The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux)

[Alex]

Was your post (#4468) in response to my post before it? I'm not seeing how it addresses what I asked.

[scaeagles]

To me it's more about the process of getting to this point that is important rather than the detonation itself. I wonder if anything will be learned from this when dealing with Iran. I doubt it.

[Alex]

We should just give up on the silliness that anything will stop countries that want the bomb from getting the bomb. And live in the real world rather than hyperventilating.

It's our own damn fault. We used nuclear weapons for 40+ years to say "if you have one of these nobody gets to **** with you." Then we get all weepy when half the rest of the countries in the world say "ooh, shiny."

[scaeagles]

So the nuclear non proliferation treaty is moot? And forgive me....I think Iran and N. Korea were both signatories, but perhaps have withdrawn from it?

To me, the issue of the bomb is not the issue. The issue of the bomb is how it shows what other countries think about agreements they make. I'm sure someone will say "but we tortured three people with waterboarding!". Point still remains. I don't trust these states that we make agreements with because they use these as a means to an end, knowing that we and the international community lacks the will to enforce them. Saying there will be grave consequences just doesn't hold much weight with Kim Jong Il or Ahmahdinejad.

[flippyshark]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I don't trust these states that we make agreements with because they use these as a means to an end, knowing that we and the international community lacks the will to enforce them. Saying there will be grave consequences just doesn't hold much weight with Kim Jong Il or Ahmahdinejad.

I don't trust them either. Now what in blue blazes has this got to do with the ethics of waterboarding? I've seriously lost your thread here.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Not relating the two of them in the least except to suggest that I think North Korea detonating a nuke is more important.

Gee, how could anyone have gotten the impression that you were trying to relate the two?

Originally Posted by scaeagles

And while the national debate continues along the lines of waterboarding 3 terrorists, North Korea detonates a nuclear weapon. Good thing they followed through on their agreements to dismantle their weapons programs!

Originally Posted by scaeagles

To me, the issue of the bomb is not the issue. The issue of the bomb is how it shows what other countries think about agreements they make. I'm sure someone will say "but we tortured three people with waterboarding!".

Well, I guess you're right. Setting up a strawman isn't quite the same as relating the two.

[scaeagles]

Nothing at all. This is the "random political thoughts thread". When I posted a reference to discussion of water boarding while N, Korea was detonating nuclear weapons, it was simply a change in subject. Not relating the two of them in the least except to suggest that I think North Korea detonating a nuke is more important.

[scaeagles]

Well, gee, GD, perhaps you should try reading this and figuring it out instead of jumping to conclusions like you do in other threads, where you choose to overreact and rip on me as well.

One was clearly a transition, and like I said, it was set up with the idea that I think the nuke test might be a slightly more important topic.

The second was an issue of me saying a country is violating their agreements, and preempting someone coming back and saying "we do the same, look at the our waterboarding torture", which I thought might be relevant in the context of recent conversations. I suppose they could be related in that way.

But if rudeness is your currently preferred method of communication, particularly with me, OK.

[scaeagles]

Seems a little early for many informed opinions on her. The only thing I know is that she was involved in ending some professional baseball strike sometime....enough reason for me to despise her already!

[Gemini Cricket]

Yesterday on his radio show, conservative host G. Gordon Liddy continued the right wing’s all-out assault on Judge Sonia Sotomayor. First, just like Tom Tancredo, Liddy slammed Sotomayor’s affiliation with the civil rights group La Raza — and referred to the Spanish language as “illegal alien“:

LIDDY: I understand that they found out today that Miss Sotomayor is a member of La Raza, which means in illegal alien, “the race.” And that should not surprise anyone because she’s already on record with a number of racist comments.

Finished with the race-based attack, Liddy moved on to denigrate Sotomayor’s gender:

LIDDY: Let’s hope that the key conferences aren’t when she’s menstruating or something, or just before she’s going to menstruate. That would really be bad. Lord knows what we would get then.

Finally, Liddy disputed the entire idea that there’s anything wrong with the paucity of women and total lack of Hispanics on the Court:

LIDDY: And everybody is cheering because Hispanics and females have been, quote, underrepresented, unquote. And as you pointed out, which I thought was quite insightful, the Supreme Court is not designed to be and should not be a representative body.

Source

So she's a racist for the following comment:

"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life," she said.

But the Liddy comments above are okay?
Huh?