While We Wait: Part 5

[Abaddon]

No, but a better man wouldn't have ended up in the POW camp to begin with!

 

[Azale]

No, but a better man wouldn't have ended up in the POW camp to begin with!

Ahh, your being insensitive for laughs. I understand but it's still not all that funny

 

[Abaddon]

No, really. Yea, sucks to be in a POW camp I am sure.. Lots of people suffer from lots of bad things.

What I am trying to ask is why it is so over-riding that we must feel sorry for someone, that we have to look beyond the obvious that it probably is their fault they are there in the first place?

 

[Azale]

Later that year while on a bombing mission over North Vietnam, he was shot down, badly injured, and captured as a prisoner of war by the North Vietnamese. He was held from 1967 to 1973, experiencing episodes of torture and refusing an out-of-sequence early repatriation offer; his war wounds would leave him with lifelong physical limitations.

from wiki. He was shot down in a bombing mission, it happens. Hell, the Red Baron was shot down.

 

[Supermath]

Makes you wonder what solitary confinement does to a man's sanity, though.

 

[human-slaughter]

Have you read up on McCain's time in the POW camp? I mean, really?

Correct. Please Abbadon do not criticize the bravery the generation of my father had to go into the middle of the jungle and fight a guerrilla enemy that had no problem with going against the terms of war. People were lucky to get out of that war.

It takes someone who can be this type of military warrior to lead the free world.

 

[Azale]

Makes you wonder what solitary confinement does to a man's sanity, though.

If he were running for President in 1973, maybe I would be more concerned.

 

[Disenfrancised]

A slightly more cognizant argument than the one Abbadon is making is that flying a plane and getting shot down a lot is, whilst certainly brave and noble etc, is hardly prepartion for running anything. Seriously, if the president is being tortured, you've probably already lost...

I'd say Obama's organisation and fundraising efforts are better exemplars of executive experience than anything McCain has done.

 

[alex994]

But is his organization and fundraising efforts his own thing or his entourage of courtiers?

 

[North King]

No it isn't. His programs did almost nothing to stop the depression itself (I will grant that they helped individuals survive, but it was essentially welfare, with work required) The depression was still on a downward movement until:

His programs look good because in the end the US drafted 22% (or so) of the workforce into the military due to WWII. This caused the appearance of the end of the depression. However due to rationing people couldn't spend the money they were making during this time period which forced people to save it. Also all the soldiers couldn't spend their money as they were at war, also forcing them to save it. So when they all came back and rationing ended people were flush with hard currency and finally had something to spend it on.

This is the only time I can find where a major conflict actually led to a true positive economic development for a nation. WWII is an anomaly in this. The main reasons are because it forced people to save money, forcefully gave money to a huge portion of the population, and was never attacked on home soil. (leaving aside Hawaii)

Sorry if I don't dig too deep, but I'm not really in an argumentative mood right now:

 

[human-slaughter]

Being a POW does not instantly make you a Presidential Candidate worthy of office of course not but on top of that we have:

McCain: 21 years of Military Service and 26 years of U.S. Congressional and Senate experience.

Contrasted by:

Obama: 0 years of Military Emperience 4 Years of U.S. Senate Experience

Now tell me McCain does not deserve and is not worthy of being the President of the United States.

 

[North King]

Now tell me McCain does not deserve and is not worthy of being the President of the United States.

McCain is worthy of it, but doesn't "deserve" it; few people do. Senate experience is not exactly the same as executive experience, and quite frankly the job of a Senator is not the same as that of the President. The "experience" argument is just a silly one that people drag up because they can't find a real argument for why their candidate is better.

 

[Azale]

I'd say Obama's organisation and fundraising efforts are better exemplars of executive experience than anything McCain has done.

I disagree. Bush Jr had one of the best organized and well funded efforts of the history of political campaigns, but it certainly was not a sign of things to come. I think McCain's record in Washington as a Senator is a better indicator of executive experience than anything Obama can claim. Obama knows this and that's why he is trying to paint McCain as a "Washington insider", when he has his hands in all the cookie jars of the Chicago political machine himself.

All in all, it's still lightyears ahead of Bush vs Kerry and thank Xenu for that

 

[human-slaughter]

Why is it silly. The next president whoever it is will need to work closely with Congress to fix the problems caused in the past. And I do believe the practice makes perfect and McCain who you cant argue has learned more of the intricateness of American government would understand what would need to be done to fix whats wrong whereas Obama will just push his agenda which I don't even know what his agenda is at this point. It having changed so much.

 

[Dachs]

McCain is worthy of it, but doesn't "deserve" it;

I wouldn't inflict the job of President of the United States on my worst enemy. (Well, maybe on him. Depends on how I feel that day. ) Seriously, that job is hell. Nobody "deserves" it, strictly speaking.

Since this seems to be mostly about American politix so far, I will be of age to vote in November and after intensive comparisons between both candidates, I believe that it is fair to say that I am planning on voting for either Obama, McCain, or possibly a write-in for Birdjaguar. (He's old enough, right?) Seriously, though, I haven't got much of a leaning and think that so far neither of them has really caught my eye as someone that I would like to lead the United States.

 

[North King]

I disagree. Bush Jr had one of the best organized and well funded efforts of the history of political campaigns, but it certainly was not a sign of things to come. I think McCain's record in Washington as a Senator is a better indicator of executive experience than anything Obama can claim.

Legislating has little to do with executive experience, or so they claim. Really I think it has more to do with innate ability, and Obama seems to have a lot more of that in my eyes.

Why is it silly. The next president whoever it is will need to work closely with Congress to fix the problems caused in the past. And I do believe the practice makes perfect and McCain who you cant argue has learned more of the intricateness of American government would understand what would need to be done to fix whats wrong whereas Obama will just push his agenda which I don't even know what his agenda is at this point. It having changed so much.

I wonder why you bother with the flip-flop argument; it won't work on any informed people. McCain's waffled himself, despite being so "principled" himself; I don't expect anything more of any politician.

As for working closely with Congress, McCain has taken a turn so far to the right that I can't see him as doing anything other than Republican business as usual. This is the same Republican party where committee chairs hold secret meetings to get bills onto the floor without having Democrats even present.

 

[Azale]

As McCain goes to the right to garner votes, Obama shifts to the center to do the same. Par for the course, happens every election cycle. Having to wade through it is annoying though.

And I agree somewhat on legislative experience =/= executive, but it's better than "campaign experience", which was what dis was arguing

 

[Abaddon]

Why is military leadership so important? Don't you have generals etc?

Its not even a blip on the radar in the UK politics..

 

[human-slaughter]

Why is military leadership so important? Don't you have generals etc?

Its not even a blip on the radar in the UK politics..

Because the UK isn't interested in protecting the liberties of foreign nations like the U.S is.

 

[North King]

Why is military leadership so important? Don't you have generals etc?

Its not even a blip on the radar in the UK politics..

The Prime Minister isn't the official Commander in Chief, is he? Moreover, Britain isn't quite as internationally involved as America is anymore...