Iran

#3,127
#3,127
McDad said:
I am someone who is super cynical about our politicians. I see very little evidence politicians care about anything more than winning and retaining power. Problems (like immigration) don't get fixed because fixing them would cede power. Money and donations are the priority because it helps with the gaining and retaining the power.

Frankly, I don't know how any of the partisans here continue to beat a drum for their side considering how abysmal our "leaders" are.
Click to expand...
Few rules about politicians:

1 - Follow the money
2 - Whether something is a "problem" or not depends on your perspective. For example, illegal immigration sounds like a problem, but for who? It isn't a problem (in fact, it is liked) for special interests of both major political parties, so that's why the status quo has persisted for so long
3 - There's a difference between a politician's words and actions. Feels obvious, but a lot of people think a politician's statements are in alignment with their actions when that isn't always the case.
4 - Politics is a lot like professional wrestling. A lot of the fights are fake, and the speeches they give are like wrestling promos. They are scripted, they're being paid to say certain things that they may or may not actually believe, it's to work the crowd and be performative.

Basically, very little of what you see in politics is a genuine representation of something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol, MemphisVol77, Velo Vol and 2 others
#3,128
#3,128
McDad said:
I am someone who is super cynical about our politicians. I see very little evidence politicians care about anything more than winning and retaining power. Problems (like immigration) don't get fixed because fixing them would cede power. Money and donations are the priority because it helps with the gaining and retaining the power.

Frankly, I don't know how any of the partisans here continue to beat a drum for their side considering how abysmal our "leaders" are.
Click to expand...
Once you view it more as primitive tribalism and stop trying to pretend we're more advanced than your basic feuding cavemen tribes or vicious Mafia families, it gets much easier to understand.

Choose your side and stay there as long as it serves your personal and family interests. When it's time to move on, do whatever awful double cross is required to move to the other side.

Don't get emotionally involved. The world ISN'T going to end over this spending program being passed over that spending program or this law vs that law. Ease off on the drama and think about what your family will need in the future and prepare there, not at the ballot box.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbh, midnight orange and 05_never_again
#3,132
#3,132
ButchPlz said:
Or he has changed. As a young man I was pro-Iraq war, pro-Afghanistan war, and on and on. As I've grown up and worked directly in the field where the "game" is played, and I've seen the suffering of soldiers in my friend group, family, and colleagues, my opinion has done a total 180.

I see suffering here in the US every day. I'm not going to be such an ******* that I volunteer more Americans, and more American resources, to fruitless causes that benefit only one group of people that are not interested in the well-being of my countrymen. That's not being bought, it's the exact opposite.
Click to expand...

I agree with this position.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ButchPlz
#3,133
#3,133
ButchPlz said:
Or he has changed. As a young man I was pro-Iraq war, pro-Afghanistan war, and on and on. As I've grown up and worked directly in the field where the "game" is played, and I've seen the suffering of soldiers in my friend group, family, and colleagues, my opinion has done a total 180.

I see suffering here in the US every day. I'm not going to be such an ******* that I volunteer more Americans, and more American resources, to fruitless causes that benefit only one group of people that are not interested in the well-being of my countrymen. That's not being bought, it's the exact opposite.
Click to expand...
I agree with this to an extent. But the way in which he changed is too convenient. He played the game and towed the line for money and ego. What reason do I have to believe that's changed?

As I said before his issue is all about credibility.

Maybe he has changed, I don't know, but I don't know whether to believe him then or to believe him now.

I've changed as well. In many of the same ways you described above.
 
#3,135
#3,135
BeardedVol said:
Nuclear weapons technology is literally 80 years old now.

We aren't stopping any country from pursuing them if they have a mind to, short of bombing them into oblivion, and/or invading and occupying them.

Are you prepared to commit to that policy?
Click to expand...
You are just ignorant of how that gets worked out. Just blubbering imaginary information.
 
#3,136
#3,136
KB5252 said:
I agree with this to an extent. But the way in which he changed is too convenient. He played the game and towed the line for money and ego. What reason do I have to believe that's changed?

As I said before his issue is all about credibility.

Maybe he has changed, I don't know, but I don't know whether to believe him then or to believe him now.

I've changed as well. In many of the same ways you described above.
Click to expand...
If every time somebody changes their opinion about something it lines up with them benefitting (or potentially benefitting) in some way, there's a good chance it isn't genuine. Both for politicians and real life. You need to follow someone's opinions for a longer period of time and build up a sample size for this; I wouldn't draw conclusions based on a single opinion change.

Somebody that has genuine evolutions or changes of opinion about things will at least occasionally change to an unpopular opinion, or adopt an opinion that they don't necessarily benefit from, or maybe even experience negative things from. And of course, just because somebody is advocating something that benefits or potentially benefits them does not mean that they are wrong by definition. It is reason to look deeper into the claims they are making, though.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: USF grad in TN
#3,137
#3,137
hog88 said:
I agree with this position.
Click to expand...
I should probably not be so angry about it- anger is God's- but it's hard when about half the people I work with and associate with have legitimately debilitating injuries from the stupid trash we pulled overseas. I respect those guys for their service, but who chose this stuff and was it necessary? And what right to any of us have to volunteer more of the same on behalf of another country?

I see suffering and drug addiction with veterans and people all around me every day. I see damage caused by bad healthcare and corrupt pharmaceutical companies. Surely, surely there is something better we could be doing with the billions our government wastes in defense, aid, and it's own crappy take on healthcare. Surely!
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#3,139
#3,139
05_never_again said:
If every time somebody changes their opinion about something it lines up with them benefitting (or potentially benefitting) in some way, there's a good chance it isn't genuine. Both for politicians and real life. You need to follow someone's opinions for a longer period of time and build up a sample size for this; I wouldn't draw conclusions based on a single opinion change.

Somebody that has genuine evolutions or changes of opinion about things will at least occasionally change to an unpopular opinion, or adopt an opinion that they don't necessarily benefit from, or maybe even experience negative things from. And of course, just because somebody is advocating something that benefits or potentially benefits them does not mean that they are wrong by definition. It is reason to look deeper into the claims they are making, though.
Click to expand...
But why can't we apply the same critical thought to people whose opinions haven't changed, as well? Why aren't we saying "damn, in stuff that's just publicly available, Ted Cruz has received almost $2M from one big Israel-issues PAC." You may be right that Tucker is paid off by someone- by whom, I can't say and neither can you- but we can prove that Ted Cruz is receiving some lobbying benefit from someone. I'm even willing to go so far as to say the interest of Cruz's defense industry donors and Israeli donors are highly aligned.
 
#3,140
#3,140
KB5252 said:
It's credibility, he's admitted he isn't credible and influenced by others........ Either then or now.

His schitck hasn't really changed, just the agenda. That makes me respect him even less. He may be right, I don't know, but he's simply not credible any longer.
Click to expand...
Understandable, I’m not a big fan of his but for other reason


My point was more so in general we see it often times in politics where someone changes their opinion on something and then said person is automatically called a grifter, sellout, controlled, etc. I think it should be welcomed when someone changes their opinion and acknowledges they were wrong and ignorant
 
#3,143
#3,143
Smokey123 said:
Understandable, I’m not a big fan of his but for other reason


My point was more so in general we see it often times in politics where someone changes their opinion on something and then said person is automatically called a grifter, sellout, controlled, etc. I think it should be welcomed when someone changes their opinion and acknowledges they were wrong and ignorant
Click to expand...
I'm very suspect of politics and politicians. Even more so political commentators. Because their entire purpose is to sway public opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TVOLS
#3,145
#3,145
Volsdeep4 said:
Wow. It saves 100’s if not 1,000s of lives. I agree tax dollars could/should be better used. That’s just a weird stance.
Click to expand...
Until now, literally nobody has been interested in the "lives" angle but me, and the moment I point out that someone is going to end up paying for this (by the way, Israel shot first) I get told I'm taking a "weird stance". Perhaps read the thread.
 
#3,146
#3,146
ButchPlz said:
Until now, literally nobody has been interested in the "lives" angle but me, and the moment I point out that someone is going to end up paying for this (by the way, Israel shot first) I get told I'm taking a "weird stance". Perhaps read the thread.
Click to expand...
Everyone has been talking about lives. You are wanting to put $ into missile defense that saves lives into a negative light.
I follow this thread. But better sources are else where. People here just have sides and bicker without hardly putting news on here. I have a lot of skin in this game.
Who cares who shot first or religious values. War is war. Always has and always will be. Once people start understanding that. Geopolitical news might make more sense.
There will always be war, factions of people killing, etc etc. I wish it weren’t the case but it is. So better be the best and proactive rather than 2nd rate and reactive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MAD
#3,148
#3,148
Up until now I thought the extent of US involvement was only giving the go ahead to attack and intelligence. IMO that enough for me to say yes, the US is very much a part of this and could be attacked because of it regardless of what Trump says. I did not think about it until reading reports today that the US is refueling Israeli aircraft and you think about how many sorties Israel is flying, it only make sense that the US is.
 
#3,149
#3,149
Volsdeep4 said:
Everyone has been talking about lives. You are wanting to put $ into missile defense that saves lives into a negative light.
I follow this thread. But better sources are else where. People here just have sides and bicker without hardly putting news on here. I have a lot of skin in this game.
Who cares who shot first or religious values. War is war. Always has and always will be. Once people start understanding that. Geopolitical news might make more sense.
There will always be war, factions of people killing, etc etc. I wish it weren’t the case but it is. So better be the best and proactive rather than 2nd rate and reactive.
Click to expand...
Ok, now tell me where I put $ on missile defense in a "negative light"? Each Israeli missile launched is $12M compared to something like $200K for the Iranian missiles that they are shooting now. 10-15 interceptors are launched per 5-10 Iranian missiles. If we're talking war of attrition, how long can Israel keep that up before America "has" to start getting involved? Days? Weeks? Months? I genuinely do not know.

I have said I don't want American involvement. All signs are pointing to us being dragged into a war- even if we aren't putting boots on the ground, we're expending on a fight that's not ours. Before you start spouting off at me and jumping in halfway, like I said- read the thread.
 
#3,150
#3,150
Everyone that disagrees with me is a racist/anti-semite/sexist/bigot paid off by Russia/Qatar/Iran/Saudi Arabia.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top