Quick poll on 9/11 and war on terrorism

[Nielsio]

This post is designed to measure people's ideas, it's not aimed at discussing the various theories; discuss at own risk.

[Bremen]

gah, you're trying to force people into certain defined camps. How about they're all right? There are people that only cared about the oil and there are people who truly were stupid enough to believe we could create a democratic government in Iraq simply by flipping a switch. Our foreign policy has been guided by both of these viewpoints and a couple others.

As for whether the government caused 9/11 how about finding some proof? Automatically blaming the government for EVERYTHING is no better than automatically believing everything the government says.

[Nielsio]

Ok,

It's good to see that the voters almost unilaterily are disgusted with the US foreign policy. This means that people are starting to come to the realization that what the state does actually has almost nothing to do with defense and defending the people; but that it accomplishes quite the opposite.

I would have expected a little more on the MIHOP side, but MIHOP and LIHOP don't really matter in how we judge the state; because in both cases we understand that the state is lying through it's teeth when it claims to protect people, when in reality they do the exact opposite.

Understanding WHY it does the opposite of what it claims and how the incentives of a monopoly and of special interests work is important, I would say.

[iron81]

[ QUOTE ]
This means that people are starting to come to the realization that what Bush does actually has almost nothing to do with defense and defending the people; but that it accomplishes quite the opposite.

[/ QUOTE ]
FYP

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This means that people are starting to come to the realization that what Bush does actually has almost nothing to do with defense and defending the people; but that it accomplishes quite the opposite.

[/ QUOTE ]
FYP

[/ QUOTE ]


The LIHOP/MIHOP/scam voters see Bush as a puppet for the interest groups and other incentives. In that regard it really doesn't matter who you put there as long as the incentive structure exists.

The blowback group (I think) also recognizes that this interventionist foreign policy is a trend that has carried on through the century.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
It's good to see that the voters almost unilaterily are disgusted with the US foreign policy. This means that people are starting to come to the realization that what the state does actually has almost nothing to do with defense and defending the people; but that it accomplishes quite the opposite.

[/ QUOTE ]

So from the results of 44 votes cast on the 2p2 Politics Forum (a representative cohort of the American populace if there ever was one), we can extrapolate that American voters are now unilaterally disgusted with US foreign policy and have come to the realization that what the state does actually has nothing to do with defense (in fact, just the opposite)?

Shouldn't we wait until there are least, I don't know, maybe fifty or sixty votes before making such bold declarations? I might feel a little more comfortable. Don't get me wrong, this poll has great potential, but I think we should wait until the sample size of 2p2 Politics Forum poll respondents gets just a little bigger before we go making any broad, sweeping generalizations about the American voter's foreign policy views.

Also, I might be more inclined to agree with the premise that the American government orchestrated 9/11 if this thread were accompanied by some links to youtube videos where shots of planes hitting the World Trade Centers are accompanied by a soundtrack of some random internet user talking about how the towers were really imploded from internal explosives. Perhaps even a similarly themed podcast might do the trick.

[iron81]

I'm in the Blowback group and while intervetionalist foreign policy has been predominant this century, it is possible to do it right. Carter, Bush 41 and Clinton were all good at doing intervention smartly: sparingly and in line with global moral standards.

[Taso]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's good to see that the voters almost unilaterily are disgusted with the US foreign policy. This means that people are starting to come to the realization that what the state does actually has almost nothing to do with defense and defending the people; but that it accomplishes quite the opposite.

[/ QUOTE ]

So from the results of 44 votes cast on the 2p2 Politics Forum (a representative cohort of the American populace if there ever was one), we can extrapolate that American voters are now unilaterally disgusted with US foreign policy and have come to the realization that what the state does actually has nothing to do with defense (in fact, just the opposite)?

Shouldn't we wait until there are least, I don't know, maybe fifty or sixty votes before making such bold declarations? I might feel a little more comfortable.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think once we have 100 we'll have an accurate picture of how America feels.

[2/325Falcon]

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
I think once we have 100 we'll have an accurate picture of how America feels.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. Maybe fifty or sixty was still low-balling it. Once we get to 100 responses from 2p2 Politics Forum members, we'll know for sure.