BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?

Subject: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 02:49 PM

I see it as a bit of humourous hyperbole. I see it used in much the same way as a political cartoon. McCain supports high troop level in Iraq and claims we can win there. But he does not tell us what a win would look like. He says that if no Americans are being killed, we can stay there indefinitely and he says that we cannot leave while our troops are there. This seems to me to be a recipe for constant war.

But some have taken offense to the characterization. Do they see senator McCain as a proponent of peace? Lets hear from them.

I would caution that a cut and paste of another person's words will probably not get a favorable response. I guess it is OK to cite or quote someone else to back up an argument of your own. But even then it would be better to quote someone with some credibility and no axe to grind rather than a partisan columnist or blogger.

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: kendall
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 02:55 PM

He is a career military man. It has been his bread and butter. He is for war. He would rather fight 'till hell freezes over before "losing" another war.


But, as Obama has pointed out, there were no Al Queda in Iraq before we invaded.

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: Amos
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 02:57 PM

McCain, by his own statement, despises war, and has said that diplomacy is a far superior tactic.

But his statement about long-duration basing in Iraq indicates that he subscribes to an imperial mindset. SO although the characteriZation is an unfair exagerration, similar to the ones levied against Kerry and Howard Dean so efficaciously by the more bitter proponents of the right, there may be a whiff of truth in it, under the surface.

He's a wealthy, white military man. He believed in the war on Iraq, despite his criticism of its praxis. I think there's plenty of room for doubt about his use of non-military (and more important, non-imperialist) strategies in foreiogn relations, and more room than a little regarding his sense of economic wisdom.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 03:05 PM

Disqualified automatically because he is wealthy? White? Served in the armed forces?

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 03:10 PM

So, Obama is disqualified because he is black and has no military service?


IMO, McCain has shown both military and civilian service. Has any other candate?

Or, if being in the Senate is not enough ( civilian service) , why would we want to look at Obama? What jobs has HE done, before being elected?

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 03:22 PM

>>Disqualified automatically because he is wealthy? White? Served in the armed forces?<<

Q,

That is a straw man. No one before you brought up disqualification. Please do not counter arguments that no one else has made.

Amos brought up those factors as arguments why McCain might be considered McWar.
I don't see the first two factors as very relevant.

But while having served in the armed forces would in no way disqualify him as President it could be a factor in calling him McWar.

An example of this would be the records of Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Kristol and Feith who are Chicken Hawks and Rumsfeld who is a hawk but not a chicken.

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 03:37 PM

Just trying to follow the reasoning used by Amos.

"He's a wealthy, white, military man." Then Amos applied that reasoning in the following two sentences.
Instead of 'disqualified' perhaps I should have said 'suspect.' Okay-

He's suspect because he is a wealthy, white, military man?

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: kendall
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 03:38 PM

So, place a value on going halfway around the world and bombing the piss out of a country that did us no harm.How does that qualify one to be President?

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 04:09 PM

Q

Your point is well taken and please pardon me for trying to keep things on track.

I don't want to put too fine a point on this. But the question is whether or not it is acceptable to call him McWar. It is simply a nickname that associates him with the war.

You are in Canada, and perhaps you have not seen the same coverage and campaign promises that we see here.

He certainly has wrapped his campaign around the war and has made no bones about it. According to McCain the choice in this election will be clear, supporting Bush's war, or not.
He has used loaded phrases such as "Cut and run" to describe the Democrats' positions.
To many Republicans, this position both acceptable and a qualification for President. To Amos, I suspect it is not, but that is not relevant to this debate.

The object of this debate is not to debate whether or not he should be President but whether or not it is acceptable to call him "McWar". Of course whether or not one of us debaters finds it acceptable is purely our own opinion. Our arguments are to support our opinions.

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: Donuel
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 04:29 PM

The McCain family has eaten from the plates of defense contractors for 80 years.

If we could only move the defense budget from 50% to 90%.
Defense contractors gotta eat too.

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: Amos
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 04:39 PM

Q:

Excuse me. I see where you could have gotten the idea I was voicing common prejuidice against him. The fact that he comes fromt he same class of people (white, military, wealthy, male Republicans) that have created the military mess should not imply that he himself would do so. But taken in combination with his past statements, it seems more fair. But I withdraw the class slur.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: Amos
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 04:58 PM

STeve Clemons, 3-31:

"McCain's comments on the Iraq War and the inevitability of more wars in the region has been reckless.

And the notion that McCain can maintain these wars and the huge military expenditures that we have today without raising taxes is also folly. Nixon Center President Dimitri Simes makes this point today in an interesting piece by Eli Lake about Republicans turning towards Obama.

We should all worry about future presidents who have forgotten John Quincy Adams' admonition that America should not go out to "seek monsters to destroy."

The sick reality is that there are too many presidents who seek such monsters as ways to define themselves and their tenures -- and as a way to generate "legacy."

Despite Loconte's effort to suggest that McCain has some realism in him, McCain appears like a dragon-chaser. Hillary Clinton too frequently comes off as someone who might define her presidency through conflict. Her commitment to "coercive diplomacy" has the ring of a dragon-chasing president.

And Barack Obama, while less committed to this path than the other presidential options, may take it anyway as he "reacts" to a world testing his resolve and kicking the tires of hope rather than realism in international affairs.

-- Steve Clemons"


A sentiment I am inclined to agree with.

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 05:25 PM

Jack, we get the same CNN, Fox, MSNBC, etc. stuff you get. Also the tripe and comedy hours (Coulter, Limbaugh, Wolf Bluster, mind-boggled what's his name, etc.). We get many of the speeches in full (I watched McCain's- the only one recently with some substance- I will look forward to more of his program). Might even watch PBS (Calgary and Edmonton pay for the Spokane station). Few here watch Canadian TV (possibly the hockey, but all else is dullsville) when the bullshit is so rich elsewhere.

Many of us get online editions of NY Times, Washington Post, LA Times, WSJ, etc. Horror of horrors, even the Huffington Post.
In fact so much that we are getting bored and to the point where we don't care who wins. We don't expect any magical 'change,' as one campaigner has suggested, will come. Just the same old, but perhaps an IQ point or two higher than Bush and Condi.

And it should be obvious to anyone that a U. S. Military presence will continue in Korea, Okinawa, Middle East, EU, a few Pacific Islands, etc. for years to come, regardless of the winner.

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 05:39 PM

One question to ask and a little something to read.


John McCain: Peace Movement Fizzling
posted 04/03, by Proud Republican (viewed 98 times)



McCain: Peace Movement Fizzling

The peace protests that received wide and uncritical coverage from sympathetic reporters during the months before the Iraq war may now be fizzling out.

At least that's the assessment from Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who noted a change in U.S. and British attitudes toward the war late Wednesday in an interview with nationally syndicated radio hosts John Batchelor and Paul Alexander.

"It's kind of interesting that the support for the war has remained at a steady 70 percent," McCain told the radio duo. "So the kind of anti-war stuff has kind of tailed off in the United States and in England."

The maverick Republican gave President Bush high marks for his conduct of the war, telling Batchelor and Alexander, "I think he's shown determination, he's talked to the American people and he's remained calm throughout, so I think he's done well."




I forget the question.

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 05:45 PM

Bush by my definition is not a chicken hawk as he served. If someone has not served him/herself I suggest refraining from calling someone that name if they have served. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 05:54 PM

"So, place a value on going halfway around the world and bombing the piss out of a country that did us no harm.How does that qualify one to be President?" - Kendall

Very good question Kendall, why not ask those who specifically identified Iraq as posing the greatest threat to the United States of America and the middle-east region and strongly advised your President and his Administration to do something about it before it was too late.

You will find that the people you must ask the question of are those who were sitting in the House of Representatives and in the Senate who also sat in the Joint House Security Committee. Another group to be asked your question are those who served in the Intelligence Services of the United States of America and gave the President exactly the same advice, mark you Kendall they did actually do that in late-January and early-February 1998.

JTS in another thread raised McCain's age as being a serious drawback to a nation engaged in a war situation. Well McCain has experience of the sharp end of the military in time of war and was also a POW, he is now 72 years old - Well Jack The Sailor, I can think of another with quite a similar CV - his name - Sir Winston Churchill, who between the ages of 66 and 72 managed to lead his country through the greatest War this World has ever known - I believe that he did so rather well.

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 05:54 PM

Sorry about that Q, didn't mean to say that you were news deprived at all.

I grew up in Canada, lived there until 1999. When I listened to and watched the CBC for news, my perspective was radically different. I guess I was projecting.

I agree about the other places there are bases. Though I feel that a shuffle might be in order. For one thing, we probably have too many men and tanks in Germany since it is no longer a frontier.

The presence in the Mid East is my main concern. I don't ever want to see Iran attacked from no matter how strategic the goal unless Shiite factions there are in accord and leading the charge. Both Clinton and McCain want to use US troops there "to deal with the Iranian threat." I think that would be most unwise. Perhaps we do need troops stationed in the Middle East, but they don't have to be in Iraq, refereeing a civil war and drawing fire from Wahabi extremists and I am afraid that while they are there in great numbers, that is what they will have to do.

McCain says that we can keep troops there if they are not being killed but as long as they are being killed they must stay. I don't like that position. I believe that there are other possibilities that can be explored.

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: Amos
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 06:13 PM

Bush served?

Scyooze me?

He was a reservist who cut his time short to get into a political campaign.

Where was the service?



A

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 06:40 PM

Teribus,

There is often a world of difference it the energy and mental capacity between a 66 year old and a 72 year old. People deteriorate with each passing year. Its a sad fact.

McCain will be 76 at the end of the next presidential term 80 for the one after that.

Comparing him to Churchill is apples and oranges.

Sorry to disagree mg. But the way I understand it the USAF spent a million dollars training Bush Junior and he was too chicken to take his medical exam to keep his flight status.

Rumsfeld volunteered to fight, and he fought. Bush used his dad to get him into the Texas ANG to avoid fighting. He could have volunteered to be a Navy Aviator and perhaps shared a cell with McCain. He didn't.

I can call them chicken hawks. They put forth wars as a solution to what ails us but didn't back that up with deeds. I am not a hawk and have never been of the right age when my country was at war.

I am not a chicken dove either. Sometimes I think war is required. But at least I don't lie to make it happen like Chaney did or say it is romantic like Bush did. (As if he would have any idea.)

You can call me a chicken chicken is you want. But I am still going to call them Chicken Hawks. I am still pissed of about how their swift boat campaign and Plamegate smeared a couple of genuine patriots.

After all isn't our right to do that something that Rumsfeld and George H.W. Bush fought for?

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 07:34 PM

A short documentary of McCain being shot down.

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: Bobert
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 07:54 PM

Is McCain McWar???

Does a duck quack???

Lets get real here... The guy talks peace but pushes endless war... He is hopelessly entwined in the Bush policies...

Iraq is a complete and total failure... It was the largest foiegn policy blunder since Vietnam and manybe worse seein' as we had Vietnam as a model of what the Hell not to do...

McWar???

Yeah... He's earned it...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: frogprince
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 08:41 PM

I have far more respect for McCain than I have, or ever expect to have, for GWB. But as to the question:

About four years ago, I was driving home from work when I heard, for the first time, an actual tape of LBJ discussing the Vietnam situation on the phone. There was nothing there I didn't know, but I had never heard it in that direct way before. LBJ said in so many words that he knew we couldn't win in Vietnam, militarily or diplomatically. But he kept sending our men to die. I had to pull over and park until I could stop crying.

GWB, when asked what lesson should be learned from Vietnam, has said, "Don't quit". He has lied, possibly even to himself, about the realities of Iraq from beginning to present.

McCain has continued to back GWB, and to give every indication that he believes a military victory in Iraq is possible. I consider him a basically honest man and a patriot. But I can't fault anyone for calling him "McWar".

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: kendall
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 08:54 PM

By the end of the 19th century, the USA was a 7th rate power. We needed bases outside the USA to become a world power, so we looked around to see who we could beat, and up comes Spain. They had those bases all around the world and we wanted them. So, with the help of the yellow journalist, Wm. Randolph Hurst who published false horror stories about Spain's atrocities in Cuba, and the trumped up attack on the battle ship Maine, we went to war and took over Spain's bases.
We are still in Cuba and the Phillipines after almost 100 years. It will be the same with the middle east. We have 700 bases around the world. When is enough enough?

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 08:57 PM

When is the twelfth of never?

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: SINSULL
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 09:11 PM

I am as concerned about Obama's withdrawal plans as McCain's plans to stay. When we pull out we will leave civil war behind. Iraq's neighbors will be forced to involve themselves, destabilizing the entire region. Oil will be a minor concern compared to the risk of nuclear combat. And terrorism will remain a serious threat. This war has created at least two new generations of children who will hate us - rightfully so.

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 09:15 PM

Can't fault that logic Kendell, I watch the video of what he went through in Saigon and I feel one way. I listen to all of the good arguments against war and feel another. McCain is a much better man than Bush. And really I would have no problem with bases in Iraq if the Iraqis would welcome them. McCain said there is no problem if Americans aren't dying. But I don't think that is the case. I think one hundred years in Iraq would likely be one hundred years of fighting. If Americans aren't dying there because of the presence of US troops, some one will be.

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: Barry Finn
Date: 01 Apr 08 - 02:11 AM

Has anyone check McWar's past record for voting on military actions as the solution or the way to solve problems. His past shows that he's been for war all along with olny a slight hint of diplomacy.

Yes Kendall, we are still trying to build bases all over the world, & the Russians are getting a little pissed about it too.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: Arne
Date: 01 Apr 08 - 08:33 AM

BeardedBruce:

[W]hy would we want to look at Obama? What jobs has HE done, before being elected?

What jobs had Dubya done before he was (s)elected? To anyone paying attention, the present disasters are wholly unsurprising.

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: Arne
Date: 01 Apr 08 - 08:37 AM

Teribus:

Very good question Kendall, why not ask those who specifically identified Iraq as posing the greatest threat to the United States of America and the middle-east region and strongly advised your President and his Administration to do something about it before it was too late.

PNAC?

They're not running and I'm not voting for them. But their fave this time around would seem to be McCain....

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: kendall
Date: 01 Apr 08 - 09:38 AM

As long as we support the worst of leaders, such as The Shah of Iran and Saddam Hussein, we will be attacked.
Don't we all know that this latest dustup was caused by our invasion of Iraq? We supported Hussein until he turned on us, we supported the Shah even when we knew what his secret police were doing to his people, and...hell, the list is way too long of the despots we have backed up.It's no wonder that even our friends are afraid of us.

Do we trust the people who got us into it to get us out of it?

As Obama has said, and I hope he makes it his mantra, There was no Al Queada in Iraq before we invaded.

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 01 Apr 08 - 01:34 PM

Bearded Bruce, What is your take on all this?

Subject: RE: BS: Debate: Is McCain McWar?
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Apr 08 - 10:52 PM

McCain War Monger?