Democrats Are Doves, Just As We Always Knew

[EconChick]

Well, this thread is going well. So far no one's disproved the title. Just lots of diversions. LMAO.

Why the need to disprove it? Warmongering is not exactly an enviable character trait.

So you're party's full of doves.

You're confirming that for me, right?

Hey, I own it if you want to call me a warmonger for slamming the enemy.

So are you confirming the dove label???

 

[Care4all]

As thread after thread on this board shows, Democrats are weak on National Security. Even when Obama is pretending to be a strong CINC, no one believes him.

This entire current mess is due to the vacuum Obama caused by pulling everyone, not just troops, but other eyes and ears needed for intel out of Iraq.

This has always been the case and always will be.

So the pin prick attacks took out a few antennaes, a few windows, small parts of buildings, maybe a handful of terrorists. The efficacy of the air strikes will diminish as jihadis blend into the population.

If you're going to wage war, do it right or not at all.

More proof of WEAKNESS on NATIONAL SECURITY.

I disagree that what is going on over there is National Security....what's going on over there is NOT national security, again in my opinion...

And I am a DOVE, have always been a DOVE and will forever be a DOVE....but at least I know my weaknesses!

And I do know that our Nation needs BOTH DOVES AND HAWKS, and the hawks will win out every once in a while.

OUR NATION, needs BOTH.

We need the DOVES to reign in the HAWKS, always wanting WAR first and foremost, we need the HAWKS to out scream the DOVES and win the battle between the two, when it IS absolutely necessary for our own protection!!!! It's a balance of the two that truly protects us all.

Great post. A serious conversation. But having worked around military people my whole life, I don't know anyone who wants war first. Even every single alleged hawk has sat back and watched diplomacy and half measures do more damage before finally saying, do this job right and do it well. Just like Powell used to say.

I've LIVED the Military life, all over the world, for decades, with my father, (Retired Air Force lifer and Mother) and with my husband who is a disabled Vet... He's the HAWK and I'm the DOVE, we balance each other out well!

but honestly, it's emotionally harder on those of us left at home when the better half is sent in to a war zone or their father is sent in to a war zone, than it is for the better half...they know what is going on, they trust their commanders and leaders...and they know their duty....we just wait and wait and wait and then pray and pray and pray, with some more wait, and wait and waiting, then worrying and worrying and worrying, and then start the praying all over again....empty, without our loved ones...wondering if we will ever see our father again, or our husband again, and if we do, will they be in one piece?

It's easy on the rest of the country to send our guys off to fight in this skirmish and that skirmish and this war and that war....but not so easy on all of those involved.

 

[EconChick]

The hawks gave us the disaster of Vietnam and the disaster of Iraq. Why would anyone be troubled at being a called a dove?

Thanks for the confirmation, dude.

See folks, Carbon backs me up that their doves.

The word is 'they're'.

The doves didn't think invading Iraq was a brilliant idea. They were proven correct. As one of them, then, I was proven correct.

I will give you points for consistency, Carbon. That counts for something.

But you're wrong on why. But I'll give you kudos on consistency.

 

[flacaltenn]

Moderation Messge:

Thread closed for moderation. Will re-open..
You can bash parties, You can bash the CHRONICALLY
bad American foreign policy.. But you can't BASH each other.
This aint martial arts..

FlaCalTenn

 

[rightwinger]

Wilson, FDR, Truman and LBJ were doves?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Killing Bin Laden = Dove

Not carrying about the guy responsible for 3000 deaths = Hawk

 

[NYcarbineer]

Well, this thread is going well. So far no one's disproved the title. Just lots of diversions. LMAO.

Why the need to disprove it? Warmongering is not exactly an enviable character trait.

So you're party's full of doves.

You're confirming that for me, right?

Hey, I own it if you want to call me a warmonger for slamming the enemy.

So are you confirming the dove label???

You were wrong about Iraq. I was right. Who was the dove?

 

[EconChick]

Wilson, FDR, Truman and LBJ were doves?

Very good point, rw. But this ain't the same Democrat Party by a long stretch. You give me another Truman and I'd vote for him.

No one has his integrity though.

 

[EconChick]

Well, this thread is going well. So far no one's disproved the title. Just lots of diversions. LMAO.

Why the need to disprove it? Warmongering is not exactly an enviable character trait.

So you're party's full of doves.

You're confirming that for me, right?

Hey, I own it if you want to call me a warmonger for slamming the enemy.

So are you confirming the dove label???

You were wrong about Iraq. I was right. Who was the dove?

Oh, I was right, darling.....it just takes other people months and years to finally catch up to my position.

 

[EconChick]

Well, this thread is going well. So far no one's disproved the title. Just lots of diversions. LMAO.

Why the need to disprove it? Warmongering is not exactly an enviable character trait.

So you're party's full of doves.

You're confirming that for me, right?

Hey, I own it if you want to call me a warmonger for slamming the enemy.

So are you confirming the dove label???

You were wrong about Iraq. I was right. Who was the dove?

Besides I already answered you in post 43. Keep up.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I see the partisan game of Republicans pretending Democrats aren't as willing to pointlessly invade, bomb, and overthrow governments as Republicans is still going on. Of course, Democrats appreciate this denial of reality from Republicans, as it helps them among voters who are actually against this nonsense.

Oh right, and the polls back that up. roll eyes.

Right, because I'm sure anti-war voters turned out overwhelmingly for John McCain or Mitt Romney.

You're welcome to derail the thread and make it about McCain or Romney. Doesn't bother me.

But still doesn't change the fact THE POLLS SHOW THE COUNTRY KNOWS WHAT WEAKLINGS LIBS LIKE OBAMA ARE.

Link?

 

[Siete]

Democrats Are Doves, Just As We Always Knew

the Democrat's voted with Bush to go invade Iraq.

PC wanted proof insisting nobody could debunk her thread (their,they're) there it is ... as a service I provided her a spelling lesson too ... no charge either.

 

[The Rabbi]

The hawks gave us the disaster of Vietnam and the disaster of Iraq. Why would anyone be troubled at being a called a dove?

Thanks for the confirmation, dude.

See folks, Carbon backs me up that their doves.

The word is 'they're'.

The doves didn't think invading Iraq was a brilliant idea. They were proven correct. As one of them, then, I was proven correct.

No you were not proven correct. You were proven wrong, if anything.
The war was a success. We achieved every goal we set. Only loser libs like you can spin that into defeat.

 

[EconChick]

Democrats Are Doves, Just As We Always Knew

the Democrat's voted with Bush to go invade Iraq.

PC wanted proof insisting nobody could debunk her thread (their,they're) there it is ... as a service I provided her a spelling lesson too ... no charge either.

Siete: "The Democrats voted with Bush to go invade Iraq."

Did you actually walk right into my trap, Siete? Do you know how many liberals have blamed Bush for all these years who said he only invaded because of his daddy?

So thanks for that admission for starters. I'm sure there are people who will find that enlightening.

Secondy,

WHY DID DEMOCRATS SUPPORT BUSH IN INVASION OF IRAQ?


And finally, nice to admit that for 2003, but today's Democrat Party is the Dove Party.

 

[Siete]

arrrrrgggggghhhhhhh ... trapped again.


I proved you were wrong and an idiot in 1 sentence ... yup. ya got me TRAPPED !!!

LMAO

 

[deltex1]

As thread after thread on this board shows, Democrats are weak on National Security. Even when Obama is pretending to be a strong CINC, no one believes him.

This entire current mess is due to the vacuum Obama caused by pulling everyone, not just troops, but other eyes and ears needed for intel out of Iraq.

This has always been the case and always will be.

So the pin prick attacks took out a few antennaes, a few windows, small parts of buildings, maybe a handful of terrorists. The efficacy of the air strikes will diminish as jihadis blend into the population.

If you're going to wage war, do it right or not at all.

More proof of WEAKNESS on NATIONAL SECURITY.

Do doves peck each other's asses?

 

[deltex1]

As thread after thread on this board shows, Democrats are weak on National Security. Even when Obama is pretending to be a strong CINC, no one believes him.

This entire current mess is due to the vacuum Obama caused by pulling everyone, not just troops, but other eyes and ears needed for intel out of Iraq.

This has always been the case and always will be.

So the pin prick attacks took out a few antennaes, a few windows, small parts of buildings, maybe a handful of terrorists. The efficacy of the air strikes will diminish as jihadis blend into the population.

If you're going to wage war, do it right or not at all.

More proof of WEAKNESS on NATIONAL SECURITY.

ISIS is a threat to National security ? ... just yesterday RW's were saying ISIS was made up by Obama just so he could start a war ???

I suppose Obama is just waiting for ISIS to mount Naval and air strikes with their ground forces and attack our country next.

a threat to our National security and all that ... how freaking laughable is that?

run, hide under the bed it's IIIIIIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSIIIIIIISSSSSSS !!!


rw's are so clueless it's sad.

Id ask you to quote which rightwingers were saying that but that implies a level of integrity you simply lack.
Obama was saying 5 weeks ago ISIS was merely the JV Team. And now he's spending billions of dollars to bomb the shit out of them. What gives?

No conundrum there...no sir! Maybe a degree of befuddlement. Or maybe Val was getting laid while he was talking...

 

[rightwinger]

Wilson, FDR, Truman and LBJ were doves?

Very good point, rw. But this ain't the same Democrat Party by a long stretch. You give me another Truman and I'd vote for him.

No one has his integrity though.

Thats interesting

If Republicans would give me another Ike, I would vote for him

 

[rightwinger]

Democrats Are Doves, Just As We Always Knew

the Democrat's voted with Bush to go invade Iraq.

PC wanted proof insisting nobody could debunk her thread (their,they're) there it is ... as a service I provided her a spelling lesson too ... no charge either.

Siete: "The Democrats voted with Bush to go invade Iraq."

Did you actually walk right into my trap, Siete? Do you know how many liberals have blamed Bush for all these years who said he only invaded because of his daddy?

So thanks for that admission for starters. I'm sure there are people who will find that enlightening.

Secondy,

WHY DID DEMOCRATS SUPPORT BUSH IN INVASION OF IRAQ?


And finally, nice to admit that for 2003, but today's Democrat Party is the Dove Party.

This Democrat didn't

Transcript Obama s Speech Against The Iraq War NPR

What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.
What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income — to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics. Now let me be clear — I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.
But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history

 

[deltex1]

Obabbles warns those who remain with ISIS they will wind up lonely...what is he a personal counselor?. What a pussy. Why doesn't he say they will end up fucking dead?