Why no one should consider voting for Jeb Bush.

[fskimospy]

My calculator when I totaled up the deaths.

Can you tell me where you got these numbers that you were totaling? You seem to be off on the total death count by a factor of 5 or 6.

 

[Jaskalas]

There was no Al Qaeda in Iraq.

There was when we got done! :wub:

 

[Jhhnn]

Can you tell me where you got these numbers that you were totaling? You seem to be off on the total death count by a factor of 5 or 6.

It's merely an attempt at misdirection, anyway.

Democrats learned a lesson in Vietnam. Neocons didn't. Hence Afghanistan & Iraq.

Hence Jeb's fairy tale about why it all happened.

 

[rudeguy]

It's merely an attempt at misdirection, anyway.

Democrats learned a lesson in Vietnam. Neocons didn't. Hence Afghanistan & Iraq.

Hence Jeb's fairy tale about why it all happened.

So then why did Democrats approve of Afghanistan and Iraq?

 

[Genx87]

It's merely an attempt at misdirection, anyway.

Democrats learned a lesson in Vietnam. Neocons didn't. Hence Afghanistan & Iraq.

Hence Jeb's fairy tale about why it all happened.

The 2016 democrat front runner voted for these wars for fucks sake.

 

[fskimospy]

The 2016 democrat front runner voted for these wars for fucks sake.

Very true. Honestly, I imagine democrats have an easier time of starting wars than republicans. They don't have a reputation for wanting wars, so you get one of those 'only Nixon could go to China' things.

Still, in this case Hillary admits she made a mistake, while Jeb seems to be defending the choice. Hillary is too hawkish for my tastes, but sadly it seems whatever alternative there is to her will be even more hawkish.

 

[fskimospy]

So then why did Democrats approve of Afghanistan and Iraq?

Actually, a majority of democrats in congress voted against the Iraq war.

I'm still genuinely curious about your war death numbers. Somewhere around 1.2 million American soldiers have died in all wars combined, so I'm trying to figure out how you got up to 6 million for the democrats alone.

 

[glenn1]

The 2016 democrat front runner voted for these wars for fucks sake.

They like to flater themselves as principled rather than opportunist when electing which wars they'll fight or politically support. You can also safely ignore their complaints about authorizations and whatnot since they ignore those at convenience when it suits them.

 

[boomerang]

The 2016 democrat front runner voted for these wars for fucks sake.

Shhh, he's in the camp of, if you like your misconception you can keep your misconception. He likes his a lot.

 

[Genx87]

Very true. Honestly, I imagine democrats have an easier time of starting wars than republicans. They don't have a reputation for wanting wars, so you get one of those 'only Nixon could go to China' things.

Still, in this case Hillary admits she made a mistake, while Jeb seems to be defending the choice. Hillary is too hawkish for my tastes, but sadly it seems whatever alternative there is to her will be even more hawkish.

Does Sanders have any real shot? I'd imagine him not being as hawkish.

 

[fskimospy]

Does Sanders have any real shot? I'd imagine him not being as hawkish.

Sanders has no shot unless Hillary dies of a heart attack or something.

 

[glenn1]

Does Sanders have any real shot? I'd imagine him not being as hawkish.

Sanders is the Democratic candidate equivalent of a leftist saying "I'm going to move to Canada." Something they cite as a wish fulfillment when they get tired of the realm of the possibile, but not something they'd actually go ahead with when decision time came. It's akin to someone on the right saying that if taxes are raised they'll just quit their job and live on the dole instead.

 

[Nebor]

Hillary is a war hawk. She always has been. She fully supported US military involvement in Libya and Syria. She'll be a good president.

 

[rudeguy]

Actually, a majority of democrats in congress voted against the Iraq war.

I'm still genuinely curious about your war death numbers. Somewhere around 1.2 million American soldiers have died in all wars combined, so I'm trying to figure out how you got up to 6 million for the democrats alone.

So what about the Democrats who did vote for the war?

And you are trying to twist my words. Nowhere did I say that number was only American soldiers.

 

[Jhhnn]

They like to flater themselves as principled rather than opportunist when electing which wars they'll fight or politically support. You can also safely ignore their complaints about authorizations and whatnot since they ignore those at convenience when it suits them.

I'll take false equivalency of denial for $1000, Alex.

 

[bshole]

Very true. Honestly, I imagine democrats have an easier time of starting wars than republicans. They don't have a reputation for wanting wars, so you get one of those 'only Nixon could go to China' things.

Still, in this case Hillary admits she made a mistake, while Jeb seems to be defending the choice. Hillary is too hawkish for my tastes, but sadly it seems whatever alternative there is to her will be even more hawkish.

You are the one of most hawkish member of this forum so that is saying something. It would be nice it we could leave bull in the china shop diplomacy behind.

 

[fskimospy]

So what about the Democrats who did vote for the war?

What about them? Did you mean 'why did any Democrat approve of those wars'? If so, the answer would be because no party is a monolithic entity. A majority of them voted against it.

And you are trying to twist my words. Nowhere did I say that number was only American soldiers.

Then what else was it? If you expand the definition to cover things other than soldiers it's hard to see how the Republican total doesn't go much higher. Don't be deliberately vague and then accuse other people of twisting your words.

 

[kage69]

But please do explain how the Iraq War was somehow "worse" than Vietnam. You say "yellowcake," I say "Gulf of Tonkin."

Someone please tell this guy is being sarcastic.

 

[Jhhnn]

So what about the Democrats who did vote for the war?

And you are trying to twist my words. Nowhere did I say that number was only American soldiers.

They were scrambling to get out of the way of the electoral steamroller that the Bushistas fashioned out of 9/11. Notice the timing of the AUMF resolution, right before the midterms. They got clobbered anyway.

There were Terrarists under every rock & the Terrar Alert! color wheel spun madly. Hundreds of Terrarists needed to be locked up & their balls broken at Gitmo to pertekt Merricuh! No terrarist coddlin'! With us or against us! WMD's! Reconstituted nuclear programs! Niger uranium! Genocide against the Kurds! Poor Israel!

Onward Christian Soldiers!

That's pretty much the ugly truth about how America was chumped & how many like yourself remain chumped to this day.

 

[rudeguy]

What about them? Did you mean 'why did any Democrat approve of those wars'? If so, the answer would be because no party is a monolithic entity. A majority of them voted against it.



Then what else was it? If you expand the definition to cover things other than soldiers it's hard to see how the Republican total doesn't go much higher. Don't be deliberately vague and then accuse other people of twisting your words.

Biden, Kerry and Clinton voted for it. Seems as though all of your leaders were in favor of it.


I was very specific in my details of what I added up. Unfortunately for you, that doesn't leave room for you to twist the truth. If you would like to dispute that total, please feel free. But do it in its correct thread

58% of Democratic senators (29 of 50) voted for the resolution. Those voting for the resolution are:
Sens. Lincoln (D-AR), Feinstein (D-CA), Dodd (D-CT), Lieberman (D-CT), Biden (D-DE), Carper (D-DE), Nelson (D-FL), Cleland (D-GA), Miller (D-GA), Bayh (D-IN), Harkin (D-IA), Breaux (D-LA), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Kerry (D-MA), Carnahan (D-MO), Baucus (D-MT), Nelson (D-NE), Reid (D-NV), Torricelli (D-NJ), Clinton (D-NY), Schumer (D-NY), Edwards (D-NC), Dorgan (D-ND), Hollings (D-SC), Daschle (D-SD), Johnson (D-SD), Cantwell (D-WA), Rockefeller (D-WV), and Kohl (D-WI).

 

[waggy]

LOL this is funny. harvey has been pretty quite the last few yeas even though obama is doing many of the same things W has done.

Now that another "bush" is running he leaps out with the same dogma.


Jeb is smarter and i think a better vote. Trouble is the people he has around him. No way in hell will i vote for him with his staff. I never had the feeling that W was the one in control. I always felt he was nothing more then a puppet and others ran things.

I don't think a vote for clinton is worth it either. She hasn't exactly been honest (lol what politician is?).

though i don't think it really matters who we vote for. the 2 parties fuck over the middle class and pander to the rich elite.

 

[fskimospy]

Biden, Kerry and Clinton voted for it. Seems as though all of your leaders were in favor of it.

It's funny how you selectively quote the vote totals that I already provided in an attempt to obscure the simple fact that a majority of Democrats voted against it. Seems a bit strange for someone who so frequently accuses others of being shills.

I was very specific in my details of what I added up. Unfortunately for you, that doesn't leave room for you to twist the truth. If you would like to dispute that total, please feel free. But do it in its correct thread

You were actually totally vague in what you added up. I'm going to call your number out right now as being bullshit. You brought up a claim, provide a source for it. Remember how you complained about people not answering simple questions? What is your source and what were your criteria?

 

[rudeguy]

It's funny how you selectively quote the vote totals that I already provided in an attempt to obscure the simple fact that a majority of Democrats voted against it. Seems a bit strange for someone who so frequently accuses others of being shills.



You were actually totally vague in what you added up. I'm going to call your number out right now as being bullshit. You brought up a claim, provide a source for it. Remember how you complained about people not answering simple questions? What is your source and what were your criteria?

The majority of Democrat senators voted for it, including leadership.

They must be evil war criminals too!

 

[Nebor]

LOL this is funny. harvey has been pretty quite the last few yeas even though obama is doing many of the same things W has done.

I look forward to hearing more about possible criminal cabals.

 

[bshole]

Jeb is smarter and i think a better vote. Trouble is the people he has around him. No way in hell will i vote for him with his staff. I never had the feeling that W was the one in control. I always felt he was nothing more then a puppet and others ran things.

I don't think a vote for clinton is worth it either. She hasn't exactly been honest (lol what politician is?).

Well unless something catastrophic occurs, those are going to be your two choices.... Bush or Clinton. I'm sure that there must be some minor differences between the two, but nothing of real significance.

The Democrats need a bold young star who is ready to upend the status quo, who will attack the wealth inequality through tax policy, who will end American meddling in the Middle East, who will federalize health insurance, end the war on drugs, outlaw the DEA, do real campaign finance reform, enact term limits, etc....