What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

Rover said:
From my understanding the Kurds are the largest ethnic population in the world without a home country. For that reason, I would think giving them a home country (northern Iraq) ought to deflate some of the separatist balloon in Turkey. If need be, I'd have some sort of UN resolution that on the one hand confers country status to what we'll call Kurdistan, but on the other hand explicity rejects ANY attempt to carve out or annex anything in Turkey to add to it.
Click to expand...

Turkey's attitude might have changed in the past two or three years, but I know they were dead set against a new Kurd nation forming back around 2007, when new government talks were commencing after the major military actions in Iraq ended. It was to the point where they told the US that if we allowed it to happen that they would remove our access to bases in the eastern section of the country, the portion that sits just north of Iraq and west of Iran, and all access to their airspace. It was a very hard line they had taken.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

St. Clown said:
Turkey's attitude might have changed in the past two or three years, but I know they were dead set against a new Kurd nation forming back around 2007, when new government talks were commencing after the major military actions in Iraq ended. It was to the point where they told the US that if we allowed it to happen that they would remove our access to bases in the eastern section of the country, the portion that sits just north of Iraq and west of Iran, and all access to their airspace. It was a very hard line they had taken.
Click to expand...

Well I wouldn't PO a NATO ally over freakin' Iraq that's for sure.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

XYZ said:
I'm not sure what the point is.
Click to expand...

I'm just saying, what's missing from the debate is that ultimately (morally) it's more productive to say "everyone do whatever you WANT to as long as you don't infringe on someone else's rights" vs. "Nobody has a choice but to do what they were born to do." It just bugs me a little, it shouldn't matter WHY someone wants to live that way. It's their CHOICE which is what I think should be defended.
You're right though, that it doesn't matter legislatively.
Take the study cited earlier for an example of terrible science though: You take a guy that's been sleeping exclusively with men for 5 or 10 years and the fact he gets aroused by naked men proves he was born that way and he can't help it? Come on. Google "Pavlov's dogs."
Sorry this debate bothers anyone.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

From Letterman last night:

Top Ten Things Overheard at Mitt Romney's Retreat

Monday, June 16, 2014

10. "Welcome, unelectable nut jobs"

9. "All in favor of lower taxes for rich guys?"

8. "Is that Eric Cantor bussing tables?"

7. "The cologne fountain is a nice touch"

6. "Next year we should hold this event in Medicine Hat"

5. "Is that my hairpiece or yours?"

4. "A retreat at a luxury resort -- this will win over the middle class"

3. "On your way out, grab some free 'Romney 2012' crap"

2. "Chris Christie is causing traffic problems at the omelet bar"

1. "Hey, save the gay stuff for the men's room"


:D
 
Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

geezer said:
I'm just saying, what's missing from the debate is that ultimately (morally) it's more productive to say "everyone do whatever you WANT to as long as you don't infringe on someone else's rights" vs. "Nobody has a choice but to do what they were born to do." It just bugs me a little, it shouldn't matter WHY someone wants to live that way. It's their CHOICE which is what I think should be defended.
You're right though, that it doesn't matter legislatively.
Take the study cited earlier for an example of terrible science though: You take a guy that's been sleeping exclusively with men for 5 or 10 years and the fact he gets aroused by naked men proves he was born that way and he can't help it? Come on. Google "Pavlov's dogs."
Sorry this debate bothers anyone.
Click to expand...

Druids
1. If it harms no one, do it
2. Protect the weak from the strong.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

geezer said:
You're right though, that it doesn't matter legislatively.
Click to expand...

It matters in how you can challenge. If it's a matter of birth, then it's covered under the Fourteenth Amendment equal protection clause. If it's a matter of choice, then it's covered under the First Amendment establishment clause. It's a violation of Constitutional protections either way, but although most of the action has been in terms of 14th amendment protections it might be better for the long term if the Court decided laws against marriage equality are by their nature a violation of the establishment clause. That would be a precedent for preventing the perversion of the law for other explicitly scriptural purposes (I'm looking at you, "Intelligent Design").

That obviously will not happen with the current composition of the Court, so hold your nose and collect your Hillary '16 buttons...
 
Last edited:
Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/18/w...n-to-answer-questions-on-assault.html?hp&_r=3
On the day of the attack, Islamists in Cairo had staged a demonstration outside the United States Embassy there to protest an American-made online video mocking Islam, and the protest culminated in a breach of the embassy’s walls — images that flashed through news coverage around the Arab world.

As the attack in Benghazi was unfolding a few hours later, Mr. Abu Khattala told fellow Islamist fighters and others that the assault was retaliation for the same insulting video, according to people who heard him.
Click to expand...

Huh.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

Priceless said:
For some reason he wasn't talking much to Americans until his capture. How convenient.
Click to expand...


No kidding, huh? Why wasn't he on the Sunday talk shows instead? Might be time to get Darrell Issa on this, as now he's got a lot more free time on his hands since Boner neutered his investigation in favor of another one of his stooges. :D
 
ScoobyDoo said:
Isn't it awesome? Could the media and the politicians screwed up this story any worse than they have?
Click to expand...

It's all a conspiracy. Obama is bringing him and Bergdahl back to the United States so they can lead the Muslin hordes when they rise up against white people. Then Obama can declare martial law and remain in power forever. Or until 2016 when he will let Hillary be in charge for some reason.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

Priceless said:
It's all a conspiracy. Obama is bringing him and Bergdahl back to the United States so they can lead the Muslin hordes when they rise up against white people. Then Obama can declare martial law and remain in power forever. Or until 2016 when he will let Hillary be in charge for some reason.
Click to expand...

Perfect. Explains Iraq at the same time.

Here's a nice liberal slanted piece on the possibility of the conspiracy around Benghazi Benghazi, etc. http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/abu-khattala-comes-sharper-focus

Where's Old Pio? He needs to apologize to Susan Rice as well.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

Is Megyn Kelly trying to get fired?

"Time and time again, history has proven that you got it wrong as well in Iraq, sir. You said there was no doubt Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. You said we would be greeted as liberators. You said the insurgency was in its last throes back in 2005, and you said that after our intervention, extremists would have to 'rethink their strategy of jihad.' Now, with almost a trillion dollars spent there, with almost 4,500 American lives lost there, what do you say to those who say you were so wrong about so much at the expense of so many?"
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top