QUIZ: Are you a neoconservative ?

DT4K

Diamond Member
Jan 21, 2002
6,944
2
81
Find out here

Hey Red,
My quiz results say I'm a realist, not a neocon. But when I read the descriptions, I want to call myself a neocon.
 

kandarp

Platinum Member
May 19, 2003
2,852
0
0
mine says i'm a liberal but when i read the captions i feel more like a realist
 

DT4K

Diamond Member
Jan 21, 2002
6,944
2
81
Originally posted by: lozina
REPOST

I remember posting this a long time ago :p
Sorry.
I searched for quiz and couldn't find this one.
 

lozina

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
11,707
5
0
Originally posted by: WalkingDead
it says I am a godd-less commie pinko bastard
You better turn yourself in to Joe McCarthy's successor, whoever that may be
 

chess9

Elite member
Apr 15, 2000
7,748
0
0
I'm WalkingDead's soulmate. :)

Yeah, we did this last month. I guess that is a long time ago for teenagers. :)

-Robert
 

lozina

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
11,707
5
0
Originally posted by: chess9

Yeah, we did this last month. I guess that is a long time ago for teenagers. :)

-Robert
Now that I checked, it was 2 months ago, but I do wish your second statement were true :(
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,894
46
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Results exactly as I would expect. I bet just about every one of the AT experts come up NeoCon.

Neocon quiz results

Based on your answers, you are most likely a realist. Read below to learn more about each foreign policy perspective.

Realist

Realists?

Are guided more by practical considerations than ideological vision
Believe US power is crucial to successful diplomacy - and vice versa
Don't want US policy options unduly limited by world opinion or ethical considerations
Believe strong alliances are important to US interests
Weigh the political costs of foreign action
Believe foreign intervention must be dictated by compelling national interest
Historical realist: President Dwight D. Eisenhower

Modern realist: Secretary of State Colin Powell



 

DT4K

Diamond Member
Jan 21, 2002
6,944
2
81
Originally posted by: chess9
I'm WalkingDead's soulmate. :)

Yeah, we did this last month. I guess that is a long time ago for teenagers. :)

-Robert
Geez, I said sorry. I searched for "quiz" and it didn't come up.
I guess I should have spent more time and done more searching before commiting the ultimate AT crime.
What is the penalty for a repost anyway?
Death by liberal indoctrination?

 
May 16, 2000
13,526
0
0
I'll just repost my input from the original thread to save time and typing. :cool:


I took it twice, because there were a few questions that had two reasonable answers. First time I came out Liberal, second time Isolationist...which is pretty close to on par with where I've always pegged myself.


Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Pers
how surprising...i'm liberal


edit:

Neoconservatives?

Want the US to be the world's unchallenged superpower
Share unwavering support for Israel
Support American unilateral action
Support preemptive strikes to remove perceived threats to US security
Promote the development of an American empire
Equate American power with the potential for world peace
Seek to democratize the Arab world
Push regime change in states deemed threats to the US or its allies



wow i hate neoconservatives...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Yeah, I'd have to say that that definition pretty much sums up my view of the worst of humanity...the absolute lowest, least useful, most dangerous to the continuation and evolution of the species...not sure that I could say enough bad things to describe the nausea I feel every time I even think about that. I hate to judge people, especially based on political opinion/agenda...but that damn near demands purification just to ensure the viability of the species.

Kristin
 

DT4K

Diamond Member
Jan 21, 2002
6,944
2
81
I agree with much of what's in the neoconservative description except,
the part about "Development of an American Empire".
And maybe the "Share unwavering support of Israel".
My support of Israel is based on the situation. If they went and nuked all the arab countries around them, my support would waver. If they went and started intentionally killing women and children, my support would waver.

And I don't equate American power as being directly proportional to the potential for peace.
 

ScottyB

Diamond Member
Jan 28, 2002
6,677
1
0
Liberal

Liberals?

Are wary of American arrogance and hypocrisy
Trace much of today's anti-American hatred to previous US foreign policies.
Believe political solutions are inherently superior to military solutions
Believe the US is morally bound to intervene in humanitarian crises
Oppose American imperialism
Support international law, alliances, and agreements
Encourage US participation in the UN
Believe US economic policies must help lift up the world's poor
Historical liberal: President Woodrow Wilson

Modern liberal: President Jimmy Carter
 

DT4K

Diamond Member
Jan 21, 2002
6,944
2
81
The liberal description is pretty reasonable, and I agree with much of it, but these two are a little tricky:

Believe the US is morally bound to intervene in humanitarian crises
Oppose American imperialism

One person's definition of intervention in humanitarian crises could be the same as another person's definition of imperialism.

I don't think most of those here who describe themselves as liberals would support an invasion of Rwanda or N. Korea or the many other nations that could be described as having a "humanitarian crisis".
 

maluckey

Platinum Member
Jan 31, 2003
2,933
0
71
Realist.......Despite the frequent accusations against me as a Neo-Con, the quiz makes me a realist. Go figure? That's what I've said all along....That either extreme is dangerous.
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
I come up realist, and admire the two example statesmen for its description more than the others, so I'll say it's accurate for me.
 

Dari

Lifer
Oct 25, 2002
17,134
38
91
Why are most people so afraid of these neo-conservatives? If anyone took the time to read their P.O.V., unlike Clinton in the 1990s, you'll find that it is spot on. I don't want to go into too much detail but here are a few tidbits:

From the ruins of the Second World War stood a country that stood far above all others. In 1945, America had the world's largest military, accounted for over half of the entire globe's GDP, and was the supreme conquerer of Nazi Europe and Fascist Asia. Instead of ruling with an iron-fist over those we defeated, America set about creating international institutions and spreading our idealisms that have been a remarkable success ever since. These institutions brought the entire globe out of the ruins of war and colonialism.

As the largest military, economic, and diplomatic power on Earth today, it is absolutely essential for the United States to be the world's policeman. That basically means holding up the international laws and norms that the various US-initiated international institutions, not unlike the UN, WTO, IMF, NATO, SEATO, WB, and others, have created. This is in the best interest of America. As globalization spreads, so will peace and prosperity for all. For those "realist" and isolationist Americans, they need to face the harsh reality that the world is a different place. We can't simply remove ourselves from the global arena. We have to be more engaged until the entire globe is synchronized and operating under the very ideals that created our beloved country: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It's happening now and there should be no stopping it. As with the global economy, the world depends on the United States for global security more than ever, as much as they would hate to say it. That is something that the UN by itself cannot enforce. There is absolutely no turning back the clock.

Using the mythical "peace dividend" as an illusionary excuse to cripple the world's only superpower, Bill Clinton did great harm to globalization and compromised our security. That left the gates of hell open and 9/11 occured. Even as I speak right now, plans are being hatched in Latin America to undermine US security. Unfortuntely, that hole will be closed only when terror attacks have been carried out.

The vision of a neocon is simple:
Unparralled supremacy of American idealism
globalization at full-throttle
full integration of the global village
world peace via international laws and democratic regimes
the absence of terror
unparralled American global leadership


To paraphrase, a wise man once said that the future is already here, just unevenly distributed. Well, the future is America. We are what the world will look like. We are the world. There is no stopping the inevitable.
 
May 16, 2000
13,526
0
0
Originally posted by: Dari
Why are most people so afraid of these neo-conservatives? If anyone took the time to read their P.O.V., unlike Clinton in the 1990s, you'll find that it is spot on. I don't want to go into too much detail but here are a few tidbits:

From the ruins of the Second World War stood a country that stood far above all others. In 1945, America had the world's largest military, accounted for over half of the entire globe's GDP, and was the supreme conquerer of Nazi Europe and Fascist Asia. Instead of ruling with an iron-fist over those we defeated, America set about creating international institutions and spreading our idealisms that have been a remarkable success ever since. These institutions brought the entire globe out of the ruins of war and colonialism.

As the largest military, economic, and diplomatic power on Earth today, it is absolutely essential for the United States to be the world's policeman. That basically means holding up the international laws and norms that the various US-initiated international institutions, not unlike the UN, WTO, IMF, NATO, SEATO, WB, and others, have created. This is in the best interest of America. As globalization spreads, so will peace and prosperity for all. For those "realist" and isolationist Americans, they need to face the harsh reality that the world is a different place. We can't simply remove ourselves from the global arena. We have to be more engaged until the entire globe is synchronized and operating under the very ideals that created our beloved country: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It's happening now and there should be no stopping it. As with the global economy, the world depends on the United States for global security more than ever, as much as they would hate to say it. That is something that the UN by itself cannot enforce. There is absolutely no turning back the clock.

Using the mythical "peace dividend" as an illusionary excuse to cripple the world's only superpower, Bill Clinton did great harm to globalization and compromised our security. That left the gates of hell open and 9/11 occured. Even as I speak right now, plans are being hatched in Latin America to undermine US security. Unfortuntely, that hole will be closed only when terror attacks have been carried out.

The vision of a neocon is simple:
Unparralled supremacy of American idealism
globalization at full-throttle
full integration of the global village
world peace via international laws and democratic regimes
the absence of terror
unparralled American global leadership


To paraphrase, a wise man once said that the future is already here, just unevenly distributed. Well, the future is America. We are what the world will look like. We are the world. There is no stopping the inevitable.


Holy freaking $h1t you scare me. It's a damn good thing I'm former military with expert training and lifelong dedication to combat and higher ideals...you'll accomplish your goals over my dead body...which you may do, but I'm taking out 20 like you for every 1 like me you guys silence. Jesus H what is WRONG WITH THE DAMN WORLD???!!!
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: Dari
Why are most people so afraid of these neo-conservatives? If anyone took the time to read their P.O.V., unlike Clinton in the 1990s, you'll find that it is spot on. I don't want to go into too much detail but here are a few tidbits:

From the ruins of the Second World War stood a country that stood far above all others. In 1945, America had the world's largest military, accounted for over half of the entire globe's GDP, and was the supreme conquerer of Nazi Europe and Fascist Asia. Instead of ruling with an iron-fist over those we defeated, America set about creating international institutions and spreading our idealisms that have been a remarkable success ever since. These institutions brought the entire globe out of the ruins of war and colonialism.

As the largest military, economic, and diplomatic power on Earth today, it is absolutely essential for the United States to be the world's policeman. That basically means holding up the international laws and norms that the various US-initiated international institutions, not unlike the UN, WTO, IMF, NATO, SEATO, WB, and others, have created. This is in the best interest of America. As globalization spreads, so will peace and prosperity for all. For those "realist" and isolationist Americans, they need to face the harsh reality that the world is a different place. We can't simply remove ourselves from the global arena. We have to be more engaged until the entire globe is synchronized and operating under the very ideals that created our beloved country: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It's happening now and there should be no stopping it. As with the global economy, the world depends on the United States for global security more than ever, as much as they would hate to say it. That is something that the UN by itself cannot enforce. There is absolutely no turning back the clock.

Using the mythical "peace dividend" as an illusionary excuse to cripple the world's only superpower, Bill Clinton did great harm to globalization and compromised our security. That left the gates of hell open and 9/11 occured. Even as I speak right now, plans are being hatched in Latin America to undermine US security. Unfortuntely, that hole will be closed only when terror attacks have been carried out.

The vision of a neocon is simple:
Unparralled supremacy of American idealism
globalization at full-throttle
full integration of the global village
world peace via international laws and democratic regimes
the absence of terror
unparralled American global leadership


To paraphrase, a wise man once said that the future is already here, just unevenly distributed. Well, the future is America. We are what the world will look like. We are the world. There is no stopping the inevitable.


Holy freaking $h1t you scare me. It's a damn good thing I'm former military with expert training and lifelong dedication to combat and higher ideals...you'll accomplish your goals over my dead body...which you may do, but I'm taking out 20 like you for every 1 like me you guys silence. Jesus H what is WRONG WITH THE DAMN WORLD???!!!
I suppose it never occured to Dari how we became the worlds pre-emminet power after WWII. I'll give him a clue it was'nt by being the worlds largest debtor nation, don't make anything (other than arms luckily), or eruopean style colonialism. We are a shell of our former self who trades in fear and oppression for products and global acceptance of our fiat money. Once China gets nationalist and starts dictating to us we are all doom.

 

Genesys

Golden Member
Nov 10, 2003
1,536
0
0
it says im a realist. i feel like an islationist sometimes tho.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
# Want the US to be the world's unchallenged superpower
# Share unwavering support for Israel
# Support American unilateral action
# Support preemptive strikes to remove perceived threats to US security
those points are taken from the neoconservative 'definanition', and im not opposed to those points.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
# Promote the development of an American empire
# Equate American power with the potential for world peace
# Seek to democratize the Arab world
# Push regime change in states deemed threats to the US or its allies
these however...i disagree with these.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

edited for readability
 

Fencer128

Platinum Member
Jun 18, 2001
2,700
1
91
# Promote the development of an American empire
Are you sure you mean that?

Also, I didn't see the word "empire" appearing in this definition of neoconservatism.

Personally I'm opposed to the position of neoconservatism - identifying and preferring the outline of "realist" but don't label myself as such. I share views from various perspectives.

Cheers,

Andy
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY