Just Watched the Democratic Presidential Debate

[aaron_mag]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye
It is so nice to have another voice of reason here to counter the rantings of Aaron Mag ( )

Wha!!! As far as I can see you now have an insane duet going!!! Actually Abinonewt I must say that it is nice to have another person that I can civilly spar with. Others seem to take political debates very personally. I rest assured in the knowledge that I will one day make fine citizens like you and 1stdeadeye see reason. :)

Now Aaron,
G.W. has proved that he is extremely politically saavy! He is not Bush I. The guy has been underestimated his whole career and he has shoved it down their throats in return.

Give the guy some credit. He probably knows more then he is letting on.

Everyone keeps saying that! Eventually you have to accept that he is not playing some subtle game but really is what he appears to be. Won't say what my impression is.

Actually I don't know why you guys rip on Bush I. I actually didn't have a problem with him. He probably would have beaten Clinton if Perot hadn't screwed things up for him. I actually think that Nader had an adverse effect on Gore. The administration of Bush I was far more diplomatic than the current one. Didn't have a major problem with him (of course I was in college at the time and more into chasing women then following politics :))

[Matt_mg]

The economy could improve in 12 months

What do you think? That Bush will order the national mint to make 6.something trillion dollars?

Let's face it Saddam(i do not support him) was a more competant leader than George W(i love america, just not him) will ever be.

Saddam DID know how to run a country very well, he was a trained pro-american before he started the first Gulf War. Iraq was then in the top 20 nations of the world, but he chose to lead an agression war against an american ally, that's dumb and because of american sanctions (caused by Saddam but they still are AMERICAN sanctions) +-600,000 children died between the 2 gulf wars. (If anyone tells that story of Iraqi soldiers stealing baby incubators you lose all credibility that **** was done in a professional studio starring the daught of an embassador)

Turkey has had close ties to the U.S. including in the first Gulf War.

Turkey doesn't have close ties to the US, their president was put in power by a millitary action aided my the US government... Puppet...

Actually I don't know why you guys rip on Bush.

Because he's doing millitary actions that go against the politics of the UN and violate international rights. AND he used to snort cocaine...

[Restola]

Originally posted by Matt_mg
[B]Saddam DID know how to run a country very well

Again, kind of tough to give praise to a dictator for brutally keeping his people in check...

Iraq was then in the top 20 nations of the world

Only because they have oil, not based on Saddam's leadership.

and because of american sanctions (caused by Saddam but they still are AMERICAN sanctions) +-600,000 children died between the 2 gulf wars.

Which only points out how brutal Saddam was. He could have ended it any time he wanted. He took food from the food for oil program and sold it to other countries for money.

What else were we supposed to do? You seem to oppose the war now (although I'm not positive), would you have supported a war in 93?

[aaron_mag]

Originally posted by Matt_mg
Turkey doesn't have close ties to the US, their president was put in power by a millitary action aided my the US government... Puppet...

Actually you are agreeing with me! Sheesh can't some of you tell when we are on the same side????? Some people raise the argument that we lost the base in Turkey to vile French sabotage and backstabbing. The truth, however, is that we lost the base due to huge protests by the Turkish population. They didn't want their country to be used as a staging area. Of course many people in the U.S. would like to blame it on the French because we have some strange obsession with blaming all of our diplomatic problems on France. Could it be that some of our diplomatic failures lie firmly at our own feet?

Because he's doing millitary actions that go against the politics of the UN and violate international rights. AND he used to snort cocaine...

Again can't you guys tell when we are on the same side? I was talking about Bush I (father). Why do some GW Bush supporters bring up that he is more savvy than his father? His father did not have the hatred of the international community. His father was also a coalition builder and worked with the U.N. I don't think most people who dislike GW Bush dislike the father (even if he did nickname Portland, OR "little Beirut" due to all the protestors here :)).

EDIT: Also note that I think Saddam was a evil bastard. I don't think he "knew how to run a country well" since people who run a country well can rely on popular support and not on force of arms. That is a totally different topic, however, and I sincerely doubt you guys want to rush in to support Saddam's leadership ability

[Albinonewt]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Matt_mg
What do you think? That Bush will order the national mint to make 6.something trillion dollars?

You know that GDP grew by over 3% last quarter, right? If that isn't economic improvement then I'd like to know what is.


Saddam DID know how to run a country very well, he was a trained pro-american before he started the first Gulf War. Iraq was then in the top 20 nations of the world, but he chose to lead an agression war against an american ally, that's dumb and because of american sanctions (caused by Saddam but they still are AMERICAN sanctions) +-600,000 children died between the 2 gulf wars. (If anyone tells that story of Iraqi soldiers stealing baby incubators you lose all credibility that **** was done in a professional studio starring the daught of an embassador)

Hold on, Saddam knew how to control his country very well, but not to govern or run it. He kept his population under his thumb, killed tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people that were politically dangereous to him. He was an evil tyrant that kept his population supressed, and that he was EXCELLENT at. But as far as governing his nation, he was an abomination. Saddam felt that Iraq exsisted soley to provide him with power and wealth, and people like that don't look out for their fellow citizen. Iraq's infrastructure was a complete disaster before the war even started (I'll submit that although we took great care in the attack we did do some damage). And the 600,000 dead children (which that number isn't confirmed anywhere to my knowledge, it's just a number people like to use to "prove" how evil America is) was not a result of the sanctions, but of Saddam's poor governance.


Turkey doesn't have close ties to the US, their president was put in power by a millitary action aided my the US government... Puppet...

Turkey does have close economic and strategic ties with the US. Culturally we're fairly different, but Turkey needs America (and the EU for that matter) to keep their economy going, which is currently a complete disaster.


Because he's doing millitary actions that go against the politics of the UN and violate international rights. AND he used to snort cocaine...

I don't know where the cocaine rumor started, but it's been floating around for a while now. Nobody has any proof of this at all, but they're convinced it's true (which I suppose is possible, but I'd like to see someone at least demonstrate where this accusation comes from).

And you're sort of right. The military actiondoes violate the politics of that squabbling bunch of self interested folks over at the UN. Unfortunaltly for them it doesn't violate their laws.

[Albinonewt]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by aaron_mag

Some people raise the argument that we lost the base in Turkey to vile French sabotage and backstabbing. The truth, however, is that we lost the base due to huge protests by the Turkish population. They didn't want their country to be used as a staging area. Of course many people in the U.S. would like to blame it on the French because we have some strange obsession with blaming all of our diplomatic problems on France. Could it be that some of our diplomatic failures lie firmly at our own feet?

But it was clearly French sabotage in the Parliment that was to blame for their last minute change of heart. They were spefically threatened with denial into the EU and Turkey has to get into the EU to survive.

Although you're right that a large number of Turkish citizens were opposed to the bases, but you're dreaming if you think that's why their parlimant changed their minds.

[aaron_mag]

Originally posted by Albinonewt
But it was clearly French sabotage in the Parliment that was to blame for their last minute change of heart. They were spefically threatened with denial into the EU and Turkey has to get into the EU to survive.

Although you're right that a large number of Turkish citizens were opposed to the bases, but you're dreaming if you think that's why their parlimant changed their minds.

I don't think I'm the one dreaming my friend but we'll never really know. In your argument France had a bigger pull with Turkey than the U.S. despite the huge financial aid package we were offering. Is there any logic that France would have more pull over the U.S.?

Personally I think you have bought off on right wing propaganda which can't accept the fact that the self determination of a nation may have gotten in the way versus the huge diplomatic prowress of an evil France (you don't believe they have that much pull versus the U.S. do you???? ) I suppose we have beaten this particular issue to death :).

[Albinonewt]

Originally posted by aaron_mag


I don't think I'm the one dreaming my friend but we'll never really know. In your argument France had a bigger pull with Turkey than the U.S. despite the huge financial aid package we were offering. Is there any logic that France would have more pull over the U.S.?

Admission to the EU is CRITICAL for Turkey, and France can make or break that.

We can't

[aaron_mag]

Answer these questions to yourself:

Was the EU going to match the billions in financial aid we were offering? Did the EU have the power to ensure that the Kurds in Iraq were not going to be allowed to form a separate Kurdish state? If the answer to these questions is no the only conclusion that can be reached is that it was not the French that lost us the base in Turkey.....not that it mattered anyhow. Probably was good for us. Just less financial aid that we have to give away. :)

[Albinonewt]

Originally posted by aaron_mag
Answer these questions to yourself:

Was the EU going to match the billions in financial aid we were offering? Did the EU have the power to ensure that the Kurds in Iraq were not going to be allowed to form a separate Kurdish state? If the answer to these questions is no the only conclusion that can be reached is that it was not the French that lost us the base in Turkey.....not that it mattered anyhow. Probably was good for us. Just less financial aid that we have to give away. :)

Actually, the economic and political impact of joining the EU is enormous to Turkey.

Which is great? It really depends the exact thing you're looking at. Long term I would have to say that joining the EU is the most important thing in Turkey's mind. They can always patch up with the US later.

[Albinonewt]

Here's a decent article that hints at what I'm talking about

Article

I'll find something better later. When I'm at work it's annoying since they filter probably half the internet.

I had to fill out 5 forms to let me have this forum

[aaron_mag]

Originally posted by Albinonewt
Here's a decent article that hints at what I'm talking about

Article

I'll find something better later. When I'm at work it's annoying since they filter probably half the internet.

I had to fill out 5 forms to let me have this forum

Yes that is an unbiased site. This is the conservative propaganda I speak of. A site that advertises Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity books is not an independent news source.

Even their own article points to the long standing alliance between the U.S. and Turkey. Even they point to the emerging democracy of the country. Yet they fail to conclude that the fact that 90% of the population was opposed to having U.S. forces there was the main reason Turkey did not go along with U.S. plan. Please!!!! I could give you my own Newsweek article that I thought was well written but 1stdeadeye already commented that he felt Newsweek was biased.

So there you have the problem. Both sides claim their "rationale" is correct and that all other arguments are biased..... We debaters of politics are an obtuse and paranoid breed aren't we :)

[Albinonewt]

Is it so difficult to believe that while we were leveraging Turkey to do what we want others would leverage Turkey to do what they wanted, and Turkey just took the other's guy's offer?

Listen, you're entitled to think what you want, but France was dedicated to defeating our attack, not in a military fashion, but diplomatically. They used every tool they had in their arsenal, and one of those tools was their influence over Turkey.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by aaron_mag


I could give you my own Newsweek article that I thought was well written but 1stdeadeye already commented that he felt Newsweek was biased.

Okay don't drag the Professor back into this one!

Newsweek is owned by the Washington Post which we all know to be a bastion of liberal dogma!

Actually, I feel you are both right on this issue. The Turkish Military desperately wanted the aid package and had essentially forced the gov't to agree. I feel that the polls combined with outside pressure forced the change in this stance.

Anyway, forget them. We won the war very easily anyway without having to pay them extortionist aid to use their space. Turkey is the on that will suffer for this, not us. Let the Turks remember this the next time they ask the US for aid money. "Sorry guys, our polls here tell us that you should go to hell!"

[aaron_mag]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye
I feel that the polls combined with outside pressure forced the change in this stance.

Thats all I'm trying to say. And yes I agree it is nice not to have another 4 billion going out with a 24 billion loan restructuring package....:) The will of the Turks had a greater role than the French.