NASA Administrator... "(My) Primary Charge Is To Reach Out To Muslims"...

Threedee said:
The ME is a land of retards. We can't change that via NASA.
Click to expand...

That was not always true. It was not, when they embraced science over religion. It could be changed by advancing science, which is without a doubt within NASA's power and purpose.

I am not saying NASA reaching out to the ME or reminding them of their history and important contributions to science will make them change overnight. But, it can't hurt.
 
They never embraced science over religion. They did have a great and glorious history in which sciences and math were developed and in which Greek contributions were collected and safely stored away. No one would ever do what you claim, but the fact remains that the Muslim world chose to seal itself off into the stone age and reject science.
 
Threedee said:
They never embraced science over religion. They did have a great and glorious history in which sciences and math were developed and in which Greek contributions were collected and safely stored away. No one would ever do what you claim, but the fact remains that the Muslim world chose to seal itself off into the stone age and reject science.
Click to expand...

Okay... they, at least, embraced science to a greater extent than now. If they returned to that it would benefit us all and weaken the fundies. There are many of them that do embrace science and we can help to encourage those parts of their culture.

What did I claim they would do?
 
Damocles said:
It is however in the ME... Does anybody remember that "all options are on the table" answer when asked if he would take military action on Iran rather than let them get the nuke? Yeah. If that were Ike you'd say he was "might makes right"... instead you are trying to pretend that the same two wars, following the same path set first by Bush (it can be argued that Obama sent more troops than Bush would have to Afghanistan), are not "changing the face of the ME", but I think you are just spinning in an attempt to justify a stupid statement.

We are definitely shooting people there, and attempting to "change the face of the ME" at the point of a gun, we are still using every method we did before, we've escalated anonymous bombing from remote controlled planes, we've escalated extraordinary rendition...

Yeah, it's all just silly spin to attempt to say it is magically better because of rhetoric. It isn't. If rhetoric was the gun, maybe, but it isn't. When we've stepped out of the theater, when we no longer pay Egyptians to torture "enemy combatants"... When we've stopped trying to prop up governments there, then you can say that. Until then, we are still at war, there is still a gun pointed at the "face of the ME"...

Let me make an analogy...

You're like a group of kids who have been led down the "wrong path" by a ruffian who are slashing tires down the next neighborhood. That ruffian is forced to move to Kansas because his father got a job, suddenly you have a new leader who leads you to the next neighborhood to slash tires, but instead of saying that you are slashing them because they are a$$holes he says you are slashing them because they are jerks, and he gets more kids to join in so that more tires can be slashed more effectively.

Then your friend spouts off, "Thank Gawd we're not slashing tires anymore!" and you say, "Amen!" Everybody looks at you both like you are insane as you take the knife and slash the next tire.

Later when somebody points out how stupid that you sounded when you said that, you justify it by saying, "But his rhetoric is better and that means he's trying to put a stop to it."
Click to expand...

If Obama is following the same path as Bush why are people bitching about Obama turning his back on our "friends" in the ME and pacifying/supporting Muslims? Why is the Right continually accusing Obama of being a secret Muslim and liking our "enemies"? Why are people ranting about inviting Muslim countries to get involved with NASA?

On the other hand maybe you are correct and the right is composed of a bunch of lunatics ranting about things they know nothing about. :cof1:
 
Apple, it strikes me as delusional that you perceive obama's nationbuilding as something meaningfully different than "neocon" nationbuilidng.

The only argument ive seen you make is that Bush was from texas and that made it Cowboy-y. You're retarded.
 
Damocles said:
It is however in the ME... Does anybody remember that "all options are on the table" answer when asked if he would take military action on Iran rather than let them get the nuke? Yeah. If that were Ike you'd say he was "might makes right"... instead you are trying to pretend that the same two wars, following the same path set first by Bush (it can be argued that Obama sent more troops than Bush would have to Afghanistan), are not "changing the face of the ME", but I think you are just spinning in an attempt to justify a stupid statement.

We are definitely shooting people there, and attempting to "change the face of the ME" at the point of a gun, we are still using every method we did before, we've escalated anonymous bombing from remote controlled planes, we've escalated extraordinary rendition...

Yeah, it's all just silly spin to attempt to say it is magically better because of rhetoric. It isn't. If rhetoric was the gun, maybe, but it isn't. When we've stepped out of the theater, when we no longer pay Egyptians to torture "enemy combatants"... When we've stopped trying to prop up governments there, then you can say that. Until then, we are still at war, there is still a gun pointed at the "face of the ME"...

Let me make an analogy...

You're like a group of kids who have been led down the "wrong path" by a ruffian who are slashing tires down the next neighborhood. That ruffian is forced to move to Kansas because his father got a job, suddenly you have a new leader who leads you to the next neighborhood to slash tires, but instead of saying that you are slashing them because they are a$$holes he says you are slashing them because they are jerks, and he gets more kids to join in so that more tires can be slashed more effectively.

Then your friend spouts off, "Thank Gawd we're not slashing tires anymore!" and you say, "Amen!" Everybody looks at you both like you are insane as you take the knife and slash the next tire.

Later when somebody points out how stupid that you sounded when you said that, you justify it by saying, "But his rhetoric is better and that means he's trying to put a stop to it."
Click to expand...

Cutting through most of the above, Obama has a timeline for troop withdrawal in both Iraq and A'stan, yet repubs are roundly criticizing him and saying he's aiding the enemy by giving dates.

He's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.
 
christiefan915 said:
Cutting through most of the above, Obama has a timeline for troop withdrawal in both Iraq and A'stan, yet repubs are roundly criticizing him and saying he's aiding the enemy by giving dates.

He's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.
Click to expand...

But he also said people are too obsessed with timelines.... so ...

what does he really think? who knows.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Apple, it strikes me as delusional that you perceive obama's nationbuilding as something meaningfully different than "neocon" nationbuilidng.

The only argument ive seen you make is that Bush was from texas and that made it Cowboy-y. You're retarded.
Click to expand...

Nationbuilding in Afghanistan is not trying to change the face of the ME. Nationbuilding in Afghanistan is because we destroyed their nation, their actual buildings/infrastructure, such as they were.

Iraq was the perfect example of trying to change the face of the ME. There was no reason to go there other than to change the political system. They were not a threat.
 
apple0154 said:
Nationbuilding in Afghanistan is not trying to change the face of the ME. Nationbuilding in Afghanistan is because we destroyed their nation, their actual buildings/infrastructure, such as they were.


Iraq was the perfect example of trying to change the face of the ME. There was no reason to go there other than to change the political system. They were not a threat.
Click to expand...

Have you ever heard the phrase "a distinction without a difference"? It fits your argument.


Afghanistan is a threat? Seriously?
 
AssHatZombie said:
But he also said people are too obsessed with timelines.... so ...

what does he really think? who knows.
Click to expand...

We have a good idea what Obama thinks by his getting rid of McCrystal.

McCrystal wanted a clear cut victory and there never will be a clear cut victory as history has shown the Afghans are stubborn people.

The Taliban are out of power. The threat is over. It's time to leave, however, Obama does not want a civil war to start. This situation is not of Obama's making.
 
apple0154 said:
If Obama is following the same path as Bush why are people bitching about Obama turning his back on our "friends" in the ME and pacifying/supporting Muslims? Why is the Right continually accusing Obama of being a secret Muslim and liking our "enemies"? Why are people ranting about inviting Muslim countries to get involved with NASA?

On the other hand maybe you are correct and the right is composed of a bunch of lunatics ranting about things they know nothing about. :cof1:
Click to expand...
I'd believe that is partisanship. Rather than look at what is happening they work on the "perspective". I prefer to look at reality. I was against undeclared warfare before, I am still against it now.

The reality is, there has been no real change in the foreign policy relating to these wars between the two administrations. Even such things as were promised to end under the new Administration haven't, and have even been expanded.
 
apple0154 said:
It was a threat as far as having terrorist camps and supporting terrorists. It's no longer a threat.
Click to expand...

So why is obama committing massive troops and time? Nationbuilding. Just like neocons. your shit stinks too, despite your psychotic inability to make the comparison.
 
AssHatZombie said:
But he also said people are too obsessed with timelines.... so ...

what does he really think? who knows.
Click to expand...
And we won't until we do not leave on his time line, or we do. Very much with this President, concerning these wars, it is important to pay attention to actions rather than speech.

I've given two very important examples in this thread.
 
Damocles said:
it is important to pay attention to actions rather than speech.
Click to expand...

This is always a good idea. its depressing when you do this though. All the excitement of the fulfillment or denial of our propaganda-implanted dramatic tension vanishes. And you begin to see the true monopolicy of elitist globalization that makes distinguishing the "two sides" very difficult.
 
apple0154 said:
We have a good idea what Obama thinks by his getting rid of McCrystal.

McCrystal wanted a clear cut victory and there never will be a clear cut victory as history has shown the Afghans are stubborn people.

The Taliban are out of power. The threat is over. It's time to leave, however, Obama does not want a civil war to start. This situation is not of Obama's making.
Click to expand...
No we don't. He replaced him with a General who is already speaking of victory as well, as well as his wishy-washy "People are paying too much attention to time lines"... it appears as if he isn't sure we'll be leaving at his deadline.

I wonder if he'll start saying that Bin Laden is no longer important and how people who freaked when Bush said it will act when he says it. My guess is you'll be here talking about how right he is.
 
"What I find amazing (though I guess I shouldn't be surprised!) is how people seem to forget the history of NASA and how several US Presidents (including Eisenhower, JFK, and Reagan) all used NASA to try and reach out to the Soviet Union during the Cold War to improve diplomatic relations between the two countries and work towards peace and ending the cold war...

The U.S. Senate issued a more formal call for renewal of U.S.-Soviet space cooperation with passage of Joint Resolution 236 on Oct. 10, 1984. President Reagan signed the resolution on Oct. 30, noting U.S. readiness “to work with the Soviets on cooperation in space in pro-grams which are mutually beneficial and productive.”

When Reagan and Gorbachev met in Geneva November, 1985 to discuss arms control, they also signed an agreement on scientific cooperation. Once again, cooperation was symbolic of a thaw in the Cold War.

And Reagan and then Vice President George H.W. Bush in 1985 had NASA include Saudi Prince Sultan Bin Salman Bin Abdul Aziz Al-Saud on the Space Shuttle Mission 51-G, the youngest person in space.

So - despite the right wing blogosphere going crazy over a simple statement and plan of NASA and the Obama administration following thru on a campaign platform to improve relations with muslim countries, the plan is well established in the history of NASA and the USA."

http://www.wral.com/golo/blogpost/7922945/

If brains were dynamite you right wingers couldn't blow your own noses. The more you watch Faux News the dumber you get. What tools you are.
 
Damocles said:
I'd believe that is partisanship. Rather than look at what is happening they work on the "perspective". I prefer to look at reality. I was against undeclared warfare before, I am still against it now.

The reality is, there has been no real change in the foreign policy relating to these wars between the two administrations. Even such things as were promised to end under the new Administration haven't, and have even been expanded.
Click to expand...

One policy was to rebuild and stay and the other is to rebuild and leave. Just because both involve rebuilding does not mean both policies are the same.
 
apple0154 said:
One policy was to rebuild and stay and the other is to rebuild and leave. Just because both involve rebuilding does not mean both policies are the same.
Click to expand...

Ill believe obama wants to leave when he stops increasing troop levels and stops chastizing people who discuss timelines.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top