Replies

Are you really that confused as to not see a difference between a native population rebelling against its occupiers, be it Hungarians against Soviets or Iraqis against the US, and separately, a foreign power invading another nation to impose a new government on the conquered power?

LOL, government school?

Your inability to understand basic political concepts can only be the result of too much TV. Now that Kerry has gotten to the Right of Bush and favors a larger commitment of troops in Iraq, I suspect you have barely an inkling of an understanding how the two party rigged system works in this country. Meanwhile, folks like Ahmed Chalabi, a man who belongs in prison, receives scant attention from you even has he more or less calls his American hawk's useful idiots.

YOU: American Conservatives don't support "global democratic revolutions"

ME: So you were rooting for the Soviet army in the Hungarian 1956 attempted revolution?

YOU: Why would I have done that, Red? Do you have any idea what you are talking about?

ME: More gibbering obfuscation from you. Either you do or you do not support democratic revolutions in other countries. If you dont, you cant mind Soviet tanks crushing Hungarian democratic fighters. If you do, you should get off the back of those of us who support freedom fighters in other contexts. Of course, stating Conservatives dont do that support at all is simply contrary to historical fact. We Conservatives have supported plenty of pro-freedom and anti-communist revolutionary movements over the years, and have supported US involvement of same.

YOU: Are you really that confused as to not see a difference between a native population rebelling against its occupiers, be it Hungarians against Soviets or Iraqis against the US, and separately, a foreign power invading another nation to impose a new government on the conquered power?

ME: You said that American Conservatives dont support 'global democratic revolutions'. Your original comment required clarification. But you only obfuscate. I note that *I* have clearly explained that I would support the Hungarian freedom fighters. I never conflated being a freedom fighter with American support for freedom fighters, but I have shown examples where US military support is required for the success of freedom against tyranny.

You havent explained coherently what your position IS ON THIS AT ALL. You just hurl invective. You have refused to answer any questions with a straight answer and are only full of venom and ad hominem, not logic.

Did you support Reagan's support of Contras? Yes or no?
Do you support Reagan's support of Afghan mujahadeen? Yes/no?
Do you support Reagan's intervention in El Salvador? yes/no?
Do you support Reagan's support of Solidarity in Poland? yes/no?
Do you support the Hungarian freedom fighters in 1956? or the soviet tanks? yes/no?
Would you have supported US military support of Hungarian freedom fighters to free that country from communism?
Did you support Gulf War I, to liberate Kuwait from Saddam's invasion?
Do you think US occupation of Germany and Japan was justified post WWII? yes/no?

I dare you to answer the questions Yes/No. Surely you are capable of that.

ALL OF THE ABOVE EXAMPLES OF INTERVENTION WERE SUPPORTED BY AMERICAN CONSERVATIVES. Your original point, that American conservatives 'dont support 'global democratic revolution'' etc. is not correct. American Conservatives support the use of American power to advance freedom and democracy, expecially because and when it aligns with our security interests. Our values and our interests can and do align. The liberation of Iraq from Saddam is just the latest example of that.

"Your inability to understand basic political concepts can only be the result of too much TV."

More projection and insults on your part, you who Bizarrely thinks the anti-Communist interventionist Reagan Docrine was Trotskyite!!! LOL. You cant handle decent debate. I have a PhD, so your insults about going to school are just laughable.