FU - FairAndUNbalanced.com - Latest comments on Cold War Mindset

In response to: Cold War Mindset

Burr Deming [Member] — Fri, 27 Jul 2012 23:20:59 +0000

Thank you Heathen.

Forgive me for losing track of your intent. I continued to focus on the original topic. I congratulate you on your grasp on the history of the last 21 years. Now if you could reach, then educate, the top advisors on which Mr. Romney relies for his foreign policy expertise, perhaps the need to repeat basic facts would disappear.

Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you, Heathen Republican.

In response to: Cold War Mindset

The Heathen Republican [Visitor] — Fri, 27 Jul 2012 23:20:59 +0000

"In any event, and I hope we don't need to repeat this more than a few more times: the Soviet Union does not exist."

Why did you feel the need to say it once? My comments were focused on Russia, which does exist.

In response to: Cold War Mindset

Burr Deming [Member] — Fri, 27 Jul 2012 03:52:21 +0000

Thank you Heathen. McCarthyism used the Communist threat to smear all opponents. That is why McCarthy was eventually censured by the US Senate.

That you did not share the conviction of the Bush administration is commendable. Your speculation about their motives is reasonable. It differs from mine. I think they were patriots who misunderstood the nature of a post-Cold War world. As I mentioned, others disagree with my conjecture.

As to Romney's Cold War mentality, it is a serious difference that will lead us into other misadventures. He urges us to fight the last war.

In any event, and I hope we don't need to repeat this more than a few more times: the Soviet Union does not exist.

In response to: Cold War Mindset

The Heathen Republican [Visitor] — Fri, 27 Jul 2012 01:30:03 +0000

"The destructive force of McCarthyism, in addition to terrorizing progressives across the country, also cost several China experts their jobs, leaving nobody to point out simple insights."

I thought McCarthyism terrorized communists, not progressives. Or are you saying there isn't a difference between the two?

"I think it was because those in charge knew to a moral certainty, but could not prove, that the attacks that happened on September 11 were state sponsored. Generations of battle against an evil empire and smaller tyrants had driven the lesson home. That a comic book villain in a cave on the other side of the world could have engineered such a massive attack was beyond reason. And the primary suspect, the one who had to have been the center of planning and execution, was Saddam Hussein's Iraq."

I don't think that at all. Instead, I think those in charge were a little too opportunistic, took advantage of the war fever, and disposed of a known problem in the Middle East. I tend to think their motives really were to try and improve the cesspool that was/is the Middle East.

"The cost in American lives was enormous, and the terrorist network flourished unchecked until a new administration got the focus right."

I think this is completely false. The number of American lives lost were miniscule relative to past conflicts and the scale of the war. I would never say the losses were insignificant, but it's flat out wrong to make it sound like the cost was enormous.

It's also not true that the terrorist network continued to flourish. There is plenty of evidence that Al Qaida was surprised at our response (given the history of Clinton lobbing missiles) and was severely scattered. The network was broken quickly and we continue to crush the remnants.

And the suggestion that Obama's focus corrected the problem is, frankly, laughable. The most generous description is that he continued Bush policies and followed-through on Bush commitments, all of which eventually improved the situation in Iraq.

"Romney advisor Rich Williamson, speaking for the Romney campaign, accused the Obama administration of ignoring trouble spots that are "strategically important to the Soviet Union." Yeah, that's what he said."

Without defending the statements because I haven't seen them for myself, I think it's short-sighted not to take both China and Russia into account. Both will rise again and both actively undermine the U.S., desiring a world where we are not the only superpower.

It's only reasonable to ensure our defense policies prepare for the eventual rise of China and resurrection of Russia.

In response to: Cold War Mindset

T. Paine [Visitor] — Thu, 26 Jul 2012 17:15:58 +0000

Oh, I absolutely agree. I hope Obama can get re-elected because his foreign policy is far more common sensical. (To say nothing of his masterful handling of our domestic issues and restoring our economy. Why isn’t he running on that record, I wonder?)

I especially like that part of Obama telling Medvedev to relay to incoming tyrant-- errr, I mean President, Putin to just give Obama some more time and he can be far more "flexible" after he is re-elected and then being able to dismantle our DEFENSIVE missile defense systems.

While Russia is a shadow of its old self, it is NOT our friend. Acquiescing to their demands is not only foolish, but downright dangerous. Cold war or not.

By the way, I think a vast majority of people, including us dim conservatives, realize that Saddam’s Iraq and the terrorist attacks on 9/11 were not connected.