APNewsBreak: Russian jet passes near US warship

[HenryBHough]

Liberal Civility is as inflamed tonight as is a gigantic anal fistula after a meal of jalapenos and broccoli.

 

[ron4342]

Two of the men killed in the Marine Barracks in Lebanon were people I knew, one from Basic the other from A-School. It was just a toss of the dice that I wasn't with them - so I did take it very personally.

When we invaded Afghanisan I cheered for Bush and out Boys, ditto for Iraq and I still stand by the decisions our President made.

But I repeat There's a big difference between a handful of tinpot terrorists taking over a plane with boxcutters and a major world power that could reduce entire cites to smoldering ash in the blink of an eye.

GreenBean, I thank you for your service. I agree with you, bush was right to send troops to Afghanistan. That is where bin Laden and al Qaida were and it was clear they were the people responsible for 9/11. But I have to ask you this, with bin Laden and al Qaida on their heels and victory in sight how can you justify pulling the troops from Afghanistan to send them into Iraq? How can you justify starting a second war based on the threat of WMD that DID NOT EXIST? How can you can approve of bush's action when it has been shown he had cherry picked Iraqi intelligence to make it appear that WMD existed? How can you approve of starting a war that would kill over 4300 Americans based on lies that would make Halliburton (and by extension cheney) wealthy? The bottom line on Iraq is that you are approving of the actions of a war criminal and a war profiteer. If you are really a soldier as you post, then you take the lives of other soldiers seriously and you do not throw them away for profit and that is exactly what bush and cheney did. In a million years I will never understand your defense of these pieces of human garbage.

"WMD that DID NOT EXIST ?" ... unknown at that time and still uncertain today.Oh please!!!!!!! You can't be serious that you still believe the WMD are simply unfound. IF they did exist, why haven't they been used? Why did Saddam not use them on US troops when they first attacked. He had to know that he was a dead man if Iraq lost. What did he have to lose if he used the weapons? Nothing! What is known is that Sadam was perfectly willing to engage is mass murder/genocide as is evidenced by his gassing of the Kurds, intelligence indicated that he had Weapons of Mass Destruction - not Nukes like the Ruskies - You are correct. But isn't everything you are saying prior to the first Gulf war? His WMD were destroyed after the First Gulf War and were never replaced thanks to the embargo that was put in place. but still highly lethal - that some of these WMDs did not cross the border into Syria as our troops approached is uncertain.
Please! There you go again with unfounded rumor. Does it make even one bit of sense that Saddam, recognizing America was about to invade for the second time and would probably overrun Iraq, would take his best and most feared weapons and give them to one of his enemies for safekeeping? Picture this, suppose we were about to be over run by Russia. Do you really think we would give our nukes and best weapons to Mexico for safe keeping while we were being attacked? Can you really believe something so silly?
war criminal and a war profiteer ? - unsubstantiated speculation. People such as Haliburton, the Koch Brothers and George Soros for that matter will engage in profiteering in war or peace .
Hummmm ..... Tell me it this smells like war profiteering? A CEO of a major military/industrial company ends up VP. Shortly there after the country goes to war. The VP pushes for and gets non bid contracts for his former company based on the argument his company was all ramped up and ready to go whereas other companies might take months or years to get ready. How it knew to be ramped up and ready for war has never been explained. Maybe a lucky guess on their part or perhaps insider knowledge. Thanks to those contracts the companies profits soar. Now, the CEO/VP has to put his money into a closed account while VP and he has no access to it. However, as a former CEO his stock in the company can continue to grow. When he leaves office he once again has access to his money and stock. Thanks to his pushing and obtaining no bid contracts his stock has shown large gains. In other words, his actions have led directly to his making a lot of money. Now, we are not talking about Soros or the Koch brothers. WE ARE SPEAKING OF THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES USING HIS INFLUENCE TO MAKE A HUGE PROFIT OFF OF THE WAR. Does that sound like war profiteering to you? It does to me. In Lincoln's time it was a hanging offense. Think about this for a second, even rand paul has accused cheney of war profiteering. I am not alone and to Obama's shame he has done nothing about it. Americans died to put money in cheney's pocket <PERIOD>
"If you are really a soldier as you post, then you take the lives of other soldiers seriously" - I was a Navy Corpsman stationed with the Marines - the Marine Barracks bombing was in 1983 - I was honorably discharged in 1985. I was nowhere near Lebanon when it happenned, in fact I was nursing a hangover in Norfolk Va.

Anyone who joined the Military was never promised a rose garden, most who fought and died did so over an extreme sense of patriotism , honor, duty and obligation to our country , our society and our way of life. But wasn't it implied somewhere in there that your life would not be wasted or thrown away. Isn't it implied that soldiers lives are to be protected and that troops are not to be looked at as things instead of people. Yes, people get killed in wars, and yes accidents happen, but does the military have the right to wage wars based on lies and to place troops in harms way for personal profit? Do you really accept that when you enlist you turn over your live to be used and slaughtered like cattle. I don't think so.
Oh, and one final question: Exactly how has the loss of around 4,500 American lives made our "society and our way of life" safer? Our involvement in Iraq has created misery for America and for Iraq. America, Iraq, and the world would have been better off without our interference in Iraq and if you are to blind to see that I am truly sorry for you. [/QUOTE]bb

 

[ron4342]

The problem I see is where does Putin stop if we do let that happen this started with the Crimea we let that go because historically it had been Russian now he's looking at Eastern Ukraine if he takes that and he goes for all of Ukraine after that is there any reason to think he would stop with Ukraine? This has very similar feel to what Hitler did in the 1930s I'm not saying Putin would go that far but the world refused to confront Hitler till he controlled most of Europe and the price to undo that was very high. My gut feeling with Putin will keep going as long as there is no serious opposition to him.

Would you be screaming about this if there was a republican in the White House? I doubt it. Of course you will claim that a republican would have handled this differently. Hummmm ...... Differently??? When Putin grabbed Georgia in almost exactly the same manner a republican was in the White House. And what did bush do about Putin's land grab? NOTHING! ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!
The thing is, I have watched you people in the past and I know exactly what you are doing. You are condemning Obama for not sending troops to the Crimea. But the thing is, IF Obama were to send troops to the Crimea you would be among the first to scream "War monger! War monger!" Your hate is so profound that it makes exactly zero difference what Obama does. You will condemn him for any action he takes and that is why I write you off as a dishonest, ignorant, and close minded person.

Go fuck yourself dip shit all your phony ass I used to be a republican and now I'm a superior highly intellectual evolved liberal bullshit is as fake as a three dollar all you are is a loud mouth far left asshole who can do nothing but spew hate towards anyone who disagrees with you. You picked the wrong night and the wrong person for this shit tonight motherfucker I can be as respectful to someone as they are to me or can be just as vile and disrespectful as they are to me if this is the road you want to go down so be it but leave no doubt you will get back what you dish out and more.

Along with having poor manners you apparently have a low tolerance for the truth. Please be so kind as to give me a list of all the actions that bush took when Putin over ran Georgia.
Now, as to the name calling, it is pretty much what I expect from you. You cannot disprove what I post so it is open season to name call. Knock yourself out!!!!!!
The bottom line is you confirm my opinion of you: I write you off as a dishonest, ignorant, and close minded person.
Oh, and just to prove I can lower myself to communicate on your level consider the following: Hey fuck face, please feel free to kiss my brown spot.

 

[GreenBean]

GreenBean, I thank you for your service. I agree with you, bush was right to send troops to Afghanistan. That is where bin Laden and al Qaida were and it was clear they were the people responsible for 9/11. But I have to ask you this, with bin Laden and al Qaida on their heels and victory in sight how can you justify pulling the troops from Afghanistan to send them into Iraq? How can you justify starting a second war based on the threat of WMD that DID NOT EXIST? How can you can approve of bush's action when it has been shown he had cherry picked Iraqi intelligence to make it appear that WMD existed? How can you approve of starting a war that would kill over 4300 Americans based on lies that would make Halliburton (and by extension cheney) wealthy? The bottom line on Iraq is that you are approving of the actions of a war criminal and a war profiteer. If you are really a soldier as you post, then you take the lives of other soldiers seriously and you do not throw them away for profit and that is exactly what bush and cheney did. In a million years I will never understand your defense of these pieces of human garbage.

"WMD that DID NOT EXIST ?" ... unknown at that time and still uncertain today.Oh please!!!!!!! You can't be serious that you still believe the WMD are simply unfound. IF they did exist, why haven't they been used? Why did Saddam not use them on US troops when they first attacked. He had to know that he was a dead man if Iraq lost. What did he have to lose if he used the weapons? Nothing! What is known is that Sadam was perfectly willing to engage is mass murder/genocide as is evidenced by his gassing of the Kurds, intelligence indicated that he had Weapons of Mass Destruction - not Nukes like the Ruskies - You are correct. But isn't everything you are saying prior to the first Gulf war? His WMD were destroyed after the First Gulf War and were never replaced thanks to the embargo that was put in place. but still highly lethal - that some of these WMDs did not cross the border into Syria as our troops approached is uncertain.
Please! There you go again with unfounded rumor. Does it make even one bit of sense that Saddam, recognizing America was about to invade for the second time and would probably overrun Iraq, would take his best and most feared weapons and give them to one of his enemies for safekeeping? Picture this, suppose we were about to be over run by Russia. Do you really think we would give our nukes and best weapons to Mexico for safe keeping while we were being attacked? Can you really believe something so silly?
war criminal and a war profiteer ? - unsubstantiated speculation. People such as Haliburton, the Koch Brothers and George Soros for that matter will engage in profiteering in war or peace .
Hummmm ..... Tell me it this smells like war profiteering? A CEO of a major military/industrial company ends up VP. Shortly there after the country goes to war. The VP pushes for and gets non bid contracts for his former company based on the argument his company was all ramped up and ready to go whereas other companies might take months or years to get ready. How it knew to be ramped up and ready for war has never been explained. Maybe a lucky guess on their part or perhaps insider knowledge. Thanks to those contracts the companies profits soar. Now, the CEO/VP has to put his money into a closed account while VP and he has no access to it. However, as a former CEO his stock in the company can continue to grow. When he leaves office he once again has access to his money and stock. Thanks to his pushing and obtaining no bid contracts his stock has shown large gains. In other words, his actions have led directly to his making a lot of money. Now, we are not talking about Soros or the Koch brothers. WE ARE SPEAKING OF THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES USING HIS INFLUENCE TO MAKE A HUGE PROFIT OFF OF THE WAR. Does that sound like war profiteering to you? It does to me. In Lincoln's time it was a hanging offense. Think about this for a second, even rand paul has accused cheney of war profiteering. I am not alone and to Obama's shame he has done nothing about it. Americans died to put money in cheney's pocket <PERIOD>
"If you are really a soldier as you post, then you take the lives of other soldiers seriously" - I was a Navy Corpsman stationed with the Marines - the Marine Barracks bombing was in 1983 - I was honorably discharged in 1985. I was nowhere near Lebanon when it happenned, in fact I was nursing a hangover in Norfolk Va.

Anyone who joined the Military was never promised a rose garden, most who fought and died did so over an extreme sense of patriotism , honor, duty and obligation to our country , our society and our way of life. But wasn't it implied somewhere in there that your life would not be wasted or thrown away. Isn't it implied that soldiers lives are to be protected and that troops are not to be looked at as things instead of people. Yes, people get killed in wars, and yes accidents happen, but does the military have the right to wage wars based on lies and to place troops in harms way for personal profit? Do you really accept that when you enlist you turn over your live to be used and slaughtered like cattle. I don't think so.
Oh, and one final question: Exactly how has the loss of around 4,500 American lives made our "society and our way of life" safer? Our involvement in Iraq has created misery for America and for Iraq. America, Iraq, and the world would have been better off without our interference in Iraq and if you are to blind to see that I am truly sorry for you. [/QUOTE]bb

Sorry Pal , your post bothers my eyes , I shant read it - perhaps you should learn the art of high lighting -

1. Do not use Bold Print on 80% of your post as it detracts from your primary points and bothers viewers eyes.

2. Do not use Red Print on 80% of your post it detracts from your primary points .

3. Use a spell checker, it keeps you from appearing as an ignorant and inarticlate Socio-Facist Liberal Jack Ass

4. Get your facts straight, not that I read your shit anyway, but I can see you are just another "Useful Idiot" so I can pretty much ascertain from there that you are more than likely parrotting left wing verbal diarhea, as most socio-facistsd not in the ruling circle are wholly incapable of independant thought.

5. Summary: The Sum and Substance of my response to you - Fuck Off

 

[ron4342]

obama is not going to do anything. Nor should he. The mistakes made were made long ago. They can't be rectified now. obama really needs to just shut up because he's only making this country look more foolish. The recent chemical attack in Syria met with silence was just more proof of how ineffective we really are.

Hummm ..... We warned Syria that if they did not get rid of their WMD, we would. They first denied that they had poison gas and then when the US didn't back down they admitted that, yes they did have poisoned gas. To avoid American intervention they agreed to turn the gas over to the UN for destruction and that is taking place now. All of this was accomplished without America firing one shot or losing one life. Seems to me what we did was very effective.

 

[Pheonixops]

At any time, the US has ships in ALL the oceans. Im sure that the ship in question was part of a fleet of ships in the area. I don't know, but I would suspect that they are currently in the Black Sea to make a statement to Russia. Russia, in turn, made a statement to the United States. Right now, it's all bluster.

They are in International waters and breaking no maritime laws.

At this point, it is no more than a matter of time before Russia takes the rest of the Ukraine. IT WILL HAPPEN. When this happens, Obama MUST do something - whether he wants to or not, or we will be back to the USSR. Things will go south very quickly from this point on.

Thanks for the information. I don't know why we need to make such a statement, I do agree that is was just posturing between both parties.

Why do you think that Obama "MUST do something"? How would it hurt us if Russia goes back to being the USSR? We got along quite well in the 1980's and the decades during the Cold War.

Frankly, as a guy who actually fought "The Cold War", I find it extremely troubling that you would even ask a question like that.

Tell you what.....let me bring a foreign country into your neighborhood with tanks, planes and troops. They shut down your rights, destroy the press, forbid you to travel ANYWHERE except where THEY tell you, put you or your family into labor camps OR shoot you in the back of the head if you disagree and tell you that you are now a "communist comrade". Now, that might be welcomed by you - I have no idea. However, ask the people of Germany how much they enjoyed it. Or the people of Poland. Or the people of Czechoslovakia how much they enjoyed it, or Albania or the Ukraine on and on.

Why MUST Obama do something? It's simple and straightforward. If Putin is allowed to go on "unchecked" and decides to put the "band back together" - What's next? World War III? Expansion all over the world? This president (OBarry) is the "leader of the free world". It is HIS responsibility to ensure FREEDOM - not stand by idly and watch as it is exterminated across the globe.

It's time for this "man" to stop drawing red lines and actually become a man and stand up for the free world. I would also suggest that he understand that Putin isn't playing around. If you are going to challenge this guy - you had damn well be ready to back it up - or just keep your mealy mouth shut and continue be the worlds biggest metro-sexual.

So did I....................why do you find it troubling that I would ask such a question?

Good point, is Russia doing that to us or are they doing that to Ukraine? If you really look at it from a sane and rational point of view, we have been doing just that by meddling in that region and attempting to get former Russian satellite countries to join our gang (EU & NATO). How would you feel if Russia was doing here with say Mexico, what we are have been doing over there with Ukraine, Georgia, etc.?

I'm surprised that you as a conservative, don't seem to want to let those people and countries pull themselves up by their bootstraps and deal with the Russian problem themselves. We don't need to get involved in that region.

I think you are really taking that to the extreme, so what if Putin gets the Soviet Union back together. Where in the Constitution does it state that we must be "the leaders of the free world", where in the Constitution does it state that we must be the "world police"? Maybe some conservative who always tout "the Founding Fathers", should read the foreign policy that George Washington envisioned in his Farewell Address.

I here and read many conservatives and republicans complain about "spending", how many billions (if not trillions) of dollars do you think this "spreading democracy" project of your would cost us? Ukraine is not a NATO country, Ukraine is not part of the EU, and we certainly shouldn't be signing any bills to send money over there so they can pay the Russians.

We should have stayed out of there conflict and just wished them peace, and good luck.

 

[Pheonixops]

At any time, the US has ships in ALL the oceans. Im sure that the ship in question was part of a fleet of ships in the area. I don't know, but I would suspect that they are currently in the Black Sea to make a statement to Russia. Russia, in turn, made a statement to the United States. Right now, it's all bluster.

They are in International waters and breaking no maritime laws.

At this point, it is no more than a matter of time before Russia takes the rest of the Ukraine. IT WILL HAPPEN. When this happens, Obama MUST do something - whether he wants to or not, or we will be back to the USSR. Things will go south very quickly from this point on.

Thanks for the information. I don't know why we need to make such a statement, I do agree that is was just posturing between both parties.

Why do you think that Obama "MUST do something"? How would it hurt us if Russia goes back to being the USSR? We got along quite well in the 1980's and the decades during the Cold War.

Ignorance of History is almost as dangerous as History forgotten.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/70561.The_Gulag_Archipelago_1918_1956

The Gulag Archipelago 1918-1956
by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Edward E. Ericson Jr. (Introduction)
4.1 of 5 stars 4.10 · rating details · 8,714 ratings · 388 reviews
Drawing on his own incarceration and exile, as well as on evidence from more than 200 fellow prisoners and Soviet archives, Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn reveals the entire apparatus of Soviet repression -- the state within the state that ruled all-powerfully.Through truly Shakespearean portraits of its victims -- men, women, and children -- we encounter secret police operations, labor camps and prisons; the uprooting or extermination of whole populations, the "welcome" that awaited Russian soldiers who had been German prisoners of war. Yet we also witness the astounding moral courage of the incorruptible, who, defenseless, endured great brutality and degradation. "The Gulag Archipelago 1918-1956" -- a grisly indictment of a regime, fashioned here into a veritable literary miracle -- has now been updated with a new introduction that includes the fall of the Soviet Union and Solzhenitsyn's move back to Russia

So what? What does that have to do with us?

 

[GreenBean]

obama is not going to do anything. Nor should he. The mistakes made were made long ago. They can't be rectified now. obama really needs to just shut up because he's only making this country look more foolish. The recent chemical attack in Syria met with silence was just more proof of how ineffective we really are.

Hummm ..... We warned Syria that if they did not get rid of their WMD, we would. They first denied that they had poison gas and then when the US didn't back down they admitted that, yes they did have poisoned gas. To avoid American intervention they agreed to turn the gas over to the UN for destruction and that is taking place now. All of this was accomplished without America firing one shot or losing one life. Seems to me what we did was very effective.

Too bad it didn't work with Sadaam Hussein , He sent his to Syria as our troops approached and thwarted UN Investigators at every turn.

 

[Pheonixops]

I'm not sure if being involved in a nuclear arms race with Russia for decades would be considered getting along quite well we were fortunate neither side did anything stupid enough to give us a nuclear war though the Cuban missile crisis came close.

I could have worded that better. I meant that as a Nation, we were pretty prosperous and safe. Besides an arms race, we tended to use proxies to "fight" each other. I agree that we were fortunate that neither side did anything stupid enough to launch us into an all out nuclear war.

My main question is how would it hurt us if Russia annexed Ukraine? How would it makes us any less safe and how many of us are willing to fight a war over the Ukraine? I certainly don't think that it's financially viable for us to get involved in such a war and I certainly don't think that it's worth the lives of our service men and women.

The problem I see is where does Putin stop if we do let that happen this started with the Crimea we let that go because historically it had been Russian now he's looking at Eastern Ukraine if he takes that and he goes for all of Ukraine after that is there any reason to think he would stop with Ukraine? This has very similar feel to what Hitler did in the 1930s I'm not saying Putin would go that far but the world refused to confront Hitler till he controlled most of Europe and the price to undo that was very high. My gut feeling with Putin will keep going as long as there is no serious opposition to him.

I'm pretty sure that he would stop when it got to the EU/NATO countries, Ukraine and Crimea were neither, though they were being groomed to be so.

 

[blackhawk]

Would you be screaming about this if there was a republican in the White House? I doubt it. Of course you will claim that a republican would have handled this differently. Hummmm ...... Differently??? When Putin grabbed Georgia in almost exactly the same manner a republican was in the White House. And what did bush do about Putin's land grab? NOTHING! ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!
The thing is, I have watched you people in the past and I know exactly what you are doing. You are condemning Obama for not sending troops to the Crimea. But the thing is, IF Obama were to send troops to the Crimea you would be among the first to scream "War monger! War monger!" Your hate is so profound that it makes exactly zero difference what Obama does. You will condemn him for any action he takes and that is why I write you off as a dishonest, ignorant, and close minded person.

Go fuck yourself dip shit all your phony ass I used to be a republican and now I'm a superior highly intellectual evolved liberal bullshit is as fake as a three dollar all you are is a loud mouth far left asshole who can do nothing but spew hate towards anyone who disagrees with you. You picked the wrong night and the wrong person for this shit tonight motherfucker I can be as respectful to someone as they are to me or can be just as vile and disrespectful as they are to me if this is the road you want to go down so be it but leave no doubt you will get back what you dish out and more.

Along with having poor manners you apparently have a low tolerance for the truth. Please be so kind as to give me a list of all the actions that bush took when Putin over ran Georgia.
Now, as to the name calling, it is pretty much what I expect from you. You cannot disprove what I post so it is open season to name call. Knock yourself out!!!!!!
The bottom line is you confirm my opinion of you: I write you off as a dishonest, ignorant, and close minded person.
Oh, and just to prove I can lower myself to communicate on your level consider the following: Hey fuck face, please feel free to kiss my brown spot.

What you have proven is you can't take what you dish out I was having a respectful discussion with Pheonixops about the situation in Ukraine I was not calling for Obama to send troops into Ukraine or trashing him his name was not even in the conversation then you jump in and start trashing me and insulting me you were the one who started the trashing and the name calling other posters may let you get away with treating them like that not me if you can't handle getting what you give keep your big mouth shut.

 

[blackhawk]

I could have worded that better. I meant that as a Nation, we were pretty prosperous and safe. Besides an arms race, we tended to use proxies to "fight" each other. I agree that we were fortunate that neither side did anything stupid enough to launch us into an all out nuclear war.

My main question is how would it hurt us if Russia annexed Ukraine? How would it makes us any less safe and how many of us are willing to fight a war over the Ukraine? I certainly don't think that it's financially viable for us to get involved in such a war and I certainly don't think that it's worth the lives of our service men and women.

The problem I see is where does Putin stop if we do let that happen this started with the Crimea we let that go because historically it had been Russian now he's looking at Eastern Ukraine if he takes that and he goes for all of Ukraine after that is there any reason to think he would stop with Ukraine? This has very similar feel to what Hitler did in the 1930s I'm not saying Putin would go that far but the world refused to confront Hitler till he controlled most of Europe and the price to undo that was very high. My gut feeling with Putin will keep going as long as there is no serious opposition to him.

I'm pretty sure that he would stop when it got to the EU/NATO countries, Ukraine and Crimea were neither, though they were being groomed to be so.

That is what I hear others say as well they could be right or he could be emboldened to push the line farther with this guy it's really hard to tell.

 

[ron4342]

"WMD that DID NOT EXIST ?" ... unknown at that time and still uncertain today.Oh please!!!!!!! You can't be serious that you still believe the WMD are simply unfound. IF they did exist, why haven't they been used? Why did Saddam not use them on US troops when they first attacked. He had to know that he was a dead man if Iraq lost. What did he have to lose if he used the weapons? Nothing! What is known is that Sadam was perfectly willing to engage is mass murder/genocide as is evidenced by his gassing of the Kurds, intelligence indicated that he had Weapons of Mass Destruction - not Nukes like the Ruskies - You are correct. But isn't everything you are saying prior to the first Gulf war? His WMD were destroyed after the First Gulf War and were never replaced thanks to the embargo that was put in place. but still highly lethal - that some of these WMDs did not cross the border into Syria as our troops approached is uncertain.
Please! There you go again with unfounded rumor. Does it make even one bit of sense that Saddam, recognizing America was about to invade for the second time and would probably overrun Iraq, would take his best and most feared weapons and give them to one of his enemies for safekeeping? Picture this, suppose we were about to be over run by Russia. Do you really think we would give our nukes and best weapons to Mexico for safe keeping while we were being attacked? Can you really believe something so silly?
war criminal and a war profiteer ? - unsubstantiated speculation. People such as Haliburton, the Koch Brothers and George Soros for that matter will engage in profiteering in war or peace .
Hummmm ..... Tell me it this smells like war profiteering? A CEO of a major military/industrial company ends up VP. Shortly there after the country goes to war. The VP pushes for and gets non bid contracts for his former company based on the argument his company was all ramped up and ready to go whereas other companies might take months or years to get ready. How it knew to be ramped up and ready for war has never been explained. Maybe a lucky guess on their part or perhaps insider knowledge. Thanks to those contracts the companies profits soar. Now, the CEO/VP has to put his money into a closed account while VP and he has no access to it. However, as a former CEO his stock in the company can continue to grow. When he leaves office he once again has access to his money and stock. Thanks to his pushing and obtaining no bid contracts his stock has shown large gains. In other words, his actions have led directly to his making a lot of money. Now, we are not talking about Soros or the Koch brothers. WE ARE SPEAKING OF THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES USING HIS INFLUENCE TO MAKE A HUGE PROFIT OFF OF THE WAR. Does that sound like war profiteering to you? It does to me. In Lincoln's time it was a hanging offense. Think about this for a second, even rand paul has accused cheney of war profiteering. I am not alone and to Obama's shame he has done nothing about it. Americans died to put money in cheney's pocket <PERIOD>
"If you are really a soldier as you post, then you take the lives of other soldiers seriously" - I was a Navy Corpsman stationed with the Marines - the Marine Barracks bombing was in 1983 - I was honorably discharged in 1985. I was nowhere near Lebanon when it happenned, in fact I was nursing a hangover in Norfolk Va.

Anyone who joined the Military was never promised a rose garden, most who fought and died did so over an extreme sense of patriotism , honor, duty and obligation to our country , our society and our way of life. But wasn't it implied somewhere in there that your life would not be wasted or thrown away. Isn't it implied that soldiers lives are to be protected and that troops are not to be looked at as things instead of people. Yes, people get killed in wars, and yes accidents happen, but does the military have the right to wage wars based on lies and to place troops in harms way for personal profit? Do you really accept that when you enlist you turn over your live to be used and slaughtered like cattle. I don't think so.
Oh, and one final question: Exactly how has the loss of around 4,500 American lives made our "society and our way of life" safer? Our involvement in Iraq has created misery for America and for Iraq. America, Iraq, and the world would have been better off without our interference in Iraq and if you are to blind to see that I am truly sorry for you. [/QUOTE]bb

Sorry Pal , your post bothers my eyes , I shant read it - perhaps you should learn the art of high lighting -

1. Do not use Bold Print on 80% of your post as it detracts from your primary points and bothers viewers eyes.

2. Do not use Red Print on 80% of your post it detracts from your primary points .

3. Use a spell checker, it keeps you appearing as an ignorant and inarticlate Socio-Facist Lieral Jack Ass

4. Get your facts straight, not that I read your shit anyway, but I can see you are just another "Useful Idiot" so I can pretty much ascertain from there that you are more than likely parrotting left wing verbal diarhea as most socio-facistsd not in the ruling circle are wholly incapable of independant thought.

5. Summary: The Sum and Substance of my response to you - Fuck Off

Hummmm ..... What a fragile person you must be not to be able to handle bold red print. One has to wonder why you use it to call me a name: "Use a spell checker, it keeps you appearing as an ignorant and inarticlate Socio-Facist Lieral Jack Ass"
Oh, and by the way, "inarticulate" is really spelled 'inarticulate,' "lieral" is really spelled 'liberal,' and "Jack Ass" is really spelled 'jackass." Perhaps you should spend some time with your spell checker. If you are so small you need to condemn me for spelling errors you should make damn sure you have none in your post. It really lets the air out of your attack.

My post was in bold red because I wanted to answer each of your points and I wanted to make clear where your statement ended and mine began. I have done it in the past and as you are not in charge of the board I will do so in the future. It is a shame you are so closed minded that when presented with truths you cannot disprove your only recourse is to resort to insults and name callings. I had thought better of you. My mistake! But then again, anyone who still really thinks we weren't lied into Iraq and who cannot recognize a war profiteer when proof is given to them certainly cannot be very smart.

Oh, and one final note, you condemn my posts and claim I have my facts wrong. Yet you are incapable of disproving what I posted <sigh> Maybe it is you who are the "Useful Idiot" of the right. You appear to be willing to swallow every piece of shit they feed you.

 

[Pheonixops]

Go fuck yourself dip shit all your phony ass I used to be a republican and now I'm a superior highly intellectual evolved liberal bullshit is as fake as a three dollar all you are is a loud mouth far left asshole who can do nothing but spew hate towards anyone who disagrees with you. You picked the wrong night and the wrong person for this shit tonight motherfucker I can be as respectful to someone as they are to me or can be just as vile and disrespectful as they are to me if this is the road you want to go down so be it but leave no doubt you will get back what you dish out and more.

Along with having poor manners you apparently have a low tolerance for the truth. Please be so kind as to give me a list of all the actions that bush took when Putin over ran Georgia.
Now, as to the name calling, it is pretty much what I expect from you. You cannot disprove what I post so it is open season to name call. Knock yourself out!!!!!!
The bottom line is you confirm my opinion of you: I write you off as a dishonest, ignorant, and close minded person.
Oh, and just to prove I can lower myself to communicate on your level consider the following: Hey fuck face, please feel free to kiss my brown spot.

What you have proven is you can't take what you dish out I was having a respectful discussion with Pheonixops about the situation in Ukraine I was not calling for Obama to send troops into Ukraine or trashing him his name was not even in the conversation then you jump in and start trashing me and insulting me you were the one who started the trashing and the name calling other posters may let you get away with treating them like that not me if you can't handle getting what you give keep your big mouth shut.

I agree that we were and are having a respectful discourse. I guess that some people of many different political persuasions just want to come on here and blow off steam from their every day lives. Others, including myself would rather have an intelligent discussion/debate.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Thanks for the information. I don't know why we need to make such a statement, I do agree that is was just posturing between both parties.

Why do you think that Obama "MUST do something"? How would it hurt us if Russia goes back to being the USSR? We got along quite well in the 1980's and the decades during the Cold War.

Frankly, as a guy who actually fought "The Cold War", I find it extremely troubling that you would even ask a question like that.

Tell you what.....let me bring a foreign country into your neighborhood with tanks, planes and troops. They shut down your rights, destroy the press, forbid you to travel ANYWHERE except where THEY tell you, put you or your family into labor camps OR shoot you in the back of the head if you disagree and tell you that you are now a "communist comrade". Now, that might be welcomed by you - I have no idea. However, ask the people of Germany how much they enjoyed it. Or the people of Poland. Or the people of Czechoslovakia how much they enjoyed it, or Albania or the Ukraine on and on.

Why MUST Obama do something? It's simple and straightforward. If Putin is allowed to go on "unchecked" and decides to put the "band back together" - What's next? World War III? Expansion all over the world? This president (OBarry) is the "leader of the free world". It is HIS responsibility to ensure FREEDOM - not stand by idly and watch as it is exterminated across the globe.

It's time for this "man" to stop drawing red lines and actually become a man and stand up for the free world. I would also suggest that he understand that Putin isn't playing around. If you are going to challenge this guy - you had damn well be ready to back it up - or just keep your mealy mouth shut and continue be the worlds biggest metro-sexual.

So did I....................why do you find it troubling that I would ask such a question?

Good point, is Russia doing that to us or are they doing that to Ukraine? If you really look at it from a sane and rational point of view, we have been doing just that by meddling in that region and attempting to get former Russian satellite countries to join our gang (EU & NATO). How would you feel if Russia was doing here with say Mexico, what we are have been doing over there with Ukraine, Georgia, etc.?

I'm surprised that you as a conservative, don't seem to want to let those people and countries pull themselves up by their bootstraps and deal with the Russian problem themselves. We don't need to get involved in that region.

I think you are really taking that to the extreme, so what if Putin gets the Soviet Union back together. Where in the Constitution does it state that we must be "the leaders of the free world", where in the Constitution does it state that we must be the "world police"? Maybe some conservative who always tout "the Founding Fathers", should read the foreign policy that George Washington envisioned in his Farewell Address.

I here and read many conservatives and republicans complain about "spending", how many billions (if not trillions) of dollars do you think this "spreading democracy" project of your would cost us? Ukraine is not a NATO country, Ukraine is not part of the EU, and we certainly shouldn't be signing any bills to send money over there so they can pay the Russians.

We should have stayed out of there conflict and just wished them peace, and good luck.

You know, if you can't understand the relevance of the example of your neighborhood, then there isn't much I can do for you. Just sit in your recliner and watch your world unfold before you. And as you do - remember this:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.


God bless you.

 

[Pheonixops]

The problem I see is where does Putin stop if we do let that happen this started with the Crimea we let that go because historically it had been Russian now he's looking at Eastern Ukraine if he takes that and he goes for all of Ukraine after that is there any reason to think he would stop with Ukraine? This has very similar feel to what Hitler did in the 1930s I'm not saying Putin would go that far but the world refused to confront Hitler till he controlled most of Europe and the price to undo that was very high. My gut feeling with Putin will keep going as long as there is no serious opposition to him.

I'm pretty sure that he would stop when it got to the EU/NATO countries, Ukraine and Crimea were neither, though they were being groomed to be so.

That is what I hear others say as well they could be right or he could be emboldened to push the line farther with this guy it's really hard to tell.

Agreed, I do think the problem started when we tried to get the former Soviet countries to join NATO and the EU. It would be akin to Russia trying to get Mexico to join with them.

 

[ron4342]

obama is not going to do anything. Nor should he. The mistakes made were made long ago. They can't be rectified now. obama really needs to just shut up because he's only making this country look more foolish. The recent chemical attack in Syria met with silence was just more proof of how ineffective we really are.

Hummm ..... We warned Syria that if they did not get rid of their WMD, we would. They first denied that they had poison gas and then when the US didn't back down they admitted that, yes they did have poisoned gas. To avoid American intervention they agreed to turn the gas over to the UN for destruction and that is taking place now. All of this was accomplished without America firing one shot or losing one life. Seems to me what we did was very effective.

Too bad it didn't work with Sadaam Hussein , He sent his to Syria as our troops approached and thwarted UN Investigators at every turn.

Ahhhhh ........ A history re-write. You have absolutely no proof that Saddam sent his weapons anywhere. If you have produce it. Eye will not hold my breath. It would have made zero sense to give his best weapons away. He especially would not give them to Syria who was a regional enemy. They had been destroyed after Gulf War 1 and only someone in denial would think otherwise.
And initially Saddam did try to block UN investigators from searching Iraq. When it became clear bush was really planning an invasion he allowed the UN in and gave they full power to search anywhere and everywhere. Had the UN and Hans Blix had time to do a full search he would have proved that Iraq had no WMD. bush, realizing this, ordered the UN out of Iraq so he could start the war he wanted.
Now, before you go on another name calling rant perhaps you should do a bit of research on Iraq's WMD. Or, alternately you can ignore the facts and get down to name calling. It seems to suit you.
Oh, by the way, did you catch my misspelling? I put that in especially for ewe.

 

[williepete]

Hey ron4342 and Pheonixops,

Do you guys even remember what this thread WAS about?

It used to be an interesting topic.

 

[blackhawk]

I'm pretty sure that he would stop when it got to the EU/NATO countries, Ukraine and Crimea were neither, though they were being groomed to be so.

That is what I hear others say as well they could be right or he could be emboldened to push the line farther with this guy it's really hard to tell.

Agreed, I do think the problem started when we tried to get the former Soviet countries to join NATO and the EU. It would be akin to Russia trying to get Mexico to join with them.

Could be then again Putin has said publicly one of the great tragedies was the collapse of the old Soviet empire so he might have done this in any event it probably did give him a good excuse to speed it up though.

 

[Pheonixops]

Frankly, as a guy who actually fought "The Cold War", I find it extremely troubling that you would even ask a question like that.

Tell you what.....let me bring a foreign country into your neighborhood with tanks, planes and troops. They shut down your rights, destroy the press, forbid you to travel ANYWHERE except where THEY tell you, put you or your family into labor camps OR shoot you in the back of the head if you disagree and tell you that you are now a "communist comrade". Now, that might be welcomed by you - I have no idea. However, ask the people of Germany how much they enjoyed it. Or the people of Poland. Or the people of Czechoslovakia how much they enjoyed it, or Albania or the Ukraine on and on.

Why MUST Obama do something? It's simple and straightforward. If Putin is allowed to go on "unchecked" and decides to put the "band back together" - What's next? World War III? Expansion all over the world? This president (OBarry) is the "leader of the free world". It is HIS responsibility to ensure FREEDOM - not stand by idly and watch as it is exterminated across the globe.

It's time for this "man" to stop drawing red lines and actually become a man and stand up for the free world. I would also suggest that he understand that Putin isn't playing around. If you are going to challenge this guy - you had damn well be ready to back it up - or just keep your mealy mouth shut and continue be the worlds biggest metro-sexual.

So did I....................why do you find it troubling that I would ask such a question?

Good point, is Russia doing that to us or are they doing that to Ukraine? If you really look at it from a sane and rational point of view, we have been doing just that by meddling in that region and attempting to get former Russian satellite countries to join our gang (EU & NATO). How would you feel if Russia was doing here with say Mexico, what we are have been doing over there with Ukraine, Georgia, etc.?

I'm surprised that you as a conservative, don't seem to want to let those people and countries pull themselves up by their bootstraps and deal with the Russian problem themselves. We don't need to get involved in that region.

I think you are really taking that to the extreme, so what if Putin gets the Soviet Union back together. Where in the Constitution does it state that we must be "the leaders of the free world", where in the Constitution does it state that we must be the "world police"? Maybe some conservative who always tout "the Founding Fathers", should read the foreign policy that George Washington envisioned in his Farewell Address.

I here and read many conservatives and republicans complain about "spending", how many billions (if not trillions) of dollars do you think this "spreading democracy" project of your would cost us? Ukraine is not a NATO country, Ukraine is not part of the EU, and we certainly shouldn't be signing any bills to send money over there so they can pay the Russians.

We should have stayed out of there conflict and just wished them peace, and good luck.

You know, if you can't understand the relevance of the example of your neighborhood, then there isn't much I can do for you. Just sit in your recliner and watch your world unfold before you. And as you do - remember this:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.


God bless you.

I don't sit in a recliner, I just have a different vision of foreign policy than you do. Thank you for your service and God Bless you too. Nice quote. Maybe this quote and vision of foreign policy will interest you as well:

"Harmony, liberal intercourse with all Nations, are recommended by policy, humanity and interest. But even our Commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand: neither seeking nor granting exclusive favours or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of Commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing with Powers so disposed; in order to give trade a stable course.
George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796"

"'Tis folly in one Nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its Independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favours and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect, or calculate upon real favours from Nation to Nation. 'Tis an illusion which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.
George Washington, Farewell Address, September 19, 1796"

"My ardent desire is, and my aim has been... to comply strictly with all our engagements foreign and domestic; but to keep the U States free from political connections with every other Country. To see that they may be independent of all, and under the influence of none. In a word, I want an American character, that the powers of Europe may be convinced we act for ourselves and not for others; this, in my judgment, is the only way to be respected abroad and happy at home.
George Washington, letter to Patrick Henry, October 9, 1775"

"My policy has been, and will continue to be, while I have the honor to remain in the administration of the government, to be upon friendly terms with, but independent of, all the nations of the earth. To share in the broils of none. To fulfill our own engagements. To supply the wants, and be carriers for them all: Being thoroughly convinced that it is our policy and interest to do so.
George Washington, letter to Gouverneur Morris, December 22, 1795"

 

[williepete]

So now, several sources are saying it was a SU-24 attack aircraft, not a fighter that "buzzed" a U.S. destroyer. The SU-24 carries a 23-mm GSh-23 six-barrel cannon so there was no way to tell if it was "unarmed" even if its racks and rails were empty. Without bombs, it could carry external fuel tanks which makes the 90 minutes episode quite believable.

'Provocative' Russian jet buzzes US ship in Black Sea: Pentagon