others within their own faith. While you're at it, explain why they go after Buddhists and Hindus as well. Islamic extremists have been out to kill anyone else who disagrees with them since long before the first crusades, so using the "they hate Christians because Christians attack them" argument is both lame and historically un-sound.
You took one little point that you wanted to prove, ignored everything else I said, and went off a cliff with it. Good job.
You mean like the early christians who killed anyone in Europe who didn't convert to Christianity or Christians who murdered native americans who refused to convert to Christianity. You know its kinda like what religions did, join me or die. |
Shawn
7/30/08
9:13 AM | QUOTE(InterestRP08 @ Jul 29 2008, 08:54 PM) [snapback]417169[/snapback]
I have the same to say to you. You can't be serious. The discotheque bombing was NEVER conclusive as to who did it! Ronald Reagan went ahead and punished an entire country of people while crooked politicians walked around unscathed!
Bad example. But, you won't be able to find any good examples. They are almost ALL staged by profiteers! Some of who work for our government, most, though, fund our government.
I'm reading a fiction book right now by Jack Du Brul called Havoc. I read a part last night in which the characters were having a discussion about the cause and effects of terrorism. I thought the characters in the book summed it up pretty nicely:
"There is no such thing as terrorism for terrorism's sake. Each act has a specific goal."
"Like getting the U.S. out of Iraq or Isreal out of the West Bank?"
"Not entirely. Those are the stated goals, yes, but what the organizers behind the suicide bombers ultimately want is power after those withdrawals. The poor soul who blows himself up next to a police checkpoint thinks he's fighting for the liberation of his people. The men who gave him the bomb are merely using him as a tool to further their political ambitions. They want to rule over that man's family."
"This is true in all cases. The men who carried out the London and Madrid bombings want to force the United States and Western interests out of Iraq, even though the bombers weren't even Iraqi. It was the men behind them that wanted these things. The men who blew themselves up just wanted to obtain paradise. Unfortunately your media focuses on the soldiers and pays scant attention to the generals."
Later...Shawn |
cyberscribbler
7/30/08
9:55 AM | QUOTE(Rural Conservative @ Jul 29 2008, 10:43 PM) [snapback]417196[/snapback] Ok, then explain to me why the extremists within Islam have historically killed others within their own faith. While you're at it, explain why they go after Buddhists and Hindus as well. Islamic extremists have been out to kill anyone else who disagrees with them since long before the first crusades. Using religion as their motivation is faulty. It's a generational thing.
Modern day Islamic extremists initially rejected "corrupt regimes" who they viewed as corrupted by Western influences. Instead of attacking the corrupt regime, they attacked the corrupters.
Getting Sunni's to reject extremists took a long time, but is finally looking to be successful. That coupled with the massive casualties endured by Sunnis & Shi-ites alike.
|
bigstew
7/30/08
6:14 PM | QUOTE(Shawn @ Jul 30 2008, 09:13 AM) [snapback]417290[/snapback]
"This is true in all cases. The men who carried out the London and Madrid bombings want to force the United States and Western interests out of Iraq, even though the bombers weren't even Iraqi. It was the men behind them that wanted these things. The men who blew themselves up just wanted to obtain paradise. Unfortunately your media focuses on the soldiers and pays scant attention to the generals."
Later...Shawn What did the 1993 wtc bombers want? 2001? USS Cole bombers?
The list goes on. I agree with you on the whole "men behind the scene" thing. But RP08 thinks it has nothing to do with being american. Well, trade the americans that were victims in these cowardly acts with australians, and the incident probably never takes place.
I also remember when the towers came down. Why were people in the palestinian territory dancing in the streets? |
View Topic | Comment on this blog
