General Discussion

guillaumeb

(42,649 posts)

9. Instead of endless war, which profits the war industries,

Reply to Ken Burch (Original post)

Thu Sep 21, 2017, 05:43 PM

Sep 2017

we should instead try peace?

Who benefits by peace? We all do.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

69 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Do you agree or disagree with this general statement about where U.S. foreign policy should go? [View all] Ken Burch Sep 2017 OP

3 guys walk into a bar Eliot Rosewater Sep 2017 #1

Where do you get that from this quote? Ken Burch Sep 2017 #4

Sense of humor much? Eliot Rosewater Sep 2017 #5

You needn't ask. NurseJackie Sep 2017 #8

If the clip actually applied, guillaumeb Sep 2017 #10

It sounded like you were comparing the speech to Pacino's courtroom speech in that movie Ken Burch Sep 2017 #19

Along those lines, if there are three people on an elevator and one farts......... George II Sep 2017 #16

That's why I only fart in crowded elevators. Nt Weekend Warrior Sep 2017 #25

He invented foreign policy years ago. nt LexVegas Sep 2017 #2

Only he can fix everything! FSogol Sep 2017 #3

This is a thread about the idea. It doesn't matter what you feel about the person who said it. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #6

can't get partnership with people who have no interest beachbum bob Sep 2017 #7

You mean Russia doesn't want to held hands and replace their oil w solar? bettyellen Sep 2017 #35

Instead of endless war, which profits the war industries, guillaumeb Sep 2017 #9

Sounds like populist demogogery taken to new global dimensions... Expecting Rain Sep 2017 #11

It's populist demagogery to say we should globally ally with the poor? Ken Burch Sep 2017 #20

Sounds like populism when you promise to reach out to the world's poor... Expecting Rain Sep 2017 #22

You're talking nonsense. PETRUS Sep 2017 #31

I'm support "fair trade"-that is trade deals that guarantee workers in different countries Ken Burch Sep 2017 #50

It's a naive and unrealistic approach. Or a very clumsy phrase... NurseJackie Sep 2017 #12

. George II Sep 2017 #17

### NurseJackie Sep 2017 #24

OK...here are some ways you can create such a partnership: Ken Burch Sep 2017 #21

That's not a partnership. That's PR or goodwill, it's an apology-tour, but it's not a partnership. NurseJackie Sep 2017 #23

The quote was a broadstrokes statement. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #42

I gotta laugh at the idea of someone running campaigning on that. And won't oppose bettyellen Sep 2017 #30

Not wish away other governments. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #43

It's bizarre that none of this has to do with doing things today. Why is their no policy for now? bettyellen Sep 2017 #55

Because the long-term also matters. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #58

I know an Iranian American woman who wants to do business with IRan and other countries JI7 Sep 2017 #48

It's a typical political slogan Warpy Sep 2017 #29

It was never meant to be an end in itself. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #44

Obviously, after "drain the swamp" and "make America great again" we need to question Warpy Sep 2017 #49

OK. But I don't know why you think I disagree with any of that. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #52

Are you pretending Dems have no policy positions ? Because that's what this "solely on Trump" bettyellen Sep 2017 #56

No, I'm not pretending that(and I AM a Democrat, so please don't imply I'm an outsider) Ken Burch Sep 2017 #57

Is this supposed to be something we should respond to? NastyRiffraff Sep 2017 #13

:) sheshe2 Sep 2017 #14

. George II Sep 2017 #18

Ah, those were the days! NastyRiffraff Sep 2017 #38

The whole thing is so unrealistic. It doesn't represent the real world. NurseJackie Sep 2017 #27

Exactly, actually it's sounding like a trade agreement. R B Garr Sep 2017 #39

The idea of actually listening to and working with the global majority terrifies you, I think. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #51

LOL! Cloudy with a chance of meatballs... NurseJackie Sep 2017 #61

This is the difference with us. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #62

Well... NurseJackie Sep 2017 #64

I don't need to scroll up. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #66

Sigh... very disappointing. NurseJackie Sep 2017 #67

The term "Nasty" has no relation to gender in my use of it. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #68

That's wrong again. NurseJackie Sep 2017 #69

It's simply a line in a speech. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #45

We use that language and sentiment anytime we want to screw over another government. rogue emissary Sep 2017 #15

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Weekend Warrior Sep 2017 #26

trump is a foreign agent chaking53 Sep 2017 #28

It is not possible. Demsrule86 Sep 2017 #32

The issue I have with it... PoorMonger Sep 2017 #33

I wasn't calling for trusting the current government. Ken Burch Sep 2017 #46

But it's still a part of reality PoorMonger Sep 2017 #53

OK. A cynic can co-opt any positive concept...we all KNOW that...what's your point here? Ken Burch Sep 2017 #54

I'm saying that PoorMonger Sep 2017 #59

I think it's actually meaningless fluff, so none of the above. bettyellen Sep 2017 #34

It *is* silly-fluff but it's fun to watch people try to make it MORE important than it actually is NurseJackie Sep 2017 #60

pap delisen Sep 2017 #36

Is This Rhetorical? Me. Sep 2017 #37

DIY trade deals/diplomacy? betsuni Sep 2017 #40

like the US arming Syrian Rebels fighting Assad and ISIS ? JI7 Sep 2017 #41

No. There aren't any rebels in Syria fighting for anything positive Ken Burch Sep 2017 #47

I can't argue with the statement. Can't understand it, either. JustABozoOnThisBus Sep 2017 #63

Perhaps it is time for the United States to seek partnerships with the people of Venezuela... Expecting Rain Sep 2017 #65