Debates

[Tide1986]

http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/

Pieces of transcript from last night.

Biden- But we are leaving. We are leaving in 2014. Period. And in the process, we’re going to be saving over the next 10 years another $800 billion. We’ve been in this war for over a decade. The primary objective is almost completed. Now, all we’re doing is putting the Kabul government in a position to be able to maintain their own security.

It’s their responsibility, not America’s.


RYAN: We’re sending fewer people out in all of these hotspots to do the same job that they were supposed to do a month ago.


BIDEN: Because we turned it over...

BIDEN: That’s right, because that’s the Afghan responsibility. We’ve trained them.
RYAN: Not in the east.

RYAN: No. We are already sending Americans to do the job, but fewer of them. That’s the whole problem.

BIDEN: That’s right. We’re sending in more Afghans to do the job, Afghans to do the job.

RADDATZ: What’s your criteria for intervention?

BIDEN: Yeah. RYAN: In Syria?

RADDATZ: Worldwide.

RYAN: What is in the national interests of the American people.

RADDATZ: How about humanitarian interests?

RYAN: What is in the national security of the American people. It’s got to be in the strategic national interests of our country.

RADDATZ: No humanitarian?

RYAN: Each situation will -- will come up with its own set of circumstances, but putting American troops on the ground? That’s got to be within the national security interests of the American people.

Is this intended to be responsive to the second part of Riz's question? I'm not sure how you get the impression of "nation building" when Ryan clearly says that we will only put troops on the ground in cases of national security interests. He was unwilling in this case to even agree to intervene in humanitarian situations, which the moderator emphasized in her questioning and which would definitely amount to nation building (à la Libya).

 

[BamaPokerplayer]

Is this intended to be responsive to the second part of Riz's question? I'm not sure how you get the impression of "nation building" when Ryan clearly says that we will only put troops on the ground in cases of national security interests. He was unwilling in this case to even agree to intervene in humanitarian situations, which the moderator emphasized in her questioning and which would definitely amount to nation building (à la Libya).

I never said I was right just that I fear that it could happen. National security interests to the GOP can cover a very wide range, like imaginary WMD. Our military is too large and needs to get cut back. I would be fine with 2 dollar in cuts to social welfare state items to one dollar cuts in defense spending if it were ever proposed.

 

[rizolltizide]

The reason I said you were trolling is because you stated a couple of talking points that generally appear on the left's stationary. I'm not the biggest Mitt fan out there, but nation building and a crumbling national infrastructure are pretty low on my list of suspicions.

 

[swoop10]

I was accused of trolling. I never said Biden was right. Remember when half the middle east was blowing up last month and I said Obama would do nothing? No one said ole poker player was trolling then.

I don't really understand trying to make a point and not caring if you are right. :conf3:

 

[PacadermaTideUs]

It hasn't been turned over. If it has then why are more Americans dying under Obama's time in office than Bush's? If we were turning it over then wouldn't we start having less casualities? Just another Obama/Biden lie to consider before pulling that lever.

If it's been "turned over," then we have three times the amount of troops there now than we did under Bush just for giggles. Afghanistan ceased to be a major concern to liberals when Obama was elected - we've heard so little about it on national media since then. And if you ask the average American, I think he'd tell you that we have much fewer casualties because it's been "turned over."

Data current through May 2012:

Source

 

[ValuJet]

Considering they were doing everything in their power to exclude God from their party platform this summer, I am not sure what this is all about.

We could say Gore was addressing Big Ozone. Not sure of Biden's schtick.

 

[BamaPokerplayer]

I don't really understand trying to make a point and not caring if you are right. :conf3:

B.c. I wasn't really making a point. I'm not inside Mitt's inner circle. I have no clue if he wants to blow up the middle east or stick his head in the sand. I don't know enough about him and I have no historical data on him as president. I only know what he says and with a politician you know what that is worth.

 

[ValuJet]

 

[Tide1986]

By the way, some of our internal "infrastructure" could stand to crumble and disintegrate so this "issue" is nowhere on my list of potential concerns.

 

[seebell]

And that is why Tidewater said if they didn't know then they are incompetent, which just so happens to be the truth. By the way, don't try to cut the man down then butt kiss in the same post. It's not becoming of you.

Is disagreeing cutting some one down? Is a truthful compliment "butt kissing"? But I still like you Sweauxp is spite of my self.

 

[BamaPokerplayer]

By the way, some of our internal "infrastructure" could stand to crumble and disintegrate so this "issue" is nowhere on my list of potential concerns.

I agree but given two options: Invest in America > Blowing something up

 

[OreBama]

I don't really understand trying to make a point and not caring if you are right. :conf3:

You can only understand if you're a liberal idealogue.

 

[RammerJammer14]

B.c. I wasn't really making a point. I'm not inside Mitt's inner circle. I have no clue if he wants to blow up the middle east or stick his head in the sand. I don't know enough about him and I have no historical data on him as president. I only know what he says and with a politician you know what that is worth.

Soooo, you have no idea what Romney's actual position is on the issue and have no intention of finding out, so you arbitrarily decide he wants to occupy the middle east and kill US infrastructure then you try to criticize him on it without making any point. Did I get all that?

 

[swoop10]

I agree but given two options: Invest in America > Blowing something up

So what makes you think Obama would invest in America? As I said earlier, he had 800 billion dollars to invest in infrastructure and decided to invest in unions and his campaign donors. Why would he do anything different this time?

 

[Bamaro]

It hasn't been turned over. If it has then why are more Americans dying under Obama's time in office than Bush's? If we were turning it over then wouldn't we start having less casualities? Just another Obama/Biden lie to consider before pulling that lever.

Not surprising that casualties have risen under BO. GB was wrongly obsessed with Iraq and let Afghanistan fall apart reversing all the progress he made there. Casualties are now, finally, going down.

 

[CajunCrimson]

Not surprising that casualties have risen under BO. GB was wrongly obsessed with Iraq and let Afghanistan fall apart reversing all the progress he made there. Casualties are now, finally, going down.

Ah -- it's George's fault that Obama has casualties under his watch. Did George pull the security detail in Libya that got our Ambassador killed too?

 

[Bamaro]

Ah -- it's George's fault that Obama has casualties under his watch. Did George pull the security detail in Libya that got our Ambassador killed too?

Funny how you all are so quick to blame BO for little 911 but hold GB blameless for big 911

 

[Tide1986]

Funny how you all are so quick to blame BO for little 911 but hold GB blameless for big 911

Feel free to live in your little fantasy world.

 

[CajunCrimson]

Funny how you all are so quick to blame BO for little 911 but hold GB blameless for big 911

Let's see George was in office for 7 months before 911 -- BO has been in office for 3 years and 7 months -- i'm guessing your RED colored glasses can see the difference?

 

[Bamaro]

Let's see George was in office for 7 months before 911 -- BO has been in office for 3 years and 7 months -- i'm guessing your RED colored glasses can see the difference?

Oh, its all about the time in office.