By Leaving Syria, Donald Trump Has Upset the World Order

Jump to Last Post 1-6 of 6 discussions (41 posts)
  1. My Esoteric profile image90
    My Esotericposted 2 months ago

    A comment I just read says it succinctly

    "By drawing down US forces in Syria to zero and Afghanistan to half, he has exposed his paltry grasp on what actually keeps Americans, their interests, and global stability on an even keel." - Nic Robertson

    1. PhoenixV profile image61
      PhoenixVposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      For months on various other social media, liberals have been predicting Trump would  probably start a war. Now we seem to be pulling out of Syria and Afghanistan. Darned if you do etc.

      1. My Esoteric profile image90
        My Esotericposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        The starting a war was because of accident coupled with incompetence.  Syria is an example of purposeful incompetence.  Liberals couldn't conceive of him doing something so stupid.

        But, because of Trump's unpredictability, he is a Darned if you do kind of guy.

        1. crankalicious profile image90
          crankaliciousposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          Liberals have been decrying our involvement in the Middle East and Afghanistan for years - doves, as it were. Conservatives are usually the ones wanting to send in the troops.

          Now, that's suddenly reversed? Liberals are attacking Trump for taking our troops out?

          This seems really weird to me. Explain.

          You know what the answer is: nobody has the slightest clue what to do in the Middle East and Afghanistan. NOT THE SLIGHTEST CLUE.

          Stay in or get out? Everyone seems to be rolling dice.

          1. My Esoteric profile image90
            My Esotericposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            What everybody understands except Trump and the Pauls, is that once there, you can't get out without seeding the field to your enemies.  Basically, he has given Putin and Iran carte blanche to do what ever they want in the oil rich cross-roads of the world.

            He also gave thousands of our allies, the Kurds, their death warrant.

            1. crankalicious profile image90
              crankaliciousposted 2 months agoin reply to this

              I don't disagree with that strategic assessment. What I am trying to address is the normal position of liberals, usually referred to as doves, who advocate for disengagement and resisting the urge to police the world, and hawks - conservatives, - who usually advocate for sending our troops into these situations.

              Those position now seem reversed. Rather than sticking to an ideology, many seem to be arguing for their position out of political expediency.

              1. PrettyPanther profile image84
                PrettyPantherposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                I am a liberal but would not consider myself a "dove."  For example, I supported the invasion of Afghanistan after 9/11, but not the invasion of Iraq.  I believe armed conflict is, sadly, sometimes a necessity in this world.  I would like to see us pull out of some of these countries, but I expect us to do it intelligently and with proper preparation and forethought in cooperation with other countries.  All that said, I realize I am woefully under informed compared to those in our government whose job it is to be immersed in the details and subtle nuances of these situations.  Where I have a problem right now is I don't believe Donald Trump has immersed himself in the details and subtle nuances of these situations.  Nothing about him or his conduct leads me to believe he has made these decisions with proper knowledge and forethought.  That wouldn't be a problem, if he were following the recommendations of those who ARE immersed in the details and subtle nuances, but it is obvious he isn't doing that, either.

                It is truly scary having this ill-tempered, uninformed, and arrogant man making foreign policy decisions.

                1. crankalicious profile image90
                  crankaliciousposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                  I agree with everything you said, but it's interesting that conservatives have been making the argument for years that the generals are the best informed people who should be making these decisions, often arguing against liberals who want us to stop sending troops all over the place.

                  Now the liberals are saying we should listen to the generals and the conservatives (not all of them, but a lot of them) are arguing for withdrawing.

                  1. PrettyPanther profile image84
                    PrettyPantherposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                    Yes, well, I believe most people are logical and rational about their positions.  Dubya said he was listening to his generals, but he went through a few of them before his found one who agreed with Cheney/Rumsfeld foreign policy. 

                    Trump supporters have already shown they will turn on a dime to support their man.  Getting along with Putin is now more important than getting along with our allies.  They no longer care about adultery.  Corruption is A-okay, too.  And, you know, Hillary is a criminal even though she's never been brought up on charges while Donald is innocent until proven guilty in  a court of law.

                    I'm really not surprised that they're suddenly in favor of withdrawing troops against the recommendations of pretty much everyone except their dear leader,  The depths of their loyalty has shown no bounds.  Why start now?

                    [Sorry, I really have lost faith in this segment of the population.]

              2. My Esoteric profile image90
                My Esotericposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                If you look back in history, it is the left-side that digs America out the economic hole the right-side put us in.

                Conversely, it is the right-side that has pulled America out of armed conflicts.

                Ironic and counter-intuitive, but nevertheless true.

                1. MizBejabbers profile image91
                  MizBejabbersposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                  Checks and balances, My Esoteric, checks and balances. The pendulum swings both ways. We have been in a conservative swing now, but it is about to swing back the other way.

    2. Onusonus profile image77
      Onusonusposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/49044784_1001867316685970_7347354141850599424_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&_nc_ht=scontent-sea1-1.xx&oh=a0a640af2b155d8b15eefb838fe0449a&oe=5CD2D131

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image79
        Kathryn L Hillposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        lol

  2. JAKE Earthshine profile image79
    JAKE Earthshineposted 2 months ago

    https://hubstatic.com/14340626.png

    Yeah, he sure looks like a well 72 year old doesn't he ??

    The RECIPE for World War 3: Bozo Trump is withdrawing our troops in a reckless, insane manner without notice to OUR Own Defense Department or our allies, without a plan and given his propensity to publicly appease dictators, he could conceivably be doing it at the direction of Vladimir Putin which will only embolden Russia. Syria, Iran and China and leave poor Israel in an extremely vulnerable situation: INSANITY:

  3. PhoenixV profile image61
    PhoenixVposted 2 months ago

    No need for woe and despair. I believe Israel was delivering air strikes on Christmas, to fulfill any Christmas carnage desires. And... The "World Order"; a new coat of paint, a lil duct tape, some tinsel and trimming, will be good as new.

    1. JAKE Earthshine profile image79
      JAKE Earthshineposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      That's not what General Mattis seems to think, he just resigned in protest to this woefully inept, lunatic perched in our oval office who seems to find great pleasure in appeasing our enemies and disrespecting our allies right on global television for the entire world to witness:

      Talk about your betrayals of the nations trust: The good news is our court system seems to still be in working order so far and that spells legal nightmare and inevitable DOOM for the Trumps:

      1. PhoenixV profile image61
        PhoenixVposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        Yes, thankfully we still have justice. Where the accused ("Trumps" ie Trump and anyone else with the last name Trump) are afforded a fair and impartial trial before their "inevitable doom".

        1. JAKE Earthshine profile image79
          JAKE Earthshineposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          If there ever was a definitive case to 'waive' and or 'suspend' due process and imprison the defendants immediately in the name of saving what's left of this country it's right here, right now with the Trump's:

          I've NEVER seen such a mountain of damning public evidence in my life which means there is even another gigantic treasure trove of damning evidence being unearthed by the criminal investigations into the Trump campaign and his business practices:

          He's already considered an un-indicted co-conspirator in one criminal case and the NY Attorney General has said she and prosecutors have uncovered a "Shocking Pattern of Illegality" within his soon to be defunct Trump Foundation, abominable unholy acts for which he and his children will be sentenced to the devils underground when they depart this planet:

          Lock em' Up NOW, before it's too late, just like his close partners in crime:

  4. Kathryn L Hill profile image79
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 months ago

    We were checking ISIS. And we were successful. Why is no one else stepping up to the plate to maintain what we accomplished? We can't stay there forever!

    1. MizBejabbers profile image91
      MizBejabbersposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      "Checking ISIS?" ISIS is not defeated yet. That is a conundrum that George Bush got us into. As soon as we leave, ISIS will be back with a vengeance. We should never have gone there in the first place. Trump criticized Obama for pulling troops out of Iraq and claimed that by doing so, Obama "founded ISIS." Now the same accusation is being made at Trump, and not just by Democrats. Here's what Fox News has to say:


      https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics … ar-BBRgd6j

    2. Ken Burgess profile image91
      Ken Burgessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      The reality of what Syria is about can be summed up in oil & gas pipelines and EU dependency on foreign oil and NG.

      If the EU wants pipelines through Syria that badly, or more to the point international oil&gas corporations, perhaps they should negotiate with Syria about it... oh, that's right, Syria is a close ally of Russia.

      And who is the EU most dependent on for piped in Oil and NG... I believe it is Russia.  So, perhaps Syria wasn't overly interested in having pipelines go through, because that would harm the relationship it has with Russia?

      As for ISIS, we (as in America through military and CIA actions) enabled and equipped ISIS (aka ISIL) to come into existence.  Our failed efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, our arming of rebels in Syria, etc.

      This would not likely be the case if we had dealt with Iran which funds and supports such terrorists and extremists, this is the root of the conflicts in the Middle East, and has been since we allowed the radical religious leader  Ayatollah Khomeini overthrow the Shaw back in 1979.

      The entire region has been embroiled in conflict ever since, and when we took out Saddam Hussein we left a vacuum in place of a dictatorship that kept a lid on that religious fanaticism from sweeping over the entire region.  Of course, there is the fact that MI companies have made billions, if not trillions, off of these conflicts.

      Anyways, the point being since we don't need those pipelines, and we don't need oil from that region (we have our own, and allies like Saudi Arabia after all) then why don't we let the EU go fight those battles and secure their source of oil and gas for themselves?

      Just so long as you understand that this is not about people in those countries being free, or better off... obviously people in Syria and Libya are far worse of now than before we interfered. 

      We are ruthlessly inflicting immense horror and tragedy on tens of millions of people, destroying their cities and homes and societies, for the sake of the EU getting oil and gas, if you understand and accept that, then your opinion may be valid.

      1. My Esoteric profile image90
        My Esotericposted 2 months agoin reply to this

        You are the first where I have heard about the pipeline connection.  What is your source?

        You are right and wrong about ISIS.  You are right that Bush left a vacuum for them to grow in, but wrong about everything else you said.

        Iran is NOT the root of the Middle East conflicts, it is the fight between the two factions of Islam.  Just like in Ireland, the war there was between Christian factions.

        I assume your "dealing with" Iran is going to war with them and conquering their territory.  Otherwise you are left with hated diplomacy which was working, to some degree, until Trump upset the apple cart and sent us back 20 years.

        Let EU fight those battles?? Because ISIS, if given the platform, which Trump is now doing, has America in its sites.  Just like al Qeada will when Trump gives back Afghanistan to the them.

        Your last paragraph is just plain stupid.

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

          "Iran is NOT the root of the Middle East conflicts, it is the fight between the two factions of Islam.  Just like in Ireland, the war there was between Christian factions."

          You are correct in that it is two religious factions fighting.  But "just like"?  I don't think so.  I don't have any recall where either the Catholics or Protestants taught their children that killing anyone not of their faction would put them in heaven.  I have no recollection of either side using children as cannon fodder in their wars.  And I have no remembrance of either side making open statements that the rest of the world either join their faction, observing their rules, or die under the sword.

          There is very little to compare here, unless you choose to go back a thousand years or more and compare Christianity then to radical Islamists now.  If you do that, they are much the same, but not when comparing the conflict in Ireland to the middle east extremists today.

          1. My Esoteric profile image90
            My Esotericposted 2 months agoin reply to this

            You need to go back and read your Christian history.  Christians are no better than Islam in that regard.

            I also refer you to

            Pre-Reformation wars:
            The Hussite Wars (1419–1434) in the Lands of the Bohemian Crown
            Conflicts immediately connected with the Reformation of the 1520s to 1540s:
            The Knights' Revolt (1522–1523) in the Holy Roman Empire[11]
            The German Peasants' War (1524–1526) in the Holy Roman Empire[11]
            The Wars of Kappel (1529–1531) in the Old Swiss Confederacy[12]
            The Tudor conquest of Ireland (1529–1603) on the Catholic population of Ireland by the Tudor kings of England and their Protestant allies
            The Kildare Rebellion (1534–1535)
            The First Desmond Rebellion (1569–1573)
            The Second Desmond Rebellion (1579–1583)
            The Nine Years' War (1593–1603)
            The Münster rebellion (1534–1535) in the Prince-Bishopric of Münster
            The Count's Feud (1534–1536) in the Kalmar Union (Denmark and Norway)
            The Anabaptist riot (1535) in Amsterdam[13]
            Bigod's rebellion (1537) in England
            The Schmalkaldic War (1546–1547) in the Holy Roman Empire[11]
            The Prayer Book Rebellion (1549) in England
            The Second Schmalkaldic War or Princes' Revolt (1552–1555)[12]
            The French Wars of Religion (1562–1598) in France[1][12]
            The Eighty Years' War (1566/68–1648) in the Low Countries[1][12]
            The Cologne War (1583–1588) in the Electorate of Cologne
            The Strasbourg Bishops' War (1592–1604) in the Prince-Bishopric of Strasbourg
            The War against Sigismund (1598–1599) in the Polish–Swedish union
            The War of the Jülich Succession (1609–10, 1614) in the United Duchies of Jülich-Cleves-Berg[14]
            The Thirty Years' War (1618–1648), affecting the Holy Roman Empire including Habsburg Austria and Bohemia and Moravia, France, Denmark and Sweden[1][12]
            Bohemian Revolt (1618–1620) between the Protestant nobility of the Bohemian Crown and their Catholic Habsburg king. This revolt started the Thirty Years' War, causing additional conflicts elsewhere in Europe, and subsuming other already ongoing conflicts.
            Hessian War (1567–1648) between the Lutheran Landgraviate of Hesse-Darmstadt (member of the Catholic League) and the Calvinist Landgraviate of Hesse-Kassel (member of the Protestant Union)
            The Huguenot rebellions (1621–1629) in France[1]
            The Wars of the Three Kingdoms (1639–1651), affecting England, Scotland and Ireland[1]
            Bishops' Wars (1639–1640)
            English Civil War (1642–1651)
            Scotland in the Wars of the Three Kingdoms (1644–1651)
            Irish Confederate Wars (1641–1653) and the Cromwellian conquest of Ireland (1649–1653)[15]
            The post-Westphalian wars:[2]
            The Savoyard-Waldensian Wars (1655–1690) beginning with the Piedmontese Easter (Pasque piemontesi) of April 1655[5][16] in the Duchy of Savoy
            The First War of Villmergen (1656) in the Old Swiss Confederacy[17][15]
            The Second Anglo-Dutch War (1665–1667) between England and the Dutch Republic[15]
            The Nine Years' War (1688–1697)[2]
            The Glorious Revolution (1688–1689)[2]
            The Williamite War in Ireland (1688–1691)[2]
            The Jacobite rising of 1689 in Scotland saw Roman Catholics and Anglican Tories supporting the deposed Catholic king James Stuart take up arms against the newly enthroned Calvinist William of Orange and his Presbyterian Covenanter allies; the religious component may be regarded as secondary to the dynastic factor, however.[18]
            The War of the Spanish Succession (1701–1714) across Europe had a strong religious component[2]
            The War in the Cevennes (1702–1710) in France[15]
            The Second War of Villmergen or Toggenburg War (1712) in the Old Swiss Confederacy[17][15]

            And then there is the Christian religeous persecution in England that led to America being created.  As well as the ongoing war in Northern Ireland, albeit in remission at the moment.

            And please don't talk to me about how only Islam is morally corrupt.  Christianity took that mantel long before there ever was an Islam.  The atrocities committed by Christians in the name of their God is long and continuing.

            And then there is:

            - In the years 1942-1943 also in Croatia existed numerous extermination camps, run by Catholic Ustasha under their dictator Ante Paveliç, a practicing Catholic and regular visitor to the then pope. There were even concentration camps exclusively for children! Mass murder was performed here.

            - 1. As soon as Christianity became legal in the Roman Empire by imperial edict (315), more and more pagan temples were destroyed by Christian mob. Pagan priests were killed.
            2. Pagan services became punishable by death in 356.
            3. In 6th century pagans were declared void of all rights.
            4. Pagan slaughter followed numerous years passed this!

            - 1.In the early fourth century the philosopher Sopatros was executed on demand of Christian authorities.
            2.The world famous female philosopher Hypatia of Alexandria was torn to pieces with glass fragments by a hysterical Christian mob
            3.Emperor Karl (Charlemagne) in 782 had 4500 Saxons, unwilling to convert to Christianity, beheaded.
            4.John Huss, a critic of papal infallibility and indulgences, was burned at the stake in 1415.
            5.Michael Sattler, leader of a baptist community, was burned at the stake in Rottenburg, Germany, May 20, 1527. Several days later his wife and other follwers were also executed.
            And that's just 5...
            - 1.Peasants of Steding (Germany) unwilling to pay suffocating church taxes: between 5,000 and 11,000 men, women and children slain 5/27/1234 near Altenesch/Germany.
            2.15th century Poland: 1019 churches and 17987 villages plundered by Knights of the Order. Number of victims unknown.
            3.First Crusade: 1095 on command of pope Urban II. [WW11-41]
            Semlin/Hungary 6/24/96 thousands slain. Wieselburg/Hungary 6/12/96 thousands. [WW23]
            9/9/96-9/26/96 Nikaia, Xerigordon (then Turkish), thousands respectively. [WW25-27]
            Until January 1098 a total of 40 capital cities and 200 castles conquered (number of slain unknown) [WW30]
            Christianchronicler Eckehard of Aura noted that "even the following summer in all of Palestine the air was polluted by the stench of decomposition". One million victims of the first crusade alone.
            4.After 6/3/98 Antiochia (then Turkish) conquered, between 10,000 and 60,000 slain. 6/28/98 100,000 Turks (incl. women and children) killed.
            5.Marra (Maraat an-numan) 12/11/98 thousands killed. Because of the subsequent famine "the already stinking corpses of the enemies were eaten by the Christians" said chronicler Albert Aquensis.
            6.Jerusalem conquered 7/15/1099 more than 60,000 victims (Jewish, Muslim, men, women, children).
            7.Battle of Askalon, 8/12/1099. 200,000 heathens slaughtered "in the name of Our Lord Jesus Christ".
            8.Fourth crusade: 4/12/1204 Constantinople sacked, number of victims unknown, numerous thousands, many of them Christian. [WW141-148]
            Rest of Crusades in less detail: until the fall of Akkon 1291 probably 20 million victims (in the Holy land and Arab/Turkish areas alone). [WW224]
            9.Manichaean heresy: a crypto-Christian sect decent enough to practice birth control (and thus not as irresponsible as faithful Catholics) was exterminated in huge campaigns all over the Roman empire between 372 C.E. and 444 C.E. Numerous thousands of victims.
            10.Albigensians: the first Crusade intended to slay other Christians. [DO29]
            The Albigensians (Cathars) viewed themselves as good Christians, but would not accept Roman Catholic rule, and taxes, and prohibition of birth control. [NC]
            Begin of violence: on command of pope Innocent III (the greatest single mass murderer prior to the Nazi era) in 1209. Beziérs (today France) 7/22/1209 destroyed, all the inhabitants were slaughtered. Number of victims (including Catholics refusing to turn over their heretic
            neighbors and friends) estimated between 20,000-70,000. [WW179-181]
            Carcassonne 8/15/1209, thousands slain. Other cities followed. [WW181]
            And that's just 10....
            - 1.16th and 17th century Ireland. English troops "pacified and civilized" Ireland, where only Gaelic "wild Irish", "unreasonable beasts lived without any knowledge of God or good manners, in common of their goods, cattle, women, children and every other thing." One of the more successful soldiers, a certain Humphrey Gilbert, half-brother of Sir Walter Raleigh, ordered that "the heddes of all those (of what sort soever thei were) which were killed in the daie, should be cutte off from their bodies... and should bee laied on the ground by eche side of the waie", which effort to civilize the Irish indeed caused "greate terrour to the people when thei sawe the heddes of their dedde fathers, brothers, children, kinsfolke, and freinds on the grounde".
            Tens of thousands of Gaelic Irish fell victim to the carnage.
            2.Crusades Eye Witness Reports...
            In the words of one witness: "there [in front of Solomon's temple] was such a carnage that our people were wading ankle-deep in the blood of our foes", and after that "happily and crying for joy our people marched to our Saviour's tomb, to honour it and to pay off our debt of gratitude."
            The Archbishop of Tyre, eye-witness, wrote: "It was impossible to look upon the vast numbers of the slain without horror; everywhere lay fragments of human bodies, and the very ground was covered with the blood of the slain. It was not alone the spectacle of headless bodies and mutilated limbs strewn in all directions that roused the horror of all who looked upon them. Still more dreadful was it to gaze upon the victors themselves, dripping with blood from head to foot, an ominous sight which brought terror to all who met them. It is reported that within the Temple enclosure alone about ten thousand infidels perished."
            Christian chronicler Eckehard of Aura noted that "even the following summer in all of Palestine the air was polluted by the stench of decomposition".
            One million victims of the first crusade alone.

            GRANTED - all this is old, but it is nevertheless Christian history.  Did you know the last inquisition execution was in 1826 where a school teacher was garroted.  In Spain, the inquisition ended in 1834, not that long ago.  In Italy, it is still legal; but they changed the name to Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

            Yep, Islam is really bad, isn't it>

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

              All of this says says pretty much what I said.  Christian evil may have existed a little closer to modern times than 1,000 years, but it (mostly) ended a long time ago.  Islam radicals, on the other hand, just now seem to be really cranking up.  My fault; I tend to view the middle ages as ancient history and it really is not.  And certainly the 1800's are not as long ago as I view them as being.

              That's not a blow at Islam, for I actually believe that the typical "Muslim in the street" is a reasonable person, not wanting to force much of anything outside of their own neighborhood, and even then not happy with anything even approaching the force and tactics of the radicals.

              1. My Esoteric profile image90
                My Esotericposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                My point is, a zebra doesn't change its stripes.  That kind of behavior is embedding in Christianity.  It may be dormant now, but when will it erupt again?  I have no doubt it will.

                1. wilderness profile image95
                  wildernessposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                  Guess I have a little more faith in mankind.  There will always be those whose ego makes them superior to others, there will always be those that demand control over others.

                  But I see man as a slowly developing creature, forever reaching for the high ground and forever, as a species, improving there.

                  So yes, a zebra CAN change it's stripes.

                  1. My Esoteric profile image90
                    My Esotericposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                    "But I see man as a slowly developing creature, forever reaching for the high ground and forever, as a species, improving there." - unfortunately, Wilderness, conservative theory does not allow for that evolution to where everyone has the same expectation to equal treatment as any other person.

                    For example, under conservative theory, women will never be allowed to have the same rights as men.  Why, because, according Kirk, it is "natural" that there be superiors and inferiors in society.  That is why I reject conservatism out of hand.

                2. Onusonus profile image77
                  Onusonusposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                  It's so ridiculous to compare Christians from 400 years ago to people today. Islamists have just as many horrors in their history, and they continue into our time. Try having a look at the amount of violence committed in the name of Allah over the last 20 years. I guarantee no sane person shouts out the name of Jesus before blowing themselves up and killing everyone around them.
                  Also you are wrong about the so called radical minority of Islam. According to 2016 Pugh research statistics there are over 600 million Muslims who hold radical views, which include favorable views of Bin Laden, and terrorist organisations such as Al Queda, Hamas, and the Taliban, support strict Sharia Law, believe honor killings of women and suicide bombings can sometimes be justified, and are in favor of attacks on Israel.
                  What do Christians have? The West Boro Baptists? A group that nobody holds favorable views towards.

                  There is literally no comparison.

                  1. My Esoteric profile image90
                    My Esotericposted 2 months agoin reply to this

                    It's too bad you have forgotten the maxim which goes something like "if you refuse to study history, you WILL repeat its mistakes."  And it seems like conservatives forget (worse, reject) the lessons of history.

                    As to your Pugh research, they claim they made no such claim.  Please provide the link (or are you quoting another Trump lie.)

                    Fundamentalist religions by their very nature, commit atrocities against mankind.  It is sort of like death and taxes.  Give fundamentalist Christians enough time, they will murdering men, women, and children again.

  5. Kathryn L Hill profile image79
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 months ago

    ... again I ask how does conservatism deny equal rights for women?

    If they do not get paid as much as men, whose fault is that?
    Women can demand fair wages.

    The people can rectify the situation, as the people have the power when they bother to take it.

    Yes, equal pay (to men) is being fought by women. Who else?

    Yes, we need to fight harder.

    And demand more maternity-leave time.

    (And if an employer doesn't allow his or her valued female employee to leave for at least six months, (as in Europe,) well, maybe she should have thought twice about getting pregnant.)

    1. My Esoteric profile image90
      My Esotericposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      And once again, conservative principles do not deny it, but they don't encourage it either.  In fact, if it exists, they encourage its continuance.  Since placing women below men had been a tradition, custom, etc for eons, conservatives don't want to change something that works.

      "Conservatives are champions of custom, convention, and continuity because they prefer the devil they know to the devil they don’t know. Order and justice and freedom, they believe, are the artificial products of a long social experience, the result of centuries of trial and reflection and sacrifice."

      "Therefore conservatives very often emphasize the importance of prescription—that is, of things established by immemorial usage, so that the mind of man runneth not to the contrary. There exist rights of which the chief sanction is their antiquity—including rights to property, often. Similarly, our morals are prescriptive in great part. Conservatives argue that we are unlikely, we moderns, to make any brave new discoveries in morals or politics or taste. It is perilous to weigh every passing issue on the basis of private judgment and private rationality. The individual is foolish, but the species is wise, Burke declared. In politics we do well to abide by precedent and precept and even prejudice, for the great mysterious incorporation of the human race has acquired a prescriptive wisdom far greater than any man’s petty private rationality."

      "They [Conservatives] feel affection for the proliferating intricacy of long-established social institutions and modes of life, as distinguished from the narrowing uniformity and deadening egalitarianism of radical systems. For the preservation of a healthy diversity in any civilization, there must survive orders and classes, differences in material condition, and many sorts of inequality. " - If slavery exists for a long time, it must be good and shouldn't be changed.  If inequality between men and women exists for a long time, it must be good and shouldn't be changed.

      "To seek for utopia is to end in disaster, " - So why even try?

      And then goes on to say "All that we reasonably can expect is a tolerably ordered, just, and free society, in which some evils, maladjustments, and suffering will continue to lurk. By proper attention to prudent reform, we may preserve and improve this tolerable order. But if the old institutional and moral safeguards of a nation are neglected, then the anarchic impulse in humankind breaks loose:" - This is the first place Kirk makes any reference of trying to fix bad things.  But it has a strict governor on it - Prudence.

      Kirk's 10th principle is dedicated to progress with a small 'p'.  In it, he admits a little progress is needed to keep the body fresh.  But, only a little and very slowly.  It is here, in a defeatist sort of way he says "When a society is progressing in some respects, usually it is declining in other respects. "  - Why, I ask, must that be so?

      You wrote - "well, maybe she should have thought twice about getting pregnant.)"  - So a woman doing what is necessary to propagate the species is to be punished for doing so???  To put it another way, in order to propagate the species, a woman must lose her job (which also contributes to the betterment of society as a whole.) if she has one - interesting perspective, that.

  6. Kathryn L Hill profile image79
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 months ago

    According to Esoteric:

    A. Conservatism: "The only time rights are equal are at birth and at death, but not in between." HUH?
     
    B. Liberalism: "Everybody should have equal rights at all times." In what way is this true?

    C. "When have women ever had equal rights as men? You come closer and closer to it with each push of the progressives, while conservatives try to diminish it through laws and judicial rulings." Perhaps you could enlighten us with examples.


    The ACTUAL liberal view in regards to equality:
    "Everybody should have equal rights at all times ..."  with certain exceptions:

    Citizens who own guns.
    Religious business owners.
    Religious schools.
    Hard working citizens who have the right to keep the money they earn.
    Well-educated descendants of the Saxons applying to institutes of higher learning across the country.
    Pro-lifers.
    Hard working successful moral, law abiding citizens.

    1. My Esoteric profile image90
      My Esotericposted 2 months agoin reply to this

      A. Kirk says "The only true forms of equality are equality at the Last Judgment and equality before a just court of law"  (I guess I was wrong about saying people of equal rights at birth; I guess they don't.

      B. Have you read the Declaration of Independence or Constitution lately?

      C.  Example, the 19th Amendment which Conservatives fought tooth and nail in trying to prevent it from happening.

      Citizens who own guns. - Liberal philosophy does not prevent this

      Religious business owners. - Liberal philosophy does not prevent this, in fact it encourages it.  What liberal philosophy does not encourage is taking away somebody else's rights in the name of religion.

      Religious schools. - Liberal philosophy does not oppose this, it encourages it through free expression of liberty

      Hard working citizens who have the right to keep the money they earn. - Liberal philosophy doesn't say they can't.

      Well-educated descendants of the Saxons applying to institutes of higher learning across the country. - Liberal philosophy doesn't oppose this either.  What they oppose is denying non-Saxons the right to apply to schools of higher learning based on the fact they are non-Saxons.

      Pro-lifers. - Liberal philosophy does not oppose this belief.  What liberals oppose is foisting your personal belief on someone else.

      Hard working successful moral, law abiding citizens. - Liberal philosophy whole-heartedly encourages this as well.

      It is clear from your list is that you have been done in by conservative propaganda.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)