tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2289595359432630118.post3415745143875142951..comments2024-03-18T04:36:26.547-04:00Comments on Paul Levinson's Infinite Regress: On the Road to Another Unconstitutional War?Paul Levinsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07609987407926836519noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2289595359432630118.post-69917913570767608262011-03-18T20:37:56.353-04:002011-03-18T20:37:56.353-04:00"Liberal Agenda?" Last I heard we were s..."Liberal Agenda?" Last I heard we were supposed to have more than one party, but that is a freedom we lost in the last shredding of the constitution where Bush used the enemy to turn liberal into a dirty word. Now we have a country with one party because most of the democrats are so scared to be called a liberal that they have all become republicans. I have always been a democrat and have had plenty of friends who are republicans, but one party and liberal a dirty word?eanbardsleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18370175028390683847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2289595359432630118.post-49269926342479249232011-03-18T19:52:55.865-04:002011-03-18T19:52:55.865-04:00I think in our last unconstitutional war, Bush shr...I think in our last unconstitutional war, Bush shredded the constitution so much to bring freedom to another country that we lost a lot of our freedoms. So, I think Paul is absolutely right about this, we cannot shred our own constitution to free another people, that will just make them free, and us not. Though, it seems to me, this is like Kosovo where Clinton stopped the ethnic cleansing in a world effort, but yes it has to be done constitutionally. That the U.N. has placed sanctions on the crazy leader shooting his own citizens is some of the best news I have heard in years, it is looking like the world will not abandon them:-)<br /><br />Ian Beardsleyeanbardsleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18370175028390683847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2289595359432630118.post-50088196701069211552011-03-18T16:24:51.895-04:002011-03-18T16:24:51.895-04:00PS to My Background (name of first commenter): and...PS to My Background (name of first commenter): and your analysis is also incorrect on the face of it. I cited Vietnam as the worst example - last time I checked, LBJ was a Democrat. So how does my analysis reflect a pro-Democratic bias?Paul Levinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07609987407926836519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2289595359432630118.post-83562134331498568902011-03-18T15:49:00.539-04:002011-03-18T15:49:00.539-04:00Bob Blechman has it entirely right.
My Background...Bob Blechman has it entirely right.<br /><br />My Background (name of first commenter): your problem is that you're a prisoner of ideology, and see everything through those glasses. Try analyzing the issues rather than applying your presumptions.Paul Levinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07609987407926836519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2289595359432630118.post-50458349991255992182011-03-18T15:42:42.006-04:002011-03-18T15:42:42.006-04:00Paul's point is not about how to deal with Lib...Paul's point is not about how to deal with Libya. His point is that if we claim to be a constitutional republic and a nation of laws, and if our Constitution states that only Congress may declare war, and if our President or other governmental entities go to war without Congressional mandate, then we are no longer truly a constitutional republic, we are a tyranny at best, even if benign, or an anarchy at worst.Robert K. Blechmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12552295127347803870noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2289595359432630118.post-9707781228508538392011-03-18T15:41:36.607-04:002011-03-18T15:41:36.607-04:00One word - oilOne word - oilViviane Brentanoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02808392383255590249noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2289595359432630118.post-29226183251609183212011-03-18T15:31:24.066-04:002011-03-18T15:31:24.066-04:00I think this situation is completely different to ...I think this situation is completely different to the previous conflicts you mention. The entire world is aware at what’s happening in Libya. Even the U.N. has agreed on military actions. China and Russia didn’t veto the decision. It’s not a U.S. action, it’s a joint effort coordinated by the U.N. (that’s what the U.N. is for, right?) I only think in cases like Rwanda. If the U.N., U.S., France, etc, had gotten involved, history would have been much different.clicantrohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05983122737931016680noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2289595359432630118.post-54110269533137199222011-03-18T15:16:38.203-04:002011-03-18T15:16:38.203-04:00So appeasement, by inaction, will do any better? ...So appeasement, by inaction, will do any better? Cut the head off now and not have a WWIII. I could not disagree more with your position on this matter. <br /><br />It's interesting the only one you deem a partial success was the one supported by a democratic president. Hummmm? Despite our previous discussions on affiliation, and your assertion that it's not based on a liberal agenda... In my opinion your "pink" colors are showing here, regardless if you can see it or not...Bobby F Dowdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14101577143252720144noreply@blogger.com