Politics from the Fahrenheit thread

[anduril]

Oh, geez, Jason...

[pmw]

There's an interesting common ground that seems to be shared by everyone involved in the debate: The apparent want to minimize needless suffering and death of people around the world.

How that should be done seems to be a point of contention.

Interesting...

I'm also interested in how religion/lack of religion informs politics. I wonder what the percentages are in terms of Reps/Dems and religious affiliation. Perhaps someone has some #'s?

It's a nice debate to be having. I remind those involved to keep an eye on the value of a debate. Or perhaps I challenge those involved to comment on the value of a debate?
P

[anduril]

Personally, the value of the debate appears limited to me because no one that opposes the position Steve and I have taken has offered any evidence to back up their rhetoric. What's more, those people just recycle their rhetoric even though it has been repeatedly shown to be false. The only value then is what Steve and I have offered, i.e., considerable evidence, including links and references to primary source material, in support of the war in Iraq.

[Johann]

http://www.g-r-e-e-d.com/GREED.htm

[HorseradishTree]

Johann talked about this in another thread, but didn't post a link:

http://www.michaelmoore.com/warroom/...ndex.php?id=16

[Johann]

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...orld_war_4.htm


Lots of awesome links...

[anduril]

Thank-you Jason for the link... but could you please contextualize this for me as I've done for you with most of the links I've provided... as far as I can tell from a quick browse of the article, it is only relevant to your argument in that you see Bush as a greedy bastard and this article talks about greed and tries to expose some of the inequalities in human existence. The link as it is doesn't prove anything as it regards this argument.

HorseradishTree: I've seen and gone through the line-by-line of F9/11 provided on Moore's website. Aside from the fact that it quickly exposes how poor his evidence in fact is (it's mostly a collection of media articles, many of which are even op-eds, rather than serious reports and investigations), none of Moore's "facts" disprove the case for war that Steve and I have made. What's more, the implications that Moore wants you to draw from the narrative that binds these "facts" together in F9/11 has been addressed and proved illogical by even Chris Knipp's articles on the movie.

Can't anyone lay out their position against the war in Iraq... as Steve and I have done with links to PRIMARY sources (not secondary ones).

[anduril]

Originally posted by Johann
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...orld_war_4.htm


Lots of awesome links...

Okay, again, give me something that supports your case. This site has thousands of links, many are even sites that provide information in support of the war. This is like giving me a link to Google! Squat load of good that'll do.

[anduril]

Just to help you out a little... in order to prove that oil and greed are the issues... I need direct evidence from a primary resource of just how much money George Bush is earning from the war and how his invasion of Iraq has given him, personally, control of Iraq's oil. Once we have this, we will have established another possible reason for the war... you will then have to refute the evidence Steve and I gave. Steve and I have provided direct evidence from primary resources on the existence of links between al Qaeda/terrorism and Iraq; the humanitarian issues; and the existence of WMD.

[HorseradishTree]

The oil thing isn't my fight; it's Johann's. I want to take a pacifistic stance, as that's what I am, a pacifist, and just say that I believe this war was for political advantage, not the bringing-down of a ruthless dictator.

You're not going to find many primary sources. Politics won't allow it. There are too many officials who are scared to say anything, so all we can do is speculate on what we most have: secondary info. I'm sorry, but that's all I can give you. When the president says something like "This is the guy that tried to kill my dad," what does that do but give himself away. Revenge and reelection. I'm sorry for wasting your time if you wanted solid proof, but that's near impossible.

I really dislike my country's politics. I plan on remaining independent when I'm able to vote (and even though that means that I won't be able to vote in the primaries, it's a sacrifice I'm willing to give). I just don't like any politicians. The executive branch, no matter who's in the oval office, seems to think that they can bully around the other branches and unbalance the system that we have strove (sorry, I think that word's wrong) to create.

If you want better evidence of a case against Bush, I suggest the works of Al Franken. His latest book, Lies, and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them, provides facts and evidence on several accounts of the lies that the current cabinet, as well as Fox News and others, have spread. Most everything you find there will be primary evidence.

I'll pointlessly blab more later. I'm sure I'll be stomped on and trounced in the next few hours, so just get it over with. I don't want to be anyone's enemy.

[pmw]

Horseradish, that is a noble stance that I can respect.

There seem to be few documents to support the very palpable sense that our president is not acting with respect for the international community but defying it. He has squandered our international reputation which is a very important part of our security and our ability to cohabitate with our neighbors.

There are few documents which say what I encounter wherever I go - that the international population does not like Bush, that they perceive him to be a bully with selective bones to pick and that he is firmly entrenched in a religious righteousness.

Facts, figures and an infinite number of opposing sources are not enough for me; they seem to prove any and every point. "The street" is perhaps more important to me, and it does not reflect well on Bush outside of this country (and only moderately well in this country). That's an important thing for me.
P

[JustaFied]

<Can't anyone lay out their position against the war in Iraq... as Steve and I have done with links to PRIMARY sources (not secondary ones).>

Sorry, I just don't have any primary sources right now. Maybe I'll find some later, maybe not. As far as secondary sources go, both the New York Times and the Washington Post have publicly gone into great depth in the last few months to criticize their own coverage of the Bush Administration's claims of WMD.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...ublic%20Editor
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Aug11.html

Partly, they're claiming that stories they published ended up being factually incorrect, and partly they're claiming that stories that could be seen as challenging the Bush Administration's "reasons for war" were buried deep in the paper. And this was the pre-war coverage from the so-called "liberal media"? Read the articles, they give a pretty broad overview of the WMD fiasco.

As far as your "primary" source goes, Kay's report does NOT prove that Iraq had active WMD's. I see words like "documents", "equipment", "plans" and "designs". Bush's claim was that Saddam was currently in possession of WMD that posed an "imminent threat". It looks like such a threat did not exist.

Guys, I don't have an agenda here. I have an open mind. I realize that there are times in history where war becomes inevitible. But at the same time, war should be a last resort, and it appears to me that the Bush Administration rushed to war in Iraq when there was no imminent threat and other options were available to explore.

I hope that Iraq and Afganistan become stable, peaceful democracies that will be models for the rest of that part of the world. But, I can't possibly agree with you that "the transfer of power has gone incredibly well". It's not going well at all right now. There are bombings and dozens of casualties every week. Al Sadr is a huge thorn in their side right now, and there's no telling how that situation will end up. Again, I hope for the best.

<The threefold argument used by the Bush administration to justify the war in Iraq was that 1. Iraq had terror ties (again see previous post for details) 2. Iraq had WMD programs and 3. Iraq's human rights record was atrocious. >

No, initially the only reason, as stated in Bush's 2003 State of the Union Address, was the WMD that posed an imminent threat. After no actual WMD were found, they moved on to the next arguments. (Also, by the way, my complaint about Cheney's use of the "terror ties" is more specifically his insistence on a connection between Iraq and the 9/11 attack itself).

<Those countries you mention aren't dealing directly with the terrorists who killed 3,000 people in New York City on Sept. 11th.
Saddam Hussein's Iraq was. >

Saddam Hussein was not directly involved with the terrorist attacks of 9/11/01. That's a bogus argument. Show me a link, not just to a passing Al Qaeda - Iraq connection but more specically to one relating Saddam to 9/11.

<The Bush administration has put forth a comprehensive energy bill, which aims to modernize conservation, increase our domestic energy supplies (including renewable energy), and increase our energy security. Although the president's energy bill passed the House of Representatives with the support of 46 Democrats, John Kerry, John Edwards, and the Democratic leadership have repeatedly used procedural hurdles to stymie the bill in the Senate. If you want to blame high oil prices on someone, blame it on the Dems.>

Getting off-topic here, how would their energy plan have lowered oil prices? That's a cheap shot and you know it. Bush and the Big 3 Detroit automakers have consistently fought higher gas mileage standards, which are easily within the means of modern technology. And, what in the world does it mean to "modernize conservation"?

One more thing, Steve: did you lose your interest in film? That would be a shame...

[anduril]

HorseradishTree: I respect the pacificist stance towards war but, if that's your position, the argument I submit you must make is that pacificism is more than an nice ideal; that is, it is workable to be pacificist in the face of cruel and tyrannical dictators.

Your argument that the war was undertaken for political advantage, however, is clearly not a sound one. How has this war given Bush a political advantage????

As for Bush's lies... I have no doubt that Bush has misspoken many times and no doubt lied even. This is certainly nothing extraordinary for a human being, let alone a politician or President.

As for the American system in general... it is imperfect... every system is... but the vitriolic competition between the branches is exactly what preserves the balance between them... this is what makes America's systems so great... they are highly pragmatic and seem to take into account how human nature works. I submit the founders perfectly understood this and that's why they created so many branches of Government.

[Johann]

I've been criticized very harshly for my emotions but as Tree pointed out (thanks) we "on the left" don't have any primary sources.

We can only be indignant. We can only shout our "gut feelings".

The "man on the street" (which is most of us) is getting the strong impression that this whole war was/is bogus and Bush isn't making giant strides in quelling those suspicions.

He said on CNN the other day that he sat in that schoolroom for 7 minutes because he didn't want to scare the children.
For fucks sakes, the kids would have coped if he slinked out of the room like he slinked into office- Bush is good at escape and evasion tactics.

As for my links, they are reminders of Bush. That's all. They reflect the man. It's not an argument- it's a bolster.
Sorry if they aren't primary enough for you.

A quick browse? I strongly suggest you read it. That article explains much of the world we live in and Bush's mindset.
He's one greedy, rich man and that article is reflecting his capitalist ideals.

I know your position, anduril- I want to support our leaders too.
We can't. Because they lie, cheat and steal- for their own interests, careers and bank statements.

Your championing of the pragmatic systems of the U.S. government contradicts what you told HorseradishTree!

You tell him in one breath that pacifism is not workable yet you say there is balance in the "branches".

Make up your mind- do we pick a party of our own free will or do we support the Nazi's who currently run the show simply because dictators are threatening us?

There are many issues, many sides, & Bush's dictatorship- and he really wants one- he said it himself! is harming the American Way.

You haven't responded to the very salient points about Bush causing the world to hate the US. Like Justafied, I want to see tangible, undeniable proof that Saddam and Al-Queda are/were in cahoots. As Steve said: "waiting...."

Precisely because the Bush Administration has deceived, lied and withheld information, we do not have ANY primary sources on the real reasons for this war.
We suspect oil and revenge. We emotionally, passionately feel that the war was not"absolutely necessary", nor do we feel one bit safer since 9/11. Quite the contrary. I feel quite angry that Bush ignored the terrorist threats and there most certainly is primary proof of that: Tree posted Moore's line-by-line fact clarification which explains quite plainly that John Ashcroft said "I don't want to hear about any more terror threats" and the memos which said "Bin Laden to attack the United States" (and even that planes would be hijacked) were completely ignored.

And then Bush declares a "war on terror". Hmmm.
He ignores warnings of terror and when terrorists strike, he declares a war on them. Why didn't you declare a war BEFORE 9/11, George?

Cuz you were relaxing on your dude ranch.

Well dude, where's your accountability?

[Johann]

And please call me Johann, anduril- he gives me strength to have the courage of my convictions.

I'll address you as Aragorn's sword, you address me as Johannes dos Matteeses dune Filmus.

OK? I won't call you Ken Ristau here anymore...