Comments on: McGovern: Impeach Bush, Cheney Now

Former Democratic Candidate Says Crimes Of Current Administration Worse Than Nixon's

[ourtomorrows]

brianbwb

An just one more thing. Your assertion that it was "easier to make a living in those days", the period I refer to. I don''t know what blessed situation your were living in in the 70s and early 80s but I for me and my family it was hardly "better" times. Gas lines that went on for an eternity, companies folding left and right, rampant inflation, the constant threat of nuclear war, for my family the threat of loosing our home--I myself do not look back to that period as one of economic calm. I myself am much better off now than I was 30 years ago.

[ourtomorrows]

brianbwb

The isolationism you seem to favor has never, ever worked in American history. We can''t just ignore the rest of the world, it does not work. Our oceans can not protect us anymore. If you believe we should not have stood against communism, that is something I can not even remotely understand. Eastern Europe did not choose communism, it was imposed on them after World War II. Czechoslovakia did not choose communism. Yugoslavia did not choose communism. It was and ideology imposed on them with no effort at all to even pretend otherwise. Only Greece held out and only thanks to the British and after 1946, to our assistance.

[brianbwb-2009]

Posted by ourtomorrows

And somehow back in those times, Americans still went about their lives, in fact, it was easier to make a living those days. So what if Latin America is communist? If they choose that way, it is their own choice, if they are forced by local warlords to accept it, then it is their problem, not ours.

Israel? again, their problem, not ours. Soviet Union? Look at the mess there now, it is not surprising that many there now long for the old days with a strong central government, and who cares if France, or Germany can "fix" anything? If it truly needs "fixing" then it doesn''t matter who does it.

But it seems that your point is that all these so called "accomplishments" justify letting the president violate the law, and ignore the constitution that he/she is under oath to protect and defend.

He/she should be allowed to lie with impunity, and as a result get innocent people killed, the military for personal gain.

This is part of the "reality" your post ignores, the death and destruction for personal agenda.

[ourtomorrows]

cdfoxtrot
It is called speculation, that is all I was doing.

As for the Soviet Union, you might want to recheck your facts. There is a huge debate among historians about the importance of Reagan and Thatcher''s policies and how they may have contributed or brought about the fall of the USSR. To say his policies had no role is just not accurate, the debate is still going on. If you look closely at the Soviet economy in the early 80s and into the mid 80s and the pressure that the renewed Reagan arms race placed upon it, there is a substantial case that at the very least Reagan''s policies hastened the end of the Soviet Union. I agree with you that their economy was hopelessly outmoded, but then again it had been for 30 years by 1985. Many Soviet factories were still using 1940s era machines. However, they continued to survive and invest billions in new defense technologies.

[talk2chief]

Posted by cdfoxtrot

Your joining the discussion late, and not following the dialog already established. SO with all due respect, catch up or FUUUKK OFF!

[cdfoxtrot]

Blah, blah, blah.... I think even though Sadam did not have WMD''''s, he was a acting like he had them. Did we make a mistake. Absolutely. Did we do the right thing. At the time yes, hindsight is 20/20. Are we and the region better off, time will only tell, but I will tell you this. A very bad man no longer rules Iraq in fear, Iraq currently fears itself. The country is too tribal. And a nationalized Iraq is never going to happen in my opinion. I think we should pull out and let them figure out what kind of government they want.

Posted by talk2chief

Actually, many of us don''t need 20/20 hindsight to know that Iraq was a mistake. We knew it well before the first bomb was dropped on them. And I''m not quite sure how Sadam (sic) "acted" like he had WMDs. Did he appear on TV doing "kaboom" impersonations? I must have missed it.

[talk2chief]

I say it is important, because the day very well may come when a president orders you to attack your own countrymen, in order to protect his/her grip on power.
Would you follow such an order?

Posted by brianbwb

It would depend on the principle or act, kinda like choosing sides during the American Civil War.

[ourtomorrows]

I am one of those partially to blame cdfoxtrot, I voted for Bush in 2004 and would vote for him in 2008 if he was running. Just one of those crazed neo-cons I guess.

brianbwb
You pose an interesting question, are you concerned that the current president might in some way try to hold onto power after his term expires?

[chefjtr]

OK...This is my two...

We can all go to a special online system, like on that *** American Idiot show...and we cast a personal vote...like a real Democracy, and we all get to just vote on impeachment...THEN let''s really see how many people give two *#%@''s about the dynamic duo in DC! (The Village Idiot & Satan)
THEN WHAT?!?
We can vote on a whole new set of automaton overlords and go back to your lives in a media bubble.

Are there really five people out there that believe that this system and Gov are anything but broken, corrupt to the core, and a horrifying embarrassment to the greatness our country should & could be?!?!?!

wow...that''s just so sad...

[cdfoxtrot]

ourtomorrows, the collapse of the Soviet Union was well underway for many, many years before Reagan came to power. Nothing to do with him. It was going to happen anyway. And all the other nonsense in your posting about Israel, Libya, etc. is just that. Unsubstantiated nonsense.

[inventagod]

With Congress both on the take and being blackmailed by the Republicons, there will be no honor in Washington for years. No one there wishes to stop the dumptrucks of money they receive for doing Cheney''s wishes. No one in Washington cares what the world, nor the American people really wants. When their terms are up, they will just walk away, unscathed.

[talk2chief]

leaders worldwide have "excommunicated" the terrorists, but still Americans believe the agitprop, and advocate "war" with the wrong group.

Posted by brianbwb

By the way thank you for your service as well. Now that we established that we are brothers with different points of view, we are none the less brothers.

As for what the majority of Americans think, they don''t know what happens in other countries. Totally clueless about their culture and society in general. However, in regard to Iraq, I think even though Sadam did not have WMD''s, he was a acting like he had them. Did we make a mistake. Absolutely. Did we do the right thing. At the time yes, hindsight is 20/20. Are we and the region better off, time will only tell, but I will tell you this. A very bad man no longer rules Iraq in fear, Iraq currently fears itself. The country is too tribal. And a nationalized Iraq is never going to happen in my opinion. I think we should pull out and let them figure out what kind of government they want.

[cdfoxtrot]

I could not agree more with Senator McGovern.
He is the kind of true patriot I wish we had in the present Congress. As the Senator rightly states: "How could a once-admired, great nation fall into such a quagmire of killing, immorality and lawlessness?" How, indeed. Anyone who voted for Bush, particularly the second time ''round, knowing what a disaster he had created during his first term, is partially to blame for the wrong-doing.

[ourtomorrows]

Oh George McGovern, have not thought of him in so long. How nice to have him back spouting the same kind of silly drivel he was thirty years ago. Perhaps he and Jimmy Carter should team up and launch a third party for the Presidency. Better yet, maybe a coalition of McGovern, Carter, Kucinich and Ron Paul--what a combo that would be, two old guard bleeding heart liberals with one new guard bleeding heart goof ball and a right wing wingnut.

If Jimmy Carter or George McGovern or Kucinich or Paul actually ran the government from the 1970s (thank God Carter only had one term to mess things up, can anyone say Iran hostages!) there would probably still be a Soviet Union with all that that entails, Libya would still be blowing up airliners, Israel would probably have fought at least three more wars, Latin and Central America would be more communist then they are now. Lord knows what Africa and the rest of the Middle East would be like, Lebanon would still be under Syrian control and we could all sit around waiting for the French or the Germans to fix everything for us. Boy what a great world that would be. It amazes me how the realities of the last 30 years still seems to elude so many people. Wake up from your dream world folks and join the rest of us in reality!

[brianbwb-2009]

"As a member of the armed forces, I swore an oath to defend and protect the constitution of the United States of America against all enemies both foreign and domestic." Posted by talk2chief

This brings us to an important question, if you knew without doubt that the president himself violated the constitution, would you still follow unlawful orders?

I say it is important, because the day very well may come when a president orders you to attack your own countrymen, in order to protect his/her grip on power.

Would you follow such an order?

[brianbwb-2009]

"brianbwb, No disrespect. But you are an intellectual. You base your argument with logic. Logic does not work in the real world. Especially radical Islam." Posted by talk2chief

I don''t necessarily consider myself an intellectual, I am out here in the real world, getting my hands dirty, and my positions are based on what I have seen and experienced. The Bush agitprop machine has convinced many that Islam is a threat. Nothing could be farther from the truth, there are people who profess Islam who commit acts of inhumanity, just as there are the "spreaders of democracy" that do the same, just as there are Catholics who are also in the Mob. They are all cowards, hiding their true agendas behind their concepts.

Much of my work has been in the largest majority Muslim country in the world, Indonesia, where I have helped the victims of the tsunami in Aceh, helped the effort to revive tourism in Bali, and sent pan religious choirs to compete in international competitions (gold medals in ''00, ''02, ''04'', and ''06)

I am not a Muslim, and I have been treated with nothing but the highest respect. Muslim leaders worldwide have "excommunicated" the terrorists, but still Americans believe the agitprop, and advocate "war" with the wrong group.

[talk2chief]

Would you personally, if you were in the position, still continue to send your men to what could be their deaths, in light of the non existence of a credible threat?

Posted by brianbwb

As a member of the armed forces, I swore an oath to defend and protect the constitution of the United States of America against all enemies both foreign and domestic. And to follow the orders of the President and all officers appointed over me.

So, professionally yes, I would do my duty. Personally I wouldn''t like it. But I would do my best to keep my troops safe and alive while we accomplished out mission.

[talk2chief]

chitown639, what the hell Marine, what took you so long. Did you serve on transport on a ship?

[talk2chief]

brianbwb, No disrespect. But you are an intellectual. You base your argument with logic. Logic does not work in the real world. Especially radical Islam. Try to use logic with a dictator. I am not a war monger. However, members of the military do not question our orders, we execute regardless who the commander and chief is. (Clinton or Bush) That aside, again, if you think the president has committed war crimes, then file a wrongful death suit against him and see what happens. I think you will find your efforts are unwarranted and you will find that he executed his office with the intent authorized by the congress both democrat and republican. Politics would have you believe otherwise.

[chitown639]

(((talk2chief)))
go talk to the chief??? Phrase sounds familiar but I cant recall the meaning...
Gunny??? ha...E-7 Gunnery Sergent