The Democratic Party is the Party of War

[PureX]

With all due respect...but maybe Europeans' point of view would help Americans understand ... beyond the glass dome that protects them from the outside world.

This is a leftist politician, criticizing the warlike attitude of the ongoing administration.

It makes no difference what party is in power. The U.S. government loves warfare. It means BIG BUCKS for anryone in political office, regardless of their party.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

There must be hatred and disgust towards all that's European, then.

Do even feel shame? You've been called out and corrected how many times yet you still puke up this nonsense?

 

[Quintessence]

Let's say that lately the Democratic Party has deservedly gained the Nobel Prize for War.

Not really, and I don't understand why you're making this into a (falsely) partisan issue. There is too much of that going around as it is without you adding to it.

 

[Estro Felino]

Not really, and I don't understand why you're making this into a (falsely) partisan issue. There is too much of that going around as it is without you adding to it.

When the Democrats understand that we deserve peace on European soil, they will try to solve the Ukrainian War with diplomacy and not with nukes.

 

[Estro Felino]

Do even feel shame? You've been called out and corrected how many times yet you still puke up this nonsense?

You understand German, right?

Just listen to what this German politician thinks of the Warlike White House:

 

[Estro Felino]

It makes no difference what party is in power. The U.S. government loves warfare. It means BIG BUCKS for anyone in political office, regardless of their party.

But in the last political debate, it seems to me that the Democrat candidate is the only one who speaks of the necessity to have a warlike and tough attitude... in Foreign Affairs.
Let's speak of concrete things.

 

[Estro Felino]

Biden pulled us out of Afghanistan. Bush Jr. got us into it. Bush and Cheney got us into Iraq.

That's very true.
And that shows that billions and billions and billions of dollars were uselessly wasted on a stupid war.

There were Democrats in on it as well so not everyone can be considered saints.

My theory is that now the warlike baton has been exclusively passed onto dems.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You understand German, right?

Just listen to what this German politician thinks of the Warlike White House:

Since when the hell is Egypt European?

 

[Quintessence]

When the Democrats understand that we deserve peace on European soil, they will try to solve the Ukrainian War with diplomacy and not with nukes.

What are you even talking about? No nukes have been fired, nobody - of any political party or nation - is using nuclear weapons. And if I'm mistaken, link us in on a reputable source of nuclear strikes that have occurred during the Ukrainian War.

 

[Estro Felino]

What are you even talking about? No nukes have been fired, nobody - of any political party or nation - is using nuclear weapons. And if I'm mistaken, link us in on a reputable source of nuclear strikes that have occurred during the Ukrainian War.

Not yet.
I understood that dems want the escalation of this conflict...so at one point nukes will be used to terminate the war.


If the USA are against nukes, I would urge them to remove the nukes from their military bases in Europe.

 

[Estro Felino]

Since when the hell is Egypt European?

The video is in German.

 

[PureX]

But in the last political debate, it seems to me that the Democrat candidate is the only one who speaks of the necessity to have a warlike and tough attitude... in Foreign Affairs.
Let's speak of concrete things.

That's because the other candidate is a moron that has no concept of world affairs at all, and is incapable of speaking on such issues with any degree of acuity whatever. He is only capable of telling us how stupendously great he is no matter what the subject, and how horribly bad anyone that disagrees with him, is. And his #2 is just a spineless sycophant willing to do and say anything to gain access to the Oval Office through the side door.

 

[Estro Felino]

That's because the other candidate is a moron that has no concept of world affairs at all, and is incapable of speaking on such issues with any degree of acuity whatever. He is only capable of telling us how stupendously great he is no matter what the subject, and how horribly bad anyone that disagrees with him, is. And his #2 is just a spineless sycophant willing to do and say anything to gain access to the Oval Office through the side door.

So if the Democratic Party decides that Europe needs to be nuked to get to the tsar...this is a good decision...I assume.

 

[PureX]

So if the Democratic Party decides that Europe needs to be nuked to get to the tsar...this is a good decision...I assume.

No one is going to decide to nuke anyone. Not even Putin.

 

[Stevicus]

Wikileaks clearly shows they were in on it.
That is why they persecuted Assange.
Who is alive by miracle.

Well, yes, these were top-level U.S. officials who were apprised of the actions of the government which they were elected to oversee. So, they were in on it, no doubt.

...I do believe Obama has a mind on his own...and he deliberately did what he did.
He didn't go with the flow at all.

I'm not seeing it. I'm not saying that to defend Obama, but prior to his election to the Senate in 2004, he was just a local politician from Chicago. He does have a certain way about himself, a kind of "man of the people" approach which appeals to voters. But he also would have needed a great deal of help from powerful people within the party to be elevated in that way. When he was elected President in 2008, he really had not had that much experience, and nobody really knew who was prior to 2004. I'm sure he was enjoying the ride, so why would he do anything to mess it up?

They sign documents...though.

They do what they consider to be politically expedient. It's pretty clear that there are enormous political pressures behind a lot of these actions, and no doubt the President is under a similar amount of pressure. Sure, they can certainly refuse to buckle under the pressure. As President, they can influence foreign policy greatly. The President is in charge of the entire Executive Branch of government, the Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces.

Of course, the military and intel community also seem to have a mind of their own, and that's where they can find themselves at cross purposes with the President. I've heard an opinion often expressed is that, when it comes to matters of national security and military necessity, the President and other civilian leaders should respectfully step aside and the let the military experts handle it.

Honestly I have never seen Europe mentioned in any political debate...
Which is totally different than the EU debates. At the EU parliament all continents are mentioned.

I guess it depends on which debates you're talking about. Americans might tend to separate and compartmentalize foreign and domestic politics, and oftentimes even specific issues. But I've seen Europe mentioned in many political debates.

I have never said there is.
I have said that Europe's destiny is not even taken into account.
It's like we didn't even exist. So how can there be something against something that doesn't exist?

Europe has been the primary focus of US foreign policy since the World Wars. Europe has to exist in order to maintain that policy, but I also try to look at it in more global terms.

It's like there was the Atlantic Ocean and then Russia. Period.

Oh, it's not really like that. Keep in mind that a lot of Americans think of European stuff as high class. A lot of Americans are still enamored with European royalty, especially British royalty. In America, one always hears about the finest French wines, authentic Italian food, real German beer - as if our stuff is inferior or something. We have a crappy healthcare system, which we already know about, but if that isn't bad enough, Europeans have to remind us of this. Europeans are often seen as more progressive, with universal healthcare, paid vacations, stricter gun laws, better schools (and ahead of us in science and math), better roads, better communications systems, fairer political systems, better pay, better social programs, and the banning of capital punishment and more humane prison conditions. I hear this from Europeans themselves. Everything they do is better than we do here in America.

We know that Europe exists. Believe me on this one.

Europe is so americanized that Europeans cannot use that kind of criticism...because it would be self-criticism.
It's not a cultural problem.

Well, Europeans came to America and Europeanized America, so there might be a bit of mutual influence there.

When Europeans say America, they mean the banking and financial sewer that funds all the wars...
so they certainly don't mean the 99,99% of the American citizens. for whom they even express sympathy for coexisting with those rats.

Most Americans tend to vote based on fear, but the differences seem to revolve around what they're afraid of.

For later: just the last 5 minutes suffice.

That's absolutely true.
But at least they are not phony. They admit they are interventionists.

I despise phoniness...the dems who pretend to be pacifists, and then they unleash dozens of war.

They're all phonies in their own way. I think that's just a truism in politics, in that you can never show all your cards at once.

 

[Estro Felino]

I'm not seeing it. I'm not saying that to defend Obama, but prior to his election to the Senate in 2004, he was just a local politician from Chicago. He does have a certain way about himself, a kind of "man of the people" approach which appeals to voters. But he also would have needed a great deal of help from powerful people within the party to be elevated in that way. When he was elected President in 2008, he really had not had that much experience, and nobody really knew who was prior to 2004. I'm sure he was enjoying the ride, so why would he do anything to mess it up?

It's so complex to explain... but he didn't come to the old continent to bring peace.
He brought us the war.
Let's not forget that he didn't do anything to terminate the Donbas War... that started in 2014. And escalated since then.

Of course, the military and intel community also seem to have a mind of their own, and that's where they can find themselves at cross purposes with the President. I've heard an opinion often expressed is that, when it comes to matters of national security and military necessity, the President and other civilian leaders should respectfully step aside and the let the military experts handle it.

This is not democracy. This is technocracy...that is unelected technocrats decide instead of the elected public servants.
Undemocratic and unjust because they can have an hidden agenda...that is, they are bribed by the MIC. Military industrial complex.

I guess it depends on which debates you're talking about. Americans might tend to separate and compartmentalize foreign and domestic politics, and oftentimes even specific issues. But I've seen Europe mentioned in many political debates.

You mean European Union countries?
Because the only European countries mentioned are Ukraine and Russia. Period.
Germany? Never heard of this country in political debates.

Oh, it's not really like that. Keep in mind that a lot of Americans think of European stuff as high class. A lot of Americans are still enamored with European royalty, especially British royalty. In America, one always hears about the finest French wines, authentic Italian food, real German beer - as if our stuff is inferior or something. We have a crappy healthcare system, which we already know about, but if that isn't bad enough, Europeans have to remind us of this. Europeans are often seen as more progressive, with universal healthcare, paid vacations, stricter gun laws, better schools (and ahead of us in science and math), better roads, better communications systems, fairer political systems, better pay, better social programs, and the banning of capital punishment and more humane prison conditions. I hear this from Europeans themselves. Everything they do is better than we do here in America.
We know that Europe exists. Believe me on this one.

Europeans think the exact opposite. That in the USA everything functions perfectly...and that it's better to have the second amendment, to have death penalty, private healthcare and so on. That in the USA everything is better and faster.
The grass is always greener on the other side. The truth is that the élites want to divide and conquer. Divide et impera.
Democracy should make the people decide. Whether they want the death penalty or the universal healthcare.

Most Americans tend to vote based on fear, but the differences seem to revolve around what they're afraid of.
They're all phonies in their own way. I think that's just a truism in politics, in that you can never show all your cards at once.

As I said...there are the plutocratic élites who want to bribe and control politicians. But they are just sewer rats that need to be hunted out. And rooted out.

 

[Argentbear]

Because the amount of destabilization, unrest and turmoil caused in the Mediterranean area because of his administration surpasses that of many other presidents.
This article has a superb titles. How Syria has stained Barack forever.

Syria Will Stain Obama's Legacy Forever

The arc of history is long, but it won't ever judge the president's Syria policy kindly.

foreignpolicy.com

Your American Hussein will never be forgotten.

wow an opinion piece by a man who has a history of saying Obama only accomplishment as president was not getting assonated. And an opinion piece completely lacking in evidence for your claims on destabilization, how Obama cause unrest and turmoil.

 

[Estro Felino]

wow an opinion piece by a man who has a history of saying Obama only accomplishment as president was not getting assonated. And an opinion piece completely lacking in evidence for your claims on destabilization, how Obama cause unrest and turmoil.

You didn't do anything to defend His Majesty the Sultan Hussein.

 

[PureX]

Both warlike...but Obama and Biden surpassed them both.

Not even close. Bush invaded Iraq for no good reason at all but that Cheney told him to. Because Cheney and his old cronies at Halliburton stood to make billions from it. And did.

 

[Estro Felino]

Not even close. Bush invaded Iraq for no good reason at all but that Cheney told him to. Because Cheney and his old cronies at Halliburton stood to make billions from it. And did.

Your American Hussein claimed that Syria is the enemy. It turns out that I have never perceived Assad as an enemy...and I would say that Assad is 100 times more reassuring and trustful than your Hussein.
Syria before Obama was one of the safest places on Earth.

I am not defending the Bushes... but Obama outmeaned them.