In response to:

Random Thoughts

Specious Rule Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 11:17 AM
Vicky asks: We fight wars, so we don't have to fight wars? Thats a terrible inference! Sowell said that we have a powerful military so we don’t need to fight wars...
rightmostofthetime Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 1:45 PM
Comments about the deterrent effect of police do not constitute a strong (sic) man (straw man) argument. The analogy is apt.
rightmostofthetime Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 1:44 PM
Yeah, Bob, I knew that's what she meant to say, but she kind of doubled-down on strong man argument.
VickyD4Liberty Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 1:41 PM
You're right, i noticed my mistake after posting it, of course
Bob F. RVN70-71 Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 1:27 PM
I think you mean "straw man" argument, not "strong man."
VickyD4Liberty Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 1:23 PM
Our military can be strong without the size needed to occupy hundreds of countries, and fighting multiple wars in others.
VickyD4Liberty Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 1:17 PM
A strong man argument means you are stating facts that deter from the real issue, whether they be true or false. I was reading something a retired policeman wrote on a comment page regarding gun control. He said that the police are often unable to prevent crime, they arrive to late or are not around to stop it in time. It is the people themselves who prevent crime. That's not to say police aren't helpful, or that the DON'T ever stop crime.
I was responding to lemmi's earlier post when he asked about the police. That comment is a side issue, that doesn't apply to the role of our military worldwide.
rightmostofthetime Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 1:04 PM
My point is that you are incorrect about police and do not understand that a strong military, including a nuclear arsenal, is a deterrent. Was that not clear?
Corbett_ Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 1:03 PM
Temmi -- we have not had any World Wars -- but we have certainly had lots of other wars. And if an American soldier is killed, it doesn't matter whether he is killed in a "major" war or a "minor" one. He is just as dead.
VickyD4Liberty Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 1:01 PM
Of course, but what is your point?
rightmostofthetime Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 1:00 PM
Huh? Strong man argument? Does that mean it's a strong argument? And I invite any police personnel here to set you straight on what police do. If you don't think a police presence prevents crime, you are the ignorant one. For an extreme example, go to China. They have armed soldiers everywhere. Guess what? Everyday crime is minimal at best.
VickyD4Liberty Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 12:53 PM
That is a strong man argument, and an ignorant one as well. The Police do not prevent crime, they're there to clean up the mess and to serve and protect (in theory that is). It's actually a denial of history on the part of the masses and the feeding of misinformation to the public that leads us to where we are today, which is at war with multiple middle eastern countries.
rightmostofthetime Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 12:51 PM
Curious, Vicky. Do you believe in our nuclear deterrent? Do you ever wonder why other countries have not used nuclear weapons, not just against us but against anyone? Could it be they know we can wipe them off the map if they do?
VickyD4Liberty Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 12:39 PM
Why would you ask if I'm insane? What part of what I've written would infer that to you?
True Conservative! Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 12:06 PM
lemmi Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 11:56 AM
read history
since WWII we have more people in the world and less wars than any time in history
Corbett_ Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 11:46 AM
We have not had 5 years without a war since the end of WWII.
lemmi Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 11:36 AM
Yes Vicky
and if we didn't have a police force there wouldn't have crime.

Your shallow understanding of the world is what leads to war
VickyD4Liberty Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 11:29 AM
And having a powerful military has not kept us from waging two wars the middle east for the last ten years, and more in the last three years.
VickyD4Liberty Wrote: Jun 20, 2012 11:26 AM
He said,
'to present such overwhelming superiority to potential enemies as to prevent having to fight a war in the first place.'

That is a dangerous position to put us in. And it absolutely is against the intent of our Founders.

Random thoughts on the passing scene:

Many people may have voted for Barack Obama in 2008 because of his charisma. But anyone familiar with the disastrous track record of charismatic political leaders around the world in the 20th century should have run for the hills when they encountered a politician with charisma.

What is scarier than any particular political policy or issue is the widespread tendency to treat political issues as personal contests in talking points -- competitive skill in fencing with words -- rather than as serious attempts to find out what the facts are and what the options are.