BF2S Forums Presidential Election 2016

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

He didn't support the invasion of Iraq and supports a two state solution.

He sounds like a great candidate if we had a time machine and can go back to the year 2000 and run him for president.

But Iraq was invaded, ISIS took over, and we have to do something now here in the year 2015. He hasn't given any plans or long term visions.

A no vote in 2003 and a politically correct bandwagon idea isn't a complete foreign policy.

Someone who articulates a long term vision for containing Chinese influence in the Pacific and stopping Russian aggression in Eastern Europe and expansion into political affairs in the Levant and Mesopotamia.

In a more specific sense, I want someone who will set tangible goals for our military and political involvement in Syria and Iraq. I want to hear a proposal that will in result in the ending of the war between the SAA and rebels and begins political transition away from the Assad regime.

I would also like to hear at least a basic idea of how to respond to Chinese artificial islands in the south China sea.




Unfortunately the only man who gave any of those is Jim Webb who would have made a wonderful president.

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Someone who articulates a long term vision for containing Chinese influence in the Pacific and stopping Russian aggression in Eastern Europe and expansion into political affairs in the Levant and Mesopotamia.

In a more specific sense, I want someone who will set tangible goals for our military and political involvement in Syria and Iraq. I want to hear a proposal that will in result in the ending of the war between the SAA and rebels and begins political transition away from the Assad regime.

I would also like to hear at least a basic idea of how to respond to Chinese artificial islands in the south China sea.




Unfortunately the only man who gave any of those is Jim Webb who would have made a wonderful president.

so you want superman? reality check: america can't do shit about any of those things.

We can do things about every one of those. I don't expect a single person to solve all of them.

We can't do something about Syria, and Iraq? We 100% can.

DesertFox- wrote:

If you want a candidate who can tell you their ideal solution for all foreign policy-related problems, I'm sure that can be arranged. However, having a plan and actually accomplishing it are two very different things. In fact, I think Donald Trump has already said that he would destroy ISIS and "beat" China, so there's your man.

Which brings us back to Bernie Sanders. Trump has been more substantive on foreign policy than Sanders. Isn't that something?

Cybargs wrote:

SuperJail Warden wrote:

DesertFox- wrote:

If you want a candidate who can tell you their ideal solution for all foreign policy-related problems, I'm sure that can be arranged. However, having a plan and actually accomplishing it are two very different things. In fact, I think Donald Trump has already said that he would destroy ISIS and "beat" China, so there's your man.

Which brings us back to Bernie Sanders. Trump has been more substantive on foreign policy than Sanders. Isn't that something?

domestic policies win elections.

Whoa. That's some groundbreaking insight.

You are just angry your savior can't speak for more than 5 minutes without blaming something on the 1%.

Whatever. A year from now Bernie Sanders will be back in the Senate being inconsequential.

Should start researching who is running for the green party next year.

Muslims are 0.9% of country. There are only 2.8 million of them. Those are awfully holocaustly numbers. Seems doable.

MajorSpittle wrote:

Ben Carson is a super smart brain doctor.  He said Islam is incompatible with western democracy, or something to that basic effect.

I will vote for him based on that statement and the fact he has nothing to do with politics up until he ran.

I am tired of the media and politicians pretending that Islam isn't another violent hate group.

he also lied about turning down west point and thinks that angels visit him in his sleep to plant thoughts and lessons there.

i.e. a mad fucking cunt

A ban on Muslim immigration is ridiculous. But it is politically feasible. Especially if it is narrowed down and made more specific combined with significant concessions to the democrats on other things they want. Like I said before 0.9% of the population is insignificant. It would have to be done off the back of a large terrorist attack or multiple smalls ones with a republican president though.

SuperJail Warden wrote:

A ban on Muslim immigration is ridiculous. But it is politically feasible. Especially if it is narrowed down and made more specific combined with significant concessions to the democrats on other things they want. Like I said before 0.9% of the population is insignificant. It would have to be done off the back of a large terrorist attack or multiple smalls ones with a republican president though.

what are you talking about? "0.9% is insignificant". the whole point of a democracy is that you judge it on how it treats its most marginalised groups. the fact they are so statistically insignificant should mean that extra efforts are made to ensure they receive their basic freedoms, not less. when you say they are insignificant, you are effectively saying they are negligible. that's the same lax attitude that slides into systemic inequality, state oppression, police brutality, war crimes. it's a very slippery slope. plenty of ethnic groups or religious sects have been brushed under the carpet of state power or surly neighbours in this way.

again, a democracy can only be judged on how it treats those most in need of democratic principles. otherwise you have a dictatorship of the majority. a baying populist mob out for dumb revenge is not the pinnacle of western political philosophy.