URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Bleacher Bums Forum
  HTML https://bbf.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Bleacher Bums Forum
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 146960--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
       By: davep Date: August 31, 2013, 2:55 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       And that explains why libertarians so seldom (fortunately)
       achieve national office.
       #Post#: 146976--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
       By: Jes Beard Date: August 31, 2013, 4:38 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       davep, had it not been for Rosenberg, the Soviet Union still
       would have been able to develop nuclear weapons, and presumably
       would have done so... unless good war hawks like yourself had
       nuked them first, totally destroying their capability of doing
       so.  You might want to live in a world in which the United
       States completely dominated the globe and from time to time
       nuked those who offended us.  I wouldn't, and I am happy that I
       don't.
       #Post#: 147002--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
       By: davep Date: August 31, 2013, 8:54 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       It is easy to win an argument (at least in your own mind) when
       you ascribe actions and wishes to the other side.
       When have I ever said that we should nuke someone that is on the
       verge of developing their own nuclear weapons.  Even you must
       realizing that giving away our secrets is not quite identical to
       nuking other nations when we are not at war.
       #Post#: 147013--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
       By: Jes Beard Date: August 31, 2013, 11:42 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=davep link=topic=96.msg147002#msg147002
       date=1378000494]
       It is easy to win an argument (at least in your own mind) when
       you ascribe actions and wishes to the other side.
       When have I ever said that we should nuke someone that is on the
       verge of developing their own nuclear weapons.  Even you must
       realizing that giving away our secrets is not quite identical to
       nuking other nations when we are not at war.
       [/quote]
       Talk about projection.
       When did I say you felt "we should nuke someone that is on the
       verge of developing their own nuclear weapons"?
       #Post#: 147028--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
       By: davep Date: September 1, 2013, 10:20 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=Jes Beard link=topic=96.msg146976#msg146976
       date=1377985114]
       unless good war hawks like yourself had nuked them first,
       totally destroying their capability of doing so
       [/quote]
       If I have to read you posts, the least you could do is read them
       yourself.
       #Post#: 147031--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
       By: Jes Beard Date: September 1, 2013, 10:31 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Reading comprehension, davep, reading comprehension.
       You are a war hawk.  And those who would urge pre-emptive
       nuclear strikes would be war hawks.  That is not to say that YOU
       feel "we should nuke someone that is on the verge of developing
       their own nuclear weapons."
       X is a number.  Two numbers added together equal 8.... that is
       not to say that X is either of the numbers which total 8 when
       added together.
       #Post#: 147050--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
       By: davep Date: September 1, 2013, 4:46 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       If you are going to make a meaningless statement like that, Jes,
       you have to try to add at least a little meaning to it by
       defining what a "War Hawk" is, and explain why you feel I fit
       into your definition.
       #Post#: 147051--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
       By: Playtwo Date: September 1, 2013, 4:53 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Short lob.
       #Post#: 147072--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
       By: Jes Beard Date: September 1, 2013, 9:00 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=davep link=topic=96.msg147050#msg147050
       date=1378071979]
       If you are going to make a meaningless statement like that, Jes,
       you have to try to add at least a little meaning to it by
       defining what a "War Hawk" is, and explain why you feel I fit
       into your definition.
       [/quote]
       If it is meaningless, why bother adding any meaning?
       You have for several years now made clear that you have very few
       reservations about the use of force (i.e. war) in order to
       further American interests, and that you have relatively little
       concern about blowback from that use of force.  I consider that
       a war hawk, which is the way the term has been used for more
       than 200 years now in American history, dating back to as least
       the War of 1812.
       #Post#: 147079--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Politics, Religion, etc.
       By: davep Date: September 1, 2013, 9:52 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       You have obviously misread my posts for the past several years.
       I have never advocated the use of force to advance American
       Interests.
       I HAVE advocated the use of force for those who threaten America
       and their allies.  That is quite a different thing.
       But although you defended the use of the term War Hawk, you
       failed to define it.  Exactly what is a War Hawk.  If it is
       merely someone that advocates the use of force to advance
       American Interests, then I clearly am not one, since there are a
       great many American Interests that I would NOT use force to
       advance.
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page