Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 106
  1. #61  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    11,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Molon Labe View Post
    No one said he didn't try. That's what liberals say..."At least we are trying". Well boo hoo.
    Is that how you measure what's right? FDR tried and he was a total idiot. It's not my constitution party...it's just I'm not voting for a liberal shithead like McCain just because he has a R by his name. I vote for "conservatives".
    The problem is when they "try", they tend to make us more dependant on government and continue to do stupid shit like pass the "Patriot act" and invade the wrong country. You'd probably vote for Joe Lieberman if he had an R by his name....
    Yep... you would.

    Tell me again why we weren't attacked for 8 1/2 years between the first and second WTC bombings? Did you have your head in the sand back then?

    What you can't get through your skull is that all the signs and flashing red lights were on from 1993 to 2001 and no on paid attention. It was a failure to listen to the right people like Scheuer who was waving his hands back in 1999 for someone to pay attention to Bin Laden.
    You need to read NewsBusters.org then you might understand the war on terror a little bit better. What you can not get thru your skull is that I am not interested in the past. I am interested in the future. I don't care about non issues like Liberman; Palin is the VP. So go blow smoke elsewhere. As far as the war and invading other countries, I am against it. Do you understand? McCain is not a conservative but he will do a hell of a lot better job of protecting this country than Obama. That is my #1 concern above all others including the Patriot Act.
    Last edited by lacarnut; 09-19-2008 at 01:56 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #62  
    Senior Member LogansPapa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Surf City, USA
    Posts
    3,782
    Quote Originally Posted by Molon Labe View Post
    That reminds me of someone that thinks because the rooster crows in the morning it makes the sun rise.
    Reminds me of the large power boat that drove full speed over a local bait barge in the middle of the night at about 30 knots here in Long Beach harbor recently. The 40-footer hit the 20 x 100 foot barge - a known navigational hazard since the late 1950’s, at full throttle, "Because the bait operator’s white nav-lite wasn’t operational."

    Night time - inside the harbor - full throttle and three separate law enforcement agencies patrol the harbor and nobody, not a single set of eyeballs saw this complete asshole barrelling through their jurisdiction.

    Save that bullshit about us being more secure because of George W. Bush for somebody in Iowa that hasn’t already been to The Big Rodeo.
    At Coretta Scott King's funeral in early 2006, Ethel Kennedy, the widow of Robert Kennedy, leaned over to him and whispered, "The torch is being passed to you." "A chill went up my spine," Obama told an aide. (Newsweek)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #63  
    gator
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by lacarnut View Post
    I understand that Americans get tired of war after 3 or 4 years. It is time to end it. On one hand Bush screwed up by not ending it quickly. On the other hand, we have not been attacked on our own soil in 7 1/2 years. This did not happen by accident. If we had not killed a bunch of the bad guys and done nothing like weakling Democrats, I believe we would have been attack again. I also believe if Obama is elected Prez, we will have a terrorist attack within 2 years on our soil. You see, my number one concern is that I or my fellow Americans do not get their asses blown up. That is why I am voting for McCain. Everything like the budget, abortion, gun rights is secondary if you are dead.

    After so many years, it does not look like their will be justice for the crew-members of the USS Liberty. BTW, neocons not caring about dead soldier is not hyperbole or exaggeration; it is mentally retarded statement.

    The thing that is missing in your little equation is that there never would have been a war on terror had we not been involved in Middle East politics in the first place.

    40 years ago we chose sides in a war that had nothing to do with our own security. We armed and supported a brutal apartheid government with a record of state sponsored terrorism. Probably the most stupid foreign policy decision ever made by the United States. The war on terror is a consequence of that stupid decision. The NeoCons won't admit it because to do so would put the blame on their shoulders so they talk about “Islamic Fascism” and other bullshit like that. They ignored all the warnings the Arabs gave us to stay out of their business. Warnings like the oil embargo of the 1970s.

    If we are going to be dumb and arm one side against another then he had better be prepared to suffer the consequences. 9/11 was the consequence of a foreign entanglement that had nothing to do with our own security. The Marines in Beirut, the men of the USS Cole, the thousands of people killed on 911 and the thousands of brave American Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines that died in Iraq and Afghanistan paid the price for American interventionism in something that had nothing to do with our own security. It is really sad when you think about it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #64  
    Senior Member Molon Labe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Jihad Me At Hello
    Posts
    4,772
    Quote Originally Posted by lacarnut View Post
    You need to read newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2008/08/21
    Thanks..I'll check it out but...sorry I can't relate. I don't read the MSM especially the liberal media.
    I'm not worried about getting duped by liberal bias. See..I'm a former and recovering Neocon..so I know the walk and talk, and secret handshake and all that jazz. I also understand the Neoconservatism is "liberal" and that's embarassing to say I was sucked into a liberal philosophy.

    I'll check out your sight and then you can check out some conservative sights I have that don't drink the Koolaide of Foxnew, CNN, and Sean Hannity. I also have some that take care of the b.s. of ALL media...cause it's ALL bias.

    http://www.factcheck.org/

    http://www.takimag.com/

    http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/

    http://www.amconmag.com/

    http://www.cato.org/
    Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound - Unknown


    The problem is Empty People, Not Loaded Guns - Linda Schrock Taylor
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #65  
    Senior Member LogansPapa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Surf City, USA
    Posts
    3,782
    Quote Originally Posted by gator View Post
    The thing that is missing in your little equation is that there never would have been a war on terror had we not been involved in Middle East politics in the first place.
    Which has equated to Iraq: 4,168 American deaths, Afghanistan: 597 American deaths, and about a trillion US dollars.
    At Coretta Scott King's funeral in early 2006, Ethel Kennedy, the widow of Robert Kennedy, leaned over to him and whispered, "The torch is being passed to you." "A chill went up my spine," Obama told an aide. (Newsweek)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #66  
    gator
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by LogansPapa View Post
    Which has equated to Iraq: 4,168 American deaths, Afghanistan: 597 American deaths, and about a trillion US dollars.
    It is actually a lot more than that in terms of dollars. You need to throw in the hundreds of billions of dollars we have given Israel over the year. The low estimate I have seen is $200 billion. The upper amount is close to a trillion. We have also given a lot of money to the Palestinians, Egyptians and other Middle East countries to leave the Israelis alone. Billions and billions of dollars.

    You also need to include the tremendous hit to our economy that happen during the oil embargo of the 1970s. That is estimated at another trillion dollars.

    It has been very costly for us to take sides in war that had nothing to do with our own security.

    Kicking Saddam’s ass in 1991 because he was screwing around with trying to control a major part of the Middle East oil was justified because it directly affected our economic security. Supporting and arming Israel does not contribute to the security of the US at all. In fact it makes us less secure because we have pissed off a billion people, some that even have oil we need.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #67  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    11,970
    Quote Originally Posted by gator View Post
    The thing that is missing in your little equation is that there never would have been a war on terror had we not been involved in Middle East politics in the first place.

    40 years ago we chose sides in a war that had nothing to do with our own security. We armed and supported a brutal apartheid government with a record of state sponsored terrorism. Probably the most stupid foreign policy decision ever made by the United States. The war on terror is a consequence of that stupid decision. The NeoCons won't admit it because to do so would put the blame on their shoulders so they talk about “Islamic Fascism” and other bullshit like that. They ignore all the warnings the Arabs gave us to stay out of their business. Warnings like the oil embargo of the 1970s.

    If we are going to be dumb and arm one side against another then he had better be prepared to suffer the consequences. 9/11 was the consequence of a foreign entanglement that had nothing to do with our own security. The Marines in Beirut, the men of the USS Cole, the thousands of people killed on 911 and the thousands of brave American Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines that died in Iraq and Afghanistan paid the price for American interventionism in something that had nothing to do with our own security. It is really sad when you think about it.
    I share your distaste for war. When I pick up the local newspaper and I see a picture of a solider that gave his life for these ungrateful bastards, it really pisses me off. 9/11 victims family get a million bucks or more and a solider family gets a whole $10k. These fucking camel jockeys should pony up at least that amount because we did prevent S.H from taking over the oil fields in Saudi A. and Kuwait. Plus, they should pay us billions for defending their asses. We can not nor should we intervene in every country's disputes unless we want to see our soldiers get killed and we wind up going broke. It is time to get out of Iraq. If we believe that Iran or N. Korea is a threat to us or will sell nukes to the terrorists, let it be known that we will nuke the hell out of them but will not send troops there.

    I do believe the WOT has kept us safer. All the crowing in the world will not change my opinion. If Obama wins the election, I do believe that we will get attacked again. I give Bush credit on that accoount, and the News Buster article points out that terrorism under Bush has decreased by 40%.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #68  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by marinejcksn View Post
    Yes sir I know you're right on protecting trade routes in the Pacific, but my question is why we maintain ground troops in Okinawa with LAVs and artillery batteries. I know we use it for training, but are we expecting a rapid ground war in Asia? Otherwise, it seems that the fighters in Iwakuni along with the ships offshore provide ample security. I still highly believe we could cut down massive levels of troops on foreign soil and save major green which could be better spent in the US of A while doing the taxpayer justice.
    We probably could relocate a lot of assets, although the problem is that when you eliminate force structure and infrastructure for any reason, but especially for economic , it's a lot harder to get it back.
    Quote Originally Posted by gator View Post
    He is not right about "protecting trade routes in the Pacific". He is very seldom right about anything.
    This is sort of like a boxer who has been beaten into the canvas and counted out raising his hand when the ref announces the winner.
    Quote Originally Posted by gator View Post
    Who are we going to protect trade routes from, the Chinese? We are tremendous trading partners with the Chinese in that we buy almost everything they produce. The "routes" are actually their full ships bringing stuff to our country and the empty ships going back
    We get most of our exported oil from Canada, Mexico and Venezuela so having a 500 ship Navy to protect the oil shipping lanes is not necessary.
    Try to engage your brain before putting your mouth in gear.
    We get our microprocessors from Korea, Japan and Indonesia, all major economies that China seeks to dominate, but none so much as Taiwan. We need to ensure our access to those nations, whether or not you think that we ought to be protecting them. We also have another aspect to trade, which you may not be familiar with, called exports. We try to sell our surplus in order to buy other countries' goods and services. Our exports to the entire world go by sea. Also, a lot of the raw materials that we need to keep our economy going come from abroad. For example, tungsten, which is a strategic metal, comes from two major sources, Russia and South Africa. Since Russia is rapidly going back into an adversarial mode, it might make sense to be able to secure sea lanes between the US and Africa, but that presumes that you don't want to see our defense capabilities and remaining manufacturing collapse. Finally, while we do get oil from Venezuela, how long do you expect that relationship to last? Chavez is always looking for ways to undermine us, and cutting off oil would be an ideal means of doing that, especially during an economic downturn. But, as you've said above, I'm very seldom right about anything.

    Quote Originally Posted by gator View Post
    We spend ten times the amount on defense than the next country and five times as much as the next two countries combined.
    As you said we don’t need artillery units in Okinawa. There are many places in the world where we don’t need American troops anymore. We are going bankrupted trying to protect the whole world and it is just not necessary for our security.
    Instead of having artillery units in Okinawa or spending a couple of billion dollars a month in Iraq so the Iraqis can sell their oil to their Chinese we should be rebuilding our Air Force. Our Air Force is falling apart nowadays. In the long run having a modern well equipped Air Force is a whole lot more important to our security than having troops stationed in 100 countries around the world.
    What are you talking about? We've been spending money on the Air Force hand over fist. Since early 2001, the Air Force has received more than $200 billion above and beyond original budget projections, and that's on top of the $80 billion that the Air Force received to support operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's not to say that we can't achieve some changes, but to complain about the defense budget, which is less than half of all discretionary spending, and roughly one quarter of federal expenditures, is silly. The things that are bankrupting us are perpetual bailouts of businesses that have been looted by politically connected con artists, unsustainable entitlements and expansive federal roles in areas where there is no need for federal intervention. As long as the federal government treats the Constitution as a shopping list of potential opportunities to expand, rather than a definition of its limits, we will be spending more than we take in.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #69  
    Senior Member Molon Labe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Jihad Me At Hello
    Posts
    4,772
    Quote Originally Posted by lacarnut View Post
    I share your distaste for war. When I pick up the local newspaper and I see a picture of a solider that gave his life for these ungrateful bastards, it really pisses me off. 9/11 victims family get a million bucks or more and a solider family gets a whole $10k. These fucking camel jockeys should pony up at least that amount because we did prevent S.H from taking over the oil fields in Saudi A. and Kuwait. Plus, they should pay us billions for defending their asses. We can not nor should we intervene in every country's disputes unless we want to see our soldiers get killed and we wind up going broke. It is time to get out of Iraq. If we believe that Iran or N. Korea is a threat to us or will sell nukes to the terrorists, let it be known that we will nuke the hell out of them but will not send troops there.

    I do believe the WOT has kept us safer. All the crowing in the world will not change my opinion. If Obama wins the election, I do believe that we will get attacked again. I give Bush credit on that accoount, and the News Buster article points out that terrorism under Bush has decreased by 40%.
    We can agree on that. And the article is well taken that terrorism is down; however, I cannot say that had Bush stayed out of Iraq that this should not have been the result from waging war against Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. I do not share your enthusiasm with the way it was done. And I'm also not convinced that Bush's GWOT has made me any safer. I'll reiterate again that the signs were there, it's getting the right people to listen that caused 9/11. Therefore I'm not convinced that a dumb demcrat like Obama is worse than a dumb republican like McCain, who doesn't understand this.


    One more note on the thread. The Constitution parties platform would have been welcomed by conservatives like Robert Taft ....we've just gone astray from the original platform.
    Last edited by Molon Labe; 09-19-2008 at 03:33 PM.
    Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound - Unknown


    The problem is Empty People, Not Loaded Guns - Linda Schrock Taylor
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #70  
    gator
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by lacarnut View Post
    I share your distaste for war. When I pick up the local newspaper and I see a picture of a solider that gave his life for these ungrateful bastards, it really pisses me off. 9/11 victims family get a million bucks or more and a solider family gets a whole $10k. These fucking camel jockeys should pony up at least that amount because we did prevent S.H from taking over the oil fields in Saudi A. and Kuwait. Plus, they should pay us billions for defending their asses. We can not nor should we intervene in every country's disputes unless we want to see our soldiers get killed and we wind up going broke. It is time to get out of Iraq. If we believe that Iran or N. Korea is a threat to us or will sell nukes to the terrorists, let it be known that we will nuke the hell out of them but will not send troops there.

    I do believe the WOT has kept us safer. All the crowing in the world will not change my opinion. If Obama wins the election, I do believe that we will get attacked again. I give Bush credit on that accoount, and the News Buster article points out that terrorism under Bush has decreased by 40%.
    I actually don't mind war. I volunteered for one once when I could have stayed home and gone to college at Florida State and screwed pretty coeds. Wars for the right reasons are fine as far as I am concerned.

    My point is that there never would have been a war on terror for the United States had we mind our own business in the Middle East for the last 40 years. Arming and supporting a country like Israel has caused us more grief than is imaginable and it was immoral for us to do so given their record of brutality. If we are going to get a billion people pissed at us it needs to be for the right reasons. Making sure that the Israelis live well is not a good reason in my opinion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •