I think I figured out how to engage neocons on foreign policy debate

[Chester Copperpot]

So when discussing the GWOT with people who want to impeach obama and other typical neocon we all know that we get into head butting with those types over our foreign policy which for the most part these people feel is for pussies..

So when people started talking about how they want to kill these muslims or arrest a guy for stepping off a plane because hes some muslim priest or something I start out with a question: "Why are Americans scared of these people?"

And surprisingly the neoconned will engage in peaceful discourse.. This allows me to talk about the Constitutionality of declared wars.. .Issuing letters of marque and reprisal etc...


It allows me to come at it with a similar hard right angle like "If we had a declared war we could arrest these people as traitors" and then it allows discussion of how both Obama AND Bush dont declare wars because they dont really want the war to end etc.

im not saying its going to magically make people come over but it seems to remove that mental barrier that makes them argue and instead makes them think.



Give it a try and let me know if you meet with the same success..

[RJB]

I've been running into less of the hard core neocons in the last few years. The people I seem to run into are the ones who agree with the corruption of the MIC, no end in sight for this war that's breaking a generation of young men, etc., but then they drop the bomb, "...unfortunately, these wars are necessary." They say this just after they agreed with the all the reasons why it was unnecessary.

We need to do something that disables everybodies TV-- (said as a joke. I'm making no terrorist threat :) )

[otherone]

So when people started talking about how they want to kill these muslims or arrest a guy for stepping off a plane because hes some muslim priest or something I start out with a question: "Why are Americans scared of these people?"

And surprisingly the neoconned will engage in peaceful discourse..

These aren't neocons, strictly speaking, as liberals, paleos, etal respond the same way to "terrorism". They are xenophobes who believe it's the government's job to address "threats", whether real or imagined.

[mosquitobite]

Always bring it back to the fiscal side to win over conservatives. I do it with the war on drugs, the war on terror, the war on poverty... they get it when you explain it's like a giant toilet that we are flushing money down. And at some point, doesn't someone have to say "ok, that's enough"?

[acptulsa]

Always bring it back to the fiscal side to win over conservatives. I do it with the war on drugs, the war on terror, the war on poverty... they get it when you explain it's like a giant toilet that we are flushing money down. And at some point, doesn't someone have to say "ok, that's enough"?

And with this, you can take it to the next level. Isn't this war to make it possible to pump oil, or to grow poppies (which don't grow well anywhere but Afghanistan)? Was it necessary and principled for the banks to keep their profits from risky derivatives, but expect us to cover their losses? Is it right for companies to keep their profits from selling oil or pain killers, even as we cover their costs of doing business?