|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
“I am sorry for his family, but I am happy he no longer has the ability to impact people’s lives.”
Is basically how I feel about all this. McCain caused a great deal of suffering around the world. It is hard to deny that. But he also had good qualities. But he also had a lot of bad qualities. I don't know.
I understand the perspective of "don't shit talk the dead", but there is also the idea that if we don't put proper blame in proper places, we are making ourselves more vulnerable to those things happening again.
Kinda like how a lot of dumb shit created the depression. We need to be honest about what caused the depression. If we are not, and we do not plan around what caused the depression, it might happen again. That logic is pretty easily applied to mourning people like McCain.
But it really begs the question: What is appropriate to say and what isn't? I really don't know.
|
On August 28 2018 02:55 Mohdoo wrote:
But it really begs the question: What is appropriate to say and what isn't? I really don't know.
And that should be the real take away. If you don’t know what is appropriate, hold off until you feel confident. There is nothing wrong with taking a day or two to hash out how to levy your criticism.
|
I think it’s safely gathered that people who think the Iraq war was an unnecessary humanitarian tragedy would not shed too many tears for the death of a vocal supporter of it, or any historical political hawks. I’d say the very same for Chavez’s socialist catastrophe (and people will forever debate that point). Say the same for Saddam Hussein and Slobodan Milosevic.
|
Norway28876 Posts
who doesn't think the iraq war was an unnecessary humanitarian tragedy? Even Mccain himself said '(the iraq war) can’t be judged as anything other than a mistake, a very serious one, and I have to accept my share of the blame for it'.
|
On August 28 2018 03:16 Liquid`Drone wrote:
who doesn't think the iraq war was an unnecessary humanitarian tragedy? Even Mccain himself said '(the iraq war) can’t be judged as anything other than a mistake, a very serious one, and I have to accept my share of the blame for it'.
Whether or not the US made a mistake in the invasion of Iraq, reflecting on what we know now, polled about 50-50 as recently as three years ago by Gallup.
|
The approval rating of that war and the decisions around it are not going to trend upwards any time soon, if ever again.
|
On August 28 2018 03:50 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2018 03:16 Liquid`Drone wrote:
who doesn't think the iraq war was an unnecessary humanitarian tragedy? Even Mccain himself said '(the iraq war) can’t be judged as anything other than a mistake, a very serious one, and I have to accept my share of the blame for it'. Whether or not the US made a mistake in the invasion of Iraq, reflecting on what we know now, polled about 50-50 as recently as three years ago by Gallup.
Would you say Gallup polls are a good way to assess the value of a war?
|
On August 28 2018 05:03 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2018 03:50 Danglars wrote:On August 28 2018 03:16 Liquid`Drone wrote:
who doesn't think the iraq war was an unnecessary humanitarian tragedy? Even Mccain himself said '(the iraq war) can’t be judged as anything other than a mistake, a very serious one, and I have to accept my share of the blame for it'. Whether or not the US made a mistake in the invasion of Iraq, reflecting on what we know now, polled about 50-50 as recently as three years ago by Gallup. Would you say Gallup polls are a good way to assess the value of a war?
Not necessarily. It is, however, a good starting point for wondering how many Americans agree it was an unnecessary humanitarian tragedy by asking 12 years later whether or not the war itself was a mistake.
I suggest a study in philosophy, political philosophy, and history if you wish to assess the war’s value.
|
On August 28 2018 05:30 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2018 05:03 Mohdoo wrote:On August 28 2018 03:50 Danglars wrote:On August 28 2018 03:16 Liquid`Drone wrote:
who doesn't think the iraq war was an unnecessary humanitarian tragedy? Even Mccain himself said '(the iraq war) can’t be judged as anything other than a mistake, a very serious one, and I have to accept my share of the blame for it'. Whether or not the US made a mistake in the invasion of Iraq, reflecting on what we know now, polled about 50-50 as recently as three years ago by Gallup. Would you say Gallup polls are a good way to assess the value of a war? Not necessarily. It is, however, a good starting point for wondering how many Americans agree it was an unnecessary humanitarian tragedy by asking 12 years later whether or not the war itself was a mistake. I suggest a study in philosophy, political philosophy, and history if you wish to assess the war’s value.
What do we really accomplish by getting a feel for how many Americans think it was a mistake? At one point, many Americans were divided as to the value of slavery. Public opinion doesn't actually help us when it comes to determining if something was a net positive or not.
|
On August 28 2018 06:31 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2018 05:30 Danglars wrote:On August 28 2018 05:03 Mohdoo wrote:On August 28 2018 03:50 Danglars wrote:On August 28 2018 03:16 Liquid`Drone wrote:
who doesn't think the iraq war was an unnecessary humanitarian tragedy? Even Mccain himself said '(the iraq war) can’t be judged as anything other than a mistake, a very serious one, and I have to accept my share of the blame for it'. Whether or not the US made a mistake in the invasion of Iraq, reflecting on what we know now, polled about 50-50 as recently as three years ago by Gallup. Would you say Gallup polls are a good way to assess the value of a war? Not necessarily. It is, however, a good starting point for wondering how many Americans agree it was an unnecessary humanitarian tragedy by asking 12 years later whether or not the war itself was a mistake. I suggest a study in philosophy, political philosophy, and history if you wish to assess the war’s value. What do we really accomplish by getting a feel for how many Americans think it was a mistake? At one point, many Americans were divided as to the value of slavery. Public opinion doesn't actually help us when it comes to determining if something was a net positive or not.
it lets you get an idea at the time. It is a way to measure how peoples views on it evolve over time.
Seeing how good and bad are Objective watching peoples views change can be a good mark of how things are going in a country
|
On August 28 2018 06:31 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2018 05:30 Danglars wrote:On August 28 2018 05:03 Mohdoo wrote:On August 28 2018 03:50 Danglars wrote:On August 28 2018 03:16 Liquid`Drone wrote:
who doesn't think the iraq war was an unnecessary humanitarian tragedy? Even Mccain himself said '(the iraq war) can’t be judged as anything other than a mistake, a very serious one, and I have to accept my share of the blame for it'. Whether or not the US made a mistake in the invasion of Iraq, reflecting on what we know now, polled about 50-50 as recently as three years ago by Gallup. Would you say Gallup polls are a good way to assess the value of a war? Not necessarily. It is, however, a good starting point for wondering how many Americans agree it was an unnecessary humanitarian tragedy by asking 12 years later whether or not the war itself was a mistake. I suggest a study in philosophy, political philosophy, and history if you wish to assess the war’s value. What do we really accomplish by getting a feel for how many Americans think it was a mistake? At one point, many Americans were divided as to the value of slavery. Public opinion doesn't actually help us when it comes to determining if something was a net positive or not.
We start an answer to Liquid’Drone’s question by getting a feel on the numbers behind whether or not it was a mistake. He asked “who doesn't think the iraq war was an unnecessary humanitarian tragedy?” Its an entirely different style of question compared to “assessing the value of the war” and the start might just be “a great many Americans didn’t gauge it to be a mistake a dozen years following with the advantage of hindsight, according to public opinion polls conducted over time from a reputable polling organization.” Right?
|
The Iraq War, The Afghanistan War and the War on Terror will be viewed in the same light as Vietnam, a mistake that nation never mustered the courage to confront, so we just let our shame slowly smoother it until it was over. And then we spend the next 10 or so years trying to ignore it until someone finally decides to build a memorial to the soldiers who died for due to our misplaced pride while neglecting those who survived.
|
On August 28 2018 03:16 Liquid`Drone wrote:
who doesn't think the iraq war was an unnecessary humanitarian tragedy? Even Mccain himself said '(the iraq war) can’t be judged as anything other than a mistake, a very serious one, and I have to accept my share of the blame for it'.
it could very well be that that's a statement about how it went, looking at it from later on, rather than a judgement on the morality or wether it was a good idea.
As in, it could very well be that he thought the Iraq war was a good thing in principle but just didn't work out the way people anticipated leaving the US involved in the middle east for way longer than they ever planned.
Would probably need to hear more about the context of that statement to judge wether he really came to the conclusion that it fundamentally was a bad idea vs it just not working out.
|
McCain said it in regards to what they considered at the time a Casus Belli (WMDs from Hussein's regime) and the execution of it (loss of lives, the cost to the treasure and security, and more than likely, American's pride). It never came down to the human tragedy. And he still thought that taking down Saddam's regime was going to be necessary anyways.
McCain would also support the war against the Taliban, see its failure, but instead of being critical of his own decisions, Iraq, another failure and then he would call for the need for a regime change on Lybia, following this he would acknowledge that it failed and go on his diatribe about bombing Syria, like he was completely unable to grasp that American-led efforts to install liberal democracies in countries with a Muslim majority have a proven record of failure, and more importantly, the humanitarian crisis that comes with the bombings, invasions, interventions. His response was that American's leaders weren't committing enough resources and lives, not so much about thinking that going to war was a mistake.
|
On August 28 2018 09:12 Godwrath wrote:
McCain said it in regards to what they considered at the time a Casus Belli (WMDs from Hussein's regime) and the execution of it (loss of lives, the cost to the treasure and security, and more than likely, American's pride). It never came down to the human tragedy. And he still thought that taking down Saddam's regime was going to be necessary anyways.
McCain would also support the war against the Taliban, see its failure, but instead of being critical of his own decisions, Iraq, another failure and then he would call for the need for a regime change on Lybia, following this he would acknowledge that it failed and go on his diatribe about bombing Syria, like he was completely unable to grasp that American-led efforts to install liberal democracies in countries with a Muslim majority have a proven record of failure, and more importantly, the humanitarian crisis that comes with the bombings, invasions, interventions. His response was that American's leaders weren't committing enough resources and lives, not so much about thinking that going to war was a mistake.
Yes, and still, he looks like a saint compared to Trump.
|
On August 28 2018 13:19 Furikawari wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2018 09:12 Godwrath wrote:
McCain said it in regards to what they considered at the time a Casus Belli (WMDs from Hussein's regime) and the execution of it (loss of lives, the cost to the treasure and security, and more than likely, American's pride). It never came down to the human tragedy. And he still thought that taking down Saddam's regime was going to be necessary anyways.
McCain would also support the war against the Taliban, see its failure, but instead of being critical of his own decisions, Iraq, another failure and then he would call for the need for a regime change on Lybia, following this he would acknowledge that it failed and go on his diatribe about bombing Syria, like he was completely unable to grasp that American-led efforts to install liberal democracies in countries with a Muslim majority have a proven record of failure, and more importantly, the humanitarian crisis that comes with the bombings, invasions, interventions. His response was that American's leaders weren't committing enough resources and lives, not so much about thinking that going to war was a mistake. Yes, and still, he looks like a saint compared to Trump.
Trump and his voters have set the bar particularly low, that’s the thing.
That being said, if we condemn anyone who has supported this iraq idiocy, we are not going to cry too many american politicians in the decades to come. I think the blame should go to the leaders who blatantly lied and deceived the whole nation in order to get this war, namely the Bush administration. For everyone else it was a tragic mistake. For them it was a horrific crime. I certainly won’t cry Bush and his cronies when they pass away.
|
Norway28876 Posts
Danglar's response to my post/question was obviously on point. I thought the support was lower in 2015 - seeing how IS was already in effect then (so the negative consequences of destabilizaton should be obvious). But I just.. don't get how it can actually be 50-50? Democrats seem to largely agree on it having been a mistake, and it seemed like Trump gained republican support from bashing bush over it / claiming that he was always against it. If something is 50-50 in the US, it tends to have at most 10% support with republicans or democrats, and I don't understand how Trump could turn something into a winning message with republicans if 90% of them disagreed with him.
|
Norway28876 Posts
On August 28 2018 16:31 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2018 13:19 Furikawari wrote:On August 28 2018 09:12 Godwrath wrote:
McCain said it in regards to what they considered at the time a Casus Belli (WMDs from Hussein's regime) and the execution of it (loss of lives, the cost to the treasure and security, and more than likely, American's pride). It never came down to the human tragedy. And he still thought that taking down Saddam's regime was going to be necessary anyways.
McCain would also support the war against the Taliban, see its failure, but instead of being critical of his own decisions, Iraq, another failure and then he would call for the need for a regime change on Lybia, following this he would acknowledge that it failed and go on his diatribe about bombing Syria, like he was completely unable to grasp that American-led efforts to install liberal democracies in countries with a Muslim majority have a proven record of failure, and more importantly, the humanitarian crisis that comes with the bombings, invasions, interventions. His response was that American's leaders weren't committing enough resources and lives, not so much about thinking that going to war was a mistake. Yes, and still, he looks like a saint compared to Trump. Trump and his voters have set the bar particularly low, that’s the thing. That being said, if we condemn anyone who has supported this iraq idiocy, we are not going to cry too many american politicians in the decades to come. I think the blame should go to the leaders who blatantly lied and deceived the whole nation in order to get this war, namely the Bush administration. For everyone else it was a tragic mistake. For them it was a horrific crime. I certainly won’t cry Bush and his cronies when they pass away. '
From what I've seen, with the exception of like.. Cheney.. McCain was one of the most vocal voices of support for the invasion.
I just.. I'm generally not a fan of passing moral judgement. The reason is basically that 'consequence-ethics' is a completely worthless metric for doing so, and intentions are usually very difficult to properly grasp (as most people are smart enough to claim the intention was positive even if it wasn't). With McCain, to me, I think he thought his actions would make the world a better place. Not just the US, but Iraq, too. (I have no problems judging Trump as morally bankrupt, even going by intentions, because he clearly doesn't give a shit about people that arent a) himself b) his family c) people he depends upon doing something for him. But as far as western politicians go, he's actually one of the only people I don't consider a 'true believer'. )
|
On August 28 2018 17:08 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Danglar's response to my post/question was obviously on point. I thought the support was lower in 2015 - seeing how IS was already in effect then (so the negative consequences of destabilizaton should be obvious). But I just.. don't get how it can actually be 50-50? Democrats seem to largely agree on it having been a mistake, and it seemed like Trump gained republican support from bashing bush over it / claiming that he was always against it. If something is 50-50 in the US, it tends to have at most 10% support with republicans or democrats, and I don't understand how Trump could turn something into a winning message with republicans if 90% of them disagreed with him.
You are looking for logic when there is only partisanship, emotion and tribalism. Yes it’ss totally inconsistent, but then again, the same 50 percent people voted for Trump on the basis that Hillary was dishonest. People don’t even try to make sense anymore as long as their side « wins ».
|
Norway28876 Posts
In that case current american support of the Iraq war should be nearing 0, as current democratic and republican leadership both think it was idiotic..
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
