(05-04-2020 06:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 05:51 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 03:27 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 01:20 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-03-2020 12:15 PM)450bench Wrote:  W was my favorite President. Love the guy.

Until 2016....

L. Johnson = G. Ford = H.W. Bush = B. Clinton = W. Bush = B. Obama = J. McCain = M. Romney = J. Biden = H. Clinton = Ike's remarks about the Military Industrial Complex = Pro Federal Reserve Investors = Deep State.

Until everyone here learns that equation you will never be free of them, ever.

J.F.K. refused to play ball with the MIC on Viet Nam and had screwed up the Bay of Pigs until the Cuban Missile Crisis made him look re-electable. R.F.K. wanted to kill the Federal Reserve. Both were assassinated. Richard Nixon lost Agnew as a V.P. on a petty old scandal and gained G. Ford. Bye bye Agnew. Bye bye Tricky Dick. In came Carter a Rickover Disciple and not pro MIC so the Dems refused to cooperate with him and made him look foolish. In came Reagan who wasn't part of the crowd so the RNC told him no endorsement without taking either H.W. Bush or G. Ford as a running mate. He chose H.W. Bush and was shot, survived, but the policy changed to one of deregulating the wrong things in his 2nd term. Now we get nothing but Deep State presidents until DJT is elected and the McCains, Ryans, and Romneys all conspire with the Dems to do him in, only he's surviving. Now W. wants to make him look like a divisive figure by pulling a presidential Rodney King.

Wake up!

What you said...

I pull LBJ and Clinton out of that equation....but yeah....LBJ was the plague we now witness to date....Clinton was the only donk with a clue in my lifetime....

#insurmountable #henceDJT

we're at the precipice/pinnacle how capitalism vs. socialized $$$ plays out....

it's a dirty game.....

#pullEmUpORfkOFF

Nah, leave 'em in. LBJ was just sleazier in every way but he was most definitely an original Deep State Fed Backer because he was one of the first to benefit from their campaign contributions.

Slick Willie rivaled LBJ in the sleaze factor and if ever there was POTUS who couldn't remember where he left his schlong it was him. But make no mistake he was a protegee of the political think tanks that the others including Bush daddy were a part of.

Lose the labels and look at whose money they take and what policies they push. Under all of them the bureaucracy grew and it grew as a means of thwarting the ability of future presidents, not of their Klan, to undo their web of corporate collusion. They are all guilty as Hell!

can I have lobbyists and unions for $1T, Alex....

my 'cancelling' was great society mucking>>>today and 'long schlong' not hockey puckin' the 'works'....there's no question we concur relative to both versions 'modeling' corpshite 'murica's influence....

Ford didn't create the war on drugs....that was Nixon (who should easily be a portion) Ford was never a factor that led to 'peanuts'....then Reagan doubled down (yep, that guy too)....then Yale trained 'Bush I' wanted more prisons....sorry chief, it all goes back to LBJ and the great societal 'smelting pot'....I don't do labels....I label as req'd.....they all sucked muh tingles as I look backwards....was the same when it occurred....the residual/coagulated timeline have borne such burden.....

I couldn't give two shites where clinton's arky-log resided...that was the dumbest move the pubs made in scope (impeachment) coupled with the hard-line war on drugs position coupled with not addressing 'incentive' driving the USD internally (jobs)....clinton kicked their nuts on any pub's version of welfare reform and balancing ze budget.....toss in muh stupid wars, and clinton kicks all their arses...both parties dicked us with NAFTA....

clinton's biggest problem was getting caught making shiTTTy trade deals...hence, why today's version of bs exists...we gave the commies an inch....they turned it into a metre....

carter and zer0 are exponential in the equation of economic pussification (x10)

once again, >>>> #henceDJT

if #DJTexperiment fails, it won't make a difference down the road....sig line 1b) will win outright....the USD will become Dutch tulips.....

#stink'sTake

(05-04-2020 10:37 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 06:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 05:51 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 03:27 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 01:20 AM)JRsec Wrote:  L. Johnson = G. Ford = H.W. Bush = B. Clinton = W. Bush = B. Obama = J. McCain = M. Romney = J. Biden = H. Clinton = Ike's remarks about the Military Industrial Complex = Pro Federal Reserve Investors = Deep State.

Until everyone here learns that equation you will never be free of them, ever.

J.F.K. refused to play ball with the MIC on Viet Nam and had screwed up the Bay of Pigs until the Cuban Missile Crisis made him look re-electable. R.F.K. wanted to kill the Federal Reserve. Both were assassinated. Richard Nixon lost Agnew as a V.P. on a petty old scandal and gained G. Ford. Bye bye Agnew. Bye bye Tricky Dick. In came Carter a Rickover Disciple and not pro MIC so the Dems refused to cooperate with him and made him look foolish. In came Reagan who wasn't part of the crowd so the RNC told him no endorsement without taking either H.W. Bush or G. Ford as a running mate. He chose H.W. Bush and was shot, survived, but the policy changed to one of deregulating the wrong things in his 2nd term. Now we get nothing but Deep State presidents until DJT is elected and the McCains, Ryans, and Romneys all conspire with the Dems to do him in, only he's surviving. Now W. wants to make him look like a divisive figure by pulling a presidential Rodney King.

Wake up!

What you said...

I pull LBJ and Clinton out of that equation....but yeah....LBJ was the plague we now witness to date....Clinton was the only donk with a clue in my lifetime....

#insurmountable #henceDJT

we're at the precipice/pinnacle how capitalism vs. socialized $$$ plays out....

it's a dirty game.....

#pullEmUpORfkOFF

Nah, leave 'em in. LBJ was just sleazier in every way but he was most definitely an original Deep State Fed Backer because he was one of the first to benefit from their campaign contributions.

Slick Willie rivaled LBJ in the sleaze factor and if ever there was POTUS who couldn't remember where he left his schlong it was him. But make no mistake he was a protegee of the political think tanks that the others including Bush daddy were a part of.

Lose the labels and look at whose money they take and what policies they push. Under all of them the bureaucracy grew and it grew as a means of thwarting the ability of future presidents, not of their Klan, to undo their web of corporate collusion. They are all guilty as Hell!

can I have lobbyists and unions for $1T, Alex....

my 'cancelling' was great society mucking>>>today and 'long schlong' not hockey puckin' the 'works'....there's no question we concur relative to both versions 'modeling' corpshite 'murica's influence....

Ford didn't create the war on drugs....that was Nixon (who should easily be a portion) Ford was never a factor that led to 'peanuts'....then Reagan doubled down (yep, that guy too)....then Yale trained 'Bush I' wanted more prisons....sorry chief, it all goes back to LBJ and the great societal 'smelting pot'....I don't do labels....I label as req'd.....they all sucked muh tingles as I look backwards....was the same when it occurred....the residual/coagulated timeline have borne such burden.....

I couldn't give two shites where clinton's arky-log resided...that was the dumbest move the pubs made in scope (impeachment) coupled with the hard-line war on drugs position coupled with not addressing 'incentive' driving the USD internally (jobs)....clinton kicked their nuts on any pub's version of welfare reform and balancing ze budget.....toss in muh stupid wars, and clinton kicks all their arses...both parties dicked us with NAFTA....

clinton's biggest problem was getting caught making shiTTTy trade deals...hence, why today's version of bs exists...we gave the commies an inch....they turned it into a metre....

carter and zer0 are exponential in the equation of economic pussification (x10)

once again, >>>> #henceDJT

if #DJTexperiment fails, it won't make a difference down the road....sig line 1b) will win outright....the USD will become Dutch tulips.....

#stink'sTake

His furthering of NAFTA and his associations with the Chinese negate any positives he might have accomplished in other areas and I'm referring to Clinton.

You say Gerald Ford was a nothing. As far as policy yes. As for as loyalty to the MIC via the Warren Commission? No. He's one of them.

None of them have been stellar. But there's a difference between not stellar and not being part of the system, and not stellar and advancing the MIC's objectives. Only now what confuses some is that the MIC includes Tech.

(05-04-2020 03:39 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 12:20 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 11:44 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 08:17 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  "A man you can bait with a tweet, is not a man we can trust with nuclear weapons." ~ HRC 2/28/2016

That is funny. With the Wikileaks dump there is an email that Hillary sent to Huma, telling her to investigate a Twitter account named OMGVince. Hillary suggested find out who he is and get after him, find out who his wife is etc. All because that guy would troll Hillary on Twitter.

So?

She's still not wrong...here.

Wait, has Trump been dangerously close to pushing that button? He's probably been one of the least hawkish presidents I can remember.

Yes, with North Korea to name one. Oh but wait...he was just playing 4D chess with his huge brain and as a result they are no longer a nuclear threat.

Com Tom loses again, and Hillary is 1,000 times more of a loose cannon than Trump. Tom and his emoji posts is always a surrender.

(05-05-2020 06:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 03:39 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 12:20 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 11:44 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 08:17 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  "A man you can bait with a tweet, is not a man we can trust with nuclear weapons." ~ HRC 2/28/2016

That is funny. With the Wikileaks dump there is an email that Hillary sent to Huma, telling her to investigate a Twitter account named OMGVince. Hillary suggested find out who he is and get after him, find out who his wife is etc. All because that guy would troll Hillary on Twitter.

So?

She's still not wrong...here.

Wait, has Trump been dangerously close to pushing that button? He's probably been one of the least hawkish presidents I can remember.

Yes, with North Korea to name one. Oh but wait...he was just playing 4D chess with his huge brain and as a result they are no longer a nuclear threat.

Drop this whole B.S. line of commentary. The military is well past the nuclear age. We have tactical nukes now but they use, and have for some time, neutron warheads with a half life of 72 hours or shorter. The only credible nuclear threat today comes from nihilistic primitive religions that want to usher in the final caliphate and could care less how many die or if the Earth remains inhabitable.

China is not nihilistic, nor are the Russians and that is why lap dog Korea won't do anything stupid either. Iran is your nuclear threat.

As for theater neutron warheads they aren't even a weapon of choice. We now have EMP's capable of targeting the frequency range at which human hearts beat. They can take out every person under their targeted area and leave edible crops in the field and some livestock the hearts of which beat at a different frequency. Harmonic Amplitude Resonance Projection, or HARP for short can emit from a satellite and sing everyone to sleep and leave a world absent humans.

It's why China won't attack us directly until they have attained parity in space.

It is why the Orange Haired Velociraptor wants a Space Force. Gotta have us some space fighter pilots to defend those satellites.

Now if some low tech thug of a nation releases the right virus it will be Katie bar the door for homo sapiens. But other than your average used camel lot of a nation nukes aren't likely because nobody else is suicidal.

But before liberals wet their wadded panties HARP is also why China has bought so much copper. Copper screening in ceilings and walls in government and military buildings creates a Faraday cage that protects you from a frequency weapon or an EMP. So it's not a first strike weapon, or even a weapon of choice since it is so indiscriminate. But it has other applications which are a lot sneakier.

Sleep well RWT, Trumpy Bear is your buddy!

(05-05-2020 06:44 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 06:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 03:39 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 12:20 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 11:44 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  That is funny. With the Wikileaks dump there is an email that Hillary sent to Huma, telling her to investigate a Twitter account named OMGVince. Hillary suggested find out who he is and get after him, find out who his wife is etc. All because that guy would troll Hillary on Twitter.

So?

She's still not wrong...here.

Wait, has Trump been dangerously close to pushing that button? He's probably been one of the least hawkish presidents I can remember.

Yes, with North Korea to name one. Oh but wait...he was just playing 4D chess with his huge brain and as a result they are no longer a nuclear threat.

Drop this whole B.S. line of commentary. The military is well past the nuclear age. We have tactical nukes now but they use, and have for some time, neutron warheads with a half life of 72 hours or shorter. The only credible nuclear threat today comes from nihilistic primitive religions that want to usher in the final caliphate and could care less how many die or if the Earth remains inhabitable.

China is not nihilistic, nor are the Russians and that is why lap dog Korea won't do anything stupid either. Iran is your nuclear threat.

As for theater neutron warheads they aren't even a weapon of choice. We now have EMP's capable of targeting the frequency range at which human hearts beat. They can take out every person under their targeted area and leave edible crops in the field and some livestock the hearts of which beat at a different frequency. Harmonic Amplitude Resonance Projection, or HARP for short can emit from a satellite and sing everyone to sleep and leave a world absent humans.

It's why China won't attack us directly until they have attained parity in space.

It is why the Orange Haired Velociraptor wants a Space Force. Gotta have us some space fighter pilots to defend those satellites.

Now if some low tech thug of a nation releases the right virus it will be Katie bar the door for homo sapiens. But other than your average used camel lot of a nation nukes aren't likely because nobody else is suicidal.

w/o question in my mind, that's how it eventually happens...'they'll' call it revelations and the four horsemen...it won't matter...

#12monkeys

@canonlyhopeI'mwrong

#covidTestDrive

(05-05-2020 06:51 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 06:44 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 06:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 03:39 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 12:20 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So?

She's still not wrong...here.

Wait, has Trump been dangerously close to pushing that button? He's probably been one of the least hawkish presidents I can remember.

Yes, with North Korea to name one. Oh but wait...he was just playing 4D chess with his huge brain and as a result they are no longer a nuclear threat.

Drop this whole B.S. line of commentary. The military is well past the nuclear age. We have tactical nukes now but they use, and have for some time, neutron warheads with a half life of 72 hours or shorter. The only credible nuclear threat today comes from nihilistic primitive religions that want to usher in the final caliphate and could care less how many die or if the Earth remains inhabitable.

China is not nihilistic, nor are the Russians and that is why lap dog Korea won't do anything stupid either. Iran is your nuclear threat.

As for theater neutron warheads they aren't even a weapon of choice. We now have EMP's capable of targeting the frequency range at which human hearts beat. They can take out every person under their targeted area and leave edible crops in the field and some livestock the hearts of which beat at a different frequency. Harmonic Amplitude Resonance Projection, or HARP for short can emit from a satellite and sing everyone to sleep and leave a world absent humans.

It's why China won't attack us directly until they have attained parity in space.

It is why the Orange Haired Velociraptor wants a Space Force. Gotta have us some space fighter pilots to defend those satellites.

Now if some low tech thug of a nation releases the right virus it will be Katie bar the door for homo sapiens. But other than your average used camel lot of a nation nukes aren't likely because nobody else is suicidal.

w/o question in my mind, that's how it eventually happens...'they'll' call it revelations and the four horsemen...it won't matter...

#12monkeys

@canonlyhopeI'mwrong

#covidTestDrive

It's why Cousteau dreamt of an underwater sea lab kind of home. There's a retired department head on my street and his arteries are clean as a whistle at 80 something. Why? He eats only fruit, vegetables and seafood. We've known for decades why Mediterranean diets were so healthy. Toss in some olive oil and voila you have the artery's version of a window cleaner.

Now couple that with the antiviral nature of living under the sea and we just might one day mutate some gills!

(05-05-2020 07:02 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 06:51 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 06:44 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 06:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 03:39 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  Wait, has Trump been dangerously close to pushing that button? He's probably been one of the least hawkish presidents I can remember.

Yes, with North Korea to name one. Oh but wait...he was just playing 4D chess with his huge brain and as a result they are no longer a nuclear threat.

Drop this whole B.S. line of commentary. The military is well past the nuclear age. We have tactical nukes now but they use, and have for some time, neutron warheads with a half life of 72 hours or shorter. The only credible nuclear threat today comes from nihilistic primitive religions that want to usher in the final caliphate and could care less how many die or if the Earth remains inhabitable.

China is not nihilistic, nor are the Russians and that is why lap dog Korea won't do anything stupid either. Iran is your nuclear threat.

As for theater neutron warheads they aren't even a weapon of choice. We now have EMP's capable of targeting the frequency range at which human hearts beat. They can take out every person under their targeted area and leave edible crops in the field and some livestock the hearts of which beat at a different frequency. Harmonic Amplitude Resonance Projection, or HARP for short can emit from a satellite and sing everyone to sleep and leave a world absent humans.

It's why China won't attack us directly until they have attained parity in space.

It is why the Orange Haired Velociraptor wants a Space Force. Gotta have us some space fighter pilots to defend those satellites.

Now if some low tech thug of a nation releases the right virus it will be Katie bar the door for homo sapiens. But other than your average used camel lot of a nation nukes aren't likely because nobody else is suicidal.

w/o question in my mind, that's how it eventually happens...'they'll' call it revelations and the four horsemen...it won't matter...

#12monkeys

@canonlyhopeI'mwrong

#covidTestDrive

It's why Cousteau dreamt of an underwater sea lab kind of home. There's a retired department head on my street and his arteries are clean as a whistle at 80 something. Why? He eats only fruit, vegetables and seafood. We've known for decades why Mediterranean diets were so healthy. Toss in some olive oil and voila you have the artery's version of a window cleaner.

Now couple that with the antiviral nature of living under the sea and we just might one day mutate some gills!

like Euell Gibbons, Jacques was one cool character/outside the box/revolutionary thinker....

I'm not close to a vegan....nor do I prescribe to any version of real diet...I'm actually fortunate that way (high metabolism, no family traitors in the genome)

however, I am John the fisherman that does everything possible to consume fruit, veggies, and seafood (~60%)..... at 6-3, 225 (back to fighting weight), enhanced vigor is easily achieved through proportioning....the other 40% is nothing more than the bs absorbed when in the field or what muh Hyde whims generate post 420....

#suchIsMuhLife

#stillLoveMuhBeef

(05-05-2020 06:37 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Com Tom loses again, and Hillary is 1,000 times more of a loose cannon than Trump. Tom and his emoji posts is always a surrender.

Right...she'd TOTALLY be up at 1 in the morning tweeting at people calling them MOONFACE!

(05-03-2020 10:39 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  W was a good governor of Texas. But when he announced he was running for president, my first thought was, "He's not ready for that yet." And he wasn't. And when he pitcked DIck Cheney for VP, my first thought was, "I can't vote for him."

Better than AlGore would have been, I'm convinced of that. But that's about all I can say.

I can't say that for sure one way or the other, because it would require me knowing the answer to something we can never know, would Al Gore have taken us into Iraq? If the answer is no then it doesn't matter what else he did he would have been a better president. I'd like to believe he wouldn't have, but considering how many Dems happily went along with every lie and half truth the intelligence community told them regarding Iraq's "WMD" program I'm not convinced he wouldn't have done the exact same thing.

(05-05-2020 07:26 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(05-03-2020 10:39 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  W was a good governor of Texas. But when he announced he was running for president, my first thought was, "He's not ready for that yet." And he wasn't. And when he pitcked DIck Cheney for VP, my first thought was, "I can't vote for him."

Better than AlGore would have been, I'm convinced of that. But that's about all I can say.

I can't say that for sure one way or the other, because it would require me knowing the answer to something we can never know, would Al Gore have taken us into Iraq? If the answer is no then it doesn't matter what else he did he would have been a better president. I'd like to believe he wouldn't have, but considering how many Dems happily went along with every lie and half truth the intelligence community told them regarding Iraq's "WMD" program I'm not convinced he wouldn't have done the exact same thing.

owl#s nailed it....the Halliburton invasion was a gimme putt....

I honestly don't want to imagine what today would be like if the 'inventor of the internutz' would've won....

toss in the tipper clapper, and it gives me the 'willies'....

(05-05-2020 07:31 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 07:26 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(05-03-2020 10:39 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  W was a good governor of Texas. But when he announced he was running for president, my first thought was, "He's not ready for that yet." And he wasn't. And when he pitcked DIck Cheney for VP, my first thought was, "I can't vote for him."

Better than AlGore would have been, I'm convinced of that. But that's about all I can say.

I can't say that for sure one way or the other, because it would require me knowing the answer to something we can never know, would Al Gore have taken us into Iraq? If the answer is no then it doesn't matter what else he did he would have been a better president. I'd like to believe he wouldn't have, but considering how many Dems happily went along with every lie and half truth the intelligence community told them regarding Iraq's "WMD" program I'm not convinced he wouldn't have done the exact same thing.

owl#s nailed it....the Halliburton invasion was a gimme putt....

I honestly don't want to imagine what today would be like if the 'inventor of the internutz' would've won....

toss in the tipper clapper, and it gives me the 'willies'....

A decade ago I would have fully believed "there's no way Al Gore would have taken us to Iraq." Today I think it's probably 80-20 that he still would have. All of these ghouls on both sides lined their pockets from that war, and that's all they cared about. Biden was pushing for invading Iraq back in the 90's. I wish 1 of the 2 major parties was actually anti-war, but both of them are far too pro-grifting, and war is the ultimate grift.

(05-05-2020 07:40 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 07:31 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 07:26 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(05-03-2020 10:39 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  W was a good governor of Texas. But when he announced he was running for president, my first thought was, "He's not ready for that yet." And he wasn't. And when he pitcked DIck Cheney for VP, my first thought was, "I can't vote for him."

Better than AlGore would have been, I'm convinced of that. But that's about all I can say.

I can't say that for sure one way or the other, because it would require me knowing the answer to something we can never know, would Al Gore have taken us into Iraq? If the answer is no then it doesn't matter what else he did he would have been a better president. I'd like to believe he wouldn't have, but considering how many Dems happily went along with every lie and half truth the intelligence community told them regarding Iraq's "WMD" program I'm not convinced he wouldn't have done the exact same thing.

owl#s nailed it....the Halliburton invasion was a gimme putt....

I honestly don't want to imagine what today would be like if the 'inventor of the internutz' would've won....

toss in the tipper clapper, and it gives me the 'willies'....

A decade ago I would have fully believed "there's no way Al Gore would have taken us to Iraq." Today I think it's probably 80-20 that he still would have. All of these ghouls on both sides lined their pockets from that war, and that's all they cared about. Biden was pushing for invading Iraq back in the 90's. I wish 1 of the 2 major parties was actually anti-war, but both of them are far too pro-grifting, and war is the ultimate grift.

XACLY!

IMO, the U.S. hasn't fought a war worth fighting since the 'deuce'....there's no reason to assume Gore & corp. would've played that 'weakness' any differently....the only difference (if = 1) would've been the cast of characters....

(05-05-2020 07:53 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 07:40 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 07:31 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 07:26 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(05-03-2020 10:39 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  W was a good governor of Texas. But when he announced he was running for president, my first thought was, "He's not ready for that yet." And he wasn't. And when he pitcked DIck Cheney for VP, my first thought was, "I can't vote for him."

Better than AlGore would have been, I'm convinced of that. But that's about all I can say.

I can't say that for sure one way or the other, because it would require me knowing the answer to something we can never know, would Al Gore have taken us into Iraq? If the answer is no then it doesn't matter what else he did he would have been a better president. I'd like to believe he wouldn't have, but considering how many Dems happily went along with every lie and half truth the intelligence community told them regarding Iraq's "WMD" program I'm not convinced he wouldn't have done the exact same thing.

owl#s nailed it....the Halliburton invasion was a gimme putt....

I honestly don't want to imagine what today would be like if the 'inventor of the internutz' would've won....

toss in the tipper clapper, and it gives me the 'willies'....

A decade ago I would have fully believed "there's no way Al Gore would have taken us to Iraq." Today I think it's probably 80-20 that he still would have. All of these ghouls on both sides lined their pockets from that war, and that's all they cared about. Biden was pushing for invading Iraq back in the 90's. I wish 1 of the 2 major parties was actually anti-war, but both of them are far too pro-grifting, and war is the ultimate grift.

XACLY!

IMO, the U.S. hasn't fought a war worth fighting since the 'deuce'....there's no reason to assume Gore & corp. would've played that 'weakness' any differently....the only difference (if = 1) would've been the cast of characters....

1. There's no reason to fight a war unless the objective is winning it.
Hire mercenaries if the objective is other.

2. We haven't fought a war seeking unconditional surrender of an
adversary since WWII.

3. That means the objectives in all wars since 1945 have been to simply bleed off people and bust equipment.

In other words, no good reason to fight. If you are going to spend lives you had better damn well accomplish something with that sacrifice.

The problem is not that we went to war in Iraq per se. The problem is that we went to war without fighting to win, and before we finished the job in Afghanistan. Which was another war that we fought without intending to win. In both cases I’m not sure we ever knew what we were fighting for.

What we should have done IMO is go into Afghanistan with full force, kill whoever needed killing ASAP (including Bin Laden, whom we finally killed years later, and Mullah Omar, who apparently died of old age before we killed him), break everything that needs breaking, tell whoever is left that if they screw up we will be back to kill them, GTFO, and stay TFO. That should have happened within 2 years. Then turn to Iraq, unless we scared Saddam into compliance. Go in the same way, kill everybody who needs killing, break everything that needs breaking, split the country into Kurdistan in the North, Shia Mesopotamia in the East, and Sunni Iraq in the north. Give Schlumberger the Halliburton contract for Kurdistan and tell the French that this is your payback for San Reno, so it’s your job to convince that Kurdistan is the price of EU admission. Leave the Baathist power structure intact in the West because they can keep the Shias from attacking Saudi. Then GTFO and stay TFO. Let China and Japan worry about it.

Play hardball for once, or don’t play at all. There is no way Al Gore would have done it that way. We would have gone in with an even more feeble attempt than we did, and gotten even worse results.

(05-05-2020 08:40 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The problem is not that we went to war in Iraq per se. The problem is that we went to war without fighting to win, and before we finished the job in Afghanistan. Which was another war that we fought without intending to win. In both cases I’m not sure we ever knew what we were fighting for.

What we should have done IMO is go into Afghanistan with full force, kill whoever needed killing ASAP (including Bin Laden, whom we finally killed years later, and Mullah Omar, who apparently died of old age before we killed him), break everything that needs breaking, tell whoever is left that if they screw up we will be back to kill them, GTFO, and stay TFO. That should have happened within 2 years. Then turn to Iraq, unless we scared Saddam into compliance. Go in the same way, kill everybody who needs killing, break everything that needs breaking, split the country into Kurdistan in the North, Shia Mesopotamia in the East, and Sunni Iraq in the north. Give Schlumberger the Halliburton contract for Kurdistan and tell the French that this is your payback for San Reno, so it’s your job to convince that Kurdistan is the price of EU admission. Leave the Baathist power structure intact in the West because they can keep the Shias from attacking Saudi. Then GTFO and stay TFO. Let China and Japan worry about it.

Play hardball for once, or don’t play at all. There is no way Al Gore would have done any of that.

Going in tepidly and hanging around is even worse than picking a parallel we won't cross and setting up rules where the enemy can attack us on our occupied ground but we can't bomb and invade his.

What was it Charlie Wilson said? We f*%k up the peace? Well if winning outright or changing the regime isn't your total objective you have no business being there.

(05-05-2020 07:02 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 06:51 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 06:44 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 06:30 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-04-2020 03:39 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  Wait, has Trump been dangerously close to pushing that button? He's probably been one of the least hawkish presidents I can remember.

Yes, with North Korea to name one. Oh but wait...he was just playing 4D chess with his huge brain and as a result they are no longer a nuclear threat.

Drop this whole B.S. line of commentary. The military is well past the nuclear age. We have tactical nukes now but they use, and have for some time, neutron warheads with a half life of 72 hours or shorter. The only credible nuclear threat today comes from nihilistic primitive religions that want to usher in the final caliphate and could care less how many die or if the Earth remains inhabitable.

China is not nihilistic, nor are the Russians and that is why lap dog Korea won't do anything stupid either. Iran is your nuclear threat.

As for theater neutron warheads they aren't even a weapon of choice. We now have EMP's capable of targeting the frequency range at which human hearts beat. They can take out every person under their targeted area and leave edible crops in the field and some livestock the hearts of which beat at a different frequency. Harmonic Amplitude Resonance Projection, or HARP for short can emit from a satellite and sing everyone to sleep and leave a world absent humans.

It's why China won't attack us directly until they have attained parity in space.

It is why the Orange Haired Velociraptor wants a Space Force. Gotta have us some space fighter pilots to defend those satellites.

Now if some low tech thug of a nation releases the right virus it will be Katie bar the door for homo sapiens. But other than your average used camel lot of a nation nukes aren't likely because nobody else is suicidal.

w/o question in my mind, that's how it eventually happens...'they'll' call it revelations and the four horsemen...it won't matter...

#12monkeys

@canonlyhopeI'mwrong

#covidTestDrive

It's why Cousteau dreamt of an underwater sea lab kind of home. There's a retired department head on my street and his arteries are clean as a whistle at 80 something. Why? He eats only fruit, vegetables and seafood. We've known for decades why Mediterranean diets were so healthy. Toss in some olive oil and voila you have the artery's version of a window cleaner.

Now couple that with the antiviral nature of living under the sea and we just might one day mutate some gills!

Scientists say there are a billion viruses in a gallon of sea water. Just sayin’...

(05-05-2020 07:23 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 06:37 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Com Tom loses again, and Hillary is 1,000 times more of a loose cannon than Trump. Tom and his emoji posts is always a surrender.

Right...she'd TOTALLY be up at 1 in the morning tweeting at people calling them MOONFACE!

No... she'd be sleeping soundly while having people killed for having dirt on her.

I'd much rather have someone insult me than have me killed.

(05-05-2020 07:23 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 06:37 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Com Tom loses again, and Hillary is 1,000 times more of a loose cannon than Trump. Tom and his emoji posts is always a surrender.

Right...she'd TOTALLY be up at 1 in the morning tweeting at people calling them MOONFACE!

Let us know when Trump nukes someone, OK Karen.

(05-05-2020 08:31 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 07:53 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 07:40 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 07:31 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(05-05-2020 07:26 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I can't say that for sure one way or the other, because it would require me knowing the answer to something we can never know, would Al Gore have taken us into Iraq? If the answer is no then it doesn't matter what else he did he would have been a better president. I'd like to believe he wouldn't have, but considering how many Dems happily went along with every lie and half truth the intelligence community told them regarding Iraq's "WMD" program I'm not convinced he wouldn't have done the exact same thing.

owl#s nailed it....the Halliburton invasion was a gimme putt....

I honestly don't want to imagine what today would be like if the 'inventor of the internutz' would've won....

toss in the tipper clapper, and it gives me the 'willies'....

A decade ago I would have fully believed "there's no way Al Gore would have taken us to Iraq." Today I think it's probably 80-20 that he still would have. All of these ghouls on both sides lined their pockets from that war, and that's all they cared about. Biden was pushing for invading Iraq back in the 90's. I wish 1 of the 2 major parties was actually anti-war, but both of them are far too pro-grifting, and war is the ultimate grift.

XACLY!

IMO, the U.S. hasn't fought a war worth fighting since the 'deuce'....there's no reason to assume Gore & corp. would've played that 'weakness' any differently....the only difference (if = 1) would've been the cast of characters....

1. There's no reason to fight a war unless the objective is winning it.
Hire mercenaries if the objective is other.

2. We haven't fought a war seeking unconditional surrender of an
adversary since WWII.

3. That means the objectives in all wars since 1945 have been to simply bleed off people and bust equipment.

In other words, no good reason to fight. If you are going to spend lives you had better damn well accomplish something with that sacrifice.

Nailed it, and the reason the Dems are fine with rehabbing W is because they aren't against starting that type of war (see Vietnam) and probably will try to start one in the future.