Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Allan from Fallbrook
Participantrankandfile: You want to make it interesting? Pick a debatable topic and put it out there for discussion amongst the group. Pick something topical, but objective, and set some ground rules for participation.
You have some very sharp individuals that post here. I would be careful before casually throwing out that particular gauntlet (as regards your closing capabilities).
Given that we as of late have seemed to drift from the RE mainstream (discussing Ron Paul, gender roles, etc), I would pick something related to RE, but perhaps more geared towards monetary policy/monetarism, the influence of the FED and the repercussions of FED policy, etc, etc, etc. You get the drift.
Participantrankandfile: You want to make it interesting? Pick a debatable topic and put it out there for discussion amongst the group. Pick something topical, but objective, and set some ground rules for participation.
You have some very sharp individuals that post here. I would be careful before casually throwing out that particular gauntlet (as regards your closing capabilities).
Given that we as of late have seemed to drift from the RE mainstream (discussing Ron Paul, gender roles, etc), I would pick something related to RE, but perhaps more geared towards monetary policy/monetarism, the influence of the FED and the repercussions of FED policy, etc, etc, etc. You get the drift.
Participantrankandfile: You want to make it interesting? Pick a debatable topic and put it out there for discussion amongst the group. Pick something topical, but objective, and set some ground rules for participation.
You have some very sharp individuals that post here. I would be careful before casually throwing out that particular gauntlet (as regards your closing capabilities).
Given that we as of late have seemed to drift from the RE mainstream (discussing Ron Paul, gender roles, etc), I would pick something related to RE, but perhaps more geared towards monetary policy/monetarism, the influence of the FED and the repercussions of FED policy, etc, etc, etc. You get the drift.
Participantmarion: I don’t go in much for labels as far as Democrat versus Republican. In truth, they have become pretty much indistinguishable from one another. I am conservative in my principles, but I don’t think liberal is a bad word. To the contrary, I think we have demonized a word that best sums up what is great about this country.
I do have a problem with the extreme left-wing element in this country, and I believe that is what Hillary and Obama unfortunately have to pander to in order to get votes. Conversely, Giuliani, McCain and Romney have to pander to the extreme right-wing element (exemplified by the evangelicals) in order to gain support.
I don’t know Bill Clinton personally, but quite a few of my friends served under him, during his presidency. To a man, they characterized that period as a dark one for the military. Bear in mind, we are speaking of a very small element, largely Rangers and SOF types, so I won’t presume to say the entire military felt that way. As I said, while I strongly disagreed with many of Reagan’s policies, I understood the bigger picture. I fear that a foreign policy dilettante like Obama doesn’t, and that Hillary’s sense of moral ambiguity will prevent any sense of coherent direction.
You may not wish to see another Republican in office right now, but I don’t see anyone in either party that strikes me as a clear choice when it comes to integrity, vision and, most importantly, an intelligent grasp of how truly screwed up this country is right now. Do you?
Participantmarion: I don’t go in much for labels as far as Democrat versus Republican. In truth, they have become pretty much indistinguishable from one another. I am conservative in my principles, but I don’t think liberal is a bad word. To the contrary, I think we have demonized a word that best sums up what is great about this country.
I do have a problem with the extreme left-wing element in this country, and I believe that is what Hillary and Obama unfortunately have to pander to in order to get votes. Conversely, Giuliani, McCain and Romney have to pander to the extreme right-wing element (exemplified by the evangelicals) in order to gain support.
I don’t know Bill Clinton personally, but quite a few of my friends served under him, during his presidency. To a man, they characterized that period as a dark one for the military. Bear in mind, we are speaking of a very small element, largely Rangers and SOF types, so I won’t presume to say the entire military felt that way. As I said, while I strongly disagreed with many of Reagan’s policies, I understood the bigger picture. I fear that a foreign policy dilettante like Obama doesn’t, and that Hillary’s sense of moral ambiguity will prevent any sense of coherent direction.
You may not wish to see another Republican in office right now, but I don’t see anyone in either party that strikes me as a clear choice when it comes to integrity, vision and, most importantly, an intelligent grasp of how truly screwed up this country is right now. Do you?
Participantmarion: I don’t go in much for labels as far as Democrat versus Republican. In truth, they have become pretty much indistinguishable from one another. I am conservative in my principles, but I don’t think liberal is a bad word. To the contrary, I think we have demonized a word that best sums up what is great about this country.
I do have a problem with the extreme left-wing element in this country, and I believe that is what Hillary and Obama unfortunately have to pander to in order to get votes. Conversely, Giuliani, McCain and Romney have to pander to the extreme right-wing element (exemplified by the evangelicals) in order to gain support.
I don’t know Bill Clinton personally, but quite a few of my friends served under him, during his presidency. To a man, they characterized that period as a dark one for the military. Bear in mind, we are speaking of a very small element, largely Rangers and SOF types, so I won’t presume to say the entire military felt that way. As I said, while I strongly disagreed with many of Reagan’s policies, I understood the bigger picture. I fear that a foreign policy dilettante like Obama doesn’t, and that Hillary’s sense of moral ambiguity will prevent any sense of coherent direction.
You may not wish to see another Republican in office right now, but I don’t see anyone in either party that strikes me as a clear choice when it comes to integrity, vision and, most importantly, an intelligent grasp of how truly screwed up this country is right now. Do you?
Participantmarion: I don’t go in much for labels as far as Democrat versus Republican. In truth, they have become pretty much indistinguishable from one another. I am conservative in my principles, but I don’t think liberal is a bad word. To the contrary, I think we have demonized a word that best sums up what is great about this country.
I do have a problem with the extreme left-wing element in this country, and I believe that is what Hillary and Obama unfortunately have to pander to in order to get votes. Conversely, Giuliani, McCain and Romney have to pander to the extreme right-wing element (exemplified by the evangelicals) in order to gain support.
I don’t know Bill Clinton personally, but quite a few of my friends served under him, during his presidency. To a man, they characterized that period as a dark one for the military. Bear in mind, we are speaking of a very small element, largely Rangers and SOF types, so I won’t presume to say the entire military felt that way. As I said, while I strongly disagreed with many of Reagan’s policies, I understood the bigger picture. I fear that a foreign policy dilettante like Obama doesn’t, and that Hillary’s sense of moral ambiguity will prevent any sense of coherent direction.
You may not wish to see another Republican in office right now, but I don’t see anyone in either party that strikes me as a clear choice when it comes to integrity, vision and, most importantly, an intelligent grasp of how truly screwed up this country is right now. Do you?
Participantmarion: I don’t go in much for labels as far as Democrat versus Republican. In truth, they have become pretty much indistinguishable from one another. I am conservative in my principles, but I don’t think liberal is a bad word. To the contrary, I think we have demonized a word that best sums up what is great about this country.
I do have a problem with the extreme left-wing element in this country, and I believe that is what Hillary and Obama unfortunately have to pander to in order to get votes. Conversely, Giuliani, McCain and Romney have to pander to the extreme right-wing element (exemplified by the evangelicals) in order to gain support.
I don’t know Bill Clinton personally, but quite a few of my friends served under him, during his presidency. To a man, they characterized that period as a dark one for the military. Bear in mind, we are speaking of a very small element, largely Rangers and SOF types, so I won’t presume to say the entire military felt that way. As I said, while I strongly disagreed with many of Reagan’s policies, I understood the bigger picture. I fear that a foreign policy dilettante like Obama doesn’t, and that Hillary’s sense of moral ambiguity will prevent any sense of coherent direction.
You may not wish to see another Republican in office right now, but I don’t see anyone in either party that strikes me as a clear choice when it comes to integrity, vision and, most importantly, an intelligent grasp of how truly screwed up this country is right now. Do you?
Participantmarion: First off, sorry for my sharp reaction. There is a reason for it, however. Clinton’s unwillingness to fully commit to the Somalia operation in 1993 (due to his worries about how America was perceived), resulted in the deaths of two of my friends, one a Ranger, the other Army Special Forces.
His deciding to cut and run following the Task Force Ranger operation (“Black Hawk Down”), was one of the things that emboldened Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda to strike us on 9/11.
His use of “soft power” and multilateralism accomplished nothing, and ultimately put us at greater risk due to the widely held belief that America had lost her will to respond. The series of terrorist strikes during his presidency that were never answered and the lost opportunities to destroy al Qaeda in its infancy are well documented, both of which contributed greatly to our present situation as regards Islamic terrorism.
I have always found moral cowardice more reprehensible than physical cowardice, and he represents true moral cowardice to me. I had significant difficulties with many of the policies that Reagan implemented during his tenure, but I also understood the larger nature of the conflict and admired his resolve when it came to defeating communism and the Soviet Bloc.
Participantmarion: First off, sorry for my sharp reaction. There is a reason for it, however. Clinton’s unwillingness to fully commit to the Somalia operation in 1993 (due to his worries about how America was perceived), resulted in the deaths of two of my friends, one a Ranger, the other Army Special Forces.
His deciding to cut and run following the Task Force Ranger operation (“Black Hawk Down”), was one of the things that emboldened Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda to strike us on 9/11.
His use of “soft power” and multilateralism accomplished nothing, and ultimately put us at greater risk due to the widely held belief that America had lost her will to respond. The series of terrorist strikes during his presidency that were never answered and the lost opportunities to destroy al Qaeda in its infancy are well documented, both of which contributed greatly to our present situation as regards Islamic terrorism.
I have always found moral cowardice more reprehensible than physical cowardice, and he represents true moral cowardice to me. I had significant difficulties with many of the policies that Reagan implemented during his tenure, but I also understood the larger nature of the conflict and admired his resolve when it came to defeating communism and the Soviet Bloc.
Participantmarion: First off, sorry for my sharp reaction. There is a reason for it, however. Clinton’s unwillingness to fully commit to the Somalia operation in 1993 (due to his worries about how America was perceived), resulted in the deaths of two of my friends, one a Ranger, the other Army Special Forces.
His deciding to cut and run following the Task Force Ranger operation (“Black Hawk Down”), was one of the things that emboldened Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda to strike us on 9/11.
His use of “soft power” and multilateralism accomplished nothing, and ultimately put us at greater risk due to the widely held belief that America had lost her will to respond. The series of terrorist strikes during his presidency that were never answered and the lost opportunities to destroy al Qaeda in its infancy are well documented, both of which contributed greatly to our present situation as regards Islamic terrorism.
I have always found moral cowardice more reprehensible than physical cowardice, and he represents true moral cowardice to me. I had significant difficulties with many of the policies that Reagan implemented during his tenure, but I also understood the larger nature of the conflict and admired his resolve when it came to defeating communism and the Soviet Bloc.
Participantmarion: First off, sorry for my sharp reaction. There is a reason for it, however. Clinton’s unwillingness to fully commit to the Somalia operation in 1993 (due to his worries about how America was perceived), resulted in the deaths of two of my friends, one a Ranger, the other Army Special Forces.
His deciding to cut and run following the Task Force Ranger operation (“Black Hawk Down”), was one of the things that emboldened Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda to strike us on 9/11.
His use of “soft power” and multilateralism accomplished nothing, and ultimately put us at greater risk due to the widely held belief that America had lost her will to respond. The series of terrorist strikes during his presidency that were never answered and the lost opportunities to destroy al Qaeda in its infancy are well documented, both of which contributed greatly to our present situation as regards Islamic terrorism.
I have always found moral cowardice more reprehensible than physical cowardice, and he represents true moral cowardice to me. I had significant difficulties with many of the policies that Reagan implemented during his tenure, but I also understood the larger nature of the conflict and admired his resolve when it came to defeating communism and the Soviet Bloc.
Participantmarion: First off, sorry for my sharp reaction. There is a reason for it, however. Clinton’s unwillingness to fully commit to the Somalia operation in 1993 (due to his worries about how America was perceived), resulted in the deaths of two of my friends, one a Ranger, the other Army Special Forces.
His deciding to cut and run following the Task Force Ranger operation (“Black Hawk Down”), was one of the things that emboldened Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda to strike us on 9/11.
His use of “soft power” and multilateralism accomplished nothing, and ultimately put us at greater risk due to the widely held belief that America had lost her will to respond. The series of terrorist strikes during his presidency that were never answered and the lost opportunities to destroy al Qaeda in its infancy are well documented, both of which contributed greatly to our present situation as regards Islamic terrorism.
I have always found moral cowardice more reprehensible than physical cowardice, and he represents true moral cowardice to me. I had significant difficulties with many of the policies that Reagan implemented during his tenure, but I also understood the larger nature of the conflict and admired his resolve when it came to defeating communism and the Soviet Bloc.
Participantmarion: Did you really say that Bill Clinton is far from spineless? Sweet Mother of God, you can’t be serious!
Look at the man’s record when it comes handling foreign policy issues and military interventions, and then get back to me.
Yes, Bill Clinton was spineless. From his draft dodging days in graduate school, to his panicked retreat from Somalia (1993), to his complete mishandling of North Korea (1994) and, finally, with the fiasco that is the Iraqi Liberation Act of 1998.
The thought of he and Hillary “leading” this nation is enough to make me think of moving to Canada.
Please get your facts straight before foisting those kind of witless bon mots on us. Thanks.
-
AuthorPosts
