If John F. Kennedy were alive today, would he... - Page 2

legion · 10-16-2007, 07:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

What???? State rights people in the south in the '60s were racist, therefore all state's rights people are racist today?

Stupid racist drug laws huh? Greatful Dead avatar? Now that lack of a cohesive thought process is starting to make sense.

Duuuuuuude...

Don't harsh his buzz, man...

Superman · 10-16-2007, 08:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by legion

nota, I'm sure you think you are the smartest person you know.

I think the manual suggests you change up occasionally. There are several conservative argument responses OTHER THAN "You're arrogant." Use them. The "shoot the messenger" thing works great, but you have to change up occasionally.

Red Baron · 10-16-2007, 08:04 AM

Castro would be dead.

legion · 10-16-2007, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Superman

I think the manual suggests you change up occasionally. There are several conservative argument responses OTHER THAN "You're arrogant." Use them. The "shoot the messenger" thing works great, but you have to change up occasionally.

Yes, well, quit being arrogant.

mjshira · 10-16-2007, 09:10 AM

we've established a consensus in another thread, the hallmarks of that consensus are:

1. you can't call a liberal, a liberal (that would be using a label)
2. if you don't agree with a liberal, you are not 'open minded'
3. liberal's can attack anyone who doesn't agree with them
4. conservatives are all stupid, love Hitler and have ruined (tense used intentionally) America

JFK would have been conservative, history evidences that fact, but I don't think personally that he would have gone into Iraq as he was way too much a student of history to do so e.g. the British experience there, etc.

dd74 · 10-16-2007, 09:12 AM

Considering Bay of Pigs, would Iraq have happened under Kennedy?

mjshira · 10-16-2007, 09:16 AM

it is all speculation but I think our biggest mistake in going into Iraq was in how we over estimated the ability of that nation to stand on its own without SH. Once the power structure in Iraq was gone, the ability to hold what were traditionally three nations together as one has proven to be the biggest challenge. This is all just my personal view, not something I can prove or state as fact...

Seahawk · 10-16-2007, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dd74

Considering Bay of Pigs, would Iraq have happened under Kennedy?

Not sure what you are asking? Would JFK have abandoned troops once they landed in Iraq?

nota · 10-16-2007, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

What???? State rights people in the south in the '60s were racist, therefore all state's rights people are racist today?

Stupid racist drug laws huh? Greatful Dead avatar? Now that lack of a cohesive thought process is starting to make sense.

you had to be there and see it all change
in 1960 there were very very few GOP members in dixie
the few were blacks and ultra liberal whites
demo primarys were the real elections by a 10/90 or 20/80 split

that started to change with goldwater [who I supported]
and really shifted with nixon in 68
I was inside the GOP watching this happen

yes most southern states rights people were racist
there maybe a few real believers in states rights but damm few
it was a way to be racist without admitting it
and a BIG code word

sorry to let the truth out
but I saw the racist flock in to the new GOP in the 68 election
people who swore they would never ever vote for the party of lincon
did support nixon in huge numbers
and it was all about race and hate for LBJ's civil rights program

I know the southern GOP hates to admitt their roots
that does not change the facts

denial is not a cohesive thought process
nore is spin or BIG LIES

the simple fact is the shift in power in the south was driven
by racist switching partys to the GOP
hate not ideals powered that switch
so it is eazy to see why the GOP members willNOT admitt that fact

nota · 10-16-2007, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seahawk

Not sure what you are asking? Would JFK have abandoned troops once they landed in Iraq?

like BUSH1 did to the swamp arabs and kurds in the end of the first gulf war???

legion · 10-16-2007, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mjshira

it is all speculation but I think our biggest mistake in going into Iraq was in how we over estimated the ability of that nation to stand on its own without SH. Once the power structure in Iraq was gone, the ability to hold what were traditionally three nations together as one has proven to be the biggest challenge. This is all just my personal view, not something I can prove or state as fact...

Someone gets it...

Seahawk · 10-16-2007, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nota

like BUSH1 did to the swamp arabs and kurds in the end of the first gulf war???

JFK was the topic...I have equal animosity for our failures with the Marsh Arabs and the Kurds.

Moneyguy1 · 10-16-2007, 10:20 AM

History is the first victim of bias and opinion. Much of what is posted concerning past events (and even current ones) is conjecture and not in the least true. Seems to fit my thread on what influences our thinking.

legion · 10-16-2007, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mjshira

we've established a consensus in another thread, the hallmarks of that consensus are:

1. you can't call a liberal, a liberal (that would be using a label)
2. if you don't agree with a liberal, you are not 'open minded'
3. liberal's can attack anyone who doesn't agree with them
4. conservatives are all stupid, love Hitler and have ruined (tense used intentionally) America

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/showthread.php?t=255363

dd74 · 10-16-2007, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seahawk

Not sure what you are asking? Would JFK have abandoned troops once they landed in Iraq?

Essentially, two questions: 1) Would JFK even go into Iraq? 2) Would he have pulled out by now?

Bonus question: considering he is more conservative than Bush, would that dictate his policy with Iraq.

"Different man, different time," or "hard to say," aren't answers. Expand, think, philosophize.

BTW: all JFK abandoned in Bay of Pigs were some Cuban Batista hopefuls. No U.S. soldiers were involved in the actual invasion, and if so, I certainly don't believe any U.S. soldiers were "abandoned."

Jeff Higgins · 10-16-2007, 10:22 AM

I wonder if he would do Marylin in the Oval Office.

lendaddy · 10-16-2007, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moneyguy1

Much of what is posted concerning past events (and even current ones) is conjecture and not in the least true.

You've got my attention, can you give me a couple examples?

dd74 · 10-16-2007, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

I wonder if he would do Marylin in the Oval Office.

Marilyn? Marilyn who? Marilyn Manson?

We're talking about JFK in the current day...

He did do Marilyn in the Oval Office, BTW. I think Dominick Dunn revealed that.

dd74 · 10-16-2007, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moneyguy1

History is the first victim of bias and opinion. Much of what is posted concerning past events (and even current ones) is conjecture and not in the least true. Seems to fit my thread on what influences our thinking.

+1 to Lendaddy. In short, "Huh?"

BeyGon · 10-16-2007, 10:37 AM

Nota
"and ''July 8, 1959 - Two U.S. military advisors, Maj. Dale Buis and Sgt. Chester Ovnand, are killed by Viet Minh guerrillas at Bien Hoa, South Vietnam. They are the first American deaths in the Second Indochina War which Americans will come to know simply as The Vietnam War.''

Big deal, JFK was the first to send troops to Vietnam, Ike had 800 "advisors" but JFK sent troops. LBJ got it up to more than 500,000 troops.
The first year Nixon was in office he cut it in half.