Quote Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
Damn...

This should be a different thread, but I'm running out of time. Last post for the night.

I am wrong in that Palin mentioned foreign trade relations and dignitaries before that part of the interview. Chew on this article for a bit. I'll me back in the morning.

ABC News Edited Out Key Parts of Sarah Palin Interview
I read through it. They didn't edit out "key" portions of it.

They edited out the extraneous non-answers of the kind politicians are so often prone to give. You know, where you ask them about topic A, and they ignore it, spew some pre-packaged talking point.

Nothing they cut made her seem more "knowledgeable", and it was obviously done to save airtime and preseve context.

More fabricated bull about how "biased" the "liberal media is".

If you believe a website with the banner "exposing & combatting liberal media bias" is actually going to give you an unbiased take on anything, you are not looking at the material in that article in the correct context.

Given that critical thinking is not your strong point, I will hold your hand and show you exactly how.

The part ABC edited out, is in italics, and that is what the website took issue with.

GIBSON: And under the NATO treaty, wouldn’t we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?

PALIN: Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you’re going to be expected to be called upon and help.

But NATO, I think, should include Ukraine, definitely, at this point and I think that we need to — especially with new leadership coming in on January 20, being sworn on, on either ticket, we have got to make sure that we strengthen our allies, our ties with each one of those NATO members.

We have got to make sure that that is the group that can be counted upon to defend one another in a very dangerous world today.

GIBSON: And you think it would be worth it to the United States, Georgia is worth it to the United States to go to war if Russia were to invade.

PALIN: What I think is that smaller democratic countries that are invaded by a larger power is something for us to be vigilant against. We have got to be cognizant of what the consequences are if a larger power is able to take over smaller democratic countries.

And we have got to be vigilant. We have got to show the support, in this case, for Georgia. The support that we can show is economic sanctions perhaps against Russia, if this is what it leads to.

It doesn’t have to lead to war and it doesn’t have to lead, as I said, to a Cold War, but economic sanctions, diplomatic pressure, again, counting on our allies to help us do that in this mission of keeping our eye on Russia and Putin and some of his desire to control and to control much more than smaller democratic countries.

His mission, if it is to control energy supplies, also, coming from and through Russia, that’s a dangerous position for our world to be in, if we were to allow that to happen.
Her answer, was in essence, a super-long "maybe".

"it doesn't have to lead to war" generally implies "but it might". Again, a "maybe"

The fact that she very carefully doesn't say "no", fully implies that she would be willing to go to war if it came to that.

Is that or is that not a reasonable conclusion?