Liberal v. Conservative Policies

[moe.ron]

When it come to International Relations, nothing is as simple as liberal vs. conservatives policies. Believe it or not, Iran, behind the scene, supported both the Afghanistan and Iraq exercise. Afghanistan because they hated the Taliban and Iraq, well, because they hated Saddam Hussein and Challabi was paid and bought by them. Challabi was also the same person that gave intel to the Pentagon and was distrusted by the CIA.

[RU OX Alum]

Originally Posted by moe.ron

When it come to International Relations, nothing is as simple as liberal vs. conservatives policies. Believe it or not, Iran, behind the scene, supported both the Afghanistan and Iraq exercise. Afghanistan because they hated the Taliban and Iraq, well, because they hated Saddam Hussein and Challabi was paid and bought by them. Challabi was also the same person that gave intel to the Pentagon and was distrusted by the CIA.

yeah. what he said. plus....

calling yourself a "liberal" or a "conservitive" is pretty ignorant if you ask me, at least in 2006. It would make more sence in 1700's Austria. Conservitives backed the German and Russian Empires (the Holy Alliance) and liberals wanted a republic.

Left wing and right wing? They were the seating arrangements after the French revolution. That's just stupid that was like, over two hundred years ago. You need to get over it. Seriously, make a list of things you support/oppose. Otherwise, I'll just think you're a tool. Of a party.


And neither the Republicans nor the Democrats opperate as a party. They opperate as coalitions of special interest groups. Because that is what they are.

[AlphaFrog]

Originally Posted by RU OX Alum

yeah. what he said. plus....

calling yourself a "liberal" or a "conservitive" is pretty ignorant if you ask me, at least in 2006. It would make more sence in 1700's Austria. Conservitives backed the German and Russian Empires (the Holy Alliance) and liberals wanted a republic.

Left wing and right wing? They were the seating arrangements after the French revolution. That's just stupid that was like, over two hundred years ago. You need to get over it. Seriously, make a list of things you support/oppose. Otherwise, I'll just think you're a tool. Of a party.


And neither the Republicans nor the Democrats opperate as a party. They opperate as coalitions of special interest groups. Because that is what they are.

Yes, but you can't vote on each seperate issue, you have to vote for a candidate. That candidate can't just call himself a cadidate and get very far (when's the last time we had an independant as a president???), so he has to choose something: liberal/conservative, right/left, or Rep/Dem. Making a list of what you support or oppose, and then choosing the party that falls more in line makes sense, but you still have to have the parties.

[shinerbock]

I agree that it isn't fully describing to term yourself a "liberal or "republican," at least generally. However, unless you're in academia, you generally don't have that luxury. While I understand people who vote for non-major parties, I don't buy into their theories that George W Bush=John Kerry. Also, just because you pay attention to special interests (as you should, to a degree) doesn't mean you are ignoring your constiuency. I agree that groups hold too much power in politics, but that is the public's fault as well. We live in a completely apathetic nation, and while it frustrates me, I frankly don't trust the general public's decision making ability, so I'm not really praying for a shift. Furthermore, if you desire to make some change in politics, you generally must join a party. It is so incredibly difficult to get elected as a third party or independent, and I think there comes a time when you might need to simply bite the bullet if you truly wish to make change from the inside. I personally do not agree with everything the Republican party does, but I do agree with much of it. I therefore consider myself Republican, but would be open to vote differently should I see a viable candidiate. I don't really think being a member of a political party makes you a tool or a lemming, because the people who generally will call you that, are also the people who generally will never have any significant impact on American society or it's politics.

[Jimmy Choo]

I just think its truely unfortunate that we have gotten ourselves so bogged down in Iraq b/c there are so many other issues that deserve our military attention. Quite frankly I would have felt better if we went after North Korea. That man is a fruitcake and if he gets his hands on a weapon, he WILL use it...

[shinerbock]

Unfortunately, the risks in N. Korea are much higher as well.

[Jimmy Choo]

To me however its risk vs. reward. Will there be higher risk going into N. Korea? Sure, there could be. But in my humble opinion I don't think Saddam would have used a nuke. He had more issues to worry about besides the US. But N. Korea is a different story. Should we go after the guy who we think would use a nuke if he had it or the wackjob who has his hands on nuclear materials and would use a nuke if he put it all together? I think its N. Korea, hands down.

[Tom Earp]

Actually, I never understood the terms Republican or Democrate.

Liberal or Conservative.

Moderate is thrown in there to differienceate some types? Who are they?

So, will some of You Poly Scies. please feeel free to give Your defenition for all of Us?

Many big terms are thrown around and actually, they don't mean Crap!

My Idea, My Feelings, I feel, or what ever!

[RACooper]

Originally Posted by ecupidelta

I just think its truely unfortunate that we have gotten ourselves so bogged down in Iraq b/c there are so many other issues that deserve our military attention. Quite frankly I would have felt better if we went after North Korea. That man is a fruitcake and if he gets his hands on a weapon, he WILL use it...

Now it just might be the jaded cynic in me... but North Korea could fight back, whereas Iraq could only put up token resistance.... and I happen to think that this little fact may have entered the political process of whom to attack in the "Axis of Evil" - but then again that just might be the cynic in me talking

[Jimmy Choo]

You could be right... N. Korea may put up some type of fight but..... this could also be the cynic in me as well but I just think that if we had left Iraq alone it would have crumbled on its own anyway. Saddam's sons would have eventually tried to kill him off and take control. The country still would have descended into chaos.

But like i said.... that's the cynic in me

[Tucker Carlson]

Originally Posted by RU OX Alum

Conservitives backed the German and Russian Empires (the Holy Alliance) and liberals wanted a republic.

Lets not forget that the liberals of that time also started the Communist movement in europe.

[RU OX Alum]

Originally Posted by Tucker Carlson

Lets not forget that the liberals of that time also started the Communist movement in europe.

That's right! So if you're either liberal or conservative, you're basically saying that only you and the people who think like yourself are worthy of having power.


Tom,

I'm a moderate. I want some social programs, and I want them when it is most feasible and conveinent to have them.

[ASUADPi]

Originally Posted by RU OX Alum

That's right! So if you're either liberal or conservative, you're basically saying that only you and the people who think like yourself are worthy of having power.

So good to know that because I consider myself a liberal that I think I'm the only person "worthy of having power". Excuse me while I roll my eyes at this generalization for liberals and conservatives.

[RU OX Alum]

You're excused this time. Next time you should take it outside.