Why I hate daily kos.

[GOP = Terrorists]

As far a lieberman goes get off his case he may have made some mistakes but he is a true democrat

I guess he is a "true democrat" the same way that Bush is a "true democrat."  I'll never "get off his back."

"You might therefore say that, when it comes to Iraq, President Bush is just enforcing the McCain-Lieberman policy." -Joe Lieberman

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Personally I think thats pretty hacky.  I support Lamont because Lieberman has prove his word to be meaningless in addition to being wrong on the biggest issue of the day.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes he does.  He is the monster who pushed for the murder of tens of thousands of innocent civilians for his war of choice in Iraq while advocating policies of torture.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Compared to the Iraq Debacle it is the best thing in the history of the world.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Okay so you agree with my point that in regards to oil it ed us over as both turning more oil over to Islamic Fundamentalists.  Don't see how you think that supports your statement that Vietnam was worse.... We screw up in Vietnam we leave and there are very few continuing consequences.  We screw up in Iraq and we just turned over a large part of the world's oil reserves to Islamic Extremists allied w/ Iran.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Stopping the spread of Stalinism is at least as important objective as the seemingly non existant objectives in Iraq.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

1) What exactly was Bush's objectives? Eliminating WMD? Bringing Democracy to Iraq?  Stealing Oil?  I guess the last choice would make the mose sense because anyone who had ever read a single book on the history of Iraq knew that no peaceful democracy would ever come out of a United Iraq.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Don't even understand what you're saying.  We didn't do half of what we needed to do in Afganistan because the Lieberman-Bush group cut and run from Afganistan so they could have his war of pleasure and start the biggest foriegn policy debacle in the history of the United States.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Naw.  The only positive outcome for the Lieberman-Bush illegal and immoral war in Iraq is for Iran.

[mgrossbe]

Before you bash lieberman look at his voting record strongly democratic he is vastly different from bush on every issue except this. By your logic you should be voting against hillary this election because she has supported the war since day one.  As far as calling me a hack thanks your the first i wanted lieberman to win he didn't he should not run that is politics i think lamont is a poor canidate who has not articulated anything outside of being anti-iraq and anti-lieberman but since its a choice between a fool who cant gamble and a loser who is to arrogant in his belief that he should own his seat i choose lamont. Will i be sad if lieberman wins no would i be happy if lamont won no. As far as the whole vietnam iraq debate goes by your logic we should not be withdrawing at all from iraq and should in fact increase troops to make sure we do not loose a foothold on the oil. However vietnam was about stopping moaist communism not stalinist china was ho chi mins main backer(and us but thats rarely stated) not russia that is why we ultimatly went and negotiated with china to releave somewhat tension in korea and vietnam and make our exit from vietnam more ammicable. Communism spread was so over hyped its riducoulous, we had nothing to gain in that war and ultimatly it destroyed a generation of americans. Iraq is not at that level it may be for the iraqi its debatable but the american people do not feel the sting of this war as they did vietnam. I have lost one friend in this war my father lost i think 7 or 8 friends in vietnam. We have peaceful protest for iraq and riots in the streets killing on campus and national guard being called in on citizens. iraq has lasted a few years vietnam 11 in full conflict depending on what you want to call our first intervention that number could reach as high as 20. Vietnam firmly established the milatary industrial complex iraq exploits it.  As for vietnamesse and iraqi both are pretty horribly of though 20 years easy if you include french actions to maintain control is much worse. I could go on but you see where i am going. As far as the whole afghanistan objective thing. The new goals promlugated by the adm is that we are there to fight the terrorist on their turf not ours and create a democracy in the middle east. One point we both agree a democracy is just not plausable in iraq the best we could hope for is a king like the british installed after 1948. We could however establish a democracy in afghanstan that could spread as long as it is not seen by people as a puppet of america.

[TheresNoMoney]

The reason i don't like daily kos (not kos himself) is because it parades around as something it is not. It says it is for electing democrats nationwide and creating a democratic majority, but it all it does is too go on tirades about impeaching bush.

That is one of the stupidest statements I've ever read on these boards.

[Gabu]

The reason i don't like daily kos (not kos himself) is because it parades around as something it is not. It says it is for electing democrats nationwide and creating a democratic majority, but it all it does is too go on tirades about impeaching bush.

That is one of the stupidest statements I've ever read on these boards.

You don't think that impeaching Bush would hinder Democrats' abilities to create a majority?

[TheresNoMoney]

You don't think that impeaching Bush would hinder Democrats' abilities to create a majority?

Yes, I do. But my comment was referring to the "all they do is go on tirades about impeaching Bush".

Obviously this poughies guy doesn't read the site and should really just keep his mouth shut.

[GOP = Terrorists]

Before you bash lieberman look at his voting record strongly democratic he is vastly different from bush on every issue except this.

Torture, Bankrupcy Bill, Social Security, Lobbiests, Fiscal Insanity, etc.  He isn't a Democratic strongman either.  But the issue that him and Bush are exactly the same on is the most important issue around.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Actually their positions are not even close.  Hillary has the same position as say Chuck Hagel or Lindsay Grahm or Harold Ford etc.  Hillary was wrong to go to war for sure but to say that her and Lieberman have the same position on Iraq is silly.  Lieberman wrote the bill that sent us to war.  He didn't agree to look tough on terrorism (although that isn't a justifiable reason either).  He didn't agree for domestic political reasons.  He is a true believer.  He is one of those who wanted Bush to invade.  As he put it himself:  Bush is just carrying out the Lieberman plan in Iraq.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well I didn't call you a hack bro I said your statement was hacky.  Lieberman has the right to run although I think it shows that his word is meaningless.   However I wouldn't support a candidate just because they have a D next to their name.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Another strong difference between Lieberman and Lamont is fiscal policy.  Lieberman is a Keneysian while Lamont is a realist.  Lieberman is pro-earmarks while Lamont is anti-earmarks.

[/quote]As far as the whole vietnam iraq debate goes by your logic we should not be withdrawing at all from iraq and should in fact increase troops to make sure we do not loose a foothold on the oil.[/quote]

No.  You can't put together the shattered egg.  There is no "saving" or "fixing" Iraq.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Okay that is a valid point.  And I agree that Maoism is slightly better than Stalinism. =)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh again I'm not defending Vietnam.  I think it was a stupid call to invade and try to cover for the French like that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

But then again it is still new compared to Vietnam.  They will feel the sting.  Hell they felt that sting for a long time everytime they filled up their gas tank.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'd say that you're clearly right about the casualty totals being less.  No doubt about it.  In reality that has little impact on how disasterous the war ends up being in the long run. =(

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well I'd say WWII established it and Iraq and Vietnam just further it. =)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well they do say that a lot no doubt about that though mostly in regards to Iraq which is clearly bunk.  Anyway It is clear that the objective in Afganistan was to get Bin Laden and that didn't happen.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nah man no Democracy in Afganistan.  Now you could set up a Democracy in the city state of Kabul but I don't see the tribal warlords giving up any power to an elected leader from another faction. =(
[/quote]