William Kristol and everyone at PNAC are fools. There are plenty of them who aren't Jewish. I don't give two shits what religion or nationality they are. It's their political failure that is in question.
I'll spell it out for you It's called REALIST International Relations theory It's THE most effective foreign policy school in history. And PNACs school of endless intervention is a fools parade and an abject failure.
Stay on topic and get a clue.
In the case of Hagel, the accusation of antisemitism is valid. In the list of quotes and other actions which make Hagel's position suspect, one particularly piece stands out, his refusal to sign onto a petition against antisemitism in the Soviet Union, the only member of the senate who refused to sign. Can you explain why he refused to sign a petition against anti-semitism? His apologists claim that he refuses to sign any letters to heads of state, but if that were the case, then why did he sign a letter urging Obama to talk to leaders of Hamas? Hamas has never renounced violence and its covenant demands, not only the destruction of Israel, but of all Jews in the world. Would you at least acknowledge that he supports talks with blatant anti-semites? Or is that too far a logical leap for you?
Finally, he doesn't put America first. If he did, he'd have signed off on the letter to the European Union to designate Hezbollah as a terrorist group (or don't you think that a group that has murdered hundreds of Americans through car bombings, assassinations and executions qualifies?). He is an isolationist, in the same stamp as the members of the 1930s America First Committee, which turned out to be a front for Nazis who were trying to keep America out of WWII, and like them, he's wrong on the issues.
I'd tell you to get a clue, but we both know that you wouldn't be able to find one if it came up and bit you.
You describe a culture war, not a shooting war. You cannot defeat a culture war by military means. See war on drugs, war on poverty, war on homeless, and any other liberal ignoramous endeavor out there. ( I wonder why conservatives use this for what suites them, when it is clearly a fallacy of the left)
There is NO middle eastern nation that rises to the level of a world military power threat of the level of the USSR, Nazi Germany or the modern states of China, or Germany. You have made that argument for years and it still rings hollow. Your fear of bugaboos is tiring.
There are few respected people in International Relations that actually beleive the military threat is on that level, save for the idiots at PNAC. Problem is that no one in charge of US foreign policy actually listens to any of the best and brightest in this subject area.
And NO, not every American believes that Israel and the US completely "share" a common interest. Actually, most scholars of US securtity (ones who are ignored by the stupid Federal Government) actually believe that our security interests are hampered and made worse by this. So it is not as true as you make it.
I can't help you with your gator issue. You're tendancy to bent out of shape over what he did to you creeps into alot of conversations when someone speaks of policy disagreements regarding this subject, and it tends to cloud your view.No, but in your case, the references to kissing William Kristol's ass reminded me of Gator's profanity in lieu of rational argument. Doesn't make you an anti-semite, but it doesn't speak well of your capacity to make an argument.
I stated that Hagel won't cow (kiss ass) to a bunch of third rate Foreign policy morons PNAC. You brought "The JOOOS" into it.
I'm afraid that anyone who agrees with a Senator who says he disagrees with the poltics of Kristol doesn't make them "anti-semite", anymore than disagreeing with Obama makes them racist of blacks or disagreement with US FP regarding Korea, makes one racist of Asians.
Isreali government itself has stated the US should get out of the way and let them handle thier own problems. Sounds like good advice. Hagel has suggested nothing any different.
Probably because taking the time to sign "symbolic" pieces of legislation is a waste of time, stupid, and pointless? That's what Libtards do. Sitting around writing up symbolic condemnations of this or that as if they are doing something. I really could care less about a 13 year old symbolic bill.....but it's a great Red herring if you want to get wrapped around the axel.In the case of Hagel, the accusation of antisemitism is valid. In the list of quotes and other actions which make Hagel's position suspect, one particularly piece stands out, his refusal to sign onto a petition against antisemitism in the Soviet Union, the only member of the senate who refused to sign. Can you explain why he refused to sign a petition against anti-semitism? His apologists claim that he refuses to sign any letters to heads of state, but if that were the case, then why did he sign a letter urging Obama to talk to leaders of Hamas? Hamas has never renounced violence and its covenant demands, not only the destruction of Israel, but of all Jews in the world. Would you at least acknowledge that he supports talks with blatant anti-semites? Or is that too far a logical leap for you?
I am worried with how he will handle AMERICAN foreign policy, not his views on another nations internal politics.
There's no logic in the belief that he harbors ill will to Jews at all. http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/07/ch...n-israel-iran/
“Israel is in a very, very difficult position,” he told the paper. “No border that touches Israel is always secure. We need to work to help protect Israel so it doesn’t get isolated.”
More propaganda Ody? By definition Realist poltics does not = isolationism.Finally, he doesn't put America first. If he did, he'd have signed off on the letter to the European Union to designate Hezbollah as a terrorist group (or don't you think that a group that has murdered hundreds of Americans through car bombings, assassinations and executions qualifies?). He is an isolationist, in the same stamp as the members of the 1930s America First Committee, which turned out to be a front for Nazis who were trying to keep America out of WWII, and like them, he's wrong on the issues.
I would say wrong on the issues would be men like Kristol who should be dressed in clown suits and run out on a rail for their failures over the last 15 years.
Nope it's alive and well. Sure wish it was defunct after the complete and utter failures of it's FP predictions and solutions, but it is not. Those idiots still have influence on American FP and Kristol and his cronies have several other endeavors that get lots of traction. I'll post some if you'd like?The Project for the New American Century was pretty much shut down in the mid-2000s, so your railing at phantoms.
[Lol. So let me see if I get this argument straight? You believe Machiavelian politics is the method best used in modern IR? The man who wrote The Prince, which is the foundation of every modern dictator in the last 200 years is the basis for which I should understand the modern nation state relationship? Ha... Ha... Ha....B]REALIST International Relations theory[/B]? Oh, okay, since it's in bold, you must know what you're talking about. No, wait, it just means that you've figured out the bold text button. Realist International Relations Theory is based on several premises, none of which are espoused by Hagel, or you. Realists believe that mankind is inherently competitive and that this is reflected in the conduct of nations. Conflict is therefore inevitable, especially between states which are culturally and politically disparate (for example, Islamist theocracies and western democracies), and that survival requires the unflinching application of force when it is necessary. Does that sound like Hagel's position on Iran and its terror proxies? Of course not. You don't know what you are talking about when you cite realism in international relations. Read Machiavelli if you want to understand it, but stop pretending that you know what you're talking about.
I studied International relations in college exclusively. I'm not calling myself an expert, but I'm supremely confidant I can hold my own in discussing the frameworks of international politics and what has been effective and what has not. You're going to have to do better than what is essentially the "nuh uh" argument.
The reason the US is in decline is because US policy wonks got influenced in this school in the early 90's and made headroads into US policy positions with clout. Alot of people gott buggered, including me, as I used to believe this garbage, when they read F. Fukuyama's thesis on "The End of History" and it's fouled up the last 20 years with alot of backwards thinking. You get back to me when you've read it, because based on your writings over the years, what you support is not Machiaveli at all in any grand scheme...... It's Fukuyama and his grand theory.
Know thyself Ody. I highly recommend it.
Lol. You know, I've never in my life heard someone condemn the most prominant school of IR in the 20th century that was responsible for bringing down the USSR. Kinda funny actually.
You don't espouse the "Rational Actor" theory in IR. As a matter of fact you have rejected one of the axioms of international politics, so therefore you cannot begin to understand what is effective. Your world view on how to handle the ME is based on some wacky version of believing you are Indiana Jones and that the Iranian caliphate is the Thuggees wating for the God Cali to return to take over the World. Once again, what you speak of is the religious culture of the region, not the actual costs and consequences State actors weigh when making decisions.It's only meaningless and remote if your understanding of history starts on your birthday and never goes back any further. You look at a snapshot of the Middle East and pretend that the 2,000 years of history that preceded it is "meaningless and remote", when what you mean to say is that it doesn't conform to your naive and simplistic worldview.
You would fight an invasion of Culture with bombs and bullets. This is ignorance.
If the West....Americans, and Europeans are too stupid to fight for thier own ideals and laws of western culture, then they have lost already. I don't believe that and I don't believe that Islam is superior to Western culture.
And no gun, or Army can change that.
I'm not a Hagel fanboy, nor do I know if he won't simply turn out to be as bad as the rest of them who've been SOD for the last 15 years. But I do know that his nomination and school of thought is a radical departure from the failures. It can't be any worse than the Panetta's, Rumsfeld,s Gates, and Cohen's of late.
And to end: I don't wish to have any other discussion about this subject based on the subject of this thread, which was basically ad hominem allegations of Anti-Semitism or Godwin's law. If you have a disagreement of the central point that he is not going to be a descent SOD, then speak it. If you cannot come up with a rational arguement based on the central policy disagreements then please don't bother responding to this.
They are all rational actor states.
Goal setting.....Weight of options......Weight of consequences.......Maximizing profit or position of stability.
There's a wiki article if actually studying the issue in depth is too time consuming. I understand it will be for many.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|