Thu Dec 13, 2012, 07:10 PM
MannyGoldstein (28,361 posts)
I know it's not sensible, but it would be nice to have an SoS who
doesn't think pointless wars are a grand idea.
Are any in the running?
5 replies, 606 views
I know it's not sensible, but it would be nice to have an SoS who (Original post)
|Smarmie Doofus||Dec 2012||#3|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Thu Dec 13, 2012, 07:16 PM
MrSlayer (22,143 posts)
They have a point. The point is to further enrich the MIC contractors with tax dollars while destroying the safety net at home. There are points to these wars, they just aren't good ones.
Response to Smarmie Doofus (Reply #3)
Thu Dec 13, 2012, 09:43 PM
joshcryer (48,261 posts)
5. Nah, he voted for it but was highly critical of Bush during it.
Foreign policy wise he has evolved from a Republican to more of a Libertarian. Which is why he wouldn't be the worst pick on the scheme of things. Not that I support him as a pick. I'm just recalling, with amusement, the freakout that he was being considered. Kerry voted for IWR too, and during the 2004 campaign waffled, he didn't have as strong of a position as Hagel against it until after the WMDs weren't found and he pretended that Bush was being truthful. (He had access to the intelligence committee and would've known, even before the vote, that Saddam didn't have WMDs.)