McCain wants to kick Russia out of G-8

[Mikey]

Yeah, you need to work on that bit, too.

We actually had a referendum on that - "Should the only electoral vote be held by Tsukiyumi opf Texas?"

But since he was the only one who voted on the issue, it couldn't be counted as a quorum.

Yes, everyone, it's very easy to call us Americans all assholes now, when you're not all begging for our help to defeat the Japanese, or Nazis, or Kaiser Wilhelm, or the fifty rice farmers who kicked French ass at Dien Bien Phu, or whoever it may be at the time. Keep asking us to come in on your side in a war, and we're going to learn to be warlike.

That said, McCain is an idiot for voicing this. First, he sounds like a hawkish moron. Secondly, he has now settled on backing an untenable position, which makes him sound like he has no clue on foreign policy.

Perhaps someone can tell me from a Republican POV what he actually hoped to gain by saying something like this?

[Aaron]

We actually had a referendum on that - "Should the only electoral vote be held by Tsukiyumi opf Texas?"

But since he was the only one who voted on the issue, it couldn't be counted as a quorum.

Yes, everyone, it's very easy to call us Americans all assholes now, when you're not all begging for our help to defeat the Japanese, or Nazis, or Kaiser Wilhelm, or the fifty rice farmers who kicked French ass at Dien Bien Phu, or whoever it may be at the time. Keep asking us to come in on your side in a war, and we're going to learn to be warlike.

So how long do you guys expect the world to suck your dick over that?

That said, McCain is an idiot for voicing this. First, he sounds like a hawkish moron. Secondly, he has now settled on backing an untenable position, which makes him sound like he has no clue on foreign policy.

He's a Republican, is anyone surprised at this?

Perhaps someone can tell me from a Republican POV what he actually hoped to gain by saying something like this?

What does look how tough I am translate into in Neanderthal?

[Mikey]

So how long do you guys expect the world to suck your dick over that?

Long enough for people to realize two things:
a) in a perfect world, the U.S. (or any nation) would be able to completely switch its stance between those types of times and these types; and,
b) the world AIN'T perfect, and NO nation can or will do what was mentioned in line "a."
Don't tell me Canada has, because Canada's role in the world is not such that the same paradigm would apply.

He's a Republican, is anyone surprised at this?

Not really, but I expected him to show a little more electioneering savvy.

What does look how tough I am translate into in Neanderthal?

Yes, yes, I know all that. What I meant was this: given the fact that it's an untenable position, what supposed benefit can McCain reap from this?

[Aaron]

Long enough for people to realize two things:
a) in a perfect world, the U.S. (or any nation) would be able to completely switch its stance between those types of times and these types; and,
b) the world AIN'T perfect, and NO nation can or will do what was mentioned in line "a."

Have you heard of a thing called comprimise? It's what adults do.

Don't tell me Canada has, because Canada's role in the world is not such that the same paradigm would apply.

Canada has little to no bearing on this. You realise that a countries role in the world is what they choose to be, right? The US does not have to choose to be the schoolyard bully and only the insane military spending (which is going to result in a depression shortly) allows them to do it. Canada could choose to have a massive military buildup, build nukes and drive the country into the ground but what would be the benefit?

What does the US get from it's behaviour besides near universal condemnation and fueling terrorism?

Not really, but I expected him to show a little more electioneering savvy.

A couple years ago he might have. At this point he's sold himself to the far right of the base.

Yes, yes, I know all that. What I meant was this: given the fact that it's an untenable position, what supposed benefit can McCain reap from this?

He appears tough to the GOP base and that makes him appealing to them. What does the average GOP voter look for, pretty much what he's preaching: more of the same. The definition of conservative is resistance to change, to a GOP voter more of the same is just fine.

[Monroe]

Wow, what a complete moron. I'm not a big fan of the cold war.

[Mikey]

Have you heard of a thing called comprimise? It's what adults do.

Yep. That can also very easily mean "You really ought to give us more than 35 years to completely change our philosophy from what you asked us to make it."

[Tsukiyumi]

Yep. That can also very easily mean "You really ought to give us more than 35 years to completely change our philosophy from what you asked us to make it."

We could cut military spending, and then say "tough luck" the next time someone asks for our help. But, then they'd say we're heartless, uncaring bastards for not coming to their aid.

[sunnyside]

So how long do you guys expect the world to suck your dick over that?

It's not just about the past. It seems like the world is only happy when America steps in after there are a few million less Jews/Chinese/non-muslims or whoever is getting slaughtered and oppressed this time. And then we have to have a big war over it.

Current American policy is to try and prevent that sort of thing. Nip it in the bud when we can.

This stems in no small part from WWII and Pearl Harbor smacking the isolationist out of nearly a whole generation.

The problem with trying to pre-empt problems is that it's a lot less clear you're the "good guy" which is annoying. Particularily when some foreign regiem can commit pretty much any horror they want and it still wouldn't be worse than a couple stupid guards making guys get naked and wear hoods in the minds of a lot of people.

I mean right now China is probably clubbing Tibetan monks like they're seals and it's fur season. And all the while lying to the Chinese people about the cause (apparantly they're saying the Tibetans are on the attack, raping and pillaging and such).

[Aaron]

We could cut military spending, and then say "tough luck" the next time someone asks for our help. But, then they'd say we're heartless, uncaring bastards for not coming to their aid.

I don't recall people asking for your help in Afghanistan or Iraq, those were entirely of your own making. I think you should cut military spending and the next time something happens either assemble a coalition or let it be.

[Aaron]

It's not just about the past. It seems like the world is only happy when America steps in after there are a few million less Jews/Chinese/non-muslims or whoever is getting slaughtered and oppressed this time. And then we have to have a big war over it.

Does America have to step in? Does anyone? The Middle East is shortly going to become irrelevant with the loss of oil and Africa is and always will be a cesspit regardless of the effort put in. Peak Oil and global warming will pretty much kill off the rest of the continent.

Current American policy is to try and prevent that sort of thing. Nip it in the bud when we can.

Except that typically the US backs the wrong horse and either gets embarrassed over it or winds up dealing with a worse problem *chough*Mujahideen*cough*

This stems in no small part from WWII and Pearl Harbor smacking the isolationist out of nearly a whole generation.

Even if the US hadn't entered the war, the USSR and the rest of the Allies would have crushed the Axis in Europe. And the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour was a direct consequence of the US cutting off their oil.

The problem with trying to pre-empt problems is that it's a lot less clear you're the "good guy" which is annoying. Particularily when some foreign regiem can commit pretty much any horror they want and it still wouldn't be worse than a couple stupid guards making guys get naked and wear hoods in the minds of a lot of people.

I mean right now China is probably clubbing Tibetan monks like they're seals and it's fur season. And all the while lying to the Chinese people about the cause (apparantly they're saying the Tibetans are on the attack, raping and pillaging and such).

You know what the difference is? China/Iran/Iraq/North Korea etc do not claim to be the land of peace, freedom and honey. The US does and people expect them to live up to the rethoric.

[Tsukiyumi]

I don't recall people asking for your help in Afghanistan or Iraq, those were entirely of your own making. I think you should cut military spending and the next time something happens either assemble a coalition or let it be.

Afghanistan was a major center for terrorist training and indoctrination; we certainly needed to go there. Or we could just ignore the jihadists and hope they go away...

Instead of cutting military spending, we should reduce the $300+ billion we spend every year on perpetual welfare rather than job training and placement. That way, we won't need months to build up forces should the need arise.

[Aaron]

Afghanistan was a major center for terrorist training and indoctrination; we certainly needed to go there. Or we could just ignore the jihadists and hope they go away...

It's not like the camps could be bombed with impunity or anything right? And it's not like A-Q was a direct result of the US backed Mujahideen.

Instead of cutting military spending, we should reduce the $300+ billion we spend every year on perpetual welfare rather than job training and placement. That way, we won't need months to build up forces should the need arise.

Welfare, is that what you call that farce? I agree that the money would be better spent on quality re-education and placement. There's not much point in having a working mom of two at McDicks.

[Tsukiyumi]

It's not like the camps could be bombed with impunity or anything right? And it's not like A-Q was a direct result of the US backed Mujahideen.

Was it, now? Or a direct result of religious zealotry and centuries of hatred toward non-muslims?

I certainly don't condone the US backing them against the Soviets, or all the times we gave aid and military equipment to belligerant nations like Iraq, Iran, etc., but the attack on 9/11 was certainly justification for a full-scale assault. Bombing the training camps? What would stop them from just continuing to build more? Iraq has derailed our previously successful efforts in Afghanistan enough for people to discredit the whole effort. It's infuriating.

Welfare, is that what you call that farce? I agree that the money would be better spent on quality re-education and placement. There's not much point in having a working mom of two at McDicks.

And with re-education and placement, the need for welfare would decrease exponentially, and we could spend the money on the military and advanced power sources.

[Teaos]

Afghanistan was a major center for terrorist training and indoctrination; we certainly needed to go there.

I really hate to bring this point up, but terrorists arent just evil bastards wanting to kill babys and woman. They only hit who they fell have wronged you, and dispite what Bush tells you its not beause you have democracy.

[Tsukiyumi]

I really hate to bring this point up, but terrorists arent just evil bastards wanting to kill babys and woman. They only hit who they fell have wronged you, and dispite what Bush tells you its not beause you have democracy.

No, they're evil brainwashed zealot bastards who want to kill babies and women because we've wronged them by not worshipping their religion.