en-us http://www.intensedebate.com/users/509068 Comments by nat8899 http://original.antiwar.com/paul/2009/10/05/instead-of-bombs-and-bribes/#IDComment37514309 Bravo, Mr. Paul! Your opinion is so simple and so straightforward that it may sound naive to some misguided souls. But it is as fresh, as accurate and as wise an opinion as it is simple and straightforward. The only mystery is why there aren’t far more people in our country who are as sensible as you are. Isn’t empathy the ultimate basis for all human communication? Why do so many Americans lack in empathy? Is our culture so bad that it destroys the most basic human nature from so many of our citizens? Tue, 6 Oct 2009 17:59:48 +0000 http://original.antiwar.com/paul/2009/10/05/instead-of-bombs-and-bribes/#IDComment37514309 http://original.antiwar.com/mike-tennant/2009/07/22/previous-governments-to-prosecute-or-not-to-prosecute /#IDComment28126042 Excellent! I am still hoping that after Obama has accomplished some major policy initiatives, such as health care reform, under his belt, he will relax his objection to an investigation of the Bush era crimes. Otherwise, his legacy will be at best a tainted one, carrying the baggage of the criminality of the Bush/Cheney regime as part of his own. Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:45:15 +0000 http://original.antiwar.com/mike-tennant/2009/07/22/previous-governments-to-prosecute-or-not-to-prosecute /#IDComment28126042 http://original.antiwar.com/huber/2009/06/29/killing-them-softly/#IDComment25930387 I don’t mean to nick pick but, I must say, I am not sure that the author is saying that what lies ahead is our nation’s complete ruin. Rather, I think, he is saying that what our government is doing under Obama is to continue the exact same thing as Bush/Cheney admin did: killing civilians in another country at the expense of our huge national resources that does not even have any bearing to our national security or other national interest. Such policy should be rejected and condemned for its immoral nature and for being contrary to our national interest, regardless of whether it would necessarily cause our national ruin or not. For just because our nation may be so rich that we can afford such wanton waste of national resources, even if that were true, does not justify adopting such policy. In that sense, the fact that our government is engaged in such policy also has something more to do than mere incompetence: most probably, the greed of the so-called military industrial complex and their power to control and manipulate our government, as President Eisenhower had so famously warned us several decades ago. Tue, 30 Jun 2009 12:51:17 +0000 http://original.antiwar.com/huber/2009/06/29/killing-them-softly/#IDComment25930387 http://news.antiwar.com/2009/06/26/official-us-wont-forcibly-board-north-korean-ship/#IDComment25703971 It is fortunate that the State Dept. has adopted a rational interpretation. Any attempt to use force will only aggravate the situation and will not contribute to peace in that region or around the world. Sun, 28 Jun 2009 01:54:42 +0000 http://news.antiwar.com/2009/06/26/official-us-wont-forcibly-board-north-korean-ship/#IDComment25703971 http://original.antiwar.com/solomon/2009/06/18/obama-targets-antiwar-democrats/#IDComment24777228 Yes, we must support Donna Edwards of Maryland, Alan Grayson of Florida, Eric Massa of New York, Chellie Pingree of Maine, Jared Polis of Colorado and Jackie Speier of California for success in their re-election campaigns and make sure that they are all re-elected. And we must also work to defeat pro-war candidates in other jurisdictions, whether Republican or Democrat. We must also work to put more pressure on Obama for torture investigations and for full compliance of civil rights. Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:31:42 +0000 http://original.antiwar.com/solomon/2009/06/18/obama-targets-antiwar-democrats/#IDComment24777228 http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/06/04/obama-in-cairo-words-words-words/#IDComment23434890 II agree with much of what you say. I, too, can support the old Republicanism, but not the current version of “Republicanism” now championed by the likes of Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, Karl Rove, and a host of neo-cons. Their mantra is always more social control, more government surveillance, fear mongering, war-mongering, torturing prisoners, foreign invasion to subjugate any nation that does not show sufficient respect to our awesome military power. All of this is directly contrary to what I believe libertarianism stands for, not to mention that it goes against the core concept of the Christian ethics of “Love thy neighbor”. It is nothing short of a national tragedy that many of fellow voters have been duped into believing that these perverted “Republicans” alone can protect our safety. Whatever shortcomings the Obama administration may have shown so far, it was refreshing and still inspiring to listen to his speech in Cairo. Fri, 5 Jun 2009 17:31:26 +0000 http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/06/04/obama-in-cairo-words-words-words/#IDComment23434890 http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/06/04/obama-in-cairo-words-words-words/#IDComment23435327 Just to say where I am coming from: I consider myself, fundamentally, a libertarian, but with compassion. So, while I adhere to all fundamental principles of libertarianism (individual freedom and the least government interference in private lives), I do not consider it an anathema to good government to provide certain social safety nets, such as welfare program, unemployment insurance, national health care system, etc. These are measures to protect the less well off, and there is nothing in the concept of libertarianism, which is inconsistent with the idea of collective compassion and assistance for the poor, old, disabled, and so forth. In this sense, fundamental libertarianism, a certain basic form of pacifism and certain forms of progressive politics on social safety net programs are all compatible with one another and can form a coalition of political forces against the wanton militarism that can destroy much of what is good in our country. Fri, 5 Jun 2009 10:24:37 +0000 http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/06/04/obama-in-cairo-words-words-words/#IDComment23435327 http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/06/04/obama-in-cairo-words-words-words/#IDComment23431467 As you also point out, there may be external factors which will critically influence the course of action he will be taking: political forces which are beyond his control and which will seriously restrain Mr. Obama’s political ability to carry out his preferred policy options. As Mearsheimer and Walton show in his now well-known book, The Israel Lobby, US Congress in the past often supported the Israeli government policy lines rather than what the US president intended to do, when there was a showdown between the two political choices. For this reason, now may not be the time for us the US citizens to be overly critical of our president; instead, we must give Mr. Obama the benefit of the doubt and provide all the political support that his electorate can possibly provide him so that he can carry out his preferred policy goals boldly and uninhibitedly, first in connection with the Palestine-Israel conflict which is at the core of many foreign policy issues. Fri, 5 Jun 2009 09:23:35 +0000 http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/06/04/obama-in-cairo-words-words-words/#IDComment23431467 http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/06/04/obama-in-cairo-words-words-words/#IDComment23431272 I could not agree more with your overall assessment and critique of Mr. Obama's speech in Cairo yesterday. On the one hand, his speech could be viewed as an integral part of a possible effort to escalate overall military campaigns in Central Asia and possibly in other regions, including a possible preparation for a war with Iran. In this interpretation, his role would not be to change the course of this country from the ruinous ways of his predecessor; instead, it would be to continue to pursue the same ruinous ways, but only more competently and more effectively than his bumbling predecessor, the Bush/Cheney team. On the other hand, what he said about the Palestine-Israel conflict generally, as well as more specifically about some of the related matters, like Hama’s possible role in the future of the political landscape in that region, though somewhat unsatisfactory in details, was far more serious and realistic and, in its overall tone and substance, was a radical departure from the standard rhetoric of any US presidents in the recent past. We will know what is his true vision and long-term foreign policy goal through his action in the near future. Fri, 5 Jun 2009 09:17:09 +0000 http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/06/04/obama-in-cairo-words-words-words/#IDComment23431272 http://original.antiwar.com/mccarl/2009/06/01/torture-from-a-distance/#IDComment23051198 Could not agree more on your point that this debate is more than about policy differences, and that it goes right to the issue of conscience. This is also why we cannot simply move on and still believe that we have dealt with the issue raised by these dark pages of our history. Tue, 2 Jun 2009 10:50:25 +0000 http://original.antiwar.com/mccarl/2009/06/01/torture-from-a-distance/#IDComment23051198 http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2009/06/01/whence-the-terror-hysteria/#IDComment23050818 It is truly refreshing to hear a sane argument in the mist of cacophony of war mongering. Tue, 2 Jun 2009 10:40:27 +0000 http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2009/06/01/whence-the-terror-hysteria/#IDComment23050818 http://original.antiwar.com/zunes/2009/05/29/defending-israeli-war-crimes/#IDComment22903244 Isn't there some kind of US or state law against our state government officers to get themselves involved in a meddling sort of way in international disputes? At least, shouldn't we also say that these state attorneys general were lobbying to the US Secretary of State by writing such letter? If so, aren't they in violation of FARA? If it turns out that there is no law whatsoever will make this kind of behavior illegal, it is certainly high time that we passed a law to that effect, and booted out state attorneys general doing the same in the future. Sun, 31 May 2009 12:12:47 +0000 http://original.antiwar.com/zunes/2009/05/29/defending-israeli-war-crimes/#IDComment22903244 http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/05/17/the-tortuous-logic-of-nancy-pelosi/#IDComment21759776 I salute your clear logic on the moral situation involved here. Pelosi must take the blame for not having been bold enough to do her job as a leading Congresswoman when she might have made a difference. However, let's not forget that she was not the most culpable person in these whole sordid affairs. At the worst, she was like a policeman who stood by doing nothing when the mob was committing a murder. That would be culpable, given his duty, but understandable, too, given the practical situation in which he found himself; but in any event, the murderers would clearly be the most culpable of all and surely must be apprehended, prosecuted and jailed, for a long time. Doesn’t the same logic apply here? Pelosi is culpable and maybe should even resign but why are we doing nothing to impeach, disbar those lawyers and the justice, and prosecute the whole gang of thugs who ordered war crimes to create false intelligence for their political agenda? Mon, 18 May 2009 14:02:12 +0000 http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/05/17/the-tortuous-logic-of-nancy-pelosi/#IDComment21759776 http://original.antiwar.com/galloway/2009/04/30/obama-and-dc-dance-the-torture-minuet/#IDComment20394314 It is nothing short of a national scandal that nothing is being done as yet. Among other things, Jay Bybee, one of the six lawyers who produced the infamous torture memos, is still sitting as an active judge on one of our federal appellate courts and yet no proceedings have commenced for his impeachment. Let's not talk about the errors of the Bush/Cheney administration, until we talk about whether we have really changed very much at all. Sat, 2 May 2009 01:02:57 +0000 http://original.antiwar.com/galloway/2009/04/30/obama-and-dc-dance-the-torture-minuet/#IDComment20394314 http://antiwar.com/discuss/2009/04/14/183/#IDComment19039300 You're right on. We are working pretty hard for it, too. Thu, 16 Apr 2009 22:59:43 +0000 http://antiwar.com/discuss/2009/04/14/183/#IDComment19039300