• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

To those who plan on voting for a Republican in '08

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,716
6
76
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
If you have never researched what PNAC is or read their mission statement I suggest you do so immediately. The most vile organization in the history of the US.
:roll: Says you and about 20 other people here on anandtech
Don't be a fool. Read it.
 

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,583
0
0
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
If you have never researched what PNAC is or read their mission statement I suggest you do so immediately. The most vile organization in the history of the US.
:roll: Says you and about 20 other people here on anandtech
Don't be a fool. Read it.
Don't be a fool and think that your opinion is anything more than it is.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,716
6
76
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
If you have never researched what PNAC is or read their mission statement I suggest you do so immediately. The most vile organization in the history of the US.
:roll: Says you and about 20 other people here on anandtech
Don't be a fool. Read it.
Don't be a fool and think that your opinion is anything more than it is.
So you admit you haven't read it? How easy it is to be foolish without knowledge.
 

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,583
0
0
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
If you have never researched what PNAC is or read their mission statement I suggest you do so immediately. The most vile organization in the history of the US.
:roll: Says you and about 20 other people here on anandtech
Don't be a fool. Read it.
Don't be a fool and think that your opinion is anything more than it is.
So you admit you haven't read it? How easy it is to be foolish without knowledge.
Your one of them people that pisses in a fan for fun, aren't you? Heh heh.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,716
6
76
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
If you have never researched what PNAC is or read their mission statement I suggest you do so immediately. The most vile organization in the history of the US.
:roll: Says you and about 20 other people here on anandtech
Don't be a fool. Read it.
Don't be a fool and think that your opinion is anything more than it is.
So you admit you haven't read it? How easy it is to be foolish without knowledge.
Your one of them people that pisses in a fan for fun, aren't you? Heh heh.
Its obvious you support things blindly and care not for truth. Enjoy your foolish ignorance.
 
May 16, 2000
13,529
0
0
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
If you have never researched what PNAC is or read their mission statement I suggest you do so immediately. The most vile organization in the history of the US.
:roll: Says you and about 20 other people here on anandtech
More like thousands if not tens of thousands across the US and world, but sure, keep on dreaming. When something brings up 1,000,000+ hits in a search engine, and isn't anything outside of itself (ie PNAC doesn't mean anything but PNAC), you've got a good indication that it's considered of MAJOR importance.

History will most likely view it as the creation of the neocon's, who eventually will probably become their own party rather than continuing to pollute the republican. I firmly expect them to play a major role in continuing world affairs.
 

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,583
0
0
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
If you have never researched what PNAC is or read their mission statement I suggest you do so immediately. The most vile organization in the history of the US.
:roll: Says you and about 20 other people here on anandtech
More like thousands if not tens of thousands across the US and world, but sure, keep on dreaming. When something brings up 1,000,000+ hits in a search engine, and isn't anything outside of itself (ie PNAC doesn't mean anything but PNAC), you've got a good indication that it's considered of MAJOR importance.
You got a list, or a link, or a poll, anything? :roll: Huge breasts brings up a million five
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,716
6
76
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
If you have never researched what PNAC is or read their mission statement I suggest you do so immediately. The most vile organization in the history of the US.
:roll: Says you and about 20 other people here on anandtech
More like thousands if not tens of thousands across the US and world, but sure, keep on dreaming. When something brings up 1,000,000+ hits in a search engine, and isn't anything outside of itself (ie PNAC doesn't mean anything but PNAC), you've got a good indication that it's considered of MAJOR importance.
You got a list, or a link, or a poll, anything? :roll:
That would require you to read.
 

fallout man

Golden Member
Nov 20, 2007
1,799
0
0
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Pabster, if you don't know what wrong with PNAC staffers, you are far too dumb to explain anything to.
...Says the far-left nut job who thinks MoveOn.org and MediaMatters are credible, charitable organizations. :roll:
Oh dear. Little have you learned about how screaming talking-points and Rovian political slurs does very little to recruit voters or sympathisers in a community which is literally... sitting one click away from Google.

Pabster, darling. You are like the fungus which seems to pop up between my pinky and ring toe every several weeks, despite treatment. Just fucking stop already. Please.
 
May 16, 2000
13,529
0
0
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
If you have never researched what PNAC is or read their mission statement I suggest you do so immediately. The most vile organization in the history of the US.
:roll: Says you and about 20 other people here on anandtech
More like thousands if not tens of thousands across the US and world, but sure, keep on dreaming. When something brings up 1,000,000+ hits in a search engine, and isn't anything outside of itself (ie PNAC doesn't mean anything but PNAC), you've got a good indication that it's considered of MAJOR importance.
You got a list, or a link, or a poll, anything? :roll: Huge breasts brings up a million five
Huge breasts are about more than one thing...big chickens, females, implants, any one of 3 billion people, etc. PNAC is just about PNAC...a very small group of individuals with AMAZING power and influence.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,716
6
76
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
If you have never researched what PNAC is or read their mission statement I suggest you do so immediately. The most vile organization in the history of the US.
:roll: Says you and about 20 other people here on anandtech
More like thousands if not tens of thousands across the US and world, but sure, keep on dreaming. When something brings up 1,000,000+ hits in a search engine, and isn't anything outside of itself (ie PNAC doesn't mean anything but PNAC), you've got a good indication that it's considered of MAJOR importance.
You got a list, or a link, or a poll, anything? :roll: Huge breasts brings up a million five
Huge breasts are about more than one thing...big chickens, females, implants, any one of 3 billion people, etc. PNAC is just about PNAC...a very small group of individuals with AMAZING power and influence.
lol so he set off to research "PNAC" but searches "big breasts" instead? :laugh:

No wonder he doesn't read. Five second attention span :laugh:
 

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,583
0
0
"The most vile organization in the history of the US."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


You got a list, or a link, or a poll, anything?
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,586
11
76
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
If you have never researched what PNAC is or read their mission statement I suggest you do so immediately. The most vile organization in the history of the US.

If you want to know more about their agenda I suggest you read this PDF on PNAC's site. Rebuilding America's Defenses


Put that together with Dick Cheney being a supporter and watch Cheney's Law. Connect the dots.
I read the whole PDF, and I don't see anything wrong with it. I'd be happy to see the US Military return to it's Cold War Era strength. Along with that would come the amazing technological advances that were so common in the Cold War.

I like PNAC.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,034
1
61
Originally posted by: Nebor
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
If you have never researched what PNAC is or read their mission statement I suggest you do so immediately. The most vile organization in the history of the US.

If you want to know more about their agenda I suggest you read this PDF on PNAC's site. Rebuilding America's Defenses


Put that together with Dick Cheney being a supporter and watch Cheney's Law. Connect the dots.
I read the whole PDF, and I don't see anything wrong with it. I'd be happy to see the US Military return to it's Cold War Era strength. Along with that would come the amazing technological advances that were so common in the Cold War.

I like PNAC.
Fine. As long as you pay for all that shit.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,716
6
76
Originally posted by: Nebor
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
If you have never researched what PNAC is or read their mission statement I suggest you do so immediately. The most vile organization in the history of the US.

If you want to know more about their agenda I suggest you read this PDF on PNAC's site. Rebuilding America's Defenses


Put that together with Dick Cheney being a supporter and watch Cheney's Law. Connect the dots.
I read the whole PDF, and I don't see anything wrong with it. I'd be happy to see the US Military return to it's Cold War Era strength. Along with that would come the amazing technological advances that were so common in the Cold War.

I like PNAC.
Did you happen to read page 11?

ESTABLISH FOUR CORE MISSIONS for U.S. military forces:

? defend the American homeland;

? fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars;

? perform the ?constabulary? duties associated with shaping the security environment in
critical regions;

? transform U.S. forces to exploit the ?revolution in military affairs;?

To carry out these core missions, we need to provide sufficient force and budgetary
allocations. In particular, the United States must:

MAINTAIN NUCLEAR STRATEGIC SUPERIORITY, basing the U.S. nuclear deterrent upon a
global, nuclear net assessment that weighs the full range of current and emerging threats,
not merely the U.S.-Russia balance.

RESTORE THE PERSONNEL STRENGTH of today?s force to roughly the levels anticipated in
the ?Base Force? outlined by the Bush Administration, an increase in active-duty strength
from 1.4 million to 1.6 million.

REPOSITION U.S. FORCES to respond to 21st century strategic realities by shifting
permanently-based forces to Southeast Europe and Southeast Asia, and by changing naval
deployment patterns to reflect growing U.S. strategic concerns in East Asia.

Yeah its fine :roll:
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,014
306
126
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon


Did you happen to read page 11?

ESTABLISH FOUR CORE MISSIONS for U.S. military forces:

? defend the American homeland;

? fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars;

<snip>

Yeah its fine :roll:
Yea, because we've never had to do that before....:roll:
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,716
6
76
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon


Did you happen to read page 11?

ESTABLISH FOUR CORE MISSIONS for U.S. military forces:

? defend the American homeland;

? fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars;

<snip>

Yeah its fine :roll:
Yea, because we've never had to do that before....:roll:
I'm confused by your response. Are you for these actions or against?
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
29,779
3,305
126
Well, least I finally learn what the meaning of the term is. I admit I?ve been too lazy to goggle it when someone froths at the mouth and the abbreviation is used.

If they wanted to defend the homeland, they?d not want us to be pre-occupied with foreign wars while illegals invade this nation by the millions, and Muslims run free to convert further followers to the bloodshed and imposition of Sharia.

I strayed off topic, the question is regarding staff members. That sort of depends on how many politically active/savvy Republicans have become members. Depends on how likely it merely happened as opposed to if they were selected for that reason, and for what position they hold in the campaign. If it?s some regional twat that the candidate has never and will never meet, I couldn?t care less.

Although the concept of such an ideology being prevalent among Republicans is nonetheless disturbing We need a campaign for further foreign wars like we need another hole in the head.

*edit

I get the impression now you?re referring to actual positions in the administration. I kept thinking campaign staff.

For this I?ll stand by my earlier analysis that the ideology is disturbing, as if to distract us while bad things occur at home. I?m less concerned about relations to a particular group though than I am about a person?s actual ideology.

If for example, a President and their staff were more interested in Iran than securing our border and pursuing the radicals already here, I?d have to oppose them.
 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,014
306
126
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon


Did you happen to read page 11?

ESTABLISH FOUR CORE MISSIONS for U.S. military forces:

? defend the American homeland;

? fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars;

<snip>

Yeah its fine :roll:
Yea, because we've never had to do that before....:roll:
I'm confused by your response. Are you for these actions or against?
I think you are not interpreting the bold correctly. I don't think there is anything wrong with having a PLAN to "fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars". It has happened before(WWII), and will probably happen again. I am not saying that I agree with the PNAC, I'm just pointing out that there are certain parts that aren't all bad.
 

HombrePequeno

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2001
4,657
0
0
Well I don't plan on voting Republican (it's up in the air) but having PNAC members on board would lose my vote. Jingoism has cost us enough as it is.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Lemon law
As CadsortaGuy points out---And in my book the most dangerous are those who would bring appeasment to our foreign policy and socialism domestically. I guess that's why I'm Conservative and you're liberal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The problem with the neocons and PNac types are not so much in their goals, which might at a stretch be laudable, but in their totally inept implementation of policy. That and their total blindness to any reality based feedback as their policies crashed around them while they studiously avoided questioning their own policies or assumtions.
And I too think the goals of the socialist left might at a stretch be laudable but the ineptness of the implementaion is what is damaging. That, and their total blindness to any reality based feedback as their programs crash down around them.

Boy this is fun. :roll: Care to continue?
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Pabster, what are you barking about now? You're equating PNAC to media matters?

The OP's point is, why would you surround yourself with dumbasses who created this massive international mess? Answer that question instead of throwing out a curve ball.

And CAD, the damn neocons are largely former liberals. Get your history right. I will let you figure out for yourself the implications of their past liberalism in their current policy.
Psssttt - We're talking PNAC here. Neo-cons are a different subject.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
As I see it there are two ultra-dangerous groups currently active in the political sphere: PNAC, and fundamentalist evangelicals. I refuse to support in any way a person who is in any way ok with those two groups of thought.
And in my book the most dangerous are those who would bring appeasment to our foreign policy and socialism domestically. I guess that's why I'm Conservative and you're liberal.


***********

Topic:

PNAC members wouldn't make me not vote for a candidate, however I expect to see some balance in cabinet positions no matter who is elected.


That's a narrow-minded generalization. There are many different types of conservatives and liberals. REAL Republicans (as in party origin believers) are just as outraged by PNAC and neocons as are core libertarians (who are also a form of conservative). Many liberals, especially those bowing to socialistic international pressures, would support much of the PNAC policy and would worship their methodology. You can't paint with a brush that broad and wind up being right very often.

Myself, it's true I am socially liberal, and have much of my root political philosophy in liberalism...but by American definitions my government leanings are core historical conservative.
So then maybe you shouldn't be painting with such a broad brush or state such narrow minded generalizations.... ;)
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,586
11
76
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon


Did you happen to read page 11?

ESTABLISH FOUR CORE MISSIONS for U.S. military forces:

? defend the American homeland;

? fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars;

<snip>

Yeah its fine :roll:
Yea, because we've never had to do that before....:roll:
I'm confused by your response. Are you for these actions or against?
I think you are not interpreting the bold correctly. I don't think there is anything wrong with having a PLAN to "fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars". It has happened before(WWII), and will probably happen again. I am not saying that I agree with the PNAC, I'm just pointing out that there are certain parts that aren't all bad.
Exactly. At current levels, we're currently unprepared for North Korea to attack South Korea, or China to take Taiwan. We need the ability to fight mulitiple major theater wars.
 

bl4ckfl4g

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2007
3,669
0
0
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Pabster, what are you barking about now? You're equating PNAC to media matters?

The OP's point is, why would you surround yourself with dumbasses who created this massive international mess? Answer that question instead of throwing out a curve ball.

And CAD, the damn neocons are largely former liberals. Get your history right. I will let you figure out for yourself the implications of their past liberalism in their current policy.
Psssttt - We're talking PNAC here. Neo-cons are a different subject.
PNAC is a neo-conservative think tank so uhh it really isn't a different subject.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY