»
Discussion
»
The Alley
»
Washington’s Civilizational Choice
| The Alley |
|
Washington’s Civilizational Choice |
|
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan 
|
. “The fact is that all freedom-loving people throughout the world are engaged in a struggle against the barbarism of Islamist extremism. This is not a battle between civilizations, but rather a battle for civilization . . . History tells us that appeasement of evil leads to disaster.” Joseph Lieberman http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NzhmNTQwYWY1ZTY2Mzk5Njg3M2U3OWRmMjA0ODkxY2Y= The question is does Joseph Lieberman speak with less or more authority on the subject? . |
||
| © Copyright 2007 John Pawlik - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
“Congress should support our troops in Iraq, not undermine their heroic achievements by imposing a formula for failure." http://lieberman.senate.gov/newsroom/release.cfm?id=287366[/URL] http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,311018,00.html |
||
Mistletoe Angel 
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
Joseph Lieberman and Ron Paul are two of the most interesting representatives in Congress currently, in my opinion. They are, in some ways, opposites on the coin, where Joseph Lieberman has some neoconservative-leaning views on foreign policy that put him at odds with just about every other Democrat, while Ron Paul has non-interventionist views that put him at odds with just about every other Republican. Answering your question, I'm convinced Joseph Lieberman is not the only representative who is making this "civilizational war" argument. All of the GOP presidential front-runners minus Ron Paul, especially Rudy Giuliani, John McCain and Duncan Hunter, are basically running with the neoconservative mindset on Iraq, and while Lieberman is generally at odds with the GOP establishment on just about every other issue, this is the issue where Lieberman and these candidates are in absolute agreement, and why Lieberman's approval rating among Republicans in Connecticut is now higher than among Democrats in the state. I, myself, believe the notion of this being a "civilizational war" is an exaggeration. Terrorism is an idelogy, thus has always existed historically in one fashion or another. And while I certainly agree propaganda is largely responsible for brainwashing young minds to be recruited to join their bloody cause and attack innocent civilians, I also believe it's largely due in part to our interventionism in the region for generations, where interventionism, regardless of which country is doing it, only foments resentment and hostility that can become terrorism. Having said that, I'm certainly, by no means, arguing that we don't bother going after these terrorist organizations that were, are, and continue to be responsible for 9/11 and many other bloody atrocities worldwide. We MUST keep our eyes on the target. But we ALSO need to re-evaluate our foreign policy to where we're concerned specifically with dismantling these terrorist networks and cracking down on their financing networks, rather than occupying whole countries and doing nation-building. Do I believe Joseph Lieberman is being unfairly demonized and smeared by Democrats just because of his position on this issue? Yes, I absolutely do, and believe that whole turning on him to back Ned Lamont's campaign in 2006 was highly unfortunate. But I certainly am troubled by Lieberman's notion of foreign policy as well, and couldn't disagree with him more on that issue. Sincerely, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" Mother Teresa |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
