02:12 PM on 11/09/12 
User Info.
I'm not here. This isn't happening.
jawstheme's Avatar
Well put.
12:58 PM on 11/12/12 
User Info.
I'm not here. This isn't happening.
jawstheme's Avatar
I don't know anyone who is hailing Obama's re-election as a triumph in humanity. Nor is this "a simple question." If we're going to be making hypotheticals, I could as easily say this kid's neighbor, had he not been droned, would have blown up a building himself and killed hundreds of children just like this boy.

Sorry, but you can't dumb down an entire presidential election to a single casualty of a single issue, especially when every viable alternative would have done the same thing.

Had legions of Obama's supporters rushed to a third party candidate on the (likely mistaken) belief that they would cease the drone program, what would have happened was Romney would win. Then we'd have more drone strikes in more countries like he promised we would. On top of that it would set human rights campaigns in our own country back ten years.

So no, I don't feel bad about re-electing Obama.

With that said, the drone thing is being completely ignored in mainstream America, and that definitely needs to change. It's an extremely inconvenient thought, so people ignore it rather than change it. I think with enough pressure from the people, Obama would pull back on the drone program. Luckily for him, we won't even try.

What hypothetical are you referring to? Its not a hypothetical that innocent children are being murdered as a result of this drone war. You're hypothetical is pretty ridiculous though, and would be hugely offensive to someone who's relative or friend was killed as a result of US drone strikes. Nor is it unreasonable to be morally opposed to such a thing in a way that the "single issue" is enough to abstain from voting at all.

The point of the article is that the Obama win isn't a cause for celebration. The article made your points (that one candidate may very well be better than the other in many areas), and understood that view as perfectly reasonable. And I think its a valid point considering half my friends went out and celebrated the Obama victory and half my Facebook feed was full of gloating (the other half was full of things about how this is the end of America).
01:11 PM on 11/12/12 
User Info.
I'm not here. This isn't happening.
jawstheme's Avatar

There was a period under Bush when the pro-war sentiment, among both the right and the left, probably had not been as strong as since WWII. So immediately your assessment is questionable. Your statement also seems to imply, if taken to its logical conclusion, that we should make things as terrible as possible for the American people so that they fight more bitterly, which is quite a dangerous position to take.

The pro-war sentiment is a little unfair of a comparison since this was the biggest attack on american soil in history and everyone was rallying behind the nation.

And I think the point is that with Bush at least the left knew that they had to fight. With Obama they assume he has similar interest but he often caves or even proposes legislation that cuts social safety nets and intrudes on civil and human rights. Meanwhile the left can place the blame on the right without fighting where responsibility lies, in part at least.

Search News
Release Dates
Best New Music
Submit News
Mobile Version
AP.net Logos
Encore Podcast
Free Music
Sports Forum
Technology Forum
Contact Us
Copyright Policy
Terms of Service
Privacy Policy
Twitter | Facebook | RSS
Encore Podcast on iTunes
Encore on Overcast
AP.net on Tumblr
Chorus.fm | @jason_tate