Clinton: Embracing Our Common Humanity

[nakedemperor]

Clinton's giving a speech here at Brown tomorrow afternoon, for which I had to stand in line for 5 freakin' hours to get a ticket. The title of the talk is "Embracing Our Common Humanity: Security and Prosperity in the 21st Century".

Great. I'm sure all those dead Rwandans appreciate his genuine concern for common humanity. It appears people have forgotten that Clinton joined the ranks of U.S. presidents who ostencibly ignored or perpatrated crimes against humanity-- Truman, Nixon, GWB, etc. The selective memory of Western Heritage continues to confound me. If there's an open question portion of this talk I'm asking for an apology.

 

[no1tovote4]

Clinton's giving a speech here at Brown tomorrow afternoon, for which I had to stand in line for 5 freakin' hours to get a ticket. The title of the talk is "Embracing Our Common Humanity: Security and Prosperity in the 21st Century".

Great. I'm sure all those dead Rwandans appreciate his genuine concern for common humanity. It appears people have forgotten that Clinton joined the ranks of U.S. presidents who ostencibly ignored or perpatrated crimes against humanity-- Truman, Nixon, GWB, etc. The selective memory of Western Heritage continues to confound me. If there's an open question portion of this talk I'm asking for an apology.

Go for it, I would love to hear how he addresses that issue. What turn of phrase he will attempt to use to explain it away.

 

[Said1]

Clinton's giving a speech here at Brown tomorrow afternoon, for which I had to stand in line for 5 freakin' hours to get a ticket. The title of the talk is "Embracing Our Common Humanity: Security and Prosperity in the 21st Century".

Great. I'm sure all those dead Rwandans appreciate his genuine concern for common humanity. It appears people have forgotten that Clinton joined the ranks of U.S. presidents who ostencibly ignored or perpatrated crimes against humanity-- Truman, Nixon, GWB, etc. The selective memory of Western Heritage continues to confound me. If there's an open question portion of this talk I'm asking for an apology.

Wow, good for you! Rocken' Roll!

 

[Jimmyeatworld]

If Clinton is embracing something, he's probably just trying to get a cheap feel anyway.

 

[OCA]

Clinton's giving a speech here at Brown tomorrow afternoon, for which I had to stand in line for 5 freakin' hours to get a ticket. The title of the talk is "Embracing Our Common Humanity: Security and Prosperity in the 21st Century".

Great. I'm sure all those dead Rwandans appreciate his genuine concern for common humanity. It appears people have forgotten that Clinton joined the ranks of U.S. presidents who ostencibly ignored or perpatrated crimes against humanity-- Truman, Nixon, GWB, etc. The selective memory of Western Heritage continues to confound me. If there's an open question portion of this talk I'm asking for an apology.

Truman, Nixon, GWB crimes against humanity? This I have to hear.

You'd be better off to ask for an apology for bombing an aspirin factory and killing innocents on the day of his impeachment vote just in order to take the attention away from himself.

 

[nakedemperor]

Truman, Nixon, GWB crimes against humanity? This I have to hear.

You'd be better off to ask for an apology for bombing an aspirin factory and killing innocents on the day of his impeachment vote just in order to take the attention away from himself.

Truman = fire bombings of Tokyo, Dresden.

Nixon = agent orange carpet bombings, ignoring the coming genocide of the Khmer Rouge

GWB = acknowledging but doing nothing about the Darfur genocide

 

[OCA]

Truman = fire bombings of Tokyo, Dresden.

Nixon = agent orange carpet bombings, ignoring the coming genocide of the Khmer Rouge

GWB = acknowledging but doing nothing about the Darfur genocide

Goddamn right about Truman, saved tens of thousands of American lives...no crime there.

Nixon...again its war....alls fair you know.

GWB....you guys scream about Iraq and imperialism....you'd do the same with Darfur. Its all bullshit.

 

[archangel]

Truman = fire bombings of Tokyo, Dresden.

Nixon = agent orange carpet bombings, ignoring the coming genocide of the Khmer Rouge

GWB = acknowledging but doing nothing about the Darfur genocide

Good Lord Naked...Being a veteran of the Vietnam era and having relatives who served in WWII..what is your problem...Truman...firebombings of Tokyo,dresden...Nixon agent Orange...carpet bombings...well,agent orange was bad, hurt alot of vets's unintentionally...but bombings geez...this is war and that was the tech at the time!...I love it when non vets comment on the atrocities of war...they were not there to see the atrocities the enemy committed...humm...how about the NVA who regulary committed crimes against US troops...like a case when they overran a Special Forces unit...they cut off their private parts and stuffed them down the throats of our guys to make a point!This was not reported in our wonderful news! And what about the atrocities the Japanese and Germans committed against our troops and civilians...try going down that road for a change...would be refreshing to say the least!

 

[musicman]

Nixon... ignoring the coming genocide of the Khmer Rouge

Now, wait a minute...How TF does one ignore "coming genocide"? Nixon's strategy for stopping the genocide (and history has borne him out) was to aggressively prosecute the war. In this, he was thwarted at every turn by liberals.

GWB = acknowledging but doing nothing about the Darfur genocide

Human nature is self-serving - murderously so at times. Tragically, America can't be everywhere, doing everything. Even our resources are finite; we must protect ourselves first.

 

[manu1959]

Clinton's giving a speech here at Brown tomorrow afternoon, for which I had to stand in line for 5 freakin' hours to get a ticket. The title of the talk is "Embracing Our Common Humanity: Security and Prosperity in the 21st Century".

Great. I'm sure all those dead Rwandans appreciate his genuine concern for common humanity. It appears people have forgotten that Clinton joined the ranks of U.S. presidents who ostencibly ignored or perpatrated crimes against humanity-- Truman, Nixon, GWB, etc. The selective memory of Western Heritage continues to confound me. If there's an open question portion of this talk I'm asking for an apology.

he has appologized on national tv several times....and has said that he regrets that he did nothing

 

[nakedemperor]

As a non-vet, I can only comment on the philosophy of "stooping to the level of the enemy"; arguments beginning with "yeah but they did" are circular logic. Similarly 'all's fair in war'. Failed logic.

Human nature is self-serving - murderously so at times. Tragically, America can't be everywhere, doing everything. Even our resources are finite; we must protect ourselves first.

Agreed-- but to claim lack or resources as an inability (as opposed to a lack of desire) re: why we did nothing in Darfur is patently false.

 

[archangel]

As a non-vet, I can only comment on the philosophy of "stooping to the level of the enemy"; arguments beginning with "yeah but they did" are circular logic. Similarly 'all's fair in war'. Failed logic.


No one( in here) myself included ever said they did it so can we...you are a product of the elite university system...how very sad..."War is Hell"...get it through your little mind....Philosophy is akin to opinion which is akin to garbage...everyone has some...geez! :cof:

 

[nakedemperor]

No one( in here) myself included ever said they did it so can we...you are a product of the elite university system...how very sad..."War is Hell"...get it through your little mind....Philosophy is akin to opinion which is akin to garbage...everyone has some...geez! :cof:

Does this presuppose the infallability of the armed services in conflict? I can only hope you don't mean this. There's a difference between cutting a soldier slack for shooting someone who may or may not have been a threat to him and criticizing the armchair decisions of products of elite university systems, who have somewhat more time to deliberate and hence a higher level of accountability. Did it save American lives to firebomb and kill ~500,000 women, children, elderly, and wounded soldiers in Dresden? A city 60 miles from military installations? Did it save a proportional number? Your response is vastly reductive.

 

[musicman]

.
Agreed-- but to claim lack or resources as an inability (as opposed to a lack of desire) re: why we did nothing in Darfur is patently false.

I disagree, NE. The finity of resources - even ours - is precisely the reason we can't be everywhere, doing everything, and righting every wrong. It's tragic, but there it is. We've got to protect ourselves first; if we're out of the picture, think what a horrible place this world would be!

 

[Said1]

I disagree, NE. The finity of resources - even ours - is precisely the reason we can't be everywhere, doing everything, and righting every wrong. It's tragic, but there it is. We've got to protect ourselves first; if we're out of the picture, think what a horrible place this world would be!

Besides, I think there's a lot of Euros sitting around with nothing else to do!

 

[archangel]

Does this presuppose the infallability of the armed services in conflict? I can only hope you don't mean this. There's a difference between cutting a soldier slack for shooting someone who may or may not have been a threat to him and criticizing the armchair decisions of products of elite university systems, who have somewhat more time to deliberate and hence a higher level of accountability. Did it save American lives to firebomb and kill ~500,000 women, children, elderly, and wounded soldiers in Dresden? A city 60 miles from military installations? Did it save a proportional number? Your response is vastly reductive.

Are you refering to the Lt.Pantano case in your comments?"Cutting slack"
Also I will always criticize the armchair decisions of the elite who always seem to avoid service to their country...while always having the time to criticize those who were actually there...remember college is just a shortcut to experience..but by no means does it stand above! Go serve then come back and debate real life issues with experience under your belt...party guy!

 

[nakedemperor]

I disagree, NE. The finity of resources - even ours - is precisely the reason we can't be everywhere, doing everything, and righting every wrong. It's tragic, but there it is. We've got to protect ourselves first; if we're out of the picture, think what a horrible place this world would be!

Are you saying the coffers are dry? That a force of less than 1,000 soldiers (as recommended by a U.S. state department official who visited Darfur and cataloged atrocities told a group of students here at Brown some months ago) was not a possibility? The rhetoric of protecting and freeing Iraqis (and noble goal) becomes a tough pill to swallow when such a small commitment would have done so, so much for the Sudanese.

 

[nakedemperor]

Are you refering to the Lt.Pantano case in your comments?"Cutting slack"

Not specifically. It was a general comment re:combat.

Also I will always criticize the armchair decisions of the elite who always seem to avoid service to their country...while always having the time to criticize those who were actually there

I'm not talking about soldiers in my criticism, never was, your responses are reactionary to a projected position which I don't actually have-- The armchair decision makers you're talking about are also not the ones I'm talking about. You seem to be critiquing politicians who make judgements on combat but who themselves never participated; I'm taking about generals and presidents.

...remember college is just a shortcut to experience..

Hahahahaha.. *Just* so? How dramatic of you.

but by no means does it stand above! Go serve then come back and debate real life issues with experience under your belt...party guy!

Eternally *beside*, I would argue. I'll serve when we fight a war that I think is worth fighting. "Real life issues". Haha. Yes yes, years beget experience begets wisdom, and someone in their early-20's has nothing to add to a "debate" about presidential decision making-- are you experienced in this field? Let's not condescend, shall we? Or if you honestly believe college is a "shortcut" to anything, how about humoring me, eh pops?

 

[archangel]

Not specifically. It was a general comment re:combat.



I'm not talking about soldiers in my criticism, never was, your responses are reactionary to a projected position which I don't actually have-- The armchair decision makers you're talking about are also not the ones I'm talking about. You seem to be critiquing politicians who make judgements on combat but who themselves never participated; I'm taking about generals and presidents.



Hahahahaha.. *Just* so? How dramatic of you. <<<Drama Queen naked

You just debated with the pop's you seem to never have had...grow up!You are a typical liberal suffering from a mental disease...how can you critique generals et al when you were never there...humm...round and round we go where we stop no one knows...your philosophy of life! Go back and read your comments...never addressing soldiers...are you blind as well or just forgot what you wrote? Also if you are in your twenties and you say you will only fight a war you feel is just...well please enlighten me as to what type of war you feel is just...geez!
Also ask your wonderful professors what war they feel is just and why they did not serve?And why shpould we the righteous parents send our kids and grandkids to be trained by them....yuk...I will pass on that one!

 

[musicman]

Are you saying the coffers are dry? That a force of less than 1,000 soldiers (as recommended by a U.S. state department official who visited Darfur and cataloged atrocities told a group of students here at Brown some months ago) was not a possibility? The rhetoric of protecting and freeing Iraqis (and noble goal) becomes a tough pill to swallow when such a small commitment would have done so, so much for the Sudanese.

You'll get no argument from me on the tragedy of Darfur, but whether or not the coffers are presently dry doesn't really enter into it. We are envied and loathed by cutthroat tyrants the world over; they'd love to see us spread as thin as possible. 1,000-soldier commitments have a way of turning into all-out wars (see...well - almost any action America has been involved in in the last 50 years). We simply MUST use our resources judiciously. We can't be everywhere; to try would leave us insanely vulnerable. We can't change the fundamental nature of man; all we can do is defend ourselves and help when we can.

What a shame that shining beacon of strength and decency, the U.N., couldn't lend a hand here. I guess they're too busy kissing tyrant ass, stealing money, and scoring 9-year-old trim.