Why would Pam Sohn want this old tired far right warrior posting in her slot? Seems like Drew filler to me.
Guns solve violence the way debt improves insolvency.
Are we supposed to proud of Bob Corker for working to provide support and weapons for the Syrian rebels? Seriously?
Most Americans now understand that we should not be taking sides in Syria. We do not have the wisdom nor the ability to shape countries into US client states. We certainly should not be trying to pick winners between the Shia and Sunni sects of Islam.
Bob Corker appears to have been sucked into the American mythology of world diplomacy by force and coercion. We have already done that. It has failed over and over. The arms Corker helped provide have enabled local dissent to erupt into civil war, all because the US (and Israel) favors Sunni control in Syria.
Americans want a strong defense capability, but not dispersed worldwide, not intervening in the affairs of others, not assassinating people whose names we do not even know.
If Bob wants to make us proud, he will lead a movement of non-intervention in other countries. That could get him elected President.
David Cook is setting a high standard for the rest of the CTFP.
Keep it coming!
World's policeman? That's quaint and sooo outdated. The US now tries to pick the governments of other countries, in other cultures.
Obama announced that Assad had to go. To be replaced by whom, may we ask? Apparently the Saudis, the Turks, the Israelis, and the Qataris want Assad replaced by a Sunni, any Sunni. The Iranians, the Russians, the Chinese, and most Lebanese want Assad to stay.
The US, Britain, and France want whatever Israel wants and are willing to intervene to try to insure that Assad is forced out.
What the hell are we thinking! How do we possibly know who should be the leader of Syria. We have made a complete mess of every regime change that we caused, and there have been plenty. We are struggling to find good leadership for ourselves, what makes us think that we can use money, weapons, no fly zones, and military force to choose a leader in another country? Who do we think we are?
Policemen try to keep order, the US specializes in entropy, the polar opposite.
I want to think that this is a patriotic, not a partisan, issue. Why would politics enter into Snowden's mind and even if it did, who benefits or loses?
The security apparatus in the US is now so large and unwieldy that no political party or President can or could control it. The US has worldwide black ops and off-budget expenditures through multiple agencies and sub-contractors that must make up a good piece of GDP. These excesses have built up over time and for various reasons. They now constitute a danger to the country, IMO.
So how do we scale them back or shut them down? We can't! In aggregate these operations have more actual power than does our political system, which is designed to be fractured. This is the road to tyranny and we are on it.
By exploiting the sectarian divides with arms and money within the Middle Eastern enemies of Israel, the US and Israel have been able to destabilize and foment civil war within those countries with minimal visible involvement. If Americans only knew what was being done secretly to disrupt and intervene in other countries by our government, they would be sick and ashamed.
Syria may turn out badly for the US and Israel because Russia and China are not willing to abandon an ally. Assad's government now seems to have the upper hand. What an irony if the Sunni majority is driven from Syria as refugees into the neighboring countries that opposed Assad. What a price they will pay and what a boost Russia and China will get in world affairs.
We are watching power and wealth being transferred from West to East. It is beginning to look like a Megatrend.
Ed Snowden had a good job and a pretty good future when he decided that he, his company, and his country were on the wrong course. With nothing to gain and everything to lose, he decided that a clear conscience was worth losing it all. He gave up the life he had for a probable life behind bars. He blew his whistle as long and loud as he knew how and you have to believe that he thought he was doing it for his country. What other motive seems likely?
Is he stupid or crazy? Neither appear to be the case. Like Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers, Bradley Manning and the WikiLeaks release of the video showing American soldiers committing war crimes, Ed Snowden was driven by something deep from within...something that would seem to be a selfless devotion to a higher principle.
But that is not the government view and never has been when embarrassing behavior, contrary to our Constitution, is released without authorization (whistle blowing). Snowden will be demonized as defective, a traitor, troubled, unstable, and on and on. He will be hunted down like a dog, jailed without judicial process for a long, long time. He will be stripped of any reasonable defense for whatever charges are eventually presented, based on national security concerns. He will no doubt, spend the rest of his life in Federal prison.
Snowden will lose his freedom trying to help us and we will not rally to his/our cause. We could stand up in solidarity for a brave man, but we won't. Most of us will agree that he must be a traitor because our government says so.
Because it's slow, like the frog in the pot, we don't feel our civil liberties being stripped away, one by one, slowly, often secretly, over time.
How did tyranny and fascism ever work their way into the American Way?
We surveil our citizens, torture our detainees, murder by drone people whose names we do not know in far-away lands, we arm and fund insurgencies to topple governments.
How does one describe a rogue nation?
Easy, you are wasting your time responding to Con-man. He never answers honest questions and simply prods those who do respond with other inane questions. His is a closed mind seemingly unaware of how little awareness has come his way. He doesn't mind being the fool and I simply skip his comments, knowing that they add nothing to the discussion.