1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Pat Buchanan On Iraq

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by MacBeth, Feb 17, 2004.

  1. MacBeth

    MacBeth Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    7,761
    Likes Received:
    2

    1) I am not convinced that this place is less dilligent in it's pursuit of reality based on such facts as the poll which showed that over 2/3rds of Americans believed at least one of the following 3 non-facts.: That Saddam had been proven to be behind 9-11, that most of the population of the planet supported the war, or that Saddam had used WMDs against us during the initial days of the invasion.

    2) This is an ends vs. means argument. We have, as a society, reconciled that flawed means poses a greater threat than the end it seeks to root out, as it becomes systemic. Put it this way...if this constitutes the mis-use of American power, and/or the circumvention of the Constitution, which poses a greater threat to the world, in the long run, misdirected US power or what Saddam was doing? Same reason we hold cops to a standard of accountability even if they think they know that there are drugs in the house...


    3) Less than expected? Expected by whom, exactly? The administration predicted virtually no support, and almost universal support for us.

    4) Where I would want to live is irrelevent. I donlt apply my standards or priorities to other nations with the assumption that mine is the correct way. Among the many flaws with that is this: people usually agree with themsleves.

    5) Maybe it's just ture....maybe. And if it's not?
     
  2. GladiatoRowdy

    GladiatoRowdy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    16,596
    Likes Received:
    496
    Actually, I think the point of this article is that conservatives can't see your "logic," either.
     
  3. MacBeth

    MacBeth Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    7,761
    Likes Received:
    2
    I've reconciled myself to this inevitability. I used to think that showing that T_J is talking nonsense, arguing in circles, or being a hypocrite meant that I had made a point, but then he would post a picture, declare himself a winner, of post soemthing in all caps, and there's just no competing with that...
     
  4. GladiatoRowdy

    GladiatoRowdy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    16,596
    Likes Received:
    496
    Sorry, t_j, but from the point of view of someone not blinded by the right, MacBeth is winning this one hands down.
     
  5. FranchiseBlade

    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    51,810
    Likes Received:
    20,466
    Any war that isn't a last resort regardless of who it's against or for what purpose is unjust. If you can accomplish the same goals without war, or at least have other options to attempt before war, but opt for war anyway, is unjust. It's unjust and costs human lives.

    And if this war is just because it was against a murdering tyrant. Isn't this war less just as a war against a bigger tyrant, like Kim of N. Korea? If the justification for war is that Saddam was a tyrant, wouldn't the most justification be for going after the most tyrranical?
     
  6. MacBeth

    MacBeth Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    7,761
    Likes Received:
    2

    Yeah. Thanks for bringing this thread, and frankly myself, back on line.


    This isn't a liberal position. This isn't even necessarily my position. This is the position of a noted hard-line Republican/conservative.

    His position is an explanation of certain facts, and in many ways is, as you'd expect, as favorable to Bush as possible given the circumstances.

    I am not asking people to say, 'well, he's a conservative, I'm a conservative, therefore I must agree with him." WHat I am asking Bush/war supporters to do is look at those facts which any realist, even Pat Buchanan, can't overlook.

    You can, as Nomar did, openly praise Machievellian practices in the interests of selfish goals. You can pretend you've never heard them before, and try and marginalize specific sources for each. You can dissapear from the forum when the facts become so overwhelming you can't arguem against them.

    What I don't understand is people who moralize en route to looking past them, or simply act as if they're not there.

    Don't agree with Buchanan on faith. God knows I wouldn't advocate that as a common practice. But ask yourself this: If the facts are so apparent, if the situation is so clear in some respects, that hard-liners on my side are conceding them and trying to explain them, is there something I am not seeing or refusing to see?
     
  7. giddyup

    giddyup Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    20,466
    Likes Received:
    488
    Isn't Buchannon something of an isolationist?
     
  8. basso

    basso Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    33,403
    Likes Received:
    9,319
    i've avoided paticipating in this thread since pat buchannan has about as much credibility w/ real conservatives as does paul krugman. macbeth, i'm disappointed that you would take the random ramblings of an idiot isolationist mad on the radio show of another idiot and try to pass them off as some challenge to neocon orthodoxy. it'd be like taking some comment michael moore made to al franken and trying to pass it off as legitimate criticism. republican or no, buchanan is an idiot.
     
  9. MacBeth

    MacBeth Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    7,761
    Likes Received:
    2
    I think that has been his general slant, but it should be noted that he is partisan enough to agree with 'going after thugs' post facto, and is recommending the GOP to stress that aspect rather than continue trying to suggest that their pre-war positions have any merit.

    IOW, if he is, it isn't the factor behind his position here, as the one apsect he agrees with is in direct contradiction to that slant.
     
  10. MacBeth

    MacBeth Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    7,761
    Likes Received:
    2

    Adressed the iso bit perviously.

    The Moore thing has been done.

    But the point was, as I re-stated, not his conclusions, but the unavoidable facts upon which they were premised.
     
  11. FranchiseBlade

    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    51,810
    Likes Received:
    20,466
    Michael Moor may be out on a limb.

    Al Franken's material is researched and accurate. EVery bit of the latest book is legitimate except what is obviously a humorous diversion.

    Buchannon is an isolationist, a xenophobe, but is still a conservative. He may not be part of the conservative establishment. I also think he's somewhat insane.

    But that only adds to MacBEth's argument. If, even a crazy, xenophobe, like Buchannon can see the flaw in the administrations arguments then other 'more reasonable' conservatives shouldn't have a difficulty understanding.
     
  12. MadMax

    MadMax Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 1999
    Messages:
    76,683
    Likes Received:
    25,924
  13. Deckard

    Deckard Blade Runner
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    57,795
    Likes Received:
    41,233
    Thanks for the link, Max. What an excellent, excellent column. I don't agree with a few parts of it, but it's only a few. That is the best thing written by Buchanan I've ever read and I don't know how the conservatives on this board can disagree with him after reading it. He absolutely ripped to shreds the Administration's foreign policy. Ripped it into little bits and showed it for what it really is.

    Simply outstanding. Thanks again for the link, Max. I'll be e-mailing it to some people I know. You can bet on it.



    edit: He did more than tear Bush's foreign policy to shreds, he gave a superb summation of the bigotry and deceit which permeates the Bush Administration's domestic policy as well.
     
    #53 Deckard, Feb 19, 2004
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2004
  14. Refman

    Refman Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    312
    The bottom line is that we will never know what happened. It is my thought to remain optimistic that our leaders will not be so dubious. Perhaps that is naive.

    I can say this. Out of all the people who have spoken on this, we are analyzing that old cook Pat Buchanan? ;)
     
  15. Deckard

    Deckard Blade Runner
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    57,795
    Likes Received:
    41,233
    Isn't it strange? I find it hard to believe he wrote the column Max linked... I'm so used to his wacko viewpoints. But what I read was far from that. Go figure.
     
  16. Woofer

    Woofer Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2000
    Messages:
    3,995
    Likes Received:
    1
    Only some of his opinions are really wacky and those make the news, most of his stuff is a logical extension of conservatism. I actually agree with a lot of his points on other issues.
     

Share This Page