User Controls
David Graber drops a big brain bomb on politics (a video actually WORTH watching)
-
2020-10-13 at 10:53 AM UTC
This youtube video is actually worth watching, and won't just make you stupid.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2020-10-13 at 11:17 AM UTCI don't endorse David Graber by the way. These people always dingle a little lure of common sense to get you to follow them, next thing you know you're invading Iraq.
What the video contains is the bait. Take it, leave the hook. -
2020-10-13 at 11:24 AM UTCI enjoyed that short clip. Mostly truth.
WHy does he want to invade Iraq? -
2020-10-13 at 11:30 AM UTCIt's not even good bait. Obama had a vision that was even more clear cut than "draining the swamp". Whether he sincerely believed in that vision at the time is a different matter, but the vision for the future that he was selling was one of demilitarization - pulling out of the Middle East, getting boots off the ground, and ending the seemingly endless wars there (they felt "endless" even back in 2008 - how quaint). He ran on Hope and Change - the Hope that he could Change America's foreign policy from neo-con warmongering to something a little more civil. Obviously this didn't come to fruition, but to claim "nobody even thought to ask him what that vision was" is historical revisionism.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2020-10-13 at 11:36 AM UTC
Originally posted by rabbitweed I enjoyed that short clip. Mostly truth.
WHy does he want to invade Iraq?
I used Iraq as an example. These people gain your trust by appealing to your self-interest and giving you a little lee-way. But that's just how confidence men operate.
Originally posted by Meikai It's not even good bait. Obama had a vision that was even more clear cut than "draining the swamp". Whether he sincerely believed in that vision at the time is a different matter, but the vision for the future that he was selling was one of demilitarization - pulling out of the Middle East, getting boots off the ground, and ending the seemingly endless wars there (they felt "endless" even back in 2008 - how quaint). He ran on Hope and Change - the Hope that he could Change America's foreign policy from neo-con warmongering to something a little more civil. Obviously this didn't come to fruition, but to claim "nobody even thought to ask him what that vision was" is historical revisionism.
I don't think he ever actually said that himself. His supporters certainly did. They thought everything would change with him. Obama was far too smooth and world-wise to make those big claims. I think he was bewildered by it all, and a little ashamed of his fans.
-
2020-10-13 at 11:38 AM UTC
-
2020-10-13 at 11:42 AM UTC
-
2020-10-13 at 7:58 PM UTC
Originally posted by MORALLY SUPERIOR BEING 2020 IV: Intravenous Soyposting I don't think he ever actually said that himself. His supporters certainly did. They thought everything would change with him. Obama was far too smooth and world-wise to make those big claims. I think he was bewildered by it all, and a little ashamed of his fans.
Well, that might be because you're so far up your own ass you think you "got away with the bait and left the hook" when really some other asshole fisherman has you hook line and sinker.The new Obama doctrine, said the presidential hopeful in 2007, was ‘not going to be as doctrinaire as the Bush doctrine, because the world is complicated’. Next, unlike his predecessor, who refused to ‘negotiate with evil’, Obama pledged to engage politically with America’s foes: ‘I will meet not just with our friends, but with our enemies, because I remember what Kennedy said, that we should never negotiate out of fear, but we should never fear to negotiate.’ Now more than ever, he said, diplomacy and engagement are critical to rebuilding ‘our alliances, repairing our relationships around the world, and actually making us more safe in the long term’. Obama argued that, by relying on hypermilitarism and shunning direct contacts with adversaries, the Bush administration had done considerable damage to America’s vital national interests and its moral standing in the world.
His entire candidacy hinged on concrete pledges to seek to reduce American militarism and usher in a new era of diplomacy. -
2020-10-13 at 8:02 PM UTC
-
2020-10-13 at 8:04 PM UTC
Originally posted by MORALLY SUPERIOR BEING 2020 IV: Intravenous Soyposting Actually I know the difference between good-ol Brzezinskism and straight-outta Tel Aviv Neoconservatism. Thanks.
Do you?
Also diplomacy is so wank.
Care to acknowledge the quote that utterly sinks your shitty argument? You know, the one about Obama being some wishy-washy candidate whose vision was never clearly defined? The historical revisionism you attempted to engage in just there? Gonna apologize for it? Fucktard. -
2020-10-13 at 8:06 PM UTC
Originally posted by Meikai Care to acknowledge the quote that utterly sinks your shitty argument? You know, the one about Obama being some wishy-washy candidate whose vision was never clearly defined?
Public vision or private vision?
His private vision was defined. His public vision was like a good hooker's - whatever you want baby. -
2020-10-13 at 8:08 PM UTCNotice how the OP never apologises, never explain themselves, never says sorry.
-
2020-10-13 at 8:13 PM UTC
-
2020-10-13 at 8:19 PM UTCThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2020-10-14 at 4:29 PM UTC
-
2020-10-14 at 4:30 PM UTC
