Re: The Great Blackwater Debate (Part One) -- The Movie Board

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3], 4 ]

Subject: Re: The Great Blackwater Debate (Part One)

Author:
Jimmy

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 06:55:57 11/14/07 Wed
Author Host/IP: c-71-197-21-170.hsd1.mi.comcast.net/71.197.21.170
In reply to: Mr. Bungle 's message, "Re: The Great Blackwater Debate (Part One)" on 18:08:59 11/12/07 Mon

"I'm glad you went first. I wanted you define the debate because I was sure you would frame it improperly, and you did."

How zen of you.

The real problem with Blackwater (and the entire idea of private government contracts) is that, like a lot of "business can do it better and cheaper" arguments, it's wrong. They don't do it better or even close to cheaper. This is part and parcel to the Republican philosophy that anything the government can do, private industry can do better and if they can't it's because of pesky "regulations"."

See, I framed the debate PERFECTLY!!! You went right after the Right proving that you are part of the problem. Blackwater started under Clinton who also gave contracts to Cheney and Halliburton. But it's just the Right, right?

"It's a two-pronged strategy they've been working at for as long as I can remember. De-regulation and diverting taxpayer money into business interests that in turn funnel back the money to the very same politicians that patronize them. That's fascism at it's most basic level, and it has fuck all to do with Eric Prince's religion, his Democratic Party cred, or whatever conspiracy theories people think up about the nature of a "private military", though, really can you blame them?"

First of all, it's already over. This country is on a road to fascism that it will not turn back from. The only thing left to do in the meantime is figure out who to blame for it.

"I haven't read Scahill's book, though he did enough press for me to get the gist, and frankly I would share many of his concerns. I don't think the idea of a super-elite (remember they go out of their way to say they aren't) amassing enough capital and power in Washington, and having their own Dominionist private army, being a threat is much of a stretch. You want to associate this with religion,"

You're the one associating it with religion and then trying to say you are not."

"Trying to tie in the media extremists and pundits (most of the media now) into this debate will only muddy the waters."

Bungle, you're missing the point. This is all there is left to debate until fascism comes back. Let's enjoy it while we can because soon enough we won't be allowed to criticize anybody on TV or in Public office.

"It's plain that there are two echo chambers at some point, but the fact is only one side is favored by our President. Actually, that's not even clear. I'm pretty convinced that fucker lives in his own very unique bubble."

Where does Hillary live? What are you doing to ensure she doesn't get the nomination? Are you working hard for Edwards?

"But at the very least the media ownership (doesn't Murdoch own most of it now?) favors punditry over journalism. Journalism should be a science, subject to peer review and based in fact. Greenwald is better at this than Micheal Moore, though like O'Rielly, Moore is an entertainer with an agenda."

Then bitch about Olbermann to show you have journalist standards. Moore is an easy target but for all the bitching you do about Bill and Bush I never hear you utter a word at Olbermann or other far-left sanctimonious phonies.

"But the fact remains the crux of my argument has to do with the idea that war should be waged by the military. Whether enlisted or drafted."

Really? Well, the draft should be back in 3-5. We'll see how you feel about Blackwater then.

"I hate this war (and war in general) but if there is a calling to do the right thing the people that enlist for that cause (or even in need conscripted) are the ones that represent us, and as you know, have a long history of rising to the worthy causes."

That long history of rising you speak of. Cite them. Don't you think things were different for a long part of that history?

"There are almost as many "private contractors" in Iraq as regular military right now, and they get paid a lot more. It's against everything the idea of this country stands for on more levels then I can enumerate. Far from conservative populism, it's more like a small group of people who want to take over, reduce the economy to a banana republic, and be just stupid enough to think they can create an empire in the Middle East."

So what are you going to do about it? By the time guys like you and me can realize this isn't too late? We're fucked.

"And I never said you hated the Constitution."

But I do.

"I just suggested that joining Blackwater would be the right idea if you feel like killing a lot of brown people, scot-free."

Why don't we start with the ones here illegally. And I don't want to kill them; I just want them to leave.

Mr. B

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]