AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2013-05-10, 02:41   Link #1001
Vallen Chaos Valiant
Logician and Romantic
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Casey View Post
Sorry, I skipped to this last page. We were talking about impeaching him for Benghazi? Okay, I see where you're coming from now.

mmm, peaches
Although to be honest, the absolute craziest of craziest seem to be on an "Impeach Obama for everything" crusade these days. I heard they even tried that before he even took his 1st oath of office.

As I say, I don't actually think it is a bad thing. People who are publicly insane are easier to avoid than those who are secretly insane. It's just, well, I want Democrats to win because the GOP is frothing at the mouth, but in the long run to have two viable parties is healthier.
__________________
Vallen Chaos Valiant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 02:45   Link #1002
monir
cho~ kakkoii
*Moderator
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 3rd Planet
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Casey View Post
I don't take Vallen's claim (that disapproving of the way Benghazi was handled makes one an insane right wing extremist) too seriously because I know that 'Hyperbole' is his middle name, ...
Whoa! Easy there. We aren't all perfect. You should know that yourself more than anyone. Couldn't you've put it in better words?

As for the issue of Benghazi itself, I think it was pretty clear the Obama administration handled it terribly in every possible way when American lives were at stake. At the same time, it should be noted that no evidence suggested up to this day that there was intentional cover up or conspiracies, the kind GOP's are seeking.
__________________
Eat and sleep! And Solace. Sig by RRW.
Space Brothers Executive member of the ASS. Ready to flee at the first sign of trouble.
monir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 02:47   Link #1003
Vallen Chaos Valiant
Logician and Romantic
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by monir View Post
Whoa! Easy there. We aren't all perfect. You should know that yourself more than anyone. Couldn't you've put it in better words?

As for the issue of Benghazi itself, I think it was pretty clear the Obama administration handled it terribly in every possible way when American lives were at stake. At the same time, it should be noted that no evidence suggested up to this day that there was intentional cover up or conspiracies, the kind GOP's are seeking.
That's my point. Was there mistakes made? Yes. Was there a conspiracy? No. And the more... unhinged members of the GOP are staying with the conspiracy theory.
__________________
Vallen Chaos Valiant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 02:51   Link #1004
Dr. Casey
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Tennessee
Age: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by monir View Post
Whoa! Easy there. We aren't all perfect. You should know that yourself more than anyone. :eyebrow: Couldn't you've put it in better words?
Sorry. I didn't mean it badly, I like the guy quite well. Vallen's just fun to tease. :p
Dr. Casey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 05:47   Link #1005
Badkarma 1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
And who said I was a republican? I've been a card carryin Democrat since '86!
@Dr. Casey is right though, @Vallen Chaos Valient is easy to get riled.
Badkarma 1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 07:40   Link #1006
GDB
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badkarma 1 View Post
And who said I was a republican? I've been a card carryin Democrat since '86!
Because everything you post screams GOP to the core.

Also, pretty sure I have a Spiderman and his Amazing Friends membership card lying around somewhere. Doesn't make me a super hero.
GDB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 07:57   Link #1007
Ledgem
Love Yourself
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 28
I'm still a bit confused as to why Benghazi is such a big deal. I understand that it's being drawn out in an effort to score political points, but why would anyone in the public buy it? Particularly since the politicians' primary concern seems to be finding out who decided to call it a protest instead of a terrorist attack. Why does that matter?

If they said that some security procedure was missed or handled improperly, then I could understand the witch hunt and procedures analysis. If they wanted to discuss funding and ways to ensure that this didn't happen again then I would say that it's worthwhile. But to claim that something was covered up because the words "terror" and "terrorist" weren't used immediately? Am I missing something, or am I correct in saying that Congress - our highly-paid, public servants - are wasting their time on something ridiculous yet again?
__________________
Ledgem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 08:03   Link #1008
kyp275
ZA ZOMBIE!!!
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Somewhere in the EVE cluster...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ledgem View Post
I'm still a bit confused as to why Benghazi is such a big deal. I understand that it's being drawn out in an effort to score political points, but why would anyone in the public buy it?
I would imagine that it's because it's much more "sellable" to their base voters, and that the general public really IS that stupid.
kyp275 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 08:19   Link #1009
Vallen Chaos Valiant
Logician and Romantic
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyp275 View Post
I would imagine that it's because it's much more "sellable" to their base voters, and that the general public really IS that stupid.
If Bengahzi actually WORKS in getting GOP back to power, I would say the voters deserved the GOP as their government.
__________________
Vallen Chaos Valiant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 11:34   Link #1010
ganbaru
books-eater youkai
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant View Post
If Bengahzi actually WORKS in getting GOP back to power, I would say the voters deserved the GOP as their government.
Too bad than the impact of such election wouldn't be limited to thoses voters. A major fuck up from the US is likely to affect others countries as well.
__________________

ganbaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 12:09   Link #1011
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ledgem View Post
I'm still a bit confused as to why Benghazi is such a big deal. I understand that it's being drawn out in an effort to score political points, but why would anyone in the public buy it? Particularly since the politicians' primary concern seems to be finding out who decided to call it a protest instead of a terrorist attack. Why does that matter?

If they said that some security procedure was missed or handled improperly, then I could understand the witch hunt and procedures analysis. If they wanted to discuss funding and ways to ensure that this didn't happen again then I would say that it's worthwhile. But to claim that something was covered up because the words "terror" and "terrorist" weren't used immediately? Am I missing something, or am I correct in saying that Congress - our highly-paid, public servants - are wasting their time on something ridiculous yet again?
It keeps their base frothing at the mouth and in line. The *problem* is - the GOP base is shrinking. Both from people (like me) abandoning it over the last 20 years and from simple age and race demographics. The old jackasses are dying and the white supremacist twits can't breed fast enough. Anyone who can add and see that Main Street has been thrown under the bus for Wall St. should know to stay away (though Wall St. is steadily buying out the DEM side of the aisle, too).

Seriously, yes Benghazi was a muff of sorts. The stupidity is that *anyone* who remembers past last week is that there were dozens of such incidents over the last 10 years that went without a peep from these same nimrods.
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 12:18   Link #1012
willx
Nyaaan~~
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Age: 30
^ Stop ragging on Wall Street. They need love too.

__________________
Nyaaaan~~
willx is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 12:25   Link #1013
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 56
Wall St. doesn't "create jobs" in any significant way. In fact, they reward corporations for eliminating jobs. And that's the sea change here - figuring out how to multiple money without actually creating value or improving an economy by the use of financial instruments and extraction.
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 12:48   Link #1014
flying ^
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ledgem View Post
I'm still a bit confused as to why Benghazi is such a big deal. I understand that it's being drawn out in an effort to score political points, but why would anyone in the public buy it? Particularly since the politicians' primary concern seems to be finding out who decided to call it a protest instead of a terrorist attack. Why does that matter?

If they said that some security procedure was missed or handled improperly, then I could understand the witch hunt and procedures analysis. If they wanted to discuss funding and ways to ensure that this didn't happen again then I would say that it's worthwhile. But to claim that something was covered up because the words "terror" and "terrorist" weren't used immediately? Am I missing something, or am I correct in saying that Congress - our highly-paid, public servants - are wasting their time on something ridiculous yet again?




"why Benghazi is such a big deal."
"why would anyone in the public buy it?"
"to claim that something was covered up because the words "terror" and "terrorist" weren't used immediately? Am I missing something?"





You are missing the context of the moment, and the timing of the falsified and manipulated reporting to protect the Administration's future.

The Administration was in a heated political battle, with one of their promoted strengths being the victorious campaign against terrorist opposition to the USA. Voters, swing voters of 2008 who were disappointed with continued involvement in Afghanistan and the Middle East in 2012 were being courted to repeat their vote for President Obama. The strategy was that these voters owed their vote to Obama, despite the continued war in Afghanistan, because the Obama Administration was claiming that their foreign policy had won the war on terror. The message to voters being that the Obama Administration has an obligation to remain in Afghanistan as a temporary (forgivable) concession, because the Obama Administration policies were resulting in a permanent (supportable) solution to the previous hostile attitudes violently expressed against the USA.

The Administration could not afford recognition that their foreign policy was ineffective.

The direction of the Arab Spring leadership fallout was headed to a more radicalized style of government in Egypt, and the direction of Libya was undetermined. The Obama Administration supported the opposition to Mummar Gaddafi and was framing the Libyan victory as a foreign policy victory. The introduction of troops and military assets in the Obama Administration's Libyan policy had already angered previous Obama supporters who opposed the U.S. entry into another foreign civil war. The Obama Administration policy actions undertaken without an approval vote of Congress was being viewed as arrogance and hypocrisy after the broken promises since 2008. The attack that resulted in the death of the Ambassador would have ravaged these pacifist voter's confidence in the Obama Administration's foreign policy, a risk the Administration could not allow.

The Obama Administration choose to covertly redirect the cause of the attack on a motive removed from foreign policy, and in the haste of the moment chose to redirect the motive to an unknown video of limited release and very limited public exposure. This redirection lasted until the election, until the swing voters who were already unhappy with President Obama's foreign policy in Libya were secure Democrat votes.

The deception did not start and stop at the introduction of the video as "the motive," it was paralleled with scrubbing of all references to hostile opposition resulting from the Obama Administration foreign policy actions in the Middle East. The word "terror" was replaced by "violence," as if the motive for these actions were unknown and ambiguous (when the Administration received reports both before, during, and after the attack that the violent faction taking action was a terrorist group). The entire deception was a (successful) effort to protect the pacifist voter who was already disappointed with broken promises and the prior involvement in Libya by the Obama Administration.

The failure of this deception would have resulted in a lost Presidential campaign, and the Obama Administration knew this risk was too great due to the timing and sensitivity of voter opposition to U.S. involvement in Libya and they chose the video deception to maintain their Democrat Party loyalty.

The deception and inaction (before, during and after the attack) was contemptible, more due to the motives than the actual acts, but the coverup and extended embrace that the video was the motive for the attack in Benghazi throughout the election debates and final days when the truth was known to the President is unacceptable.

Last edited by flying ^; 2013-05-10 at 13:03.
flying ^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 12:56   Link #1015
willx
Nyaaan~~
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Age: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vexx View Post
Wall St. doesn't "create jobs" in any significant way. In fact, they reward corporations for eliminating jobs. And that's the sea change here - figuring out how to multiple money without actually creating value or improving an economy by the use of financial instruments and extraction.
That sounds very good and all, but my friend is an IT/management consultant and his primary job is eliminating jobs as well -- via automation, best practices and IT infrastructure. Obsolete jobs are obsolete. As a person I would likely sympathize with people out of work and miserable, but big picture, unneeded roles are unneeded .. and I don't care what whit that those roles are now gone.

Financial engineering in and of itself seldom creates value unless it removes inefficiencies or economic drag -- but the economic and financial system itself features importantly for businesses like GE to manage it's daily financing needs to "make stuff"

"Wall Street" and "Bankers" are not just stockbrokers, hedge funds and investment bankers (most people don't even have a basic comprehension of what investment bankers even actually do).
__________________
Nyaaaan~~
willx is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 13:24   Link #1016
Ledgem
Love Yourself
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by flying ^ View Post
The Administration was in a heated political battle, with one of their promoted strengths being the victorious campaign against terrorist opposition to the USA. Voters, swing voters of 2008 who were disappointed with continued involvement in Afghanistan and the Middle East in 2012 were being courted to repeat their vote for President Obama. The strategy was that these voters owed their vote to Obama, despite the continued war in Afghanistan, because the Obama Administration was claiming that their foreign policy had won the war on terror.
I don't know about this. It's certainly possible that someone in the government was thinking along the lines that you've mentioned, but I have a hard time believing that it represented the administration's efforts because it seems pretty out of touch with reality.

Case in point, those who voted for the Democrats - at least, those who I know (and I know many more of those than I do Republicans) - didn't care about the "war on terror." Most of us (I'm grouped in with this one) thought the entire idea of the "war on terror" was pretty stupid. Terror isn't a country or a person, so how do you win a war on it? It was a term that was coined under President Bush and most of the Democratic voters really didn't care about it. They simply wanted us to withdraw our troops, and while Obama moved much more slowly than people wanted on it, that's what he did.

Quote:
Originally Posted by flying ^ View Post
The Obama Administration choose to covertly redirect the cause of the attack on a motive removed from foreign policy, and in the haste of the moment chose to redirect the motive to an unknown video of limited release and very limited public exposure. This redirection lasted until the election, until the swing voters who were already unhappy with President Obama's foreign policy in Libya were secure Democrat votes.
This line of reasoning doesn't work out. People didn't really care about what sparked the initial violence. Whether it was a sudden flash-mob over a video or whether it was a carefully planned attack in response to American actions, an American embassy was attacked. Why was an American embassy attacked, instead of some other country's embassy? It's because of the foreign policy we've taken over the past few years.

In other words, people already knew that our foreign policy was making us very unpopular in the Muslim world, and Democrats blamed former President Bush for that foreign policy (even if Obama didn't radically deviate from it). Trying to pin the embassy flare-up on a video would not have altered that view. As far as voters were concerned, Obama was safe. The motive that you've described doesn't really fit, unless you want to believe that Obama's team was really out of touch with American citizens. If you do believe that, practically every political analyst disagrees with you, as I've read nothing but praise and grudging admiration for how Obama's campaign operated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by willx View Post
That sounds very good and all, but my friend is an IT/management consultant and his primary job is eliminating jobs as well -- via automation, best practices and IT infrastructure. Obsolete jobs are obsolete. As a person I would likely sympathize with people out of work and miserable, but big picture, unneeded roles are unneeded .. and I don't care what whit that those roles are now gone.
Automation and technological development has resulted in a job shift and the creation of new jobs. Much of the financial sector seems to be involved with shipping jobs overseas or finding new ways to force people to do more for less.
__________________
Ledgem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 13:32   Link #1017
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 56
What Ledgem said, not necessary to repeat it as such. False conflation of issues.
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 15:14   Link #1018
Kyuu
=^^=
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 42 10' N (Latitude) 87 33' W (Longitude)
Age: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ledgem View Post
Case in point, those who voted for the Democrats - at least, those who I know (and I know many more of those than I do Republicans) - didn't care about the "war on terror." Most of us (I'm grouped in with this one) thought the entire idea of the "war on terror" was pretty stupid.
Furthermore, with bin Laden dead, as far as I'm concerned, the mission in Afganistan is done. The remaining efforts against terrorism is merely to prevent it - as much as possible. If terror does happen (like Boston), it is to be minimized. Just simple, small bombings -- rather than complete destruction of whole buildings, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ledgem View Post
so how do you win a war on it?
A game with no endgame is dangerous; for it can perpetuate and be prolonged.

Quote:
To date, this is the longest war ever endured by the U.S. The only other longest wars the U.S. participated in were the Vietnam War from 1964-1972, and the Iraq War from 2003-2011. Sadly, there was no true victory in either of those two wars. Unfortunately, the same unsuccessful outcome will be true with the Afghanistan War.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nake-m...b_3220799.html

After the Iraq War was ended, the question I have is: "OK, what did we get out of it?"

With Afganistan, OK. It was to completely destroy this country's capability to host large scale terrorist operations. Well, that's done, especially after bin Laden's death. So, it's time for troops to get back home; and the remainder of the job falls on monitoring and prevention.
Kyuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 15:52   Link #1019
Ithekro
Space Battleship
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 36
Technically the US was involved in Vietnam since 1959.
__________________
Dessler Soto, Banzai!
Ithekro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2013-05-10, 15:54   Link #1020
Ledgem
Love Yourself
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyuu View Post
With Afganistan, OK. It was to completely destroy this country's capability to host large scale terrorist operations. Well, that's done, especially after bin Laden's death.
I wouldn't say it's done, but then I also don't think that it's possible to "destroy a country's capability to host large scale terrorist operations." If Afghanistan were more secure and prosperous then the chances of a terror group being able to take hold and operate would be very low, but that isn't a transformation that America can bring about. The Afghans need to do it for themselves.

That goes for just about every other country, as well. The biggest blunder that many Americans made (possibly even within our government) was the assumption that everyone on this planet wants to be just like us, and that they would do it if only they weren't repressed. Remove the dictator, help to ensure that at least one fair election is held, and then the country will automatically become a democracy in our image. Hopefully we all know better now.
__________________
Ledgem is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 00:38.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.