The following is a Facebook conversation between two of my buddies, the first of whom has some very elucidating views about foreign policy (see if you can spot all the fallacies!):
First Friend: "The drone strikes in Pakistan are a reason not to support Obama? Yea, it sucks to live in North Waziristan but the US President has an obligation to put the highest priority on protecting American's lives. The Pakistani government created this mess because they can't control their own country while at the same time refusing to let anyone else do something about the extremists using their country as a safe haven (Osama). The drone strikes are a compromise between allowing the extremists who attack Ameicans in Afghanistan to operate freely and not completely destroying ties between the US and Pakistani governments by directly sending in US troops"
Other Friend "Terrorism can't be defeated. Bothering people in their own land, killing civilians, just perpetuates the infinite cycle of pissing people off and creating more terrorists. With all the money we spend on defense we should be able to protect America without even having to leave our own turf. Our soldiers shouldn't be in Afghanistan to begin with."
First Friend "Our involvement in the Mid East is a whole nother issue with which I agree with what you're saying but Obama didn't get the US into the shit storm over there on his own. Maybe you can say extremism can't be defeated but violent terrorism can to an extent. I mean after 9/11 who would have been optimistic enough to predict that not a single other American would die inside the US because of Islamic terrorism? So obviously something the US is doing is working in regards to this."
Well, if its ony thing the state is rather good at, is
Lots and lots of killing.
“Since people are concerned that ‘X’ will not be provided, ‘X’ will naturally be provided by those who are concerned by its absence.""The sweetest of minds can harbor the harshest of men.”
Find new friends.
Other Friend did a good job debating First Friend. Post the rest of the convo.
"I mean after 9/11 who would have been optimistic enough to predict that not a single other American would die inside the US because of Islamic terrorism? So obviously something the US is doing is working in regards to this."
Remember everyone, the shooting at Ft. Hood was "workplace violence."
First Friend: I know the guy in the article [http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/why-i-refuse-to-vote-for-barack-obama/262861/] says he doesn't want to choose between the lesser of two evils but if that's your stance about US involvement in the Mid East then you definitely have to go with Obama over Romney because Romney is way more hawkish on Iran.
Other Friend: *Presumably sighs, begins to type a response, then just flat out gives up on the conversation and makes a sandwich instead*