tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19209018.post114104537912769198..comments2024-03-28T14:32:19.334+00:00Comments on Who Would Have Believed The Singularity Would Be So Stupid?: When paleoconservatives crack, the disappointment of William F BuckleyPastoriushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03169561459129778670noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19209018.post-1141255611244040022006-03-01T23:26:00.000+00:002006-03-01T23:26:00.000+00:00Two items you need to address to make your argumen...Two items you need to address to make your argument convincing:<BR/>1) Carter's foriegn policy at time of Iranian revolution (good luck proving it followed the conservative ideals of Buckley). <BR/>2) Success of Taiwan, Chile, S. Korea in becoming democracies after passing through dictatorial rule.unaha-closphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11385104004764358415noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19209018.post-1141131007911111972006-02-28T12:50:00.000+00:002006-02-28T12:50:00.000+00:00Ah, we have a real paleo among us. Saddam, of cour...Ah, we have a real paleo among us. Saddam, of course, was a threat <I>by his very nature.</I> True, with better intel we could have contemplated a wider courses of strategies; but, it took only 200 fatalities to rid the world of Saddam and stop the Arab nuclear program (which had been moved to Libya.) <BR/><BR/>On the other hand, nations-building has cost 2000 fatalities so far and it has diverted our attention from the Iranian threat. As I said a few weeks ago, FDR wouldn’t have stopped the war after invading Italy to construct a model state. But that hints at my preference in limiting warfare to dealing with threats and establishing a deterrent.Jason Pappashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18233796281520274898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19209018.post-1141103546316183242006-02-28T05:12:00.000+00:002006-02-28T05:12:00.000+00:00What has bothered Buckley, as what has bothered ma...What has bothered Buckley, as what has bothered many conservatives that were a part of the Reagan revolution, is that this Iraq war was not necessary. They were not an imminent threat and the whole escapade was a diversion from the places that really needed our attention.<BR/><BR/>We all know that Iran and N. Korea were the more important threats. But I am not saying we needed to attack either of them. Why was there a need for a war in any of these named countries?<BR/><BR/>Paleo.Myra Langerhashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03819607941599513755noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19209018.post-1141089184373749732006-02-28T01:13:00.000+00:002006-02-28T01:13:00.000+00:00Buckley has rarely been on the side of nation-buil...Buckley has rarely been on the side of nation-building. The concept is not in his line, nor is it in mine. However, I want to see what more he's saying on this. I'm quite sure he'll be saying a lot more in the next print edition of National Review. He usually does. <BR/><BR/>Stogie-I may be comparatively young, and therefore not quite a "paleo-conservative" as my upbringing and age in which I grew up did not lend the same issues to my political thoughts. I do not, however, see how you would think that Buckley and his crowd (quite different IMHO than Buchanan, and especially Buhanan LATELEY, who seems to have blown a few fuses) would ever sell out Israel or have much in common with the left at all. <BR/><BR/>I need to read all of these comments a bit more. Buckley is causing quite a storm and I'm not sure what has gotten into him.Kiddohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05626502212185158978noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19209018.post-1141074604418787922006-02-27T21:10:00.000+00:002006-02-27T21:10:00.000+00:00I suspect that Buckley is hesitant to undertake na...I <I>suspect</I> that Buckley is hesitant to undertake nations-building except in isolated cases if even then. I'm sympathetic to such a modest posture but I also respect the more ambitious policy, shall we call it enlightened self-interest, that sees investing in a extensive rebuilding as an investment in long-term change for the better. I’d prefer a more modest policy of removing the regime that was a threat and sending a loud message (which obviously was loud enough to be hear in Libya) that threats will not be tolerated. <BR/><BR/>However, what worries me about Buckley is the way he is expressing his policy preference. Debating a policy change while under fire is always difficult. You want to make sure you’re just not overcome with or encouraging defeatism.<BR/><BR/>PS. Agreed about Lew & PatJason Pappashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18233796281520274898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19209018.post-1141071202481463282006-02-27T20:13:00.000+00:002006-02-27T20:13:00.000+00:00I agree that Buckley's latest assertion that "Iraq...I agree that Buckley's latest assertion that "Iraq is lost" did not sit well. However, he is not a paleoconservative, but more of a traditional conservative. The paleos (like Lew Rockwell and Pat Buchanan) are just plain nuts, IMHO. They would sell out Israel and often join forces with the Far Left.Stogiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05852841950131130696noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19209018.post-1141059808431338032006-02-27T17:03:00.000+00:002006-02-27T17:03:00.000+00:00Why has Buckley taken this position?Why has Buckley taken this position?Always On Watchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01216119321836479641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19209018.post-1141048538791341022006-02-27T13:55:00.000+00:002006-02-27T13:55:00.000+00:00Looks like one of my long-time idols has stopped "...Looks like one of my long-time idols has stopped "standing athwart history, yelling stop".Kiddohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05626502212185158978noreply@blogger.com