Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

realmirage

(2,117 posts)
49. Since you prefer insults to putting forth smart arguments
Sun Jun 26, 2016, 03:41 PM
Jun 2016

let me explain to you why your question is still not a good one. First, a clue to the problem with your question lies in your lack of understanding of the wars in Syria, Libya, and Iraq, as you attempted to equate all three. When I see someone making such false assumptions, the first question I ask is - what other false assumptions are they making? After asking you for clarification, you walked back your "regime change" theory and now are simply going with "Boot knows nothing about foreign affairs" while sticking with a characterization of him as a one dimensional evil war profiteer. Let's look at both of those.

First, the only source in this entire thread is the notoriously shitty Salon. But even in this article, which does a terrible job of supporting its assertions, I find things that counter its own premise. Boot cites NATO - Trump being against it, Hillary for it - as a big reason for preferring Hillary's foreign policy. Alliances in the war against ISIS I'd say are very important. So I give Boot credit for understanding that. Trump is an isolationist who simultaneously wants to "bomb the shit out of ISIS" as his military strategy. Boot's reaction to this? - "Donald Trump does not have a serious foreign policy thought in his head. He has no ideas, he only has impulses — and those impulses change every 30 seconds." Sounds to me like Boot agrees with nearly every Democrat here.

Now let's look at your simplification of Boot as just some evil supporter of war profiteers. In that same interview Salon cited, Boot says he's pro immigration, anti-tea party, and calls Trump a "fascist demagogue." He also says there's a "vein of xenophobia, protectionism, racism, and other sentiments out there" that accounts for a "significant share" of Trump's base. Does this sound like the caricature you put forth of Boot as some one dimensional, evil war profiteer?

It sounds to me like you heard someone say he supported the Iraq war, then boiled him down to some cartoon character who couldn't possibly have any knowledge of foreign affairs or care about anything or anyone. Except the facts show differently.

Here's a final quote from the Boot interview. You tell me if he sounds like an insane, evil war profiteer, or like a reasonable person who (while I disagree with many of his political stances) is not an insane person and whose support of Hillary on foreign policy makes perfect sense. Note also that he has learned somewhat from his past beliefs on the Iraq invasion. (emphasized in bold)

"Trump loves dictators. He praises Putin, he loved the Tiananmen Square crackdown, he praises Kim Jong-Un. He said Saddam Hussein was great because he killed terrorists, which is a hell of a way to characterize the hundreds of thousands of victims Saddam Hussein claimed.

At the same time, he saves his venom for democratic allies like South Korea, Japan, and Germany because he thinks they're freeloaders. That's because, as he's repeatedly said, he admires strength and leadership, and people like Putin have it.

I do think there's been a swing in the Republican Party against the perceived excesses of the George W. Bush administration. I don't think we should go around, necessarily, toppling every dictator in the world — but I also don't think embracing these murderous thugs is going to be the solution to our foreign policy problems. And I think Donald Trump is certainly prone to embracing them."


Am I saying I agree with Boot on everything? No, but the evidence I provided you with showed the danger of turning those you don't agree with on everything into cartoon characters who are without souls or brains. Many of us have family who disagree with us on political matters, but we don't go around saying those family members are evil people who care only about getting blood money.

Also, going around condescending to people isn't very attractive. Get your facts first. Research things. Don't just react to headlines and run with it.

Not surprising. Robert Kagan is fundrasing for her as well... think Jun 2016 #1
Looks like our candidate is a success on both sides of the aisle, November is going to be a insta8er Jun 2016 #2
Doubtful she gets any significant GOP crossover vote AgingAmerican Jun 2016 #7
At least some of the most prominent republicans seem to like her views on things plus that she isn't insta8er Jun 2016 #9
Trump upsets the present order AgingAmerican Jun 2016 #11
What "things" are you referring to? realmirage Jun 2016 #23
Really? It seems that they're saying it's not about her views, just that she's not a lunatic synergie Jun 2016 #64
Who gives a fuck edhopper Jun 2016 #15
Anyone with half a brain isn't going to vote for Trump. That leaves Clinton. TwilightZone Jun 2016 #3
Not at all, if I was a 1%er I would have put all of my money on HRC as well. It makes total sense, I insta8er Jun 2016 #4
Anyone with any sense should be putting their money on Clinton. TwilightZone Jun 2016 #6
I get you. 840high Jun 2016 #8
Do you realize what you are saying? AgingAmerican Jun 2016 #10
Stop boiling every issue on the planet down to realmirage Jun 2016 #22
Ben Norton from Salon SharonClark Jun 2016 #25
Trump IS the 1% radical noodle Jun 2016 #28
are you saying the other 99% should not be against Trump? bettyellen Jun 2016 #67
"total sense" is not contrary to TOS. LanternWaste Jun 2016 #69
Exactly mcar Jun 2016 #12
Good. She'll win in a landslide..nt SidDithers Jun 2016 #5
OUSTANDING!!!! MohRokTah Jun 2016 #13
Awesome! zappaman Jun 2016 #14
That is way to kind a photo of edhopper Jun 2016 #16
Excellent! NastyRiffraff Jun 2016 #17
The celebratory posts here illustrate how DU is no longer a site for Democrats. n/t brentspeak Jun 2016 #18
Do you know what's going on in the war on ISIS? realmirage Jun 2016 #20
So a cheerleader for war profiteering brentspeak Jun 2016 #29
Are you comparing Syria to Iraq? realmirage Jun 2016 #31
Are you trying to make some sort of intelligent-sounding point? brentspeak Jun 2016 #33
Again I ask - are you saying Iraq an Syria realmirage Jun 2016 #35
Let's stay on point brentspeak Jun 2016 #40
Your question is based on a ridiculous foundation realmirage Jun 2016 #41
Ok, so basically you stepped in it brentspeak Jun 2016 #45
Since you prefer insults to putting forth smart arguments realmirage Jun 2016 #49
Here's more information for you realmirage Jun 2016 #56
You may want to (for the sake of consistency) apply the same question (and critique) to yourself. LanternWaste Jun 2016 #70
Nah, it is the site for Democrats. SharonClark Jun 2016 #21
Really? Because I don't remember people objecting when Bernie made promises that he could convert La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2016 #38
How is wanting to convince Republicans to become more progressive brentspeak Jun 2016 #42
They want sanity. Most people do. No one wants the insanity that trumps foreign policy La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2016 #46
Uh, the guy in question wants "sanity"? brentspeak Jun 2016 #48
+100 AntiBank Jun 2016 #50
Yes, trumps foreign policy is erratic and insane La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2016 #52
Well, those who were putting lots of money into "negative" ads that were not, were indeed synergie Jun 2016 #66
Special rules apply to certain people, or so it seemed during that nasty primary season. synergie Jun 2016 #65
I'm guessing that you don't realize that many of them are sarcasm. TwilightZone Jun 2016 #54
It's been some time since DU has been that, hasn't it, especially this cycle? synergie Jun 2016 #63
Considering the mistakes Obama, a smart guy, made in the fight against ISIS realmirage Jun 2016 #19
Shouting for war all the time might sound good, too.... villager Jun 2016 #30
Who is shouting for war? It's called survival realmirage Jun 2016 #32
As I recall, it was the folks shouting for war who brought us ISIS. villager Jun 2016 #36
Ok now you're talking about Bush. realmirage Jun 2016 #44
I am talking about all you war hawks -- who have brought us ISIS, the refugee crisis, etc. villager Jun 2016 #47
You haven't researched this issue at all, not even a little bit, have you? realmirage Jun 2016 #57
"You're using very broad statements to describe this issue" villager Jun 2016 #60
You still don't get it. realmirage Jun 2016 #68
You still don't get it. villager Jun 2016 #71
You're still talking about Iraq 2001 realmirage Jun 2016 #72
Let's not start with that, since you and your friend Boot got us into this mess. villager Jun 2016 #73
Any republican that isn't a racist knuckle dragging chin drooler workinclasszero Jun 2016 #24
Great! DesertRat Jun 2016 #26
This is the 2nd DU post today of the May 9th article. Why?? riversedge Jun 2016 #27
The OP's replies reveal the true intent- smear Hillary realmirage Jun 2016 #34
Good. Bernie also told us that he thought he could convert republicans La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2016 #37
There are several one time hard line Republicans who see Trump as terrible, it is a no brainer for Thinkingabout Jun 2016 #39
I see what you are doing. trumad Jun 2016 #43
oh my god. isn't it fabulous!! Hiraeth Jun 2016 #51
even the loons cant bear to embrace Rump MFM008 Jun 2016 #53
She's "“the last true hawk left in the race,” NYT Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2016 #55
The search for "the line" continues. JoePhilly Jun 2016 #58
This won't lead many rank-and-file Republicans to the one true religion Jake Stern Jun 2016 #59
k&r nt bananas Jun 2016 #61
So even right wingers are too smart to vote in ways that might allow Trump to win? synergie Jun 2016 #62
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Hard-line right-wing war ...»Reply #49