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.
The Global War on Terror - Chapter 5 -- Putin on the Blitz!
- Thread starter joecct
- Start date
Re: The Global War on Terror - Chapter 5 -- Putin on the Blitz!
Blather alert! In Neville/Rover world, the ends justify the means, evidently. "Nobody can prove what we did, that means we didn't do anything." Neville's a liar. So is Hillary. And you still know it.
Opie Opie Opie, where to begin.....
IF there is a coverup, its gotta be about the best darn coverup in history. A Republican committee with subpeona power and all personnel at their disposal (dispite their whining, they can't state one person who they've been refused access to) can't get to the bottom of this after a year of digging? This in a govt crawling with Bradley Mannings and Edward Snowdens? All those military people who are in the know, as well as CIA professionals, all of them are disgracing their uniforms according to you. A guy like Petreaus, now out of govt and with nothing to lose and with no reason to carry water for the O, is still intent on deceiving the country according to your logic? Again, have you no shame, sir? Will you continue to slander the very people who served in the same institution as yourself, all to undo the last two elections? When and where does your crackpot obsession end?
Opie brings up a fascinating point about unfortunately a majority of so called conservatives. Its something I've never seen before, which is when a lie about the President gets exposed, the people who bought into the lie aren't made at the source of the falsehood, they get even more angry at the President because it turned out not to be true!
Lets say I had it out for, I don't know, Ted Cruz or somebody like that. So I'm reading all the whiny liberals over at Daily Kos, and they have a story where Cruz faked his Harvard degree. I'm all over it, post about it a bunch of times...then it turns out not to be true. Then the next week they post a story about how Cruz has several drug convictions in his past. I again get all excited and post about it....only to find out again it wasn't true. Then this same cycle repeated itself 10 more times.
You know, after getting burned by the same source a dozen times, I'm not going to like Ted Cruz any better, but at the same time I'm not going to be more angry at him because a bunch of baseless accusations ended up not being true. I am going to be pretty upset at the people who kept feeding me BS that they knew wasn't true. This is what seperates knuckledraggers from the rest of us. Its the desperate attempt to find something, ANYTHING, to take down a Democratic President with no care whether its true or not. This attitude makes those people fools, and its bringing down the once proud Repubican party with it.
Blather alert! In Neville/Rover world, the ends justify the means, evidently. "Nobody can prove what we did, that means we didn't do anything." Neville's a liar. So is Hillary. And you still know it.
Last edited:
Re: The Global War on Terror - Chapter 5 -- Putin on the Blitz!
Be careful you don't ever actually have a thought. You might cause yourself an injury.
Be careful you don't ever actually have a thought. You might cause yourself an injury.
Opie's response is to basically jam his fingers in his ears and yell out "NYAH NYAH NYAH!!!! I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!!" I don't know how much they're paying the orderlies in your ward, but it can't be enough.
Re: The Global War on Terror - Chapter 5 -- Putin on the Blitz!
Right. It's so much easier sharing your infantile repetitive "wit" with us than it is to advance an argument explaining Neville's serial lying about what caused the attack in Benghazi. He's a liar. And son of a gun, you still know it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpIr-wmfEI0
Opie's response is to basically jam his fingers in his ears and yell out "NYAH NYAH NYAH!!!! I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!!" I don't know how much they're paying the orderlies in your ward, but it can't be enough.
Right. It's so much easier sharing your infantile repetitive "wit" with us than it is to advance an argument explaining Neville's serial lying about what caused the attack in Benghazi. He's a liar. And son of a gun, you still know it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpIr-wmfEI0
Last edited:
Re: The Global War on Terror - Chapter 5 -- Putin on the Blitz!
Does anyone find this terrifying?? http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/sep/26/air-forces-new-f16-drone-makes-debut-air/
War without a human cost becomes too easy to get into.
Does anyone find this terrifying?? http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/sep/26/air-forces-new-f16-drone-makes-debut-air/
War without a human cost becomes too easy to get into.
Re: The Global War on Terror - Chapter 5 -- Putin on the Blitz!
So you favor trenches? And broadswords? And banzai charges? This "terrifies" you? I'd recommend staying in doors 'till after Halloween.
Paraphrasing George C. Scott in Patton: "The object is not to die for your country. The object is to make the other poor dumb b*stard die for his country."
So you favor trenches? And broadswords? And banzai charges? This "terrifies" you? I'd recommend staying in doors 'till after Halloween.
Paraphrasing George C. Scott in Patton: "The object is not to die for your country. The object is to make the other poor dumb b*stard die for his country."
Last edited:
Re: The Global War on Terror - Chapter 5 -- Putin on the Blitz!
And when the score is 0 for us and 10,000 for them, do you think the politicians will be reluctant to do it all over again? Then what happens when the other side turns the technology back against us?
Remember what Robert E. Lee said: "It is well that war is so terrible–we would grow too fond of it!" I would also urge everyone to read "Once an Eagle" by Anton Myrer. It is (or was) required reading at the Army War College. It is one of the finest anti-war books ever written.
And when the score is 0 for us and 10,000 for them, do you think the politicians will be reluctant to do it all over again? Then what happens when the other side turns the technology back against us?
Remember what Robert E. Lee said: "It is well that war is so terrible–we would grow too fond of it!" I would also urge everyone to read "Once an Eagle" by Anton Myrer. It is (or was) required reading at the Army War College. It is one of the finest anti-war books ever written.
Re: The Global War on Terror - Chapter 5 -- Putin on the Blitz!
So the way to be prepared for war is to be unprepared for war? Pete Seeger had a song about Andorra. IIRC the words went something like "They spend four dollars and ninety cents on armaments for their defense, have you ever heard of such confidence, Andorra hip hoorah." And if we were as unimportant as Andorra, that might be an appropriate approach to national defense.
During the first gulf war some high ranking AF dude was asked about "proportionality." He defined is as "all of my guys coming home and none of theirs." Nobody in our military is "pro war." Even so, one of the continuing liberal memes throughout the cold war was "crazy" American generals (Jack D. Ripper) conspiring to get us into WWIII. It was all good fun, of course. But was totally fiction. Some of us took it seriously. The liberal case for military intervention is "we shouldn't ever do it, except in those cases where there's nothing in it for us." There's a place for humanitarian intervention. Just as there's a place for doing something selfishly in our own interests.
If the "score" as you put it, is "0 for us and 10,000 for them," I'd thank God. You seem to be suggesting if we suffered catastrophic casualties in some future conflict, that would make us and therefore the world more peaceful. It is bordering on insanity to think the mullahs of the world would be dissuaded from future adventurism by an American military setback. Our current enemies are the ones who talk about "weak horse, strong horse."
The decision to apply force is somewhat more nuanced. Other than whining about our "willingness to go to war" and quoting an over rated 19th century loser, what's your alternative? Flowers in the barrels of rifles? As to "turning technology back on us," we spend lots of money to avoid that happening. As I've previously mentioned, Tom Clancy once quoted an L.A. attack boat skipper on the matter of the new Soviet Kirov class cruisers that had lots of people sweating in their panty hose. The guy said, "when I see a Kirov class cruiser, I see a Navy Cross waiting to happen."
So the way to be prepared for war is to be unprepared for war? Pete Seeger had a song about Andorra. IIRC the words went something like "They spend four dollars and ninety cents on armaments for their defense, have you ever heard of such confidence, Andorra hip hoorah." And if we were as unimportant as Andorra, that might be an appropriate approach to national defense.
During the first gulf war some high ranking AF dude was asked about "proportionality." He defined is as "all of my guys coming home and none of theirs." Nobody in our military is "pro war." Even so, one of the continuing liberal memes throughout the cold war was "crazy" American generals (Jack D. Ripper) conspiring to get us into WWIII. It was all good fun, of course. But was totally fiction. Some of us took it seriously. The liberal case for military intervention is "we shouldn't ever do it, except in those cases where there's nothing in it for us." There's a place for humanitarian intervention. Just as there's a place for doing something selfishly in our own interests.
If the "score" as you put it, is "0 for us and 10,000 for them," I'd thank God. You seem to be suggesting if we suffered catastrophic casualties in some future conflict, that would make us and therefore the world more peaceful. It is bordering on insanity to think the mullahs of the world would be dissuaded from future adventurism by an American military setback. Our current enemies are the ones who talk about "weak horse, strong horse."
The decision to apply force is somewhat more nuanced. Other than whining about our "willingness to go to war" and quoting an over rated 19th century loser, what's your alternative? Flowers in the barrels of rifles? As to "turning technology back on us," we spend lots of money to avoid that happening. As I've previously mentioned, Tom Clancy once quoted an L.A. attack boat skipper on the matter of the new Soviet Kirov class cruisers that had lots of people sweating in their panty hose. The guy said, "when I see a Kirov class cruiser, I see a Navy Cross waiting to happen."
Last edited:
FadeToBlack&Gold
Microlot Marxist
Re: The Global War on Terror - Chapter 5 -- Putin on the Blitz!
No, but there are times when one wonders if the military-industrial complex is. Even Gen. Eisenhower warned Americans about that during his final White House speech.
No, but there are times when one wonders if the military-industrial complex is. Even Gen. Eisenhower warned Americans about that during his final White House speech.
Re: The Global War on Terror - Chapter 5 -- Putin on the Blitz!
I think I am talking Klingon and you're talking English. You misunderstand, I think. The decision to go to war should not be a thing taken lightly. However, when the political masters say go, then the gloves come off and all manner of deviltry is unleashed. However, when war becomes a video game and the stench of the dead and dying becomes remote, then, I fear, the politicians will find it easier to say go.
You are 100% correct that nobody in the military is "pro war". However, they do not make the decision to go to war. It's the politicians who, for the most part, have no idea what they are unleashing.
I think I am talking Klingon and you're talking English. You misunderstand, I think. The decision to go to war should not be a thing taken lightly. However, when the political masters say go, then the gloves come off and all manner of deviltry is unleashed. However, when war becomes a video game and the stench of the dead and dying becomes remote, then, I fear, the politicians will find it easier to say go.
You are 100% correct that nobody in the military is "pro war". However, they do not make the decision to go to war. It's the politicians who, for the most part, have no idea what they are unleashing.
Re: The Global War on Terror - Chapter 5 -- Putin on the Blitz!
Except that you and Oliver Stone are misinterpreting what he meant. Those bad guys at Boeing and General Dynamics, et all, want us to be in war and are willing to kill a POTUS (with the help of like minded generals) who wants to pull us out of a war? Wait a minute, that sound familiar. Oh, I remember, Donald Sutherland in JFK.
Except that you and Oliver Stone are misinterpreting what he meant. Those bad guys at Boeing and General Dynamics, et all, want us to be in war and are willing to kill a POTUS (with the help of like minded generals) who wants to pull us out of a war? Wait a minute, that sound familiar. Oh, I remember, Donald Sutherland in JFK.
Last edited:
Re: The Global War on Terror - Chapter 5 -- Putin on the Blitz!
We're in the 21st century. The only way a POTUS or any other politician is going to experience the "stench of death and dying" is if that's what's happening here. I don't want that happening here. We don't need that kind of object lesson.
And the comment about "video games" is merely a liberal trope, with exactly zero evidence to back it up. That suggests we'd be better prepared if we didn't use technology to train and equip our warriors. Je le doute. Throughout history, man has believed he had devised the "ultimate weapon." People standing in the path of Roman legions undoubtedly thought they were the ultimate weapons. Notwithstanding Hiroshima, do you think the thousands more incinerated by fire bombs in Tokyo, thought the B-29 was the "ultimate" weapon? What about Londoners getting pounded every night by V-1's and V-2's? Or the poor devils first torn to pieces by the Maxim gun?
Of course, the decision to apply force should not be taken lightly. It's just that people don't all define "lightly" the same way.
We're in the 21st century. The only way a POTUS or any other politician is going to experience the "stench of death and dying" is if that's what's happening here. I don't want that happening here. We don't need that kind of object lesson.
And the comment about "video games" is merely a liberal trope, with exactly zero evidence to back it up. That suggests we'd be better prepared if we didn't use technology to train and equip our warriors. Je le doute. Throughout history, man has believed he had devised the "ultimate weapon." People standing in the path of Roman legions undoubtedly thought they were the ultimate weapons. Notwithstanding Hiroshima, do you think the thousands more incinerated by fire bombs in Tokyo, thought the B-29 was the "ultimate" weapon? What about Londoners getting pounded every night by V-1's and V-2's? Or the poor devils first torn to pieces by the Maxim gun?
Of course, the decision to apply force should not be taken lightly. It's just that people don't all define "lightly" the same way.
Last edited:
Re: The Global War on Terror - Chapter 5 -- Putin on the Blitz!
It has been this way for thousands of years, no drones required. From an anti-war folk song by John McCutcheon about the factual Christmas in the Trenches event of WWI:
It was Christmas in the trenches where the frost so bitter hung.
The frozen fields of France were warmed as songs of peace were sung.
For the walls they'd kept between us to exact the work of war
had been crumbled and were gone for ever more.
My name is Francis Tolliver. In Liverpool I dwell.
Each Christmas come since World War One I've learned it's lessons well.
That the ones who call the shots won't be among the dead and lame
and on each end of the rifle we're the same.
Gotta side with OP on this one. The days of politicians leading troops into battle ended in 44 BC. Do you think King George III had a good whiff of the stench of death from the colonies in 1777? If you want to make this argument, then you should also be calling for our soldiers to stop being such pu$$ies, take off the body armor, get out of their APCs, and go to war like real men. That'll teach those dastardly politicians a lesson!
It has been this way for thousands of years, no drones required. From an anti-war folk song by John McCutcheon about the factual Christmas in the Trenches event of WWI:
It was Christmas in the trenches where the frost so bitter hung.
The frozen fields of France were warmed as songs of peace were sung.
For the walls they'd kept between us to exact the work of war
had been crumbled and were gone for ever more.
My name is Francis Tolliver. In Liverpool I dwell.
Each Christmas come since World War One I've learned it's lessons well.
That the ones who call the shots won't be among the dead and lame
and on each end of the rifle we're the same.
Re: The Global War on Terror - Chapter 5 -- Putin on the Blitz!
TO: President Obama
FM: Old Pio
RE: Negotiating with Iran
Mr. President, please be firm in demanding as a condition of any negotiations on lifting sanctions, verifiable prior cessation of Iran's production of fissionable material. If we're unable to verify that they've stopped uranium enrichment, we run the risk of allowing them to drag out the talks as they continue developing nuclear weapons. We can't afford to be played here. And we're counting on you.
As you know, Iran is awash in oil and has no need whatsoever for reactors to meet its power needs. Israel has said it won't tolerate an Iranian bomb. And so have you, for that matter. Israel, I am certain, will act in its own best interests at some point if Iran crosses the nuclear threshold. We can't afford to get this wrong. Nuclear weapons in the hands of a vicious, ruthless Islamist regime like the one in Tehran is just about the worst thing that could happen in that part of the world. You must stop Iran from getting the bomb. All other items on your agenda pale in comparison. I will be praying for your success.
TO: President Obama
FM: Old Pio
RE: Negotiating with Iran
Mr. President, please be firm in demanding as a condition of any negotiations on lifting sanctions, verifiable prior cessation of Iran's production of fissionable material. If we're unable to verify that they've stopped uranium enrichment, we run the risk of allowing them to drag out the talks as they continue developing nuclear weapons. We can't afford to be played here. And we're counting on you.
As you know, Iran is awash in oil and has no need whatsoever for reactors to meet its power needs. Israel has said it won't tolerate an Iranian bomb. And so have you, for that matter. Israel, I am certain, will act in its own best interests at some point if Iran crosses the nuclear threshold. We can't afford to get this wrong. Nuclear weapons in the hands of a vicious, ruthless Islamist regime like the one in Tehran is just about the worst thing that could happen in that part of the world. You must stop Iran from getting the bomb. All other items on your agenda pale in comparison. I will be praying for your success.
Last edited:
Re: The Global War on Terror - Chapter 5 -- Putin on the Blitz!
Disgusting savegery from followers of the religion of peace.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...Eyes-gouged-bodies-hooks-fingers-removed.html
Disgusting savegery from followers of the religion of peace.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...Eyes-gouged-bodies-hooks-fingers-removed.html
Re: The Global War on Terror - Chapter 5 -- Putin on the Blitz!
It was these a*sholes that AP referred to as "militants." Al Sharpton is a militant. Freddie Phelps is a militant. These people are beastial terrorists. What on earth, aside from political correctness, would account for anyone referring to these monsters as "militants?"
It was these a*sholes that AP referred to as "militants." Al Sharpton is a militant. Freddie Phelps is a militant. These people are beastial terrorists. What on earth, aside from political correctness, would account for anyone referring to these monsters as "militants?"
Last edited:
Re: The Global War on Terror - Chapter 5 -- Putin on the Blitz!
Bibi's planning to tell Neville how the cow ate the cabbage with regard to Iran. Let's hope he listens carefully.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/benjamin-netanyahu-iran-comments-97524.html?hp=r6
Bibi's planning to tell Neville how the cow ate the cabbage with regard to Iran. Let's hope he listens carefully.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/benjamin-netanyahu-iran-comments-97524.html?hp=r6