Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

    It astounds me how Bush Admin foreign policy people STILL get air time. Paul Bremer is chiming in about how we should send troops to Iraq. Is there a bigger f uck up in all of this than Paul Bremer? Maybe Dick Cheney but that's about it.
    Legally drunk???? If its "legal", what's the ------- problem?!? - George Carlin

    Ever notice how everybody who drives slower than you is an idiot, and everybody who drives faster is a maniac? - George Carlin

    "I've never seen so much reason and bullsh*t contained in ONE MAN."

    Comment


    • Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

      Meanwhile, in current events, Russia has turned off the Gas tap to the Ukraine for failure to pay the bills.
      CCT '77 & '78
      4 kids
      5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
      1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)

      ”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
      - Benjamin Franklin

      Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

      I want to live forever. So far, so good.

      Comment


      • Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

        This just in. Bergdahl receives death sentence...
        CCT '77 & '78
        4 kids
        5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
        1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)

        ”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
        - Benjamin Franklin

        Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

        I want to live forever. So far, so good.

        Comment


        • Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

          As much as it absolutely sucks, because we've essentially wasted so many lives, and so much money there...**** Iraq. What else are we supposed to do? It was disaster, and it still is a disaster. Let the place burn.
          Having a clear conscience just means you have a bad memory or you had a boring weekend.

          RIP - Kirby

          Comment


          • Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

            In all seriousness, the US Army has begun its investigation into Bergdahl.

            Comment


            • Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

              Originally posted by bigblue_dl View Post
              As much as it absolutely sucks, because we've essentially wasted so many lives, and so much money there...**** Iraq. What else are we supposed to do? It was disaster, and it still is a disaster. Let the place burn.
              What a colossal waste of money. Same with the Afghanistan "rebuild" efforts. A total waste.
              **NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.

              Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
              Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.

              Comment


              • Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

                Originally posted by ScoobyDoo View Post
                What a colossal waste of money. Same with the Afghanistan "rebuild" efforts. A total waste.
                I forget the guy's name, but he's a retired Army colonel and has since become an author. At any rate, I was listening to the man give a very succinct plan as to how to deal with future wars that could very well be much more effective. Using my own interpretation of his idea here: We only ever attack in response to having been attacked first, and when we do, we simply go into the country, kick the ever loving snot out of it and then just leave. Let the world know - and especially the country against whom we just retaliated - that there will be consequences for taking aggression against us, but that we will never be the aggressors. And if they do it again, we'll go back and do it again. Rebuilding nations that do not like us so as to turn them into allies is not working. We put in giant mounds of cash, yet we get nothing for it when we place all of these humanitarian rebuilding goals in place. WWII was entirely different than the current situation, so to look at one as the guide for the other is a flawed plan.
                "The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." George Orwell, 1984

                "One does not simply walk into Mordor. Its Black Gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust, the very air you breathe is a poisonous fume." Boromir

                "Good news! We have a delivery." Professor Farnsworth

                Comment


                • Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

                  Originally posted by St. Clown View Post
                  I forget the guy's name, but he's a retired Army colonel and has since become an author. At any rate, I was listening to the man give a very succinct plan as to how to deal with future wars that could very well be much more effective. Using my own interpretation of his idea here: We only ever attack in response to having been attacked first, and when we do, we simply go into the country, kick the ever loving snot out of it and then just leave. Let the world know - and especially the country against whom we just retaliated - that there will be consequences for taking aggression against us, but that we will never be the aggressors. And if they do it again, we'll go back and do it again. Rebuilding nations that do not like us so as to turn them into allies is not working. We put in giant mounds of cash, yet we get nothing for it when we place all of these humanitarian rebuilding goals in place. WWII was entirely different than the current situation, so to look at one as the guide for the other is a flawed plan.
                  Whoever he is I totally agree with him. 100%.
                  **NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.

                  Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
                  Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.

                  Comment


                  • Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

                    If you think of the conflicts of the post Cold War years, nation building has really been a phenomenon of the past dozen years. Prior to Iraq:

                    Panama: Invade, get what's his name, leave. Kuwait: Kick out invaders, then leave. Somalia: Becomes too much trouble, either full scale war or take off, we left. Haiti: Threaten dictators with force, they leave. We don't spend time rebuilding country. Bosnia/Kosovo: Bomb troublemaking Serbs, they surrender. We leave.

                    For a decade, a pattern emerged from two different Presidencies, two men of different ideologies and generations on how to handle these situations. Only one turned out poorly, Somalia - a lawless country if there ever was one and we limited the damage. Only the zealotry of the Bush admin neo-con crowd (Bush II, Cheney, Rice, Bremer, Wolfowitz, Bolton, McCain, Graham, etc) brought us disasterous results.

                    Its up to the public to never elect likeminded people such as these to the Presidency ever again. That doesn't mean don't elect Republicans, as Bush Senior was a very good foreign policy President. It means any idiot who still thinks we should have the US military involved in Iraq disqualifies themselves from office.
                    Legally drunk???? If its "legal", what's the ------- problem?!? - George Carlin

                    Ever notice how everybody who drives slower than you is an idiot, and everybody who drives faster is a maniac? - George Carlin

                    "I've never seen so much reason and bullsh*t contained in ONE MAN."

                    Comment


                    • Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

                      Originally posted by St. Clown View Post
                      I forget the guy's name, but he's a retired Army colonel and has since become an author. At any rate, I was listening to the man give a very succinct plan as to how to deal with future wars that could very well be much more effective. Using my own interpretation of his idea here: We only ever attack in response to having been attacked first, and when we do, we simply go into the country, kick the ever loving snot out of it and then just leave. Let the world know - and especially the country against whom we just retaliated - that there will be consequences for taking aggression against us, but that we will never be the aggressors. And if they do it again, we'll go back and do it again. Rebuilding nations that do not like us so as to turn them into allies is not working. We put in giant mounds of cash, yet we get nothing for it when we place all of these humanitarian rebuilding goals in place. WWII was entirely different than the current situation, so to look at one as the guide for the other is a flawed plan.
                      That sounds like a good idea to me. Enough with this flushing lives and money down the toilet in these ****hole countries.
                      Having a clear conscience just means you have a bad memory or you had a boring weekend.

                      RIP - Kirby

                      Comment


                      • Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

                        Originally posted by St. Clown View Post
                        I forget the guy's name, but he's a retired Army colonel and has since become an author. At any rate, I was listening to the man give a very succinct plan as to how to deal with future wars that could very well be much more effective. Using my own interpretation of his idea here: We only ever attack in response to having been attacked first, and when we do, we simply go into the country, kick the ever loving snot out of it and then just leave. Let the world know - and especially the country against whom we just retaliated - that there will be consequences for taking aggression against us, but that we will never be the aggressors. And if they do it again, we'll go back and do it again. Rebuilding nations that do not like us so as to turn them into allies is not working. We put in giant mounds of cash, yet we get nothing for it when we place all of these humanitarian rebuilding goals in place. WWII was entirely different than the current situation, so to look at one as the guide for the other is a flawed plan.
                        Wonderful idea as long as original attack is not a knockout blow.
                        CCT '77 & '78
                        4 kids
                        5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
                        1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)

                        ”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
                        - Benjamin Franklin

                        Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

                        I want to live forever. So far, so good.

                        Comment


                        • Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

                          Originally posted by Rover View Post
                          If you think of the conflicts of the post Cold War years, nation building has really been a phenomenon of the past dozen years. Prior to Iraq:

                          Panama: Invade, get what's his name, leave. Kuwait: Kick out invaders, then leave. Somalia: Becomes too much trouble, either full scale war or take off, we left. Haiti: Threaten dictators with force, they leave. We don't spend time rebuilding country. Bosnia/Kosovo: Bomb troublemaking Serbs, they surrender. We leave.

                          For a decade, a pattern emerged from two different Presidencies, two men of different ideologies and generations on how to handle these situations. Only one turned out poorly, Somalia - a lawless country if there ever was one and we limited the damage. Only the zealotry of the Bush admin neo-con crowd (Bush II, Cheney, Rice, Bremer, Wolfowitz, Bolton, McCain, Graham, etc) brought us disasterous results.

                          Its up to the public to never elect likeminded people such as these to the Presidency ever again. That doesn't mean don't elect Republicans, as Bush Senior was a very good foreign policy President. It means any idiot who still thinks we should have the US military involved in Iraq disqualifies themselves from office.
                          If the Shah had not been deposed???
                          CCT '77 & '78
                          4 kids
                          5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
                          1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)

                          ”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
                          - Benjamin Franklin

                          Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

                          I want to live forever. So far, so good.

                          Comment


                          • Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

                            Originally posted by St. Clown View Post
                            I forget the guy's name, but he's a retired Army colonel and has since become an author. At any rate, I was listening to the man give a very succinct plan as to how to deal with future wars that could very well be much more effective. Using my own interpretation of his idea here: We only ever attack in response to having been attacked first, and when we do, we simply go into the country, kick the ever loving snot out of it and then just leave. Let the world know - and especially the country against whom we just retaliated - that there will be consequences for taking aggression against us, but that we will never be the aggressors. And if they do it again, we'll go back and do it again. Rebuilding nations that do not like us so as to turn them into allies is not working. We put in giant mounds of cash, yet we get nothing for it when we place all of these humanitarian rebuilding goals in place. WWII was entirely different than the current situation, so to look at one as the guide for the other is a flawed plan.
                            Great idea. The threat of we'll turn your country into a parking lot if you hit us first is a great idea.
                            Twitter: DanMountSports
                            2013-14 DIII T.O.P. NIT Champion

                            2010-2011 Interlock LPS Co-Champion

                            Well, I'm going to do a farewell tour of upstate New York, hellholes like Plattsburgh. Fred Armisen as Gov. Paterson

                            "There's no point in being grown up if you can't be childish sometimes." - The Doctor (Tom Baker)

                            Team I Like NFL: BUF NBA: NYK MLB: SEA NHL: NYR College Hockey: Clarkson (DI) Oswego (D3) Soccer: USA, Man United, Rangers (newco and all), Scotland NCAAF & B: SU

                            Comment


                            • Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

                              Originally posted by MountieBoyOz View Post
                              Great idea. The threat of we'll turn your country into a parking lot if you hit us first is a great idea.
                              So...Like the cold war, but with an enemy that is even more mentally unstable than the Soviets?

                              I guess maybe this idea isn't as good as I originally thought.
                              Having a clear conscience just means you have a bad memory or you had a boring weekend.

                              RIP - Kirby

                              Comment


                              • Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

                                Originally posted by MountieBoyOz View Post
                                Great idea. The threat of we'll turn your country into a parking lot if you hit us first is a great idea.
                                Especially against fanatics who feel their ultimate reward only comes AFTER they are martyred for the cause.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X