Sanders, Warren, and Clinton support military action against ISIS

[apples and oranges]

Last edited Wed Sep 10, 2014, 02:34 AM - Edit history (1)

And before the libertrolls chime in, Rand Paul supports war too. Who will be the peace candidate of 2016?

[atreides1]

1. Peace is a lie, there is only passion.

And donuts...there are always donuts...

[justiceischeap]

2. I'd like to think that Sanders and Warren (and possibly Clinton) are seeing things we aren't

I know many are skeptical about the IS threat but maybe they're seeing things (secret things) that the public isn't aware of. Maybe we should consider that we need to deal with IS militarily because we don't yet have all the facts.

I'm certainly not beating the war drum, I'm as much for peace as most on this board but to think that we live in a society that can do without war is naive. Sadly, there will always be war--it's how we go about war that matters, I think.

[wyldwolf]

8. I would suspect Clinton has seen more than Warren and Sanders.

[Capt. Obvious]

27. Of course you have

Is there anything she doesn't know?

[wyldwolf]

30. why would you believe two senators - one a freshman - have seen more than the former SOS?

[Capt. Obvious]

31. No one has seen more than a former first lady, junior Senator, SOS

and all around awesome Clinton.

[wyldwolf]

33. ah, ok, I see where you're going. Have fun!

[Capt. Obvious]

35. Do you though?

Do you?

[stevenleser]

3. There were peace activists advocating disarmament before WWII too. That would have been a bad idea.

Advocating for peace shouldn't mean turning your brain off to what is happening.

Considering how they behave, allowing ISIS to establish themselves as a semi-superpower in the Middle East by gobbling up several countries seems like a really bad idea.

[brooklynite]

4. Dennis Kucinich probably has free time...

[anti partisan]

17. Didn't you get the memo?

Kucinich is a Libertarian - he works for Ron Paul Institute now and supports civil liberties even when Obama doesn't.

[conservaphobe]

5. Because they are smarter than those who put them on a pedestal. nt

[SidDithers]

6. +1...nt

Sid

[wyldwolf]

9. yup. best answer so far.

[anti partisan]

11. Politicians don't deserve pedestals. Ideas and morals do. (nt)

[L0oniX]

7. Our war criminals destroyed Iraq so we owe Iraq compensation.

[apples and oranges]

10. Our actions are making things worse, not better.

[anti partisan]

12. A lot of people support peace, only they have not sold their soul yet for high office (nt)

[William769]

13. Two smart women and one asshat (Paul).

Sometimes military action is required to achieve peace. To bad people don't focus on the shit & brutality that ISIS is commiting...

There are bad people in the world and yes peace would be great but when you have people that are terrorists you have to deal with them (and yes, thats what ISIS is). ISIS is a cancer that needs to be cut out to save the rest.

Flame away!

[AgingAmerican]

14. This time it's someone elses turn

...to save the day.

[William769]

15. Thats the price we pay for being the only super power. nt

[AgingAmerican]

16. Bull pucky

nt

[morningfog]

18. We are not and should be a super power.

I would also say we are matched or surpassed by China at this point.

[Lurks Often]

20. China is not a world super power

and neither is Russia, both lack the ability to project significant military power world wide.

China, Russia, the EU, India and Japan are all regional powers. Right now the US is the only world super power and I'd just as soon not see China or Russia reach the status of world super power.

[pampango]

19. It's never "someone else's" turn to deal with bad guys.

It should not be a unilateral ("cowboy diplomacy&quot effort nor just a Western one, but truly multilateral. That will take longer to organize and implement but it is better in the long run.

[AgingAmerican]

21. Where have I heard that one before?

Oh, yeah. "The coalition of the willing".

How about this then, someone ELSE pays for it?

[pampango]

22. You have a better memory than me. I don't remember anyone saying that.

How about this then, someone ELSE pays for it?

Agreed. That should be shared as well.

Beyond sharing the cost, I would not want support Americans fighting in a war that we don't feel is worth taxpayers paying for. If it is not worth the cost (or a share of the cost) it is not worth asking someone to die for it.

[cali]

23. so now liberals who oppose war are freely called "libertrolls" on DU. disgusting.

Sanders is my Senator. I support him on many issues. I think he's wrong as hell on this and so does my lone Congressman, Peter Welch. Well at least one of my congressional delegation thinks this is a huge fiasco.

Proudly anti this military intervention,

Cali

[Capt. Obvious]

24. These flame bait posts

occasionally need to gild the lily.

I'm sure he just meant to insult libertarians though.

And equate liberals with them.

[leftstreet]

26. I think the OP meant Paul/Libertarians?

I could be wrong

[pampango]

28. I suspect the poster is referring to libertarian trolls who would promote Rand Paul rather

than liberals who oppose war but "libertrolls" is a confusing term. If he/she had not mentioned Paul, the term 'libertrolls' could refer to liberals or libertarians.

[djean111]

29. Oh, I think part of the intent is for Warren and Sanders supporters to think Oh! Warren and Sanders

agree with Hillary! So they must be EXACTLY like Hillary! So I should support Hillary!
Doesn't work like that, though.
If Warren supports the TPP and other trade agreements, I will not support her - because then - she would be just like Hillary.

[Marrah_G]

25. I don't think we should go to war with Isis

But I do think we should do whatever we can short of going to war with them to stop them. This time it needs to be the countries of the middle east getting together to stop them.

If our soldiers go in it just bolsters their cause.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

32. The Peace Candidate will be in a 3rd Party.

And, will probably get my vote.

[bigwillq]

36. Mine too

I have options living in a blue state (CT).
The DEM will win CT regardless of my vote (like in 2012), so I am free to give my vote to another voice.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

37. Me too. But, wouldn't vote for a hawk no matter where I live.

[Enrique]

34. Alan Grayson opposes war

I could see him putting his hat in the ring. I would love it and vote for him.