NationStates Jolt Archive

This question is more for the older Americans here. Do you think that this US Presidential election is more important than others in the past? The fighting and propaganda wars seem to be much harder. Supporters on both sides seem much more zealous than before.

Do you think you are at a turning point in US political history? Or is this just another election?


*I know I made this thread two months ago, but I want to see if opinions have changed.

There have been many turning points in American history. However I do believe this is another one of those times.

If Bush is elected to 4 more years, it might be a very dark period that I don't believe history will be kind to. Think about it, preemptive war! Yeah, I'd say that's a negative turning point. If Kerry is elected, I believe he will fight the war on terror in a smart way, some thing I'm afraid we haven't seen at this point.

People want revenge, given what happened on 9/11 I suppose I can understand that. However, going to war without plans to win the peace and or a plan at all for after major conflict was just stupid and no one can say it wasn't. They had no freaking idea of what to expect and were quite frankly delusional in their expectation of being greeted with "roses" in Iraq.

If any of the neo-cons had ever picked up a history book they would of known that Iraq is not Japan or Germany. Neither of these two countries had the same level of religious nationalism that the middle east has. It's like I've said before, as much I wish I was wrong, I know I'm not, no matter how much resolve America has, these religious fundamentalists have more. Just ask the British!

It really doesn't matter who wins. With Kerry though, your oil prices might gradually go down. (Do you honestly think they will considerably fall with Bush in charge? HELLO!? His family is tied very deeply to the oil industry) Anyhow, oil prices don't really matter much to the course of history (although they do make for a good excuse for war). Either president will probably feel the need to preemptively invade Iran within the next 4 years. And if they don't, Iran will probably start up its own wars once it has nuclear weapons. Heck, it could probably even ally with Pakistan. Wouldn't it be cool though if we occupied one huge block of countries stretching from Afghanistan, through Iran (maybe even Pakistan? Surely they must have terrorist ties, we could strech those into a war if we managed to do it with Iraq), and into Iraq and maybe even Syria? It would be wonderful! Now I just wish I wasn't of draft age...

It really doesn't matter who wins. With Kerry though, your oil prices might gradually go down. (Do you honestly think they will considerably fall with Bush in charge? HELLO!? His family is tied very deeply to the oil industry) Anyhow, oil prices don't really matter much to the course of history (although they do make for a good excuse for war). Either president will probably feel the need to preemptively invade Iran within the next 4 years. And if they don't, Iran will probably start up its own wars once it has nuclear weapons. Heck, it could probably even ally with Pakistan. Wouldn't it be cool though if we occupied one huge block of countries stretching from Afghanistan, through Iran (maybe even Pakistan? Surely they must have terrorist ties, we could strech those into a war if we managed to do it with Iraq), and into Iraq and maybe even Syria? It would be wonderful! Now I just wish I wasn't of draft age...

I seriously hope you were just joking in this post. Because what you've basically posted here is that you're a war monger and you think it would be cool. You just don't want to have to help fight it. You sound like Bush.. or Cheney or Rove or any of the Washington war mongers who all did every thing in their power to get out of fighting a war they should of in their generation. Nice! :rolleyes:

Personally, I feel that neither Bush or Kerry are fit to run the country. Things will continue to go downhill regardless of who wins, especially considering the majority of American society is a tad too complacent, ignorant, and oblivious for its own good. Things are probably going to get worse before they get better.

This election is just as important as every other. Really each was important except first since Washington won automatically lol It was no contest...

we are headed torwards taking that all important first step to joining the ranks of elected dictatorships

Well I am saying it makes no difference in the sense that if you actually like one of the third parties, you should ignore the claim that a vote for Nader (or whoever) is a vote for Bush. If you go off the premise that this election is the most important in the world and that because of it you should vote for the lesser of two evils instead of the guy you like, I say there is no election that important.

We have seen how pathetic Bush is, and since Kerry seems stuck somewhere between Bush and Clinton, clearly he isn't going to be that much better. Personally I am going to vote for Kerry, but thats from a somewhat libertarian perspective. I figure Kerry will do the least damage to the system of the two of them. (After all, what the heck can he actually get through Republican dominated legislative and judicial branches? Nothing too heavy-handed at least). Thank God (pun intended since I am more atheist than christian - the true reason I won't be voting for Bush) that the liberals in this country are too unorganized and honest to actually play the political game effectively (aka as ruthlessly as the Bush crew). Speaking of the God part, we are more likely heading towards a theocracy than a dictatorship, not like it matters since they are usually about the same as far as results are concerned.

Originally posted by Stephistan
I seriously hope you were just joking in this post. Because what you've basically posted here is that you're a war monger and you think it would be cool. You just don't want to have to help fight it. You sound like Bush.. or Cheney or Rove or any of the Washington war mongers who all did every thing in their power to get out of fighting a war they should of [sic] in their generation. Nice!

Its not that I think it would be cool, it is that it is an inevitable part of the neo-con agenda. And, since both Kerry AND Bush support the neo-con agenda, and both are absolutely obsessed with protecting Israel at all costs, BOTH will end up attacking Iran. At minimum, Israel will be launching strikes on known Iranian nuclear facilities like they did to Iraq.

In terms of the neocon agenda, Iran was truly the biggest threat in the middle east. We couldn't just invade Iran after we entered Afghanistan though, because Saddam was the type of leader who might have actually fought with the Iranians against us. Thus, we have to take the middle east one nation at a time. The key problem with democracy is that ordinary citizens neither know nor understand global political strategy, and politicians can not disclose what they intend to do to other countries, because then other countries will find out and be forewarned.

Iran is a serious target and I heard some people on CNN today considering as the next pre-emptive war. Iran (as opposed to Iraq) actually has a nuclear program, has clear ties to terrorism, clearly gives shelter to Al Qaida leadership, has a history of oppressing dissent in its country, etc.

The other potential target is North Korea, but since it already has nukes, is situated in a jungle (deserts are a little easier to occupy than jungles), has no known major oil sources, and has militarized itself beyond belief, there is little chance that the US will even consider another Korean war, even if NK invades SK. We would simply go running to the Chinese begging them to handle the situation.

Sorry for the long post