Voting against Obama's war is not about beating Republicons, it is about

doing what is right. I know Republicons won't vote against a repuke President unless it is against immigration reform and that is pathetic. Dems should vote against a dem President when he or she is wrong. I expect dems to vote against any President when his or her policies are wrong for America. Remember it is not about beating repukes it is about doing what is right for the country. It is not a game. It is easy to fall into that trap, but one should avoid it like the plague.

That is possible, right?

As you note, the GOP will vote with the GOP President no matter what, and against the Dem President no matter what.

As a Dem, I supported Bush going into Afghanistan, and was vehemently opposed to his Iraq invasion.

I wished Clinton responded faster in Rawanda ... and also wished that when the Iraqis took on Saddam after GWI, that we did not sit on the sidelines ... given that we'd been encouraging them to overthrow Saddam and suggesting that we would help them if they tried. When they did try, we sat back and watched.

At times I worry that parts of the right and the left see each of these countries as being "the same" ... it is all black and white. And so, you simply take a position ... and then stay with it regardless of the specific situation ... so Afghanistan, becomes Iraq, becomes Iran.

And somehow, Lybia, Egypt, Syria and Yemen are also the "same place".

It is as if both sides use the fact that most Americans can't tell these places apart to push their own narrow view.

That is what NATO represents.

You asked a question suggesting that Dems and Republicans only support a President's use of the military when that President was of their party.

I gave my own example of how you are wrong about that.

And then ... for some reason I can't determine yet ... you complained about the evil NATO.

I have a suggestion ... post an OP about evil NATO if that is what you really want to discuss.

we won't leave Afghanistan or Iraq. Capitalism, imperialism, and colonialism.

that they too see all of these countries as "the same".

That is how OBL became Saddam.

The REALITY is that they are different countries. And how we engage them should reflect that reality.

For instance ... why do we not invade Turkey? Its a Muslim country. And as imperialists, we should control them.

Or India?

The notion that the US has no role to play in the world, given that we are still the richest nation on the planet, is silly.

We can actually help other countries get out from under their dictators. We can't fix them all at once. But if their people are ready to step up, we should try to help them.

Or, we can build some walls, and be happy that we were born here.

On edit ... did we take Kuwait's resources?

Kosovo?

If the west cared so much about dictators. Why haven't they stopped the ones in the Sudan, Rwanda, Congo, and etc? You know why.

us to intervene everywhere, or nowhere.

Clearly we can not intervene everywhere .... right? You do agree with that ... yes?

I mean we COULD invade North Korea. If we pretend that all of these situations are the same, then we need to invade there too.

Or ... maybe, we make complex decisions about where to intervene based on when we think we can help create a positive outcome.

Now, I will admit that trying to do that is hard. AND ... we may not always select the best place to engage at the best time.

But ... at least for me, that does not mean that we should not be trying.

I mean we COULD invade North Korea. But if we did so, we'd be unable to help any one else. If we pick country X, Y, and Z to help ... then we might not be able to help countries D, E, and F.

And of course, we could ignore them all.

I suppose that too is an argument to be made.

Bush was in office. When the US was the head of the Iraqi government immediately following Bush's "mission accomplished" fiasco, Paul Bremer sold off the rights to oil reserves to oil companies at bargain basement prices. We then forced the newly elected government to accept the deals that Bremer made and now competing factions that make up the Iraqi government are fighting over oil revenues that should be much higher than what they are.

The US has done similar things in Afghanistan in regards to precious metal mines.

wrong as long as they beat the cons.

..because it was the right thing to do was LBJ,
The Civil Rights Act.
.
.
.
.
Maybe Jimmy Carter on Environmental/Energy Policy.
His conservation measures were unpopular,
and got him Swiftboated out of office.
If we had stayed with Carter's energy policies,
we wouldn't be in all the trouble we are today.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Not even Republicans are doing that.

That said, I'm glad the French king's opponents didn't convince him to forego helping rebel colonists in their desperate fight against British tyranny.

..can not honestly be called "mild".

Enough crap already. This has been gone over and over.

They never learn to play the game of politics. They are enabling the Republicans. And only hurting themselves and the President. Never in a million yrs would you get Republicans to go against Bush on something like this. NEVER

This is a political stunt by Boner and the Republicans. And they are going along with it. This vote would mean nothing either way but to make Boner look good in the media and to the public. And they went along with it. Dumbasses.

thing to do.

You have the recognize how things play in the media. Its political. They refuse to learn to play the game. Which is why they don't stay in power very long.

I don't want us to be like them. Politics isn't a game and those who treat it that way are almost always the ones you don't want leading the way.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

How else will they fade into history? This is politics. Ideals may be the goal, but they have to be a guide to the end point, not for the trip along the way. Republicons know that and that's why they are still around and a force.

Sorry, misread the headline.