POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
That article reads like a Dr Suess book for developmentally stunted adults obsessed with political rhetoric. Can't wait to read it to my kids.
Ah, the old respond to something that is not actually a response to something. Read what I wrote then tell me in what way Operation Cyclone is a response to what I actually wrote?
You can claim your information is a response to me calling Reagan the Father of Mujahideen/al Qaeda in one of my previous posts but that is not based on Operation Cyclone, it is based on what was known as The Reagan Doctrine (try more googling) and then the abrupt cutting off of support of the Mujahideen when the US signed the Geneva Accords with the Soviets that led to the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan and the Mujahideen redirected their hatred towards the US.
Operation Cyclone was seized on by the Reagan administration and then greatly expanded to become The Reagan Doctrine. The Mujahideen were dropped like a hot rock by Reagan once their usefulness expired. This is the genesis of their hatred towards the United States, not the initial military advisement and funding.
Look, figure out history then try and argue. All of you prior to this discussion clearly had no idea what you were talking about. Look at all the knowledge you gained today. I liked when you excitedly posted about Operation Cyclone. Like you had discovered a great mystery. Cute. So build on that. Maybe in a year or two you'll have enough knowledge to successfully defend your positions from a 3rd grade study hall crayon drawing contest.
Lost in my need to conduct an impomptu training lesson on the history of al Qaeda today were several of our conservative friends ramping up attacks on a Gold Star family.
Look, this man's son was killed fighting for our country. Is there a line? Some minimum level of decency that you will not go below?
Something is wrong with you. Seriously. That shit is not funny and you're not "telling it like it is" you are stooping beneath the minimum level of basic human decency in your actions and it's not funny nor should it be tolerated, frankly.
Look, this man's son was killed fighting for our country. Is there a line? Some minimum level of decency that you will not go below?
Something is wrong with you. Seriously. That shit is not funny and you're not "telling it like it is" you are stooping beneath the minimum level of basic human decency in your actions and it's not funny nor should it be tolerated, frankly.
Very interesting on Morning Joe today. Joe said he is being told by a person very close to Trump that Trump is in this to lose so he can start up "Trump TV" backed by Russian money after he loses in November. Said Trump's dream scenario is to narrowly lose so he can claim the election was rigged.
This is great because it means once again today's Republicans are good for nothing aside from being useful rubes. EVERYONE uses them. They're little more than trinkets. Need a bunch of idiots for whatever you'd like to do... then they are your party.
This is great because it means once again today's Republicans are good for nothing aside from being useful rubes. EVERYONE uses them. They're little more than trinkets. Need a bunch of idiots for whatever you'd like to do... then they are your party.
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
Hilarious. Throw shade on the present spectre of Hillary providing arms to Syrian rebels by saying, "well, Reagan did it!" And then claim everybody else is not addressing YOUR point. Your point is beside the point. Which, for you, is the point. Well done, son! The powers of deflection and obfuscation are great with this one.
Ah, laughing smiley faces. You must know what you're talking about.
I'm not throwing shade on anything. Ron Paul was laughed off the Republican debate stage by his fellow Republicans in 2008 for making the same case then that I am now. I bet you were laughing right along with them because you're part of the stupidity that enables it to continue regardless of party.
Blowback is universal irrespective of party. It comes from sticking your fingers into things that would have best been left alone. That's the lesson here, not Hillary Clinton.
I'm not throwing shade on anything. Ron Paul was laughed off the Republican debate stage by his fellow Republicans in 2008 for making the same case then that I am now. I bet you were laughing right along with them because you're part of the stupidity that enables it to continue regardless of party.
Blowback is universal irrespective of party. It comes from sticking your fingers into things that would have best been left alone. That's the lesson here, not Hillary Clinton.
Still deflecting!
PROPOSITION: HILLARY ALLEGEDLY SUPPLIED ARMS TO THE SYRIAN REBELS.
1. TRUE OR FALSE?
2. IF TRUE, GOOD OR BAD DECISION?
GO!
PROPOSITION: HILLARY ALLEGEDLY SUPPLIED ARMS TO THE SYRIAN REBELS.
1. TRUE OR FALSE?
2. IF TRUE, GOOD OR BAD DECISION?
GO!
Dropped like a hot rock? So we helped them beat the Soviets, and then left to let them run Afghanistan? Then they turn around, and attack us for NOT leaving the Middle East in the 90's?
You're just slinging mud Z.
Only bad and worse decisions in Syria.
GHWB made the correct call in not taking out Saddam Hussein in the first gulf war. At the time that was a very controversial decision but history has proven him correct. He correctly determined taking out Saddam Hussein would destabilize then entire region and make Iran a kingmaker.
However, he missed that at the same time he inflamed the entire middle east when he put US troops on the ground in their holy land. He underestimated the blowback from that.
9/11 happens and we respond foolishly by intentionally cherry-picking intelligence reports. We wind up invading the wrong country and killing Saddam by handing him over. We idiotically envision democracies flourishing in the middle east. We run off and make enemies of what remains of the Iraqi army which was monumentally stupid, so now you have thousands of unemployed soldiers with nothing to do except kill our troops. We realize way too late what we did so we institute another monumentally stupid program where we pay people that we know killed our troops not to kill any more of them.
So at that point, what do we have? Well, we have folks that will like us as long as we are handing them money or checkbook democracy. That is not enduring. It is guaranteed it will fail. We pull the same stunt in Afghanistan.
So Arab Springs comes along and brings even more destabilization to the middle east. More radicalization moves into the vacuums that are now spanning the entire middle east and northern africa...
What do you expect us to do, now? We own it. We have totally screwed it all up under multiple administrations under both parties. There are no good decisions. There are bad, worse, and catastrophic and they are hard to tell apart. We don't know who to back in Syria.
Now, in this thread, you want to lay all that on Hillary Clinton? And I am supposed to shut up and just pretend history is not relevant to the shit storm she has to navigate through?
GHWB made the correct call in not taking out Saddam Hussein in the first gulf war. At the time that was a very controversial decision but history has proven him correct. He correctly determined taking out Saddam Hussein would destabilize then entire region and make Iran a kingmaker.
However, he missed that at the same time he inflamed the entire middle east when he put US troops on the ground in their holy land. He underestimated the blowback from that.
9/11 happens and we respond foolishly by intentionally cherry-picking intelligence reports. We wind up invading the wrong country and killing Saddam by handing him over. We idiotically envision democracies flourishing in the middle east. We run off and make enemies of what remains of the Iraqi army which was monumentally stupid, so now you have thousands of unemployed soldiers with nothing to do except kill our troops. We realize way too late what we did so we institute another monumentally stupid program where we pay people that we know killed our troops not to kill any more of them.
So at that point, what do we have? Well, we have folks that will like us as long as we are handing them money or checkbook democracy. That is not enduring. It is guaranteed it will fail. We pull the same stunt in Afghanistan.
So Arab Springs comes along and brings even more destabilization to the middle east. More radicalization moves into the vacuums that are now spanning the entire middle east and northern africa...
What do you expect us to do, now? We own it. We have totally screwed it all up under multiple administrations under both parties. There are no good decisions. There are bad, worse, and catastrophic and they are hard to tell apart. We don't know who to back in Syria.
Now, in this thread, you want to lay all that on Hillary Clinton? And I am supposed to shut up and just pretend history is not relevant to the shit storm she has to navigate through?
Last edited:
Technically, he has been the best advocate for America. I'm still pissed about them for upending his momentum to the Iowa caucus. America would actually be moving towards a better place under Paul.
Ron Paul is the only candidate in history that actually had the courage to tell the truth about the disastrous blowback much of our foreign policy around the world has produced. Doesn't mean he knew what to do (although he can make a pretty damned good case that we'd have been better off had we simply done nothing) and it doesn't mean he had the correct answers, but at least he stood up there and told the truth.
Z, You're last post is very good, if you want people to listen to you thats how you should post.
I disagree with you about the tail end of Iraq. Looking back we shouldn't have went, but hindsight is 20/20, but by leaving before Iraq was ready we created the vacuum for ISIS.
So we basically told our veterans you fought and died for nothing, but now we are going back there.
Afghanistan is always going to be a mess.
I disagree with you about the tail end of Iraq. Looking back we shouldn't have went, but hindsight is 20/20, but by leaving before Iraq was ready we created the vacuum for ISIS.
So we basically told our veterans you fought and died for nothing, but now we are going back there.
Afghanistan is always going to be a mess.
I'm not sure anyone would know where to start when you have fallen 1000 feet in shit and the only way out is up. That is one huge pile of insurmountable shit
But Z, we are doing a repeat of history here and Hillary is leading the charge. I could easily see this woman getting us into WW3 within 8 years. All because of her backing Islam terrorists. I'm gonna see how Europe's trending disgust with Islam goes.
![[laughing]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/laugh.r191677.gif "Laughing [laughing]")
Then Trump really is a goddam genius. If he could orchestrate his run through the primary, and run against Clinton, with the foresight to lose closely and start a television network, then he really is the greatest business man and politician this country has ever seen. (Edit: forgot to address the Russian element in Z's original moronic post. But it's the "Never Clinton" people who are being played. Not the rubes who actually think Trump orchestrated some elaborate plan to have the Russians fund a television network.)
But hey, Joe says a guy close to Trump said something so it must be true. The mother of a person murdered in Benghazi says Clinton said something and let's shit all over the mother of the murder victim.
Great how you guys work shitting all over the families of people who lost their lives at the hands of Clinton.
Because Trump bad mouthing NATO, not knowing Russia/Putin were already in Ukraine, Trump saying he'd look into recognizing Russia's annexation of Crimea because the Crimean people prefer the Russians, and Trump carpet bombing the middle east makes you feel safer?
Let's just all agree we are better off watching Hillary shill for Wall Street for four years while Trump starts up his TV channel then we can all start fighting again in four years when you folks actually field a viable candidate to go against overwhelming Democratic demographics that reduce you to a small regional local party. Deal?
Yes, this line of attack makes no sense to anyone who is familiar with big law firms. Hogan is one of the largest law firms in the world with thousands of lawyers. Just because someone who works there has done work for Clinton and Saudi Arabia has nothing to do with Khan.
Supreme Lord Z, post: 4916936, member: 51894"]Only bad and worse decisions in Syria.
True.
GHWB made the correct call in not taking out Saddam Hussein in the first gulf war. At the time that was a very controversial decision but history has proven him correct. He correctly determined taking out Saddam Hussein would destabilize then entire region and make Iran a kingmaker.
True. 41 wrote in his book the reason he didn't take out SH was it would destabilize the region. 43 can't read.
However, he missed that at the same time he inflamed the entire middle east when he put US troops on the ground in their holy land. He underestimated the blowback from that.
False. They were already inflamed. We were asked to come there by the Kuwaiti government. Iraq had a legitimate beef with Kuwait for sucking more oil out from under Iraq than they were supposed to.
9/11 happens and we respond foolishly by intentionally cherry-picking intelligence reports. We wind up invading the wrong country and killing Saddam by handing him over. We idiotically envision democracies flourishing in the middle east. We run off and make enemies of what remains of the Iraqi army which was monumentally stupid, so now you have thousands of unemployed soldiers with nothing to do except kill our troops. We realize way too late what we did so we institute another monumentally stupid program where we pay people that we know killed our troops not to kill any more of them.
True.
So at that point, what do we have? Well, we have folks that will like us as long as we are handing them money or checkbook democracy. That is not enduring. It is guaranteed it will fail. We pull the same stunt in Afghanistan.
False. They do not like us even when we pay them. This will endure.
So Arab Springs comes along and brings even more destabilization to the middle east. More radicalization moves into the vacuums that are now spanning the entire middle east and northern africa...
True.
What do you expect us to do, now? We own it. We have totally screwed it all up under multiple administrations under both parties. There are no good decisions. There are bad, worse, and catastrophic and they are hard to tell apart. We don't know who to back in Syria.
True.
Now, in this thread, you want to lay all that on Hillary Clinton? And I am supposed to shut up and just pretend history is not relevant to the shit storm she has to navigate through.
False. Not laying it all on HRC. Just the parts that she had a hand in. That's plenty.
True.
GHWB made the correct call in not taking out Saddam Hussein in the first gulf war. At the time that was a very controversial decision but history has proven him correct. He correctly determined taking out Saddam Hussein would destabilize then entire region and make Iran a kingmaker.
True. 41 wrote in his book the reason he didn't take out SH was it would destabilize the region. 43 can't read.
However, he missed that at the same time he inflamed the entire middle east when he put US troops on the ground in their holy land. He underestimated the blowback from that.
False. They were already inflamed. We were asked to come there by the Kuwaiti government. Iraq had a legitimate beef with Kuwait for sucking more oil out from under Iraq than they were supposed to.
9/11 happens and we respond foolishly by intentionally cherry-picking intelligence reports. We wind up invading the wrong country and killing Saddam by handing him over. We idiotically envision democracies flourishing in the middle east. We run off and make enemies of what remains of the Iraqi army which was monumentally stupid, so now you have thousands of unemployed soldiers with nothing to do except kill our troops. We realize way too late what we did so we institute another monumentally stupid program where we pay people that we know killed our troops not to kill any more of them.
True.
So at that point, what do we have? Well, we have folks that will like us as long as we are handing them money or checkbook democracy. That is not enduring. It is guaranteed it will fail. We pull the same stunt in Afghanistan.
False. They do not like us even when we pay them. This will endure.
So Arab Springs comes along and brings even more destabilization to the middle east. More radicalization moves into the vacuums that are now spanning the entire middle east and northern africa...
True.
What do you expect us to do, now? We own it. We have totally screwed it all up under multiple administrations under both parties. There are no good decisions. There are bad, worse, and catastrophic and they are hard to tell apart. We don't know who to back in Syria.
True.
Now, in this thread, you want to lay all that on Hillary Clinton? And I am supposed to shut up and just pretend history is not relevant to the shit storm she has to navigate through.
False. Not laying it all on HRC. Just the parts that she had a hand in. That's plenty.
Trump: "Wouldn't it be great if we teamed up with Russia and maybe NATO.... "
The man will not get off Russia's knob and if you don't understand this is because that is the last place on earth he can get money from then you're just being willfully ignorant.
I think Morning Joe's talk is correct. It makes sense. Trump planned on running but not winning and then starting up his own TV Channel backed by Russian money. He's went further than he ever dreamed possible. He has no interest in actually governing that's why he starkly has no idea of any actual real policy nor has he proposed any. It also explains his son Donald Jr. reaching out to Kasich and telling him Trump wants somebody to be his VP to actually do the job of governing as Trump has no interest in it if he actually did win.
The pieces fit. Trump News. All Trump. All the time. Backed by Russian mob money. I wonder if he'll call it "TT" as the sister channel to "RT"?
The man will not get off Russia's knob and if you don't understand this is because that is the last place on earth he can get money from then you're just being willfully ignorant.
I think Morning Joe's talk is correct. It makes sense. Trump planned on running but not winning and then starting up his own TV Channel backed by Russian money. He's went further than he ever dreamed possible. He has no interest in actually governing that's why he starkly has no idea of any actual real policy nor has he proposed any. It also explains his son Donald Jr. reaching out to Kasich and telling him Trump wants somebody to be his VP to actually do the job of governing as Trump has no interest in it if he actually did win.
The pieces fit. Trump News. All Trump. All the time. Backed by Russian mob money. I wonder if he'll call it "TT" as the sister channel to "RT"?
Yep. For some reason the us always feels the need to be involved. Needs to stop.
Maybe. Maybe not. But the public deserves to know and make their own decision. Something that will never happen.
Plus there's more to it than him being simply employed there.
Well, isn't teaming up with Russia exactly what Hillary and Obama did? Didn't Hillary push a reset button, and Obama pull the missile defense in Poland?Weren't we also in NATO then too?
The whole Russia stuff is the left's way of diverting attention from the DNC scandal, and to create a defense when more emails are released.
Now you've got him taking money from Russian mobs, lol. All because he cracked a joke over Hillary using a private server in her house to do State business on. Thats literally all you guys can do, deflect and not talk about real issues affecting the Country.
.
Asian history...know your geography if you're going to speak from a position of knowledge.
The middle east isn't a continent you moron. You're talking about the difference between Europe and Asia. The modern middle east encompasses parts of both plus part of northern Africa.
Just by default know that I am much smarter than all of you are and that will save us a lot of time and unnecessary corrections.
Just by default know that I am much smarter than all of you are and that will save us a lot of time and unnecessary corrections.
Z, tell us all about your military service, you miserable hack!
Up until know you never differentiated between region and continent? Funny how that works. Oh, you must have ASSumed people knew what you were talking about.
Telling it like it is would be calling out Mr. Khan for his views on Sharia Law...while holding the fcking U.S. Constitution in his hands! Keep spinning though.
She hasn't even won yet and the Dems are already spinning her possible failure as president as "it's the republicans fault from 30 years ago!" They come up with crazy scenarios about Trump, but with facts everywhere to be had on H.R.C. they explain them away like their nothing. It's absolutely unreal!
You mad, bro?
Your tears are sweet. They remind me of morning dew off freshly ripened nectarines. More please. your whining amuses me.
Why would you ask Mr. Khan about Sharia Law unless you were racist? Should he ask you about the Olympic Park Bombing or Oklahoma City?
Your tears are sweet. They remind me of morning dew off freshly ripened nectarines. More please. your whining amuses me.
Why would you ask Mr. Khan about Sharia Law unless you were racist? Should he ask you about the Olympic Park Bombing or Oklahoma City?
Not mad at all, just want to hear about your military experience. Come on, share with everyone. There are plenty of vets/active military here that will gladly back you up.
Or you can just keep spinning and ignoring like a coward.
Or you can just keep spinning and ignoring like a coward.
Question for the Day: What if the US and Russia formed a more strategic alliance?
Maybe this Putin guy and his cronies could turn out to be one of our best allies.
Thoughts?
- It would benefit from massive geographic and strategic land mass.
- It would benefit from massive and strategic natural resources
- Militarily, well, biggest bullies on the block
- Could impose it's military and economic willpower on virtually anything
- Both are challenged by Islamic fanatics
- Both are basically controlled by a small group of financially driven individuals who balance their own self-interest with that of what can be achieved within their countries.
Maybe this Putin guy and his cronies could turn out to be one of our best allies.
Thoughts?
Looking forward to watching all our conservative friends suck up to the commies today. To think of Ronnie seeing this day. I just wish he could. I would want him to know everything he believed most strongly in was destroyed. That the Republicans had become the party of what he called "The Evil Empire" and that they openly embraced a mass murdering Putin as one of their own.
This is like the best year ever.
This is like the best year ever.
You didn't know? Z is prior military and has worked closely with the military after his however many years of service. He is currently googling as much as he can to make sure nobody here who served calls him on anything...smart little fella.
I don't agree with LEK on a lot politically, but yeah, he would be a pretty damn good politician.
Oh, and while they are sucking up to the commies they are dumping on a Gold Star family. It just gets better and better. It's like Trump is intentionally proving what he can make them do no matter how insane or low. Here, want to watch them beg for us to embrace a communist state while spiting our oldest allies in NATO... watch this...
"sucking up to commies" is bad, right?
"sucking up to" I.S.I.S./I.S.I.L./I.S. (depending on your allegiance to Islam) by funding them is good, right?
Just trying to keep up, it's so freakin hard to tell if anyone stands for anything or they just say "well the other side did it so we should be allowed to and nothing be said". If you do what the other side does, then how the hell are you any different?
"sucking up to" I.S.I.S./I.S.I.L./I.S. (depending on your allegiance to Islam) by funding them is good, right?
Just trying to keep up, it's so freakin hard to tell if anyone stands for anything or they just say "well the other side did it so we should be allowed to and nothing be said". If you do what the other side does, then how the hell are you any different?
Have a liberal friend in Connecticut, great guy, level-headed, born and raised in the Northeast. Smart, 45 years old, has traveled the world, successful.
No family member has served in the military amongst his parents, uncles, cousins, kids, cousins' kids. None. No friends or friends' kids served in the military. No perspective whatsoever what it means to serve, be away from their family for months at a time and/or have someone killed or harmed. Maybe he's just the extreme exception, but I don't think so.
Think about how this might/would affect someone's viewpoint and or respect for those who have served. Especially when what they have learned is filtered by the mainstream media.
No family member has served in the military amongst his parents, uncles, cousins, kids, cousins' kids. None. No friends or friends' kids served in the military. No perspective whatsoever what it means to serve, be away from their family for months at a time and/or have someone killed or harmed. Maybe he's just the extreme exception, but I don't think so.
Think about how this might/would affect someone's viewpoint and or respect for those who have served. Especially when what they have learned is filtered by the mainstream media.
Similar threads
