Foreign politics/policy discussions on this forum – a suggestion

[Lickitysplit]

First, this is an unmoderated forum and everyone has the freedom to say and post whatever they want.

That said, there is an increasing amount of thread highjacking going on where pleasent, on-topic real estate discussion degrades into emotion-charged world politics with little arguable application to the topic at hand. The vitriol displayed in these posts has been rising and I feel is likely to continue to do so.

In the interest of keeping this forum on-point, I’d like to offer a suggestion, which, as this is an unmoderated forum, is entirely optional. Take the politics somewhere else. There are plenty of political forums where your thoughts are much more on-topic, regardless if you are a bush-basher or bush-supporter, support the war, against the war, etc. If you would like to share your political opinions on this site, start a thread and make it clear in the subject that the discussion is of a political, possibly partisan nature. And honestly, have the courtesy to understand that there are highly informed, highly educated people here who have come to different conclusions, and try to realize that bashing any politician, whether the name is Bush, Clinton, Condi or Kennedy, is going to needlessly tick people off.

[PD]

I apologize to anyone who may have been irritated by my part in hijacking a thread or threads. I am afraid that when a gauntlet is thrown down before me, it is hard for me to walk away without picking it up.

[lostkitty]

I dont agree. Politics certainly plays a role in most of these topic discussions.

It isnt so terrible if we have differing views and it also is not so bad if we debate them heatedly.

Isnt it intersting that PS and PD, who agree so completely on most things, differ on politics? This is the BEAUTY of America – that we can freely discuss our differences of opinion. I am proud of both powayseller and PD for sticking up for themselves so vehemently although I agree with Pseller politically and wasnt impressed with PD’s link to an article “proving” her theories about bullying… The link came from a pro-gun website… Go figure.

[lostkitty]

Ooops, duplicate.

[PD]

Lostkitty, it is certainly true that politics plays a part in the state of our economy. How can it not? Our situation with Iran is having big implications, for example. I do have strong beliefs on a number of issues, as does Powayseller (along with others), and they have a tendency to come out, now and again. Many people come to this site wanting cold, unemotional fact that is focused solely on real estate and are distressed by any divergence from the original thread. It is hard to always to keep a conversation on a predetermined track.

As for my link, thank you for taking the time to read it. I read that article long ago (from a different source) and searched for it on the web so that I could provide a link. I did not know that it was on a pro-gun website. Even so, I do not think that is really relevant as the point, in my opinion is good. It is not a statement about “bullying” or a justification for any PARTICULAR war (Iraq, The Civil War, WWII, Korea, etc). Rather, it is a statement of human nature, which includes people who are peaceful, people who are violent, people who are sociopaths, people who are protectors. Those who denigrate it today may have felt different had they read on it on December 7, 1941 or September 11, 2001. For any of you who are bristling, I did say, “may.”
The link: http://www.pgpft.com/On_Sheep_Wolves_and_Sheepdogs-Grossman.htm

9/11 brought about a great deal of thankfulness among the American people for the dedication of firefighters, policemen and the military. Alas, it seems as though the admiration for firefighters and policemen has largely sunk into indifference or a mild thankfulness. The admiration for our military has been tarred by a disagreement with the Iraq war. The same thing happened during Vietnam. People who disagreed spit on returning soldiers. Did this make sense? Did the soldier set the policy? Any anger over the war should not be directed at the tool, rather at how it has been used.

Now that statement will lead some to scream, “Get rid of the tool, then it can’t be used!” This also makes no sense. I’ve read stories of a number of people getting killed by a frying pan applied to the head. Should we ban the frying pan? Okay, now someone is going to jump in and say that is a stupid analogy for this reason, that reason, etc. Please don’t, we are all aware of the holes.

I believe that we need a strong military as deterrence. Further, there are times when war must be used as a last resort. I point to the entire history of the world as evidence. This is NOT a statement either for or against any current or past war or conflict.

I have no ill feelings toward any person who disagrees with me and appreciate all efforts on behalf of others to extend the same courtesy. Powayseller has expressed an interest in meeting me. I would be very pleased to meet her, as well as anyone else on this board, regardless of whether they agree with me.

[lostkitty]

Well, we HAD a strong military – but now it is weakened. And for what?

We’ve spent way in excess of what we have… now our children will all pay and pay and pay… You cannot say we were provoked by Iraq – that did not happen this time.

[powayseller]

I think defense is good, but our military is all about offense now. I fault our leaders in Washington for provoking international relations. Aren’t we clever enough to find a better way of getting along with other nations? Or must we resort to guns and bullying?

Take the Iran example. At first I was glad to hear that Bush had “all options on the table”. I was convinced by the media reports of a bad Iran. Then I heard the other nations were against our tactic, and started questioning why that is. Perhaps Iran does have peaceful intentions? Now Bush has been pressured to forego his nuclear bunker buster. But he was trying to force Iran to give up its nuclear ambitions by threatening force. Iran threatened to disrupt oil supplies. We weren’t being smart about it! Now get this: Bush sweetens the pot by offering airplanes and airplane parts in exchange for Iran’s cessation of the nuclear program, and Iran is interested in negotiating. This is exactly what should have been done from the beginning.

It is only due to our ally interference that Bush switched from nuclear bunker busters to offering airplanes in trade. But this was an intelligent solution.

I was proposing that we do more of this kind of stuff. But PD likes the weapons approach, probably because she is a military wife. Go figure…

[PD]

I have never said that we should invade and/or use weapons against Iran. Please do not put words in my mouth. I have said numerous times that war should be avoided, if possible. Just because I think a strong military is important, does not mean that I think it should be used for every problem. If I were married to man who was an oncologist, I would not run around suggesting that every person with a strange lump should immediately get radical surgery or chemo.

I am very proud of being a military wife. I am proud of my husband and his service to this great country. I have no wish to send him off to war. In fact, my wishes are for the exact opposite. But if it happens, I will send him off with smile on my face and my tears saved for later.

[lostkitty]

PD- Do you think we should have gone into Iraq?

PS – Have you read “Reading Lolita in Tehran”? Great book, and it is a glimpse into the way things have changed there politically, and for the individual citizens. No doubt, there is an element of fanaticism in control – however, I feel that globally speaking, there are NUMEROUS countries that can be described in such a way – several of them already in possession of nuclear capabilities – so why Iran? why now? Why Iraq? I think these are the questions that Bush supporters need to ask…

Black gold, Texas tea… Next thing you know ole’ Jed’s a millionaire, kin folks said….

[bgates]

I’m unlurking here, because like the rest of you I feel strongly about this (and why post about the housing stuff – I agree with the consensus there).

PS, the comment “PD likes the weapons approach, probably because she is a military wife. Go figure…” is condescending. You don’t know PD. Do you many military wives, that you feel comfortable generalizing? I don’t know you, but I know you recently left ths forum vowing never to return because you felt personally slighted. Do unto others.

Foreign policy involves more than cleverness. Have the police in your neighborhood given up guns, because they have a better way of keeping the peace? We negotiate whenever possible, but that involves trust. Iran has been building a nuclear program for 19 years, and lying about it. Say we give them airplanes as you suggest, in return for their word that they won’t build weapons. What if – in accordance with their history – they’re lying?

Lostkitty – there are two countries run by fanatics that have or are trying to get nukes: North Korea and Iran. (If Saddam were still in power, given the advances in the Iranian nuclear program, would he be sitting on his hands? Would Khadaffi?) We’ve been in negotiations for years trying to get NK to give up theirs. Why let Iran have them? If Bush was just interested in oil, as you clumsily suggest, why not just offer to normalize relations with Iran and Iraq in return for generous contracts with his friends in the oil business. That’s the question Bush opponents need to answer.

[lostkitty]

Check out this link to see who has what regarding nuclear bombs:

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/experience/the.bomb/deployment/

The list of countries in possesion of them that can be characterized as run by fanatical governments is certainly longer than 2… and also very subjective. I am certain that Bush’s religious leanings (and words) could be characterized by some as fanatical. Why do we get to decide who has nukes and who doesnt?

It is precisely this mind-set that pisses off the rest of the world… and having lived abroad for extended periods – i can tell you that pissed off they are. They are pissed in South America, in Japan, in England, etc etc. We are not doing any good over in Iraq. Killing is worse, quality of life is much worse, – instead we let tens of thousands of our military personnel get maimed and killed. FOR WHAT? Show me one thing that was worth all this?

Getting rid of Saddam alone was not worth this.

We have increased instability in the region, not stability.

We’ve spent so much money it is just mind-boggling. I read that the debt during this presidency has surpassed the debt of ALL past presidencies COMBINED. Show me what we got for it!

The 9/11 plan was to destroy us financially as well as killing several hundred people (they got lucky and killed more). Destroying us financially they are succeeding at. Scramble as we may, the national debt is coming due eventually. Not worth it…

[Farls]

I hate politics…..

1. I think the #1 terrorist in the world in George Bush.

2. I think the “War on Terror” is a joke….and definitely not necessary…The Fox News daily “Terror Alert” makes me want to throw up…

3. I don’t support the Iraq invasion. I don’t support the troops. I’m sympathetic to their situation and I wouldn’t want to be in their shoes. In my opinion they are dying for nothing.

4. I think Duke Cunningham was just performing “Business as Usual”…and all votes are for sale in one way or another.

5. I don’t trust the U.S. government one bit….

6. How is it that George Bush was rich before becoming President even if he’d never really had a successful business? Ah…the Good-Ol-Boy network.

7. I think our military should be a bunch of computer nerds that can blow up a beer can from 1000 miles away. Fighting on the ground is ridiculous in this day and age. Who in their right mind would join the military anyway???

8. Diplomacy is better than war.

9. The money spent for the Iraq war would have been much better spent on education or not spent at all… What a total waste of money.

10. I’m an American living abroad and happy that I won’t be paying a cent towards this ridiculous war.

11. I think the dollar should be worth much less than it is….as the printing press is running overtime.

12. At some point…the government debt and personal debt for Americans will have to be paid. How do they expect to do this?

13. Where I live…college grads who speak english will work “call-center” or other similar jobs for $5-$10/day without benefits and be happy with it. So, U.S. jobs will continue to be exported…Can you blame the business owners?

14. People who love America so much should travel the world more and see what else is out there….

Farls

[lostkitty]

Farls – I think I love you… your politics anyway! You are right on. We were a military family and we are glad to be out. Most quality individuals were getting out, but we were stuck due to a pay-back for a certain program my husband went through. When we were finally able to get out, we did…
S@#t floats to the top in the military… I hate to say that, but that is what we saw. Every thinking person got out (gross generalization).

I’ve got two different neighbors on my street who are returning to their native countries because they dont like the direction that the US is heading. Dont want to raise their kids in this political atmosphere… (one, a university professor – Canadian, the other a married pair of oncologists from Europe).

This ‘bully or be bullied’ approach is all wrong.

[zk]

“If Bush was just interested in oil, as you clumsily suggest, why not just offer to normalize relations with Iran and Iraq in return for generous contracts with his friends in the oil business. That’s the question Bush opponents need to answer.”

That’s the question Bush opponents need to answer!? With all the things bush has screwed up, and all the objections bush opponents have, I don’t understand why that’s the question you think they need to answer.

Bush isn’t interested only in oil. He’s also interested in fulfilling the vision of PNAC. He’s interested in a flawed vision that won’t work and will cost us thousands of lives and trillions of dollars.

If you’d like, I can write up a very long list of questions bush supporters need to answer, and you can have a go at them.

In fact, when I have time, I’ll write up that list anyway. A friend of mine has a website that’s more for debating politics/philosophy/whatever than this site. I’ll post it on that website and put a link on this page. Perhaps we can get PS and PD and whoever else is interested in debating such things to join us.

I’m not one of those bush haters who knows every little fact about his presidency. I’m not even a liberal (not that there’s anything wrong with that). I’m just a guy who can see what a ruinous presidency he’s having, and I have trouble seeing why people still support him. I must admit that in debates with bush supporters so far, I’ve been somewhat less than impressed with their response and reasoning. Here’s hoping you’re different, bgates. Looking forward to a debate.

[Lickitysplit]

…and thus my point is made. Politics is an area where some are simply unable of showing common courtesy towards viewpoints differing from their own, and frequently go on to trashing individuals or groups that personally insults well-intentioned members of this online community. PD, bgates, thanks for maintaining the high road and not being sucked into the muck and responding in kind.

And a big THANK YOU to all our military men, women & families. What an irony it is that you are willing to risk your lives to defend the freedom of your detractors to unfairly say the things they do. Perhaps one day they will realize this irony, be grateful for your sacrifices, and regret the vile with which they spoke of you.

[Author]

Posts