Why I'll Never Support Interventionist Warmonger Obama

[Eldritch]

To me Bush vs. Gore was the first very potent example of "The system gets what it wants—whether by hook or by crook." (Bush vs. Kerry was still another example.) The "voters" seem to have been comparatively incidental to the process.

If the "voters" go along with it, so much the better for appearances' sake.

If they don't? Well, it's a relatively small inconvenience for the real "deciders" to create a narrative that "the people" will believe.

[LilyPatToo]

I agree. And also--did anyone else sense discomfort in Obama's demeanor as he assumed a degree of "strong father" resolve in that speech of his? Whatever/whoever he is deep inside, I had the sense that he was doing what had to be done, rather than reveling in the authoritarian posturing/wording/tone. A number of commentators remarked on how oddly it came across to them, so I don't think I was imagining it.

LilyPat

[timetunneler]

I'd like to thank chiggerbit for that post on the previous page--those are all points I've raised (or tried to raise, rather) with the "Only naive idiots still bother to VOTE!" contingent

I think this discussion would be much improved if people would distinguish between the idea that voting itself is a waste and the idea that voting for the Democratic party is ineffictive/insufficient/delusional/fillintheblank. There is such a distinction being made by people likr myself, but we all seem to be lumped into the same category. And I strongly object to the term "spoiler" to refer to alternatives to the major party candidates. The spoiler to me is the party of "hope" and "change" that backs the global war on terror, domestic spying and telecom immunity, REAL ID, the Patriot Act, speeding cameras, smoking bans and every other infringement on liberty that upsets me. No offense to chigger.

Regardless of whether you personally vote or not.. you will be living in the world created by the people who do. So yes, maybe you should consider swaying the vote one way or another.

The vote apparently does count... if it didn't why would John McCain pick a woman to grab votes or how did we possibly get the "black guy" as the Dem candidate when a white guy would be a safer choice. That should clue you in that the puppet masters do not have total contrrol. The vote counts... and the more people that vote one way, the harder it is for them to steal that vote.

[timetunneler]

You forget Clinton murdered just as many Iraqis or more in 8 years of nonstop carpet bombing/horrific sanctions

No Bill Clinton obviously did not murder just as many Iraqis or more than what is going on now. Come on 8bit!

[timetunneler]

A third party vote is simply a protest vote. It doesn't result in a mandate for an elected representative, so it is a "throw away", an impotent waste.

While the choice between Democrat or Republican often involves comparable levels of distrust of both local candidates, a distinction still exists at the national party level policies and the leadership candidate platforms and personalities. That is where the crunch decision rests.

While the electoral college system dilutes the direct impact of the individual voter's franchise, the system still delivers its support for the chosen party's candidate. So the ballot choice between the two parties counts. That is your voice.

In the upcoming election it is also clear to most analytical voters of conscience and critical thinking that the correct choice is obvious.

And that ain't "right"!

Good first post! People who are complaining that Obama ain't perfect enough and are going to sit out are going to find themselves sitting out their entire lives. Like I've side before.. in a country of 350 millions people with competing interests... the odds you will ever find a perfect candidate are close to none.

You make a compromise vote or you make no vote at all. I have nothing against people who opt out. I have opted out many times myself. This time no... regardless of what Obama turns out to be I am going to try and sway things to the democrats with my single vote because the last 8 years have been an ABSOLUTE FUCKING NIGHTMARE...

If Obama goes Neocon when he gets in... I'm going to join everyone and jump all over his skinny ass to. But enough is enough... anything that can be done to shut these fucks down NEEDS to be done... I'll worry about whether Obama is a crypto-fascist later. I already know what McCain is so the choice is clear.

Again, I respect people who opt out.... I have been there... I know why you are opting out.. because you want to see the system crash.. you guys hint at what you really feel but rarely say it out right... but I think I know what you're thinking. A system crash wouldn't be wise... because system crashes usually lead directly into fullblown fascism/authoritarianism.

If you think you're going to see the system crash and then when its over find yourself in a bigger house with more money and more freedom then YOU WOULD BE WRONG. Ask the Iraqis.

If the USA crashes, expect to stand in lots of lines and to have lots of cops and military types in your face for the next 10 years trying to keep order. There is no perfect American Utopia coming that will personally fullfill all of YOUR PERSONAL desires. Work with what you are given or take what they give you.

Hope you know that. Hope you care.

[Eldritch]

You forget Clinton murdered just as many Iraqis or more in 8 years of nonstop carpet bombing/horrific sanctions

No Bill Clinton obviously did not murder just as many Iraqis or more than what is going on now. Come on 8bit!

I don't know if he "murdered" them or not, but it does appear that millions perished needlessly—and with his tacit support—during the Clinton presidency.

From an article dated October 23, 2000 in Common Dreams:

The U.N. embargo has devastated all of life in Iraq. But nowhere is the deprivation more evident than in the once-modern health care system, where sanctions deny doctors the medicine and equipment they need to save patients dying of the curable diseases burgeoning amid the wreckage of war. U.N. officials estimate more than 1 million Iraqis have died in the last decade as a direct result of the sanctions.

The embargo is harvesting children. Before the Persian Gulf War, when food was plentiful and clean water readily available, the greatest pediatric health problem in Iraq was obesity. Now, with widespread food shortages and contaminated drinking water, undernourished children are stalked by cholera and typhoid. UNICEF blames the sanctions for the deaths of more than 500,000 Iraqi children under 5 since 1991.

Officials in the United States, the strongest supporter of the sanctions, blame the suffering on Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. They say Saddam can end the sanctions by allowing U.N. inspections to ensure Iraq is not developing nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.

But the embargo does not appear to be affecting Saddam or his friends, who have billions of dollars in hard currency, access to high-quality health care and a history of indifference to the suffering of the people. The regime stopped cooperating with weapons inspections in 1998. The United Nations withdrew its inspectors; the regime says they will not be allowed to return.

It is the people who are being punished. UNICEF says thousands are dying every month.

[chlamor]

You forget Clinton murdered just as many Iraqis or more in 8 years of nonstop carpet bombing/horrific sanctions

No Bill Clinton obviously did not murder just as many Iraqis or more than what is going on now. Come on 8bit!

That is accurate.

Clinton oversaw the death of somewhere between 1.5 million- 3 million Iraqis. We will never know the exact number.

Bush the younger will ultimately have somewhere between 2- 5 million Iraqi deaths on his hands. We will never know the exact number.

Some consolation heh? That bloody story, ongoing and bi-partisan, about sums up the difference between the Dems and the Republicans.

If you had to guess how many Iraqi children do you think will be slaughtered during an Obama presidency?[/list]

[cptmarginal]

The vote apparently does count... if it didn't why would John McCain pick a woman to grab votes or how did we possibly get the "black guy" as the Dem candidate when a white guy would be a safer choice. That should clue you in that the puppet masters do not have total contrrol. The vote counts... and the more people that vote one way, the harder it is for them to steal that vote.

psy-op

[elfismiles]

Obama: send 15,000 more troops to Afghanistan
http://rigorousintuition.ca/board/viewtopic.php?t=21028

[elfismiles]

Even as he pledges to end the war in Iraq, Obama promises to increase Pentagon spending, boost the size of the Army and Marines, bolster the Special Forces, expand intelligence agencies and maintain the hundreds of US military bases that dot the globe. He supports a muscular multilateralism that includes NATO expansion, and according to the Times of London, his advisers are pushing him to ask Defense Secretary Robert Gates to stay on in an Obama administration. Though he is against the idea of the United States imposing democracy abroad, Obama does propose a sweeping nation-building and democracy-promotion program, including strengthening the controversial National Endowment for Democracy and constructing a civil-military apparatus that would deploy to rescue and rebuild failed and failing states in Africa, Asia and the Middle East.

...

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080721/dreyfuss

Maybe that "pragmatist "Colin can get a position with the "centrist" Obama and we can continue with the rich liberal Democratic tradition of aggressive US interventionism masked as humanitarianism?

http://rigorousintuition.ca/board/viewt ... 261#223261

[professorpan]

If you had to guess how many Iraqi children do you think will be slaughtered during an Obama presidency?

Far fewer than would be slaughtered under McInsane.

[elfismiles]

FUCK OBAMA

In case you missed it:

POLITICO Live
December 26, 2010

Bush officials: Obama terror policies echo Bush's

While Vice President Dick Cheney and other prominent conservatives have faulted President Barack Obama for going slack in the war on terror, two top Bush administration intelligence officials are arguing that the Obama team has been just as tough--if not tougher.

"The new administration has been as aggressive, if not more aggressive, in pursing these issues, because they're real," former Director of National Intelligence and retired Navy Admiral Michael McConnell said on CNN's "State of the Union."

"You commend them for that?" host Candy Crowley asked.

"I do commend them for that," McConnell said.

Former Central Intelligence Agency Director Michael Hayden also argued that the Obama approach has been by and large the same--regardless of campaign rhetoric.

"When one is in office, it's -- as the admiral has suggested, when one is in office, that responsibility weighs pretty heavily. And so we've seen a powerful consistency between two administrations trying to deal with this problem," Hayden said. "Actually, I've seen it over two administrations and I thank god every day for the continuity."

"Regardless of which side of the political spectrum you come from or what your political views might be, these threats are very real and very serious. And we have to -- have to deal with them in a very serious way," McConnell added.

Taken CNN transcripts, here.

viewtopic.php?p=373758#p373758