Friday, October 12, 2012
Another Quick Observation on the V.P. Debate
I was very disappointed in Mr. Ryan on foreign policy (not that I didn't see it coming, mind you). The man apparently thinks that a) we should be staying in Afghanistan indefinitely and b)simply throwing money at the Defense Department (above and beyond even what the Pentagon itself has requested) is somehow going to make us safer. The only thing that I can think of is that this is just another hard-core politician with a humongous blind-spot. The dude is so into cutting out waste in virtually every other part of the government but the Pentagon, not so much....Oh well, maybe Rand Paul and some of the other reasonable Republicans can somehow forge a deal and reform that sucker...and Romney, if elected, will eventually come to his senses.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
One can hope Will, one can hope. But realistically the neocon /socon repub party is what it is. And it ain't pretty.
Les, I know that the younger Paul has disappointed you from time to time. But I gotta give him some due here. He came out the other day pretty strongly opposed to the proposed Romney defense increases, basically saying that if the left has to give in a little on social programs, the right has to be willing to give a little on defense. The dude was very statesmanlike, I thought.
And just what would you suggest be done with defense spending?
How many present members of the military should we put into the unemployment line?
How many employees of Boeing and Lockheed/Martin should we add to the present unemployment rate due to cuts?
Are you more then willing to save the jobs of UAW workers but not defense workers?
I think that the defense budget can be trimmed 10-20 billion, Russ. We spend more than the next 14 countries combined and I think that a lot of the savings can simply come from closing foreign military bases (which do little more than stimulate the economies of THOSE countries).
The only viable exit strategy from Afghanistan is victory. Eliminate the terrorists who have killed so many thousands of innocent Americans and promise to kill many many more.
------------------
Rusty said: "Are you more then willing to save the jobs of UAW workers but not defense workers?"
To save the jobs of UAW workers, get rid of the UAW. It is directly responsible for hundreds of thousands of auto worker jobs lost when UAW demands, entirely unrelated to economic realities, force auto companies to close factories or move them off-shore.
Will: On defense cuts, you have a good idea, to eliminate actual waste. However, most of the proponents of such cuts act as if our enemies are paying them off, as they see the main way to cut costs is to retreat/surrender in the face of enemy aggression.
.
"... maybe Rand Paul and some of the other reasonable Republicans can somehow forge a deal and reform that sucker.."
Reality is a concept whose time has not come.
For the record; there is NO reasonable Republican in the national RepublicanT Party.
"The only viable exit strategy from Afghanistan is victory."
Yea VICTORY! V.I.C.T.O.R.Y! - Ya right. Define victory for US. Really get a grip! Victory, what a chump. Next you'll say Parah Salin was a deep thinker.
Mr Ryan lost because he is a part of a team whose whole campaign is that their political candidate is NOT Mr Obama.
Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.
Of course a blindly partisan person like Ema would say that there is no reasonable Republican. This is typical lowbrow unintellectual garbage that any.... reasonable.... person rejects.
Anyway, what is so wrong with victory.. ie defeating the terrorists instead of surrendering to them? You really need to think things through, Ema.
As for Palin, deep thinker or not, she consistently has better ideas than Obama. Imagine how much better off we would be now if her ticket (which focused on jobs and recovery) had been elected instead of Obamas (which focused on seizing control of healthcare no matter what the cost).
Also, Ryan won the debate since he stuck to the facts and presneted them in a reasonable fashion.
Biden lost, due to an avallanch of his own lies, facial tics, and such craziness as his bashing Romney for correctly calling it on Benghazi early on after Biden was put on the spot for Obama's lying for weeks about this terrorist attack.
Exactly, dmarks, it's the waste; items such as our military bases in places like Aruba. We can still be the number one military power without them.............And Ema dear, both sides are going to have to give a little in order to get a grand deal. Let's just hope that there are enough "reasonable" people on both sides of the aisle to get that done.
I do like Rand Paul, and on this issue he has my full support, not that he needs it.
However, the neocon socon agenda within the rEpublican neo fascist party will not be easy to dismantle. Which of course is why I believe the rEpublican neo fascist party will eventually die a natural death of its own making.
Kind of like becoming extinct, or fossilized.
I dislike Rand Paul some because he talks like a moron. I mean, pronouncing "social security" correctly is not rocket science, is it?
He should excuse himself from voting on anything regarding social security until he stops calling it "So Security"
Will said: "Exactly, dmarks, it's the waste; items such as our military bases in places like Aruba. We can still be the number one military power without them"
Exactly. I still want us to be the Number 1 power, and for military cuts to not affect this at all.
Those on the Left who want military cuts tend to want the US to be diminished, and for the power and aggression of our enemies to grow. Their goal is not saving money, but to cut us down.
Rand Paul, yeah, he does have some moments. LOL
Will,
You seem like you are becoming more conservative to me, and I think one of the reasons why is that the liberals seem to have departed from the site, which gives you more conservative arguments and fewer liberal ones (no good).
Anyway, Ryan did not say we should stay anywhere indefinitely. He specifically said he agreed with the Obama timeline for departure. In fact, he renounced Obama's "failed foreign policy," though he embraces all of the specifics about it and in almost every case said he would effective have done the same thing.
His only gripe was that we acted with international support and consensus, instead of showing our enemies how tough we are by not cooperating with the international community at large on things, but simply making unilateral decisions and implementing them.
He believes that Obama should have done everything he did, and pretty much the same way he did it. That is his explanation of Obama's "Failed foreign policy."
John, I would love to have you back as a liberal commentator. You're sane and you compromise and I could get on back to hugging the middle.
I never left. I have just been overwhelmed with work and other things and had little time to play.
Well, it's good to have you back writing again in any event.
I don't understand the rationale of
spending more on military than the next 17 countries combined . Are we that terrified?
Do we want to trapse around kicking ass and taking names?
..BTW, anyone else here a vet?
I think that Europe, Japan, and South Korea need to spend more of their own money defending themselves. Either that, or pay us.
I find that to be an irrelevant comparison.
No, we aren't terrified at all. Because adequate national defense keeps the wolf from our door.
Post a Comment