SGG's Pick the President Poll

If Saudi Arabia had a revolution tomorrow, what should the United States do?[/quote]

But this is why you need sound foreign policy and have sound advisors around you before hand. These types of decisions, to some extent, have to made before conflicts actually takes place.

We need economic allies and we need military allies, and vice versa.
There is an inherent responsibility that comes along with being the most powerful and wealthiest Nation in the world. Now that's not to say we should police the world, but we can't just stand pat while things are going awry globally.

I guess I need to learn more about Ron Paul. It just seems to me like he hasn't really thought through the whole "we'll let's just leave" philosophy. Or maybe I haven't, but I'm not the one trying to convince America to vote for me as their next President.

It says a lot that virtually no one in the house and no one (that I know of) in the Senate is calling for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. I personally think the "leave immediately" plan is no plan at all. If I were in surgery, and even if the surgery went terribly awry, I wouldn't want the doctors to say, "Oh we screwed up, let's leave the room, don't worry about closing the patient up."

Here's my general impression:

A dem will win the WH due to anti-Bush backlash alone. People are VERY done with the administration, and it showed in the midterms. Plus, it's very hard to hold the WH for 12 years, and the Bushies have not groomed a candidate in the VP slot as is usual. So I disagree with SBF's claim about the dems, though I agree they have no real plan or anything.

So, who is going to win the dem primaries? Hillary. She's got the most cash, the best team, and she knows how to play hardball. And Bill is one of the best politicians of the last few decades (note: I did not say leader or human being!), and he's her top adviser.

My guess is Obama will trip up, and his lack of experience will be his downfall. Edwards has a rousing stump speech, but it won't carry him through the big primaries where the deal is done by labor unions, local party hacks, etc. (Iowa means less and less, IMO, especially with the crazy front-loaded primary schedule.)

The republicans will lose the general election due to the backlash factor. And as for the "people hate Hillary" thing, sure, but those are mostly republicans anyway. In this election, whoever is the democratic candidate gets NY and CA for free. Then it's just a matter of picking up a few more states--look, Kerry (who was LAME) almost won, given the electoral map. She just needs a few more states, and she and her team know how to get them, IMO.

So it's Hillary. I'm ok with that--she been a decent centerist/pragmatist in the Senate, she's a "liberal hawk" on defense/IR, and she's proven she can play well with others. Plus, she's part of the New Dem caucus that melds free trade to the usual democratic issues--see NAFTA, for what it's worth. And she'll most likely bring in some of the good people from Bill's administration. Finally, DC, especially in the executive branch, needs a good housecleaning. I doubt a republican could do that, but a dem will have a mandate to fix CIA, INS, EPA, FEMA, and all those other departments that the Bushies have gutted and filled with political hacks (to the great detriment of our nation's security). So I'm going with Hillary.

And I'm psyched to have Bill back in the WH chasing tail. I miss those days when that was the worst thing going on in the world.

Why is it our job to stick our noses into everyone else's problems??

I'll just never understand why people think the US needs to be the world police.

Here's my general impression:

A dem will win the WH due to anti-Bush backlash alone. People are VERY done with the administration, and it showed in the midterms. Plus, it's very hard to hold the WH for 12 years, and the Bushies have not groomed a candidate in the VP slot as is usual. So I disagree with SBF's claim about the dems, though I agree they have no real plan or anything.

So, who is going to win the dem primaries? Hillary. She's got the most cash, the best team, and she knows how to play hardball. And Bill is one of the best politicians of the last few decades (note: I did not say leader or human being!), and he's her top adviser.

My guess is Obama will trip up, and his lack of experience will be his downfall. Edwards has a rousing stump speech, but it won't carry him through the big primaries where the deal is done by labor unions, local party hacks, etc. (Iowa means less and less, IMO, especially with the crazy front-loaded primary schedule.)

The republicans will lose the general election due to the backlash factor. And as for the "people hate Hillary" thing, sure, but those are mostly republicans anyway. In this election, whoever is the democratic candidate gets NY and CA for free. Then it's just a matter of picking up a few more states--look, Kerry (who was LAME) almost won, given the electoral map. She just needs a few more states, and she and her team know how to get them, IMO.

So it's Hillary. I'm ok with that--she been a decent centerist/pragmatist in the Senate, she's a "liberal hawk" on defense/IR, and she's proven she can play well with others. Plus, she's part of the New Dem caucus that melds free trade to the usual democratic issues--see NAFTA, for what it's worth. And she'll most likely bring in some of the good people from Bill's administration. Finally, DC, especially in the executive branch, needs a good housecleaning. I doubt a republican could do that, but a dem will have a mandate to fix CIA, INS, EPA, FEMA, and all those other departments that the Bushies have gutted and filled with political hacks (to the great detriment of our nation's security). So I'm going with Hillary.

And I'm psyched to have Bill back in the WH chasing tail. I miss those days when that was the worst thing going on in the world.

Good analysis

"I'm just waiting on a Fred."

Ha, I love my own humor. Meantime Rudy.


I assume you're talking about Fred Thomspon and this morning on my way to work WMAL basically said you can expect him to announce his candidacy on July 4th.

Why is it our job to stick our noses into everyone else's problems??

I'll just never understand why people think the US needs to be the world police.

Well that's an argument for never going into Iraq in the first place, but it's not a good argument for why we should just pack up and leave.

We were the ones who made that friggin mess (though not the only ones, thanks Iran and Syria). We'd absolutely DESTROY any remaining credibility we have in the international community if we just packed up and left a power vacuum in it's place. The Iraqi government is not nearly strong enough to stand on its own, and without our presence the insurgents/Iran would quickly move to overthrow the existing government.

As for Ron Paul's position on Iraq, what does he think will happen to Iraq once we leave? Does he think the sectarian strife will subside following our departure? If so, he's nuts. If, however, he doesn't care if the civil war will increase in intensity and perhaps bring other countries (e.g., Turkey and Iran) into the mix, then I guess that's his perogative. Finally, Iraq is a terrorist training ground already, but I can't see how our departure will help matters.

I'm not certain he's stated one way or the other what he thinks will happen once we leave. I do know this -- go back and read his statements in 2002 and 2003 about why we shouldn't go into Iraq, and his predictions on what will happen once the balance of power is overturned. At every turn, Ron Paul was right.

I can't speak for him, but I can tell you what I think about 'sectarian strife' after we leave: Who cares? Let the Sunnis and the Shia duke it out. It is not our job to referee a civil war over religious disputes between Muslims. Our departure will secure one thing -- a stop to dead American servicemen and women in a poorly planned fiasco we never should have gotten ourselves involved with in the first place.

As for Iran taking over? Fine. Let them start taking the casualties.

Well that's an argument for never going into Iraq in the first place, but it's not a good argument for why we should just pack up and leave.

We were the ones who made that friggin mess (though not the only ones, thanks Iran and Syria). We'd absolutely DESTROY any remaining credibility we have in the international community if we just packed up and left a power vacuum in it's place. The Iraqi government is not nearly strong enough to stand on its own, and without our presence the insurgents/Iran would quickly move to overthrow the existing government.

I can appreciate the point of those who say we're there now, and there's nothing we can do about the mistakes our country has made in the past.

But for a moment, let's say what is not supposed to be said: They'll say we'll lose all of our credibility -- We have no credibility in the international community. They say Iraq will turn into a bloodbath when we leave -- Iraq IS a bloodbath. The only difference is that American blood will no longer be spilled there.

We were the ones who created the vacuum when we toppled Saddam. He was a Secularist, who quite obviously knew how to keep the Sunnis and the Shia separated and in line. Was he evil? Sure. But he kept order in what we now know to be a volatile environment, and he kept Iran in check. Now he's gone, the insane are running the asylum, and we are caught in the crosshairs of huge mess.

The old saying by Thomas Jefferson goes like this: The tree of liberty must be freshened from time to time by the blood of patriots and tyrants. At some point, the people of Iraq will have to discover their own destiny -- even if that destiny is paved with blood, even if it's a knock-down, drag out with Iran. The right thing to do, the ONLY thing to do, is get the hell out of their way.

I assume you're talking about Fred Thomspon and this morning on my way to work WMAL basically said you can expect him to announce his candidacy on July 4th.

I was actually referring to Fred Couples. I think if his back stays healthy he could really give it a run. That belly putter will go over like gangbusters in New Hampshire.