Forums
March 29, 2024, 01:41 AM

Author Topic: Wally's school of politics  (Read 9803 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online TheWalrus

Re: Wally's school of politics
« Reply #45 on: January 29, 2013, 06:47 AM »
What's mainly outrageous is how steadfastly and consistently our government lies to us; the incident was not preceded by protests about the anti-Muslim video, as was first claimed. Granted, there has been outrage over that video, and to hell with people who think we should respect their religious dogma at the cost of free speech, but it was demonstrably not the cause in this case. At first I uncritically accepted the original explanation; we should always be skeptical when the only news source is straight from the administration's mouth.

As far as Hillary Clinton's failure, the blame can't be put squarely on her, and I think this issue is nothing more than another partisan distraction, which both sides absolutely love. As a general rule, the more attention the media gives to an issue, the less important it actually is. Take gun control for example, we could easily be focusing on the misguided drug war instead, as legalizing more drugs would curb gang violence dramatically, but instead we focus on a more superficial issue (which needs addressing, but still). And yeah, we really seem to enjoy propping up dictators in the middle east, so that we can later go to war with them.
The problem I have with the Obama administration is lack of transparency.  Obama is one of the slickest back-door operators we have seen in the oval office.  To his credit he is an amazing politician, despite taking accountability or culpability in anything, instead criticism seems to slide right off of him.  The idea that he would have been able to get through the whole Clinton situation without throwing her under the bus is amazing.  He knew he didn't want to lose the Clinton support and somehow stood by her and her people.  I also see this as a partisan distraction, seems like a copout to me though, that can be used as a universal defense for anything and everything.  Hillary was simply left alone by the democrats because anyone who is anyone on capitol hill knows that you can't shake a stick at anything Clinton if you want to go anywhere politically. 

As for religion, there is a cut and dry reason for another couple of centuries of infighting on the strip.  I don't see the jews and muslims cohabiting the holy land, so I think people are just going to have to accept that the battle of religion is going to be fought there for a very long time.  I think most of the focus in the region has to be shifted to possibly imperialistic countries like Iran.  Iran is a menace to the region because of the ruling party and their nuclear program.  Netanyahu isn't dumb enough to resort to a nuclear solution, he just holds it above the other countries' heads as an ultimate threat.  He knows the most powerful ally he has, the US, deserts him the instant he resorts to nuclear weapons.  Ahmadinejad, I am not so sure he plays by the same rules as Israel.  Ultimately, I don't see Iran using a nuclear weapon, but the threat of one is very real.

I feel the US should consider withdrawing from embassies throughout the middle east, and strongly discourage its citizens from  traveling to certain countries.  There is little reason to maintain a presence in certain places and risk more American lives.  The embassies do a world of good for relations and protecting American citizens, but im not sure the good outweighs the bad at this point.   

Online TheWalrus

Re: Wally's school of politics
« Reply #46 on: February 18, 2013, 08:33 PM »
What the f@#!! My one-liner was the ultimatum of politics and you f@#!ing delete it. Bitches.

To Free: re-read the first post of this thread.  Not even you in your infinite wisdom are exempt.  Breeze, you, and a few others have gotten posts deleted because they were either too short or just a partisan snipe.  This thread isn't about one-liners about how shitty you think a party is or whatnot.  Adhere to the rules and Peja will leave your posts be.

I'll finish off your questions since I have some time now Peja.

What do you think about the United Nations?

United Nations is a worthy foray into creating a unified ruling body that can police its child nations.  Unfortunately, the UN can't get anything done, with the powerful nations bypassing and brushing off ineffective UN sanctions.  I can't remember a case where UN sanctions caused a rogue nation to reverse it's foreign policy.  The UN just doesn't wield enough influence to hold nations to it's collective ideals.  It was a good idea, but I would compare it to the articles of confederation here in the United States.  The AoC gave the federal government so little power, nothing could get done.  The states held more power than it's collective government and so they had no incentive to cave to the federal government unless it suited them, exactly the scenario we see now.  The UN is a net negative to large global powers such as the US, China, Russia, ect.  The smaller countries of course are all in favor of the UN, because it affords them a collective voice and defense.  This isn't changing anytime soon.  A drastic change in policy would require the US, Russia, and China to all submit; and they will not, there are too many points to hold out on individually, much less all at once.  Read underlined part one more time for effect. 

which role should they play on worldwide conflicts?

They should play a peacekeeper role, a collective action controlled by the members of the security council.  Just like it is done now.  Again, they are currently too weak collectively to have an effect on any conflict of reasonable size.
What can be done to avoid a debacle with peacekeeping forces like in Srebrenica or Rwanda?

Real power behind the deployed UN peacekeepers.  They didn't have it. 

What can the UN do to avoid creating a platform for authoritarian regimes to share their political ideas? (like in the Durban Review Conference from 2009)

I'm not currently aligned with the ideas around exclusion of nations.  Ahmadinejad should have been, and was allowed to, elaborate on his doctrines, mostly of hate and repression.  Once you start exclusion, it creates an imbalance of power.  The only situation I agree with exclusion is if there are currently hostilities provoked by a member country or prospective member country.  The DRC was held for this expressed purpose. 

Do you think the state of palestine deserves a full membership in the united nations, even their government is unwilling/unable to controll their own people not to attack a legitimate country according to international law in their direct neigborship?

I don't think the UN can recognize Palestine at this point as a full member nation.  Israel toes a very razor thin line between following or defying the UN.  Lets be clear.  Palestine is unwilling to control their people.  State sponsored terrorism exists, and it isn't a well kept secret.  I ultimately side with Israel, I don't hide my support for Netanyahu, although my support not unilaterally exclusive.   This is also a sticky situation where it is one or the other.  You can't accept both knowing full well there will be conflict.  The holy land hasn't been continually without war for thousands of years.  I have no solutions to this situation, religion trumps good politics every day of the week. 
« Last Edit: February 18, 2013, 08:38 PM by TheWalrus »

Online TheWalrus

Re: Wally's school of politics
« Reply #47 on: August 31, 2015, 06:16 AM »
Since the election cycle is rolling around again in america, I am once again taking questions about politics and ready for contemptuous debate.

Donald Trump is a visionary.

Offline Korydex

Re: Wally's school of politics
« Reply #48 on: October 26, 2016, 01:11 PM »
del
« Last Edit: January 31, 2017, 06:30 AM by Korydex »

Offline Husk

Re: Wally's school of politics
« Reply #49 on: October 26, 2016, 01:45 PM »
sure we can talk about jobs and taxes every election but aslong as we are lying to ourselves what really happened on 9/11

it's a huge wound and it hasn't been healed properly



this kind of shit has to be fixed so people have more trust in their government and then we can start fix other things

Offline Mega`Adnan

Re: Wally's school of politics
« Reply #50 on: October 26, 2016, 01:53 PM »
sure we can talk about jobs and taxes every election but aslong as we are lying to ourselves what really happened on 9/11

it's a huge wound and it hasn't been healed properly





Adnan, you are Mega, not Micro and not even faint  :D So fight till the end please.

Online TheWalrus

Re: Wally's school of politics
« Reply #51 on: October 26, 2016, 04:26 PM »
Are we still pretending nuking japan didn't save lives in the long run?  Or still shortsighted?

Offline HHC

Re: Wally's school of politics
« Reply #52 on: October 26, 2016, 04:42 PM »
Why is Trump the better choice Wally?

The only thing I see on the media at my disposal is Hillary = good; Trump = evil, so let's focus on how Trump is digging his own grave with silly statements.. in short, the typical liberal bullshit propaganda.

So cos of the shit I have no idea what Trump or Hillary stands for lol.

I have sympathies for Trump cause he (used to at least) speak his mind and not play the game of pretending to be a morally uptight christian housewife (we all know Hillary is a royal b*tch when there's no mic); that and his new approach to foreign affairs (middle east and Russia), where Hillary seems to continue down the path of cold war and third world imperialism. Well anywho.
Why you're on Trump's side Wally and ya think he stands a chance amidst the media storm?




Online TheWalrus

Re: Wally's school of politics
« Reply #53 on: October 26, 2016, 06:11 PM »
Why is Trump the better choice Wally?

The only thing I see on the media at my disposal is Hillary = good; Trump = evil, so let's focus on how Trump is digging his own grave with silly statements.. in short, the typical liberal bullshit propaganda.

So cos of the shit I have no idea what Trump or Hillary stands for lol.

I have sympathies for Trump cause he (used to at least) speak his mind and not play the game of pretending to be a morally uptight christian housewife (we all know Hillary is a royal b*tch when there's no mic); that and his new approach to foreign affairs (middle east and Russia), where Hillary seems to continue down the path of cold war and third world imperialism. Well anywho.
Why you're on Trump's side Wally and ya think he stands a chance amidst the media storm?
I was being sarcastic.

I hate both of these candidates, but Hillary is likely less shitty than Trump.

Offline HHC

Re: Wally's school of politics
« Reply #54 on: October 26, 2016, 07:14 PM »


Ahh.

Still though, what's the difference in policies?
You just going on experience and general 'reliability'?

Offline Dr Abegod

Re: Wally's school of politics
« Reply #55 on: October 26, 2016, 07:44 PM »
If it wasnt because I couldnt find my american security card to vote overseas, I'd vote for Jill Stein. People say that's like supporting Donald Trump (not voting Hillary), but then I think they missed the point of democracy.

Re: Wally's school of politics
« Reply #56 on: October 26, 2016, 07:47 PM »
Honestly, this is just the result of winner takes all in your voting system
in '92, 20% of the votes went to an independant candidate, but only 1 of the 435 seats didn't go to republicans or democrats.

Fix that broken system and perhaps one day, there will be viable alternatives.

Online TheWalrus

Re: Wally's school of politics
« Reply #57 on: October 26, 2016, 09:05 PM »
I don't think the system can be fixed as currently constructed, D1.

I'll just keep hoping for a small government advocate who doesnt try to strip our civil liberties in the meantime.  Ideologically, Trump is somewhere in that spectrum, but the only problem is he is the anti-christ.  Too bad.

Offline Korydex

Re: Wally's school of politics
« Reply #58 on: October 27, 2016, 05:19 AM »
Trump he is the anti-christ.  Too bad.
Lmao, where you got that from?

About civil liberties, I think you already lost them after 9/11 xd

Offline Triad

Re: Wally's school of politics
« Reply #59 on: July 31, 2019, 01:04 PM »
So can we have some discussion for 2020? What's your opinion on candidates Wally? I really have surface level knowledge for all, but I am curious and I want to learn more.

Imo Joe Biden should have just enjoyed his retirement cause I don't think he has a chance against Trump. He's kinda like a forced meme lol. Also this site does a great job to give him a negative image. ;D

How's Elizabeth Warren? I heard people say she seems to shift towards what people want to hear as opposed to making people want to hear her, what's your opinion?

I guess Bernie Sanders has a kind of charm for some people and people think he can beat Trump. But he's not really my favorite. Much better than f@#!in Biden tho.

By the way how Andrew Yang does against other candidates? He kinda intrigued me.