Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 41
  1. #1
    Owner / Senior Admin

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    19,394
    Post Thanks / Like

    WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    OK, so we know that liberals hate anything and everything about the Bush Administration. So let's put liberals "in charge" and see what a difference that could be made by doing things their way.

    First, let's start with: TERRORISM. We'll get to other topics in other threads. I'd like to focus specifically on terrorism for now.

    According to the anti-war, anti-Bush, anti-everything crowd (aka "liberals"), the "war on terror" is a miserable failure. SO...what would liberals do if they had their way?

    Now's your chance to argue productively instead of just ranting and raving about how horrible things are all the time. Let's see the superior solution that you have to offer.

    I want YOUR arguments, not that of some talking points blogger whose newsletter you subscribe to.
    -=]Apokalupsis[=-
    Senior Administrator
    -------------------------

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. - Thomas Jefferson




  2. #2
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Sheffield, S.Yorks., UK
    Posts
    8,862
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    Here in the UK the Islamic community is beginning to heed the wake up call - that there are in effect two Islams - one violent and fundamentalist - one more peaceful and progressive. As someone who is politically slightly left of centre, I would seek to engage with the latter community in addressing violent fundamentalism, for the sake of the general community AND their own specific one.

    Cooperation and speedy and robust action is needed, and appears to be happening. It is the 'handlers' and recruiters that need to be isolated and dealt with. I would seek to use rational debate to forge a divide between the general Islamic community and the men of violence. A lot of information has come in from Islamic souces, which is progress indeed. One way of doing this is to try to educate my own ethnic majority that it is not a case of 'the only good Muslim being a dead one'.
    "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." - Anais Nin.
    Emitte lucem et veritatem - Send out light and truth.
    'Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt' - Julius Caesar (rough translation, 'Men will think what they want to think')
    Kill my boss? Do I dare live out the American dream? - Homer Simpson.

  3. #3
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    7,671
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    I would convert to Islam before I run for president, then if I won, I'd say "I was just kidding"; keep the head covered at all times.

    I would offer a reward for every suicide bomber who gives himself up.

    I would create terror free zones for trade and education.

    I would ask GWB for his opinion and just do the opposite.
    While laughing at others stupidity, you may want to contemplate your own comedic talents. (link)
    Disclaimer: This information is being provided for informational, educational, and entertainment purposes only.

  4. #4
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    9,345
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    1) After gaining evidence that 9/11 hijackers were Saudi, "settle up" with Saudi Arabia. Listen to their side of the events and see what they're willing to do about it. If it was just a bunch of nut-jobs who HAPPENED to be Saudi, then send in the CIA to make sure they're on the up-and-up about it and keep an eye on them. If it turned out the Saudis funded this, then use the CIA to investigate who was responsible and why. Deal with them accordingly.

    2) Committ a MASSIVE force to going after Bin Laden. None of this half-hearted, under-funded, "Oops, he was in Tora Bora, but we lost him" BS. Most of the active duty troops in Iraq (as opposed to reservists... who there is no need to call up) would be committed to this hunt.

    3) Hold the Bin Laden family in the U.S. for questioning.

    "Oh, you haven't seen your brother since he went fundy 20 years ago? Great. You have nothing to worry about. We're just going to ask you a few more questions, then the FBI is going to ask you some questions, and then we'll help you leave the country. If that inconveniences you, tough sh**. "

    4) Come clean about the plane that was shot down on 9/11.

    5) COMPLETELY restructure foreign aid. As of 9/12, there IS NO AMERICAN FOREIGN AID. PERIOD. Zero. None. You want aid? We'll be happy to give it to you... just as soon as you show us your plan to combat terrorism in your country. You can have it back as quickly as a few months... but don't ever expect to see another penny if you cop out on us.

    6) Use the sympathy gained for the 9/11 attack to unify the world in the hunt for terrorism by having a COMPLETELY transparent administration. You want our intelligence? Here it is. You want our real reasoning for invading a country? Here it is. This also includes coming clean about who knew what on our end and when they knew it. Again, 100% transparency. If heads need to roll, then roll they will.

    7) Call up Naval reservists and Coast guard to monitor our marine borders.

    8) Call up reservists (you know... the ones that are being wasted in Iraq right now) and SECURE THE censored MEXICAN BORDER. It's pretty goram easy to get into Mexico and from there it's even easier to hop the border into America.

    9) Do not spend months trying to figure out if there needs to be a department of homeland security. Begin creating one right away. Begin funding it and staffing it asap.

    10) Institute aid for victims of 9/11.

    11) Call upon the secular and non-fundamentalist regimes in the mid-east to condemn the attacks and assist in the apprehension of Osama Bin Laden.

    12) Approach the problem of terrorism with the aid of all our allies and treat the problem from a law enforcement standpoint with military support, rather than the other way around.

    13) CATCH BIN LADEN.

    14) Force Israel to settle up with Palistine. Not peace talks. Not a road map. GET THEM TO SETTLE THE DISPUTE... for their own good as much as ours. We are entertaining too much animosity due to our continued support of Israel.

  5. #5
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    Quote Originally Posted by SnoopCitySid
    I would convert to Islam before I run for president, then if I won, I'd say "I was just kidding"; keep the head covered at all times.
    A Jewish Muslim, eh. I don't like your chances.

    I would offer a reward for every suicide bomber who gives himself up.
    Negotiating with terrorists, good start.

    I would create terror free zones for trade and education.
    And then the terrorists would turn them into tolerance-free zones with their suicide bombings, since, if you've forgotten, the WTC was a center of trade and education.

    I would ask GWB for his opinion and just do the opposite.
    ...This does not even require comment.

  6. #6
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,893
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    Quote Originally Posted by zhavric
    2) Committ a MASSIVE force to going after Bin Laden. None of this half-hearted, under-funded, "Oops, he was in Tora Bora, but we lost him" BS. Most of the active duty troops in Iraq (as opposed to reservists... who there is no need to call up) would be committed to this hunt.
    I assume that according to you use of "active duty troops" you mean the active duty military as a whole? Or do you specifically mean army special forces, rangers, navy seals, and the like?

    In the first case...impossible. Osama Bin Laden could be basically anywhere....and committing your average infantry and marine would mean basically invading any nation he happened to be in regardless if that nation has a role or not in his hiding.

    Your average active duty troop is not trained for this sort of hunt we are not capable of sending in an entire division, let alone a single battalion on a hunt that could take us anywhere.

    This is a job solely for those trained for it.....Special Ops. This means a limited number of troops, who operate in near silence....which means you dont hear about anything they do.

    Your suggestion is both strategically bad and completely impractical.
    I typically cite original research papers and reviews that are available only to a personal or institutional subscriptional. If you wish a PDF copy of the papers I cite, send me a request.

  7. #7
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,893
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    Quote Originally Posted by zhavric
    8) Call up reservists (you know... the ones that are being wasted in Iraq right now) and SECURE THE censored MEXICAN BORDER. It's pretty goram easy to get into Mexico and from there it's even easier to hop the border into America.
    Remind me....is it liberals or conservatives that wants to secure the border and deal with illegal immigrants?

    Is it liberals or conservatives who are always fighting for those who enter our nation illegally?

    Which is it?

    And when you know the answer.....then tell me.....which party is to blame for this failure?
    I typically cite original research papers and reviews that are available only to a personal or institutional subscriptional. If you wish a PDF copy of the papers I cite, send me a request.

  8. #8
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    9,345
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    Quote Originally Posted by chadn737
    I assume that according to you use of "active duty troops" you mean the active duty military as a whole? Or do you specifically mean army special forces, rangers, navy seals, and the like?

    In the first case...impossible. Osama Bin Laden could be basically anywhere....and committing your average infantry and marine would mean basically invading any nation he happened to be in regardless if that nation has a role or not in his hiding.

    Your average active duty troop is not trained for this sort of hunt we are not capable of sending in an entire division, let alone a single battalion on a hunt that could take us anywhere.

    This is a job solely for those trained for it.....Special Ops. This means a limited number of troops, who operate in near silence....which means you dont hear about anything they do.

    Your suggestion is both strategically bad and completely impractical.
    And conservatives have the audacity to say liberals are out of touch with reality:

    http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapc...eal/index.html

    We're STILL fighting the Taliban, Chad. Wake up.

    If we had the forces we have in Iraq stationed in Afghanistan, there wouldn't still be a Taliban problem. Sure we need special forces to go after Bin Laden, but you'll notice that I stated very clearly that going after terrorists has to be treated like law enforcement that is supported by the military.

    So your argument, overall, is a straw man.

  9. #9
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    205
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    If we had the forces we have in Iraq stationed in Afghanistan, there wouldn't still be a Taliban problem. Sure we need special forces to go after Bin Laden, but you'll notice that I stated very clearly that going after terrorists has to be treated like law enforcement that is supported by the military.
    5) COMPLETELY restructure foreign aid. As of 9/12, there IS NO AMERICAN FOREIGN AID. PERIOD. Zero. None. You want aid? We'll be happy to give it to you... just as soon as you show us your plan to combat terrorism in your country. You can have it back as quickly as a few months... but don't ever expect to see another penny if you cop out on us.
    ahh, your not a liberal! you can't be! because i agree with you fully!
    ;? *head explodes* ;?

  10. #10
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,292
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    Some of this is very nice and I support it fully. Much of it is a bit on the idealistic side and makes the typical left-wing mistakes. It ignores the realpolitik of international relations and foreign policy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric
    1) After gaining evidence that 9/11 hijackers were Saudi, "settle up" with Saudi Arabia. Listen to their side of the events and see what they're willing to do about it. If it was just a bunch of nut-jobs who HAPPENED to be Saudi, then send in the CIA to make sure they're on the up-and-up about it and keep an eye on them. If it turned out the Saudis funded this, then use the CIA to investigate who was responsible and why. Deal with them accordingly.
    Deal with Saudi accordingly eh? You mean like a surgical airstrike at a Saudi palace? This sounds real nice, but unless the Saudi government supported the actions of 9/11 there is no reason to try to strong arm them. In addition, it is much more beneficial for us to treat them with kid gloves and give them room to go after terrorism on there own terms. Something they have come to grips with over the last several years. In other words, what does your policy proposal give the U.S. which the U.S. does not already have? Furthermore, how does it improve the U.S. position?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric
    2) Committ a MASSIVE force to going after Bin Laden. None of this half-hearted, under-funded, "Oops, he was in Tora Bora, but we lost him" BS. Most of the active duty troops in Iraq (as opposed to reservists... who there is no need to call up) would be committed to this hunt.
    First, you make the assumption that the primary problem is lack of resources. Actually, you have placed almost the entire cause of not finding Bin Laden on lack of resources. Again, this diminishes some of the complexities of international relations. We could devote more troops to the relatively small battlefield. Ask the British how that worked out in the Crimea or the Russians in the same campaign. Overcrowding a battlefield can be worse than being undermanned in a given theatre. May I also point out that against a savy opponent, mere numbers may not be the answer. Again, I should refer you to the British campaigns against the Boers in Africa. The best of the Boer generals escaped from the clutches of larger British columns time and again due to mobility and familiarity of terrain. The typical, we need more, historically, is not always the cure.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric
    3) Hold the Bin Laden family in the U.S. for questioning.
    And this would serve what purpose????

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric
    "Oh, you haven't seen your brother since he went fundy 20 years ago? Great. You have nothing to worry about. We're just going to ask you a few more questions, then the FBI is going to ask you some questions, and then we'll help you leave the country. If that inconveniences you, tough sh**. "
    And what is your take on holding detainess without due process at Gitmo? How odd. You wish to give legitimate prisoners of war more rights and completely trample over the rights of innoncent individuals.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric
    4) Come clean about the plane that was shot down on 9/11.
    Oooh! More conspiracy theories, oh my!

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric
    5) COMPLETELY restructure foreign aid. As of 9/12, there IS NO AMERICAN FOREIGN AID. PERIOD. Zero. None. You want aid? We'll be happy to give it to you... just as soon as you show us your plan to combat terrorism in your country. You can have it back as quickly as a few months... but don't ever expect to see another penny if you cop out on us.
    I am in favor of this one! Sounds rather conservative. I bet Ted Kennedy wouldn't support this bill.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric
    6) Use the sympathy gained for the 9/11 attack to unify the world in the hunt for terrorism by having a COMPLETELY transparent administration. You want our intelligence? Here it is. You want our real reasoning for invading a country? Here it is. This also includes coming clean about who knew what on our end and when they knew it. Again, 100% transparency. If heads need to roll, then roll they will.
    Again, a bit idealistic. You assume sympathy was real. Nations protect their own interests. Giving them our intelligence would as likely be used to help us fight terrorism as it would be to support terrorists. Bad plan.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric
    7) Call up Naval reservists and Coast guard to monitor our marine borders.
    If we really need reservists to perform this duty, I am in favor of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric
    8) Call up reservists (you know... the ones that are being wasted in Iraq right now) and SECURE THE censored MEXICAN BORDER. It's pretty goram easy to get into Mexico and from there it's even easier to hop the border into America.
    Again, I am all for securing borders. If it requires reservists, I am for it. I don't think reservists would be/are needed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric
    9) Do not spend months trying to figure out if there needs to be a department of homeland security. Begin creating one right away. Begin funding it and staffing it asap.
    Not sure how useful the dept of homeland security is. If it is the only way of realistically combining the CIA and FBI, so be it. Spending a few months working out details does not seem a bad idea. Every company/organization should be planned and designed before being initiated.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric
    10) Institute aid for victims of 9/11.
    You mean institute more aid? Is more needed? Based on what grounds? Honest question as I know next to nill on aid programs for the victims other than that they exist.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric
    11) Call upon the secular and non-fundamentalist regimes in the mid-east to condemn the attacks and assist in the apprehension of Osama Bin Laden.
    Seems this was done. Hence India, Pakistan, and Saudi have all been helpful to varying degrees. In addition Libya has made some progress.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric
    12) Approach the problem of terrorism with the aid of all our allies and treat the problem from a law enforcement standpoint with military support, rather than the other way around.
    Another realpolitik problem. Terrorism is not seen equally by all of our allies. France is not nearly as concerned with terrorism as England. Germany and France both would like to see the U.S. knocked down a few notches. Terrorism is simply not a law enforcement problem. Treating it as such was done during the Clinton years. Didn't work.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric
    13) CATCH BIN LADEN.
    That would be nice.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric
    14) Force Israel to settle up with Palistine. Not peace talks. Not a road map. GET THEM TO SETTLE THE DISPUTE... for their own good as much as ours. We are entertaining too much animosity due to our continued support of Israel.
    You mean force Israel to give up land they won after being attacked? Land they have used as a buffer zone to increase their own saferty? We support Israel becasue they are the best ally we have in that region. Period. You also would assume Palestine would act peacefully after getting back some of that buffer zone. They want Jerusalem. Again, realpolitik.

    Your plan contains far too much fantasy.
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  11. #11
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    205
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    i see we've covered more of the political/military aspects of what would be done

    but what about economic issues?

  12. #12
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    SF,CA
    Posts
    2,133
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Apokalupsis
    According to the anti-war, anti-Bush, anti-everything crowd (aka "liberals"), the "war on terror" is a miserable failure.
    *sigh* To borrow Clive's phraseology, how much longer do we have to put up with this hyperbolic invective?

    Quote Originally Posted by Apokalupsis
    I want YOUR arguments, not that of some talking points blogger whose newsletter you subscribe to.
    How about for starters, not diverting our resources from the real war on terror to invading a country that has nothing to do with the war on terror (under the guise of "imminent threat"), other than to fulfill the neocon prophecy of toppling Saddam as the first move in our grand plan to remake the Middle East in our image?

  13. #13
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wheaton, IL
    Posts
    13,847
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Booger
    ...how much longer do we have to put up with this hyperbolic invective?
    Come on. You know that phrase has no intellectual integrity.
    If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe. - Soren Kierkegaard
    **** you, I won't do what you tell me

    HOLY CRAP MY BLOG IS AWESOME

  14. #14
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,893
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    Quote Originally Posted by zhavric
    And conservatives have the audacity to say liberals are out of touch with reality:

    http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiap...seal/index.html

    We're STILL fighting the Taliban, Chad. Wake up.

    If we had the forces we have in Iraq stationed in Afghanistan, there wouldn't still be a Taliban problem. Sure we need special forces to go after Bin Laden, but you'll notice that I stated very clearly that going after terrorists has to be treated like law enforcement that is supported by the military.

    So your argument, overall, is a straw man.
    WOW....whats all this about the Taliban? May I remind you of your original post?

    Quote Originally Posted by zhavric in previous post
    2) Committ a MASSIVE force to going after Bin Laden. None of this half-hearted, under-funded, "Oops, he was in Tora Bora, but we lost him" BS. Most of the active duty troops in Iraq (as opposed to reservists... who there is no need to call up) would be committed to this hunt.
    The fact that there are still insurgents and Taliban forces in Afghanistan has as much to do with hunting down Bin Laden as the fact that there are insurgents in Iraq.

    They are two sepperate issues.....regardless of the fact that taliban forces are still hiding and fighting in the remote regions of Afghanistan, committing more troops to fighting them will no more bring us closer to Bin Laden.

    A hunt of this sort can not be waged simply by throwing more men at the situation. It requires careful and systematic information gathering in situations where ONLY SPECIAL OPS can operate. You do not send in a Infantry battalion into villages to talk to the locals and gain their confidence. They simply are not trained and equipped to operate in this manner. The vast majority of military troops are trained to go in and be the #$@% out of anything in that stands in their way.

    For all we know Osama isnt in Afghanistan....but instead in Sudan or who the Heck knows where? You cant just send massive forces anywhere you please....even if they act like police rather than soldiers....which they arnt! "Try telling Syria that your going to send an entire company of troops through their country......just in a law enforcement like manner to hunt down one man....yah right. Either you invade and then committ massive amounts of troups to a probably fruitless search OR.....

    You committ a FEW (because their type are do not come in massive numbers) of highly specialized troops to covertly gather information and then swiftly strike, covertly of course, at their objective.

    Army Special Forces are trained in local languages.....their speciality is unlike any other in the world as their speciality is to train guerrilla fighters from local sources. This means they are trained in ways that Regular troops are not, they are trained to blend in with the locals, they understand the customs, they speak the languages, they can gain the trust of the people.

    When an infantry man walks up to a village, in full gear, with a full force at his back to give him cover.....what do you think the local's reaction will be....."Oh sure....we trust you....and will tell you the whole truth!" This is a no-brainer. Massive committment of forces will never work in this endeavor.
    I typically cite original research papers and reviews that are available only to a personal or institutional subscriptional. If you wish a PDF copy of the papers I cite, send me a request.

  15. #15
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    The Bunny Ranch
    Posts
    2,680
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    Quote Originally Posted by chadn737
    You cant just send massive forces anywhere you please....even if they act like police rather than soldiers....which they arnt! .
    Sure you can..You just tell the world you believe they have weapons of mass destruction

  16. #16
    Owner / Senior Admin

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    19,394
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    Quote Originally Posted by SnoopCitySid
    I would offer a reward for every suicide bomber who gives himself up.
    The calling these guys have is much greater than monetary value. It is naive to believe that all terrorists come from impoverished families. Many are well educated, come from very well off families. They are idealists...not money grabbers. Your western attempt at bribery wouldn't hook a single terrorist.

    I would create terror free zones for trade and education.
    New York City was a "terror free zone". So was Madrid. So was London. There is really not such thing as "terror free".

    FAIL

    No productive, creative, feasible change in plan is offered here.
    -=]Apokalupsis[=-
    Senior Administrator
    -------------------------

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. - Thomas Jefferson




  17. #17
    Owner / Senior Admin

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    19,394
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    Zhav, most of your ideas were quickly and validly shot down, so I won't address those that have been thus far. However...

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhavric
    5) COMPLETELY restructure foreign aid. As of 9/12, there IS NO AMERICAN FOREIGN AID. PERIOD. Zero. None. You want aid? We'll be happy to give it to you... just as soon as you show us your plan to combat terrorism in your country. You can have it back as quickly as a few months... but don't ever expect to see another penny if you cop out on us.
    This is a good one actually. However, as was pointed out, this would most likely be blocked by liberals. But, to be fair, the question was merely what would you do (assuming there were reasonable means to do so), so this one "works" as far as truly possible ideas goes.

    7) Call up Naval reservists and Coast guard to monitor our marine borders.
    1) The USN doesn't do this...the Coast Guard does.
    2) They are already doing this.
    3) There is no need to put that much more man power and resources in play to guard our marine borders. We won't be attacked by an amphibious assault. And terrorists won't be coming by boat a la Cuba. They can get state drivers licences easily with no documentation in several states (CA, TN, etc...).

    8) Call up reservists (you know... the ones that are being wasted in Iraq right now) and SECURE THE censored MEXICAN BORDER. It's pretty goram easy to get into Mexico and from there it's even easier to hop the border into America.
    This is a temporary fix. Border patrol desperately needs to be revamped, but politicians (both liberal and conservative) stay away from this one as it's too "controversial" for their career. It's asnine and puts us in harm's way...but it's too hot for them to handle. I'm for beefing up the border, by using reservists, but it's a short term solution, not a long-term one.

    10) Institute aid for victims of 9/11.
    This does nothing to fight terrorism.

    13) CATCH BIN LADEN.
    How? That's like saying "Win the war", or "Get a hit". This doesn't address the issue as to what you would do differently in regard to the approach of catching Bin Laden.

    14) Force Israel to settle up with Palistine. Not peace talks. Not a road map. GET THEM TO SETTLE THE DISPUTE... for their own good as much as ours. We are entertaining too much animosity due to our continued support of Israel.
    There are 2 parties involved. Palestine will never, ever, ever setlle with Israel...never. There are too many terrorist organizations who will ensure that this never occurs. These organizations are very well trained and funded by neighboring nations. This is an idealistic but naive and impractical solution.

    Status: FAIL

    1 great idea, a couple decent ideas. But in the overall scheme of things (the war on terror), they don't change a whole lot.
    -=]Apokalupsis[=-
    Senior Administrator
    -------------------------

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. - Thomas Jefferson




  18. #18
    Owner / Senior Admin

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    19,394
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Booger
    *sigh* To borrow Clive's phraseology, how much longer do we have to put up with this hyperbolic invective?
    Until you see the light.

    How about for starters, not diverting our resources from the real war on terror to invading a country that has nothing to do with the war on terror (under the guise of "imminent threat"), other than to fulfill the neocon prophecy of toppling Saddam as the first move in our grand plan to remake the Middle East in our image?
    While Saddam did not have anything to do with 911, it is intellectually bankrupt to make the statement that he had nothing to do with terrorism.

    FAIL

    No valid and practical changes offered by liberals to date.

    I think the point of this thread is being made quite well. Liberalism has become a philosophy of "attack" and "I don't like this". It definitely knows it "doesn't like stuff", it just doesn't know what to do about it.
    -=]Apokalupsis[=-
    Senior Administrator
    -------------------------

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. - Thomas Jefferson




  19. #19
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Apokalupsis
    I think the point of this thread is being made quite well. Liberalism has become a philosophy of "attack" and "I don't like this". It definitely knows it "doesn't like stuff", it just doesn't know what to do about it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Snoop
    I would ask GWB for his opinion and just do the opposite.
    That sums up the liberal "strategy" quite nicely.

  20. #20
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    With my Angel in Aurora
    Posts
    5,722
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: WWLD (What would Liberals Do?)

    As soon as Bin Laden too credit, I'd simply announce to the country he was in private, "Hand over Bin Laden. You have three days. One to find him. One to catch him. One to bring him here. If he's not here on day four, use your imagination."

    Then, seeing that capturing Bin Laden makes no difference(because it DOESN'T make a difference) I'd have covert ops groups assassinate the Saudi royal family just to tell the world, "If you f*ck with us, not only will we kill YOU, but we'll kill your family too." Then I'd proceed to Iran where I'd fund and support the people who want democracy there, when it came, we'd move to Saudi Arabia. Then to Iraq. And I'd enlist the aid of Israel all the way and any nations willing to get down and dirty Unforgiven style.
    But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.
    1 Peter 3:15-16

 

 
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Differences between conservatives and liberals
    By Apokalupsis in forum Shootin' the Breeze / Off-Topic
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: December 2nd, 2010, 03:38 PM
  2. We already are socialists
    By Zhavric in forum Politics
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: August 18th, 2005, 10:06 PM
  3. The thoughts of Chairman Fruity.
    By FruitandNut in forum General Debate
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: August 3rd, 2005, 09:53 AM
  4. Fundamentalist Islam = Fundamentalist Right
    By Booger in forum Shootin' the Breeze / Off-Topic
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: July 6th, 2005, 02:04 PM
  5. Who watches the Liberals?
    By Paul in forum Politics
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: May 23rd, 2004, 09:59 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •