Discussion:
Will Obama Grovel And Apologize To The Pirates?
(too old to reply)
MioMyo
2009-04-10 12:19:43 UTC
Permalink
I think bamby will give em a million bucks a piece (as a way to stimulate
the economy- after all the USA is at fault for the human conditions in
Somalia) and let em know they should meet more often like this!
HELL NO!!
However,
Obama says these pirates are just misunderstood and we must have a
town hall meeting, a stern one. Turn this over to the brutal tough guy
Rahm Emanuel, if he can handle Republicans, pirates should be no
problem. A parachute rescue mission using ACORN commandos, fresh from
stunning victories over AIG execs and their wives and children, might
be considered. And don't forget David Axelrod, a guy who knows how to
follow the path the media has laid down for him. Above all Mr Obama,
the ultimate weapon, your teleprompter, show no mercy ! And remember
to keep turning your head from side to side, that physical punctuation
mark that suggests gravity. And don't poo your pants, it ain't all
taking over the economy.
M***@dick.com
2009-04-10 13:09:38 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009 05:19:43 -0700, "MioMyo"
Post by MioMyo
I think bamby will give em a million bucks a piece (as a way to stimulate
the economy-
See the problem here, Whineo?

"thinking" on your part is a fucking laugh.
Frank Pittel
2009-04-10 18:38:07 UTC
Permalink
That's his way.


References: <***@news.motzarella.org> <tPGDl.14219$***@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com>

In alt.politics.usa.republican MioMyo <***@somewhere.com> wrote:
: I think bamby will give em a million bucks a piece (as a way to stimulate
: the economy- after all the USA is at fault for the human conditions in
: Somalia) and let em know they should meet more often like this!

: "Way Back Jack" <***@Home.org> wrote in message
: news:***@news.motzarella.org...
: > HELL NO!!
: >
: > However,
: >
: > Obama says these pirates are just misunderstood and we must have a
: > town hall meeting, a stern one. Turn this over to the brutal tough guy
: > Rahm Emanuel, if he can handle Republicans, pirates should be no
: > problem. A parachute rescue mission using ACORN commandos, fresh from
: > stunning victories over AIG execs and their wives and children, might
: > be considered. And don't forget David Axelrod, a guy who knows how to
: > follow the path the media has laid down for him. Above all Mr Obama,
: > the ultimate weapon, your teleprompter, show no mercy ! And remember
: > to keep turning your head from side to side, that physical punctuation
: > mark that suggests gravity. And don't poo your pants, it ain't all
: > taking over the economy.
--
-------------------
Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
Spink_Budvorm
2009-04-10 23:50:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by MioMyo
I think bamby will give em a million bucks a piece
Why not. What's a million bucks worth these days? 3 Euro's?
Spartakus
2009-04-11 16:28:57 UTC
Permalink
Time for a history lesson:

In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held by Israel. The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and wheelchair overboard. When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air to Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on Sicily. Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and apprehend the hijackers. After
a standoff between Italian police and American special forces that
lasted through the night, President Ronald Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down. This allowed Abu Abbas, the mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.

When Glenn Beck and his wannabes posture about how Americans are safer
with Republicans in power, remember what actually happened.
Stan de SD
2009-04-11 18:01:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held by Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air to Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police and American special forces that
lasted through the night, President Ronald Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu Abbas, the mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes would have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or apologize to anyone. He did
everything in his power but was frustrated by the type of spineless,
ineffectual EU-weenies that liberals think we need to form a
"consensus" before we do anything militarily... But it's interesting
to see how all you filthy lefties, who crowed about how the whole
world would love and "respect" us more now that Obama was in office,
can't deny that your hero is a weak, cowardly, incompetent DISASTER,
so instead you have to resort to sliveling little lies like "But, but,
but Reagan... he groveled and apologized to pirates too... see?"

Yes, the American Left is intellectually and morally bankrupt, but you
didn't need to remind us of that - we knew that already. :O(
Spartakus
2009-04-11 19:40:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held by Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air to Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police and American special forces that
lasted through the night, President Ronald Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu Abbas, the mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes would have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that situation.
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually unilaterally. Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Post by Stan de SD
But it's interesting to see how all you filthy lefties, who crowed about how
the whole world would love and "respect" us more now that Obama was in
office, can't deny that your hero is a weak, cowardly, incompetent DISASTER,
so instead you have to resort to sliveling little lies like "But, but,
but Reagan... he groveled and apologized to pirates too... see?"
Of course I can deny that Obama is a disaster. We are dealing with a
hostage situation here, involving an American citizen. Going in with
guns blazing will certainly get him killed. Thank gawd the grown-ups
are back in charge.
Post by Stan de SD
Yes, the American Left is intellectually and morally bankrupt, but you
didn't need to remind us of that - we knew that already. :O(
It's quite the other way around, Stan, as evidenced by the fact that
your side has not offered ONE idea, plan, proposal, whathaveyou, that
any rational person would take seriously. We're all done with the
Cold War, the Contract on America and the Project for a New American
Century. If you want conservatives and/or Republicans to be a viable
presence in American politics, you all better start brainstorming.
Stan de SD
2009-04-11 20:13:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held by Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air to Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police and American special forces that
lasted through the night, President Ronald Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu Abbas, the mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes would have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that situation.
Are you suggesting the should have attacked the Italians?
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually unilaterally.  Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Damn well better than if we sat around waiting for France and Germany
to hop on board. We got rid of Saddam, killed off a bunch of al-Qaeda
types, and kept the terrorists occupied with fighting us over there
and not here. Note there hasn't been another major terrorist attack on
US soil, only in Europe to intimidate the cowards there. Things didn't
go perfectly (they never do), but Bush was far more successful in Iraq
than LBJ was in Vietnam. That's why you don't let liberals run wars -
they only fuck things up.
sid9
2009-04-11 20:50:46 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held by
Israel. The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard. When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on
Sicily. Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and
apprehend the hijackers. After
a standoff between Italian police and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down. This allowed Abu Abbas, the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that situation.
Are you suggesting the should have attacked the
Italians?
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Damn well better than if we sat around waiting
for France and Germany
to hop on board. We got rid of Saddam, killed
off a bunch of al-Qaeda
types, and kept the terrorists occupied with
fighting us over there
and not here. Note there hasn't been another
major terrorist attack on
US soil, only in Europe to intimidate the
cowards there. Things didn't
go perfectly (they never do), but Bush was far
more successful in Iraq
than LBJ was in Vietnam. That's why you don't
let liberals run wars -
they only fuck things up.
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest disaster
America encountered!
Stan de SD
2009-04-11 20:57:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held by
Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on
Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and
apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu Abbas, the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that situation.
Are you suggesting the should have attacked the
Italians?
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Damn well better than if we sat around waiting
for France and Germany
to hop on board. We got rid of Saddam, killed
off a bunch of al-Qaeda
types, and kept the terrorists occupied with
fighting us over there
and not here. Note there hasn't been another
major terrorist attack on
US soil, only in Europe to intimidate the
cowards there. Things didn't
go perfectly (they never do), but Bush was far
more successful in Iraq
than LBJ was in Vietnam. That's why you don't
let liberals run wars -
they only fuck things up.
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to the last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.
a***@hotmail.com
2009-04-11 21:41:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held by
Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on
Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and
apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu Abbas, the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that situation.
Are you suggesting the should have attacked the
Italians?
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Damn well better than if we sat around waiting
for France and Germany
to hop on board. We got rid of Saddam, killed
off a bunch of al-Qaeda
types, and kept the terrorists occupied with
fighting us over there
and not here. Note there hasn't been another
major terrorist attack on
US soil, only in Europe to intimidate the
cowards there. Things didn't
go perfectly (they never do), but Bush was far
more successful in Iraq
than LBJ was in Vietnam. That's why you don't
let liberals run wars -
they only fuck things up.
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to the last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
ummm... as i remember, the USA was defeated by the VC and the NVA on
NIXON's watch, not LBJ's, despite Nixon's illegal carpet-bombing of
Cambodia and so on. I seem to remember that Nixon was a GOP president.
While we're at it, it looks like the antiObama loons like to
compare him to Carter a lot - yes, Carter who mounted the large but
failed military rescue of the Iran hostages. Reagan is held up as the
example of all that is good and holy - yes, IranGate Reagan, who had
Teheran hold US hostages several months longer than necessary so that
they could be released on HIS watch - spectacular criminal behavior
that has largely been forgotten - dax
Stan de SD
2009-04-11 21:43:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held by
Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on
Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and
apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu Abbas, the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that situation.
Are you suggesting the should have attacked the
Italians?
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Damn well better than if we sat around waiting
for France and Germany
to hop on board. We got rid of Saddam, killed
off a bunch of al-Qaeda
types, and kept the terrorists occupied with
fighting us over there
and not here. Note there hasn't been another
major terrorist attack on
US soil, only in Europe to intimidate the
cowards there. Things didn't
go perfectly (they never do), but Bush was far
more successful in Iraq
than LBJ was in Vietnam. That's why you don't
let liberals run wars -
they only fuck things up.
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to the last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
ummm... as i remember, the USA was defeated by the VC and the NVA on
NIXON's watch, not LBJ's
Who started the escalation and created the mess in the first place.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Carter who mounted the large but
failed military rescue of the Iran hostages.
Note emphasis on "failed", thanks to cutbacks in maintenance and
training during the 1970's.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Reagan is held up as the
example of all that is good and holy - yes, IranGate Reagan, who had
Teheran hold US hostages several months longer than necessary so that
they could be released on HIS watch -
You have any proof of that? Didn't think so.
sid9
2009-04-11 21:54:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
On Apr 11, 4:57 pm, Stan de SD
On Apr 11, 1:50 pm, "sid9"
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized
the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners
held by
Israel. The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish
American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard. When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by
air to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO
airbase on
Sicily. Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the
Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane
and
apprehend the hijackers. After
a standoff between Italian police
and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President
Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down. This allowed Abu
Abbas, the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked
the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes
would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had
even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that
situation.
Are you suggesting the should have
attacked the
Italians?
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do
anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually
unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Damn well better than if we sat around
waiting
for France and Germany
to hop on board. We got rid of Saddam,
killed
off a bunch of al-Qaeda
types, and kept the terrorists occupied
with
fighting us over there
and not here. Note there hasn't been
another
major terrorist attack on
US soil, only in Europe to intimidate the
cowards there. Things didn't
go perfectly (they never do), but Bush
was far
more successful in Iraq
than LBJ was in Vietnam. That's why you
don't
let liberals run wars -
they only fuck things up.
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest
disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to
the last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too
whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
ummm... as i remember, the USA was defeated by
the VC and the NVA on
NIXON's watch, not LBJ's
Who started the escalation and created the mess
in the first place.
Carter who mounted the large but
failed military rescue of the Iran hostages.
Note emphasis on "failed", thanks to cutbacks in
maintenance and
training during the 1970's.
Reagan is held up as the
example of all that is good and holy - yes,
IranGate Reagan, who had
Teheran hold US hostages several months longer
than necessary so that
they could be released on HIS watch -
You have any proof of that? Didn't think so.
A plain fact of the times...Read newspapers of the
day....
Hostage release was held up until a few days after
"The Acting President: took office.
When do you think all the negotiating with the
Iranians was done?

This was one of the most horrible cynical acts of
the Republican Party
Stan de SD
2009-04-12 00:13:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by sid9
Post by Stan de SD
On Apr 11, 4:57 pm, Stan de SD
On Apr 11, 1:50 pm, "sid9"
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized
the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners
held by
Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish
American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by
air to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO
airbase on
Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the
Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane
and
apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police
and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President
Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu
Abbas, the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked
the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes
would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had
even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that
situation.
Are you suggesting the should have
attacked the
Italians?
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do
anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually
unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Damn well better than if we sat around
waiting
for France and Germany
to hop on board. We got rid of Saddam,
killed
off a bunch of al-Qaeda
types, and kept the terrorists occupied
with
fighting us over there
and not here. Note there hasn't been
another
major terrorist attack on
US soil, only in Europe to intimidate the
cowards there. Things didn't
go perfectly (they never do), but Bush
was far
more successful in Iraq
than LBJ was in Vietnam. That's why you
don't
let liberals run wars -
they only fuck things up.
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest
disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to
the last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too
whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
ummm... as i remember, the USA was defeated by
the VC and the NVA on
NIXON's watch, not LBJ's
Who started the escalation and created the mess
in the first place.
Carter who mounted the large but
failed military rescue of the Iran hostages.
Note emphasis on "failed", thanks to cutbacks in
maintenance and
training during the 1970's.
Reagan is held up as the
example of all that is good and holy - yes,
IranGate Reagan, who had
Teheran hold US hostages several months longer
than necessary so that
they could be released on HIS watch -
You have any proof of that? Didn't think so.
A plain fact of the times...Read newspapers of the
day....
Hostage release was held up until a few days after
"The Acting President: took office.
Who held up the hostage release again?
Post by sid9
When do you think all the negotiating with the
Iranians was done?
This was one of the most horrible cynical acts of
the Republican Party-
Nice try, you clueless twit. The Iranians stopped holding the hostages
for one reason and one reason alone: Reagan had made it quite clear
that he had no intention of playing Jimmy Carter type games when he
got in office. Those hostages were held for over a YEAR while your
beloved idiot DEMOCRAT president Jimmy Carter stuffed peanuts up his
ass and looked like a fucking fool. Get a clue, you hopeless apologist
for mediocrity and failure: Reagan didn't make Carter look bad. Jimmy
Carter made HIMSELF look bad.
sid9
2009-04-12 00:26:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
Post by Stan de SD
On Apr 11, 4:57 pm, Stan de SD
On Apr 11, 1:50 pm, "sid9"
Post by sid9
in
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers
seized
the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners
held by
Israel. The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish
American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard. When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage
by
air to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO
airbase on
Sicily. Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the
Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane
and
apprehend the hijackers. After
a standoff between Italian police
and
American special forces that
lasted through the night,
President
Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down. This allowed Abu
Abbas, the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to
Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had
attacked
the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing
assholes
would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel
or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff
had
even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that
situation.
Are you suggesting the should have
attacked the
Italians?
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but
was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies
that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do
anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually
unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Damn well better than if we sat around
waiting
for France and Germany
to hop on board. We got rid of Saddam,
killed
off a bunch of al-Qaeda
types, and kept the terrorists
occupied
with
fighting us over there
and not here. Note there hasn't been
another
major terrorist attack on
US soil, only in Europe to intimidate
the
cowards there. Things didn't
go perfectly (they never do), but Bush
was far
more successful in Iraq
than LBJ was in Vietnam. That's why
you
don't
let liberals run wars -
they only fuck things up.
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the
greatest
disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared
to
the last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or
too
whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
ummm... as i remember, the USA was defeated
by
the VC and the NVA on
NIXON's watch, not LBJ's
Who started the escalation and created the
mess
in the first place.
Carter who mounted the large but
failed military rescue of the Iran hostages.
Note emphasis on "failed", thanks to cutbacks
in
maintenance and
training during the 1970's.
Reagan is held up as the
example of all that is good and holy - yes,
IranGate Reagan, who had
Teheran hold US hostages several months
longer
than necessary so that
they could be released on HIS watch -
You have any proof of that? Didn't think so.
A plain fact of the times...Read newspapers of
the
day....
Hostage release was held up until a few days
after
"The Acting President: took office.
Who held up the hostage release again?
Post by sid9
When do you think all the negotiating with the
Iranians was done?
This was one of the most horrible cynical acts
of
the Republican Party-
Nice try, you clueless twit. The Iranians
stopped holding the hostages
for one reason and one reason alone: Reagan had
made it quite clear
that he had no intention of playing Jimmy Carter
type games when he
got in office. Those hostages were held for over
a YEAR while your
beloved idiot DEMOCRAT president Jimmy Carter
stuffed peanuts up his
ass and looked like a fucking fool. Get a clue,
you hopeless apologist
for mediocrity and failure: Reagan didn't make
Carter look bad. Jimmy
Carter made HIMSELF look bad.
See the OPs post that blows away your fantasy.

Next to bush,jr, "The Acting President" did the
most damage to the United States
Stan de SD
2009-04-12 02:20:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by sid9
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
Post by Stan de SD
On Apr 11, 4:57 pm, Stan de SD
On Apr 11, 1:50 pm, "sid9"
Post by sid9
in
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers
seized
the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners
held by
Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish
American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage
by
air to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO
airbase on
Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the
Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane
and
apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police
and
American special forces that
lasted through the night,
President
Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu
Abbas, the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to
Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had
attacked
the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing
assholes
would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel
or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff
had
even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that
situation.
Are you suggesting the should have
attacked the
Italians?
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but
was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies
that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do
anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually
unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Damn well better than if we sat around
waiting
for France and Germany
to hop on board. We got rid of Saddam,
killed
off a bunch of al-Qaeda
types, and kept the terrorists
occupied
with
fighting us over there
and not here. Note there hasn't been
another
major terrorist attack on
US soil, only in Europe to intimidate
the
cowards there. Things didn't
go perfectly (they never do), but Bush
was far
more successful in Iraq
than LBJ was in Vietnam. That's why
you
don't
let liberals run wars -
they only fuck things up.
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the
greatest
disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared
to
the last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or
too
whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
ummm... as i remember, the USA was defeated
by
the VC and the NVA on
NIXON's watch, not LBJ's
Who started the escalation and created the
mess
in the first place.
Carter who mounted the large but
failed military rescue of the Iran hostages.
Note emphasis on "failed", thanks to cutbacks
in
maintenance and
training during the 1970's.
Reagan is held up as the
example of all that is good and holy - yes,
IranGate Reagan, who had
Teheran hold US hostages several months
longer
than necessary so that
they could be released on HIS watch -
You have any proof of that? Didn't think so.
A plain fact of the times...Read newspapers of
the
day....
Hostage release was held up until a few days
after
"The Acting President: took office.
Who held up the hostage release again?
Post by sid9
When do you think all the negotiating with the
Iranians was done?
This was one of the most horrible cynical acts
of
the Republican Party-
Nice try, you clueless twit. The Iranians
stopped holding the hostages
for one reason and one reason alone: Reagan had
made it quite clear
that he had no intention of playing Jimmy Carter
type games when he
got in office. Those hostages were held for over
a YEAR while your
beloved idiot DEMOCRAT president Jimmy Carter
stuffed peanuts up his
ass and looked like a fucking fool. Get a clue,
you hopeless apologist
for mediocrity and failure: Reagan didn't make
Carter look bad. Jimmy
Carter made HIMSELF look bad.
See the OPs post that blows away your fantasy.
You mean Sparky the Commie? Really now...
sid9
2009-04-12 02:47:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 2:54 pm, "sid9"
Post by sid9
Post by Stan de SD
On Apr 11, 4:57 pm, Stan de SD
On Apr 11, 1:50 pm, "sid9"
Post by sid9
in
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers
seized
the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of
prisoners
held by
Israel. The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish
American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body
and
wheelchair overboard. When
Egypt
gave the hijackers safe
passage
by
air to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO
airbase on
Sicily. Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the
Italian
authorities refused to let
Navy
SEALs board the terrorists'
plane
and
apprehend the hijackers.
After
a standoff between Italian
police
and
American special forces that
lasted through the night,
President
Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down. This allowed
Abu
Abbas, the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to
Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had
attacked
the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing
assholes
would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't
grovel
or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff
had
even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in
that
situation.
Are you suggesting the should have
attacked the
Italians?
Post by Spartakus
He did everything in his power
but
was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual
EU-weenies
that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do
anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually
unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Damn well better than if we sat
around
waiting
for France and Germany
to hop on board. We got rid of
Saddam,
killed
off a bunch of al-Qaeda
types, and kept the terrorists
occupied
with
fighting us over there
and not here. Note there hasn't
been
another
major terrorist attack on
US soil, only in Europe to
intimidate
the
cowards there. Things didn't
go perfectly (they never do), but
Bush
was far
more successful in Iraq
than LBJ was in Vietnam. That's why
you
don't
let liberals run wars -
they only fuck things up.
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the
greatest
disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success
compared
to
the last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young
or
too
whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
ummm... as i remember, the USA was
defeated
by
the VC and the NVA on
NIXON's watch, not LBJ's
Who started the escalation and created the
mess
in the first place.
Carter who mounted the large but
failed military rescue of the Iran
hostages.
Note emphasis on "failed", thanks to
cutbacks
in
maintenance and
training during the 1970's.
Reagan is held up as the
example of all that is good and holy -
yes,
IranGate Reagan, who had
Teheran hold US hostages several months
longer
than necessary so that
they could be released on HIS watch -
You have any proof of that? Didn't think
so.
A plain fact of the times...Read newspapers
of
the
day....
Hostage release was held up until a few days
after
"The Acting President: took office.
Who held up the hostage release again?
Post by sid9
When do you think all the negotiating with
the
Iranians was done?
This was one of the most horrible cynical
acts
of
the Republican Party-
Nice try, you clueless twit. The Iranians
stopped holding the hostages
for one reason and one reason alone: Reagan
had
made it quite clear
that he had no intention of playing Jimmy
Carter
type games when he
got in office. Those hostages were held for
over
a YEAR while your
beloved idiot DEMOCRAT president Jimmy Carter
stuffed peanuts up his
ass and looked like a fucking fool. Get a
clue,
you hopeless apologist
for mediocrity and failure: Reagan didn't
make
Carter look bad. Jimmy
Carter made HIMSELF look bad.
See the OPs post that blows away your fantasy.
You mean Sparky the Commie? Really now...
You're out of style.
Your leader, Limbo, is using "Socialist" these
days.
M***@dick.com
2009-04-12 03:37:39 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 19:20:01 -0700 (PDT), Stan de SD
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
See the OPs post that blows away your fantasy.
You mean Sparky the Commie? Really now...
You actually have ANYONE that isn't a fucking warmed
over rightwing Nazi you admire?

How about the Big Republican Policy making arm of the
GOP----The Heritage Foundation, you dumb fuckwit

Adolph Coors was a nazi sympathizer---started it---now
funded by the same man who gave millions to set up
smears against a popular sitting president..
M***@dick.com
2009-04-12 03:35:56 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 17:13:14 -0700 (PDT), Stan de SD
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
This was one of the most horrible cynical acts of
the Republican Party-
Nice try, you clueless twit. The Iranians stopped holding the hostages
for one reason and one reason alone: Reagan had made it quite clear
that he had no intention of playing Jimmy Carter type games when he
got in office
He got into office by doing just that, you dingbat.

He also called Bin Laden akin to out "Founders"

SNicker
a***@hotmail.com
2009-04-11 22:33:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held by
Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on
Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and
apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu Abbas, the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that situation.
Are you suggesting the should have attacked the
Italians?
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Damn well better than if we sat around waiting
for France and Germany
to hop on board. We got rid of Saddam, killed
off a bunch of al-Qaeda
types, and kept the terrorists occupied with
fighting us over there
and not here. Note there hasn't been another
major terrorist attack on
US soil, only in Europe to intimidate the
cowards there. Things didn't
go perfectly (they never do), but Bush was far
more successful in Iraq
than LBJ was in Vietnam. That's why you don't
let liberals run wars -
they only fuck things up.
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to the last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
ummm... as i remember, the USA was defeated by the VC and the NVA on
NIXON's watch, not LBJ's
Who started the escalation and created the mess in the first place.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Carter who mounted the large but
failed military rescue of the Iran hostages.
Note emphasis on "failed", thanks to cutbacks in maintenance and
training during the 1970's.
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Reagan is held up as the
example of all that is good and holy - yes, IranGate Reagan, who had
Teheran hold US hostages several months longer than necessary so that
they could be released on HIS watch -
You have any proof of that? Didn't think so.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Try this, shill:
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1992_cr/h920205-october-clips.htm
sid9
2009-04-11 21:44:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held
by
Israel. The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard. When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air
to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on
Sicily. Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and
apprehend the hijackers. After
a standoff between Italian police and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President
Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down. This allowed Abu Abbas,
the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes
would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that
situation.
Are you suggesting the should have attacked
the
Italians?
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Damn well better than if we sat around
waiting
for France and Germany
to hop on board. We got rid of Saddam, killed
off a bunch of al-Qaeda
types, and kept the terrorists occupied with
fighting us over there
and not here. Note there hasn't been another
major terrorist attack on
US soil, only in Europe to intimidate the
cowards there. Things didn't
go perfectly (they never do), but Bush was
far
more successful in Iraq
than LBJ was in Vietnam. That's why you don't
let liberals run wars -
they only fuck things up.
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest
disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to the
last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too
whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.
Try to stay on subject.

Iraq.

1. It isn't concluded after more than six years
2. We showed clay feet to the world
3. We wasted billions of dollars
4. We set off a conflict that is not yet resolved.
5. We destroyed Iran's most potent enemy in the
region
6. We violated an wrecked our claim of decency
with torture
and worst of all....
7. It was UNNECESSARY
Stan de SD
2009-04-12 00:15:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by sid9
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held
by
Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air
to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on
Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and
apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President
Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu Abbas,
the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes
would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that
situation.
Are you suggesting the should have attacked
the
Italians?
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Damn well better than if we sat around
waiting
for France and Germany
to hop on board. We got rid of Saddam, killed
off a bunch of al-Qaeda
types, and kept the terrorists occupied with
fighting us over there
and not here. Note there hasn't been another
major terrorist attack on
US soil, only in Europe to intimidate the
cowards there. Things didn't
go perfectly (they never do), but Bush was
far
more successful in Iraq
than LBJ was in Vietnam. That's why you don't
let liberals run wars -
they only fuck things up.
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest
disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to the
last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too
whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.
Try to stay on subject.
I am on subject. Lefties scream "failure" about Iraq because that's
what they wanted all along. Bush clearly did a better job in Iraq than
LBJ did in Vietnam - and try as hard as you can, you will never be
able to refute it.
sid9
2009-04-12 00:27:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 1:50 pm, "sid9"
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized
the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners
held
by
Israel. The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard. When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by
air
to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase
on
Sicily. Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the
Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and
apprehend the hijackers. After
a standoff between Italian police and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President
Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down. This allowed Abu
Abbas,
the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked
the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes
would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had
even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that
situation.
Are you suggesting the should have
attacked
the
Italians?
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do
anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually
unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Damn well better than if we sat around
waiting
for France and Germany
to hop on board. We got rid of Saddam,
killed
off a bunch of al-Qaeda
types, and kept the terrorists occupied
with
fighting us over there
and not here. Note there hasn't been
another
major terrorist attack on
US soil, only in Europe to intimidate the
cowards there. Things didn't
go perfectly (they never do), but Bush was
far
more successful in Iraq
than LBJ was in Vietnam. That's why you
don't
let liberals run wars -
they only fuck things up.
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest
disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to
the
last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too
whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.
Try to stay on subject.
I am on subject. Lefties scream "failure" about
Iraq because that's
what they wanted all along. Bush clearly did a
better job in Iraq than
LBJ did in Vietnam - and try as hard as you can,
you will never be
able to refute it.
If wishing would make it so, bush,jr would not
have ever been president
Stan de SD
2009-04-12 02:20:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by sid9
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 1:50 pm, "sid9"
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized
the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners
held
by
Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by
air
to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase
on
Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the
Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and
apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President
Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu
Abbas,
the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked
the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes
would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had
even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that
situation.
Are you suggesting the should have
attacked
the
Italians?
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do
anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually
unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Damn well better than if we sat around
waiting
for France and Germany
to hop on board. We got rid of Saddam,
killed
off a bunch of al-Qaeda
types, and kept the terrorists occupied
with
fighting us over there
and not here. Note there hasn't been
another
major terrorist attack on
US soil, only in Europe to intimidate the
cowards there. Things didn't
go perfectly (they never do), but Bush was
far
more successful in Iraq
than LBJ was in Vietnam. That's why you
don't
let liberals run wars -
they only fuck things up.
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest
disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to
the
last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too
whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.
Try to stay on subject.
I am on subject. Lefties scream "failure" about
Iraq because that's
what they wanted all along. Bush clearly did a
better job in Iraq than
LBJ did in Vietnam - and try as hard as you can,
you will never be
able to refute it.
If wishing would make it so, bush,jr would not
have ever been president-
So much for your Utopian visions, fruit-loop.
sid9
2009-04-12 02:48:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 2:44 pm, "sid9"
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 1:50 pm, "sid9"
Post by sid9
in
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized
the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners
held
by
Israel. The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish
American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard. When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by
air
to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO
airbase
on
Sicily. Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the
Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane
and
apprehend the hijackers. After
a standoff between Italian police
and
American special forces that
lasted through the night,
President
Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down. This allowed Abu
Abbas,
the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to
Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked
the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing
assholes
would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel
or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had
even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that
situation.
Are you suggesting the should have
attacked
the
Italians?
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but
was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies
that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do
anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually
unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Damn well better than if we sat around
waiting
for France and Germany
to hop on board. We got rid of Saddam,
killed
off a bunch of al-Qaeda
types, and kept the terrorists occupied
with
fighting us over there
and not here. Note there hasn't been
another
major terrorist attack on
US soil, only in Europe to intimidate
the
cowards there. Things didn't
go perfectly (they never do), but Bush
was
far
more successful in Iraq
than LBJ was in Vietnam. That's why you
don't
let liberals run wars -
they only fuck things up.
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest
disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared
to
the
last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or
too
whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.
Try to stay on subject.
I am on subject. Lefties scream "failure"
about
Iraq because that's
what they wanted all along. Bush clearly did
a
better job in Iraq than
LBJ did in Vietnam - and try as hard as you
can,
you will never be
able to refute it.
If wishing would make it so, bush,jr would not
have ever been president-
So much for your Utopian visions, fruit-loop.
Ooo, ooo....that's scary!
M***@dick.com
2009-04-12 03:39:34 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 17:15:26 -0700 (PDT), Stan de SD
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
Try to stay on subject.
I am on subject. Lefties scream "failure" about Iraq because that's
what they wanted all along.
Bullshit

What we wanted was for Bush to take note in February
2003---that NONE of his stated reasons to attack Iraq
were true.

Had he stepped back and allowed UNSCOM to COMPLETE the
inspections---everything we knew 4 months AFTER the
attack could have prevented 5,000 of our military from
dying.
Stan de SD
2009-04-12 02:55:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by sid9
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held
by
Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air
to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on
Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and
apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President
Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu Abbas,
the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes
would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that
situation.
Are you suggesting the should have attacked
the
Italians?
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Damn well better than if we sat around
waiting
for France and Germany
to hop on board. We got rid of Saddam, killed
off a bunch of al-Qaeda
types, and kept the terrorists occupied with
fighting us over there
and not here. Note there hasn't been another
major terrorist attack on
US soil, only in Europe to intimidate the
cowards there. Things didn't
go perfectly (they never do), but Bush was
far
more successful in Iraq
than LBJ was in Vietnam. That's why you don't
let liberals run wars -
they only fuck things up.
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest
disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to the
last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too
whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.
Try to stay on subject.
No, the subject was Obama and the pirates.
Spartakus
2009-04-13 01:12:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
Post by Stan de SD
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to the
last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too
whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.
Try to stay on subject.
No, the subject was Obama and the pirates.
And as it turned out, the captain of the freighter was rescued, and
the planet is down 3 pirates. Good on the U.S. Navy and especially
the sharpshooters who held fire until they were sure the captain's
life was in imminent danger. So what's it going to be? A celebration
or sour grapes?
Stan de SD
2009-04-13 02:14:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
Post by Stan de SD
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to the
last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too
whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.
Try to stay on subject.
No, the subject was Obama and the pirates.
And as it turned out, the captain of the freighter was rescued, and
the planet is down 3 pirates.  Good on the U.S. Navy and especially
the sharpshooters who held fire until they were sure the captain's
life was in imminent danger.  So what's it going to be?  A celebration
or sour grapes?
Sounds like Obama took my advice and let the Navy do it's job. Good
for him...
Spartakus
2009-04-14 15:45:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
And as it turned out, the captain of the freighter was rescued, and
the planet is down 3 pirates.  Good on the U.S. Navy and especially
the sharpshooters who held fire until they were sure the captain's
life was in imminent danger.  So what's it going to be?  A celebration
or sour grapes?
Sounds like Obama took my advice and let the Navy do it's job. Good
for him...
Careful! The rightwing commentariat is expressing strong disapproval
of anyone taking undeserved credit for this success. ;-)
Spartakus
2009-04-12 00:50:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to the last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.
Well you know what they say about the 60s - if you remember the 60s,
you did it wrong. But Vietnam was Nixon's baby from January 20, 1969
through August 8, 1974. During that time U.S. forces bombed Hanoi and
invaded Cambodia, all to no avail. And when the end came, Gerald
Ford, another Republican, was at the helm.
Stan de SD
2009-04-12 02:23:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to the last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.
Well you know what they say about the 60s - if you remember the 60s,
you did it wrong.  But Vietnam was Nixon's baby from January 20, 1969
through August 8, 1974.
At the same time he had a bunch of hysterical people screaming at him,
and a population forcing his hand. When he did try to do things right
(mining Hanoi and Haiphong harbors, and Linebacker II) and actually
made headway, the lefties screamed the most. LBJ left him with a
losing hand, and the lefties certainly offered no support.
Post by Spartakus
 During that time U.S. forces bombed Hanoi and
invaded Cambodia,
Try reading the history of Linebacker II, which drove the NVA back to
the bargaining table.
M***@dick.com
2009-04-12 03:40:24 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 19:23:21 -0700 (PDT), Stan de SD
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
Well you know what they say about the 60s - if you remember the 60s,
you did it wrong.  But Vietnam was Nixon's baby from January 20, 1969
through August 8, 1974.
At the same time he had a bunch of hysterical people screaming at him,
and a population forcing his hand.
Nixon,like Bush, was lying thru his teeth, StanDeLoon.
Spartakus
2009-04-13 01:07:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
 During that time U.S. forces bombed Hanoi and
invaded Cambodia,
Try reading the history of Linebacker II, which drove the NVA back to
the bargaining table.
I did. Both Linebacker operations were acts of desperation that
killed a lot of people, but didn't do a damn bit of good. That's what
comes from not having a plan.
Stan de SD
2009-04-13 02:14:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
 During that time U.S. forces bombed Hanoi and
invaded Cambodia,
Try reading the history of Linebacker II, which drove the NVA back to
the bargaining table.
I did.  Both Linebacker operations were acts of desperation  that
killed a lot of people, but didn't do a damn bit of good.
Sources and cites?
Frank Pittel
2009-04-14 00:19:46 UTC
Permalink
In alt.politics.usa.republican Stan de SD <***@gmail.com> wrote:
: On Apr 12, 6:07??pm, Spartakus <***@my-deja.com> wrote:
: > Stan de SD <***@gmail.com> wrote:
: >
: > > Spartakus <***@my-deja.com> wrote:
: > > >??During that time U.S. forces bombed Hanoi and
: > > > invaded Cambodia,
: > > Try reading the history of Linebacker II, which drove the NVA back to
: > > the bargaining table.
: >
: > I did. ??Both Linebacker operations were acts of desperation ??that
: > killed a lot of people, but didn't do a damn bit of good.

: Sources and cites?

Now you did it. I've challenged a looney tune brain dead looney tune brain dead lying
fascist loser lib dem to prove a claim. Expect to have four or five of them attack
you personally and call you names before begging you to "go away". Then they'll demand
that you go to google and find the proof yourself. You'll never get the proof though.
--
-------------------
Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
Spartakus
2009-04-14 15:46:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
 During that time U.S. forces bombed Hanoi and
invaded Cambodia,
Try reading the history of Linebacker II, which drove the NVA back
to the bargaining table.
I did.  Both Linebacker operations were acts of desperation that
killed a lot of people, but didn't do a damn bit of good.
Sources and cites?
Look at the final outcome of that war. Sheesh.
Stan de SD
2009-04-12 03:12:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to the last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.
Well you know what they say about the 60s - if you remember the 60s,
you did it wrong.
My experience as a kid living in Daly City, literally across street
from the SF city limit from 1966-1968, and seeing the hippies and the
heads tripping in the Haight and the Fillmore, convinced me of two
things: never to touch hard drugs, and that Frank Zappa was right
about hippies... :O|
M***@dick.com
2009-04-12 03:42:11 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 20:12:33 -0700 (PDT), Stan de SD
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to the last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.
Well you know what they say about the 60s - if you remember the 60s,
you did it wrong.
My experience as a kid living in Daly City, literally across street
from the SF city limit from 1966-1968, and seeing the hippies and the
heads tripping in the Haight and the Fillmore, convinced me of two
things: never to touch hard drugs, and that Frank Zappa was right
about hippies... :O|
What does a piss-ant minority of SF people have to do
with US policy?

The "Counter-cultural" revolution was fought by
rational, thinking, educated students all over the
United States.

It's PROPAGANDA to associate "hippies" with the
movement to strip power away from reactionary
conservatives.
Joe King Eu
2009-04-14 00:50:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@dick.com
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 20:12:33 -0700 (PDT), Stan de SD
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to the last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.
Well you know what they say about the 60s - if you remember the 60s,
you did it wrong.
My experience as a kid living in Daly City, literally across street
from the SF city limit from 1966-1968, and seeing the hippies and the
heads tripping in the Haight and the Fillmore, convinced me of two
things: never to touch hard drugs, and that Frank Zappa was right
about hippies... :O|
What does a piss-ant minority of SF people have to do
with US policy?
The "Counter-cultural" revolution was fought by
rational, thinking, educated students all over the
United States.
It's PROPAGANDA to associate "hippies" with the
movement to strip power away from reactionary
conservatives.
And just look at the shit of a society it has given us. Thanks counter
culture. You've led us to be a bunch of self indulgent, narcisstic, can't
take responsibility for our own action, perpetual victim and self absorbed
country full of the world's buffoons. Liberalism has led us to the edge of
the abyss.
Spartakus
2009-04-13 01:21:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to the last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.
Well you know what they say about the 60s - if you remember the 60s,
you did it wrong.
My experience as a kid living in Daly City, literally across street
from the SF city limit from 1966-1968, and seeing the hippies and the
heads tripping in the Haight and the Fillmore, convinced me of two
things: never to touch hard drugs, and that Frank Zappa was right
about hippies... :O|
You know what? I sort of agree with you about the hippie thing.
There was definitely a dark side to that movement that scared the hell
out of me when I looked closer. And I laughed out loud at Zappa's
smack-downs of that whole scene. At the same time, their influence on
American culture was profound and mostly positive. The myth was more
powerful than the reality, maybe in a good way.
Joe King Eu
2009-04-14 00:41:32 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 17:50:59 -0700, Spartakus wrote
(in article
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
bush,jr's Iraqi adventure is the greatest disaster
America encountered!
Iraq was an unqualified success compared to the last war a Democrat
ran - Vietnam. You're either too young or too whacked out on drugs to
remember that one.
Well you know what they say about the 60s - if you remember the 60s,
you did it wrong. But Vietnam was Nixon's baby from January 20, 1969
through August 8, 1974. During that time U.S. forces bombed Hanoi and
invaded Cambodia, all to no avail. And when the end came, Gerald
Ford, another Republican, was at the helm.
Just as Bush was handed a prelude to 9/11 so Obama was handed an economic
bucket of shit. Nixon was handed LBJs bucket of shit. Of course, Democrats
seem to always get us into wars like WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam and Bosnia.
Bosnia was Europe's problem and should have been dealt with by Europeans.

Iraq was hardly an unqualified success as we are still involved with
fighting.
Stan de SD
2009-04-11 20:51:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held by Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air to Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police and American special forces that
lasted through the night, President Ronald Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu Abbas, the mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes would have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that situation.
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually unilaterally.  Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Post by Stan de SD
But it's interesting to see how all you filthy lefties, who crowed about how
the whole world would love and "respect" us more now that Obama was in
office, can't deny that your hero is a weak, cowardly, incompetent DISASTER,
so instead you have to resort to sliveling little lies like "But, but,
but Reagan... he groveled and apologized to pirates too... see?"
Of course I can deny that Obama is a disaster.  We are dealing with a
hostage situation here, involving an American citizen.  Going in with
guns blazing will certainly get him killed.  Thank gawd the grown-ups
are back in charge.
Post by Stan de SD
Yes, the American Left is intellectually and morally bankrupt, but you
didn't need to remind us of that - we knew that already. :O(
It's quite the other way around, Stan, as evidenced by the fact that
your side has not offered ONE idea, plan, proposal, whathaveyou, that
any rational person would take seriously.  
My side - the conservatives - have come up with plenty of plans to
deal with political, economic, and national defense isses, and overall
they have worked quite well. Limited government, personal
responsibility, and a strong military have made us the most prosperous
and most free nation on Earth - a stark contrast to the hell-holes
such as Cuba, North Korea, Zimbabwe and Somalia that are the logical
extrapolation of the left-wing ideas of collectivism,
multiculturalism, race/ethnicity based victimization, and white
liberal guilt. Lefties yell and scream when things aren't 100%
perfect, because they use Utopianism, not reality, as their standard
of comparison. The fact that the US isn't perfect in comparison to
their Utopian one-world vision leads them to believe that they could
make things better if only THEY were in charge. The results - the
Vietnam disaster caused by LBJ/McNamara micromanagement, the fall of
pro-American Iran and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan thanks to the
vacillation and misguided crusading of Jimmy Carter, the escalating
Muslim terror attacks of the 1990's thanks to BJ Clinton's distraction
with oral sex, and the humiliation of the US in the hands of a bunch
of illiterate, uneducated Somali pirates thanks to the cowardice and
clueless of Obama - never seem to sink in with liberals... :O|
sid9
2009-04-11 21:40:36 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held by
Israel. The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard. When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on
Sicily. Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and
apprehend the hijackers. After
a standoff between Italian police and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down. This allowed Abu Abbas, the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that situation.
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Post by Stan de SD
But it's interesting to see how all you
filthy lefties, who crowed about how
the whole world would love and "respect" us
more now that Obama was in
office, can't deny that your hero is a weak,
cowardly, incompetent DISASTER,
so instead you have to resort to sliveling
little lies like "But, but,
but Reagan... he groveled and apologized to
pirates too... see?"
Of course I can deny that Obama is a disaster.
We are dealing with a
hostage situation here, involving an American
citizen. Going in with
guns blazing will certainly get him killed.
Thank gawd the grown-ups
are back in charge.
Post by Stan de SD
Yes, the American Left is intellectually and
morally bankrupt, but you
didn't need to remind us of that - we knew
that already. :O(
It's quite the other way around, Stan, as
evidenced by the fact that
your side has not offered ONE idea, plan,
proposal, whathaveyou, that
any rational person would take seriously.
My side - the conservatives - have come up with
plenty of plans to
deal with political, economic, and national
defense isses, and overall
they have worked quite well. Limited government,
personal
responsibility, and a strong military have made
us the most prosperous
and most free nation on Earth - a stark contrast
to the hell-holes
such as Cuba, North Korea, Zimbabwe and Somalia
that are the logical
extrapolation of the left-wing ideas of
collectivism,
multiculturalism, race/ethnicity based
victimization, and white
liberal guilt. Lefties yell and scream when
things aren't 100%
perfect, because they use Utopianism, not
reality, as their standard
of comparison. The fact that the US isn't
perfect in comparison to
their Utopian one-world vision leads them to
believe that they could
make things better if only THEY were in charge.
The results - the
Vietnam disaster caused by LBJ/McNamara
micromanagement, the fall of
pro-American Iran and the Soviet invasion of
Afghanistan thanks to the
vacillation and misguided crusading of Jimmy
Carter, the escalating
Muslim terror attacks of the 1990's thanks to BJ
Clinton's distraction
with oral sex, and the humiliation of the US in
the hands of a bunch
of illiterate, uneducated Somali pirates thanks
to the cowardice and
clueless of Obama - never seem to sink in with
liberals... :O|
"Worked well"?

What reality do you live in?

They've been an American tragedy.

Harding, Coolidge, Hoover, Reagan, HW Bush,
bush,jr, loser, liar, and world class incompetent!

The destructive philsophy of Grover Norquist?

The "conservatives" who are not at all
conservative, who destroyed the financial reforms
put in place after the Great Depression, have been
the most dangerous radicals to ever control
America.
Stan de SD
2009-04-11 21:46:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held by
Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on
Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and
apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu Abbas, the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that situation.
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Post by Stan de SD
But it's interesting to see how all you
filthy lefties, who crowed about how
the whole world would love and "respect" us
more now that Obama was in
office, can't deny that your hero is a weak,
cowardly, incompetent DISASTER,
so instead you have to resort to sliveling
little lies like "But, but,
but Reagan... he groveled and apologized to
pirates too... see?"
Of course I can deny that Obama is a disaster.
We are dealing with a
hostage situation here, involving an American
citizen.  Going in with
guns blazing will certainly get him killed.
Thank gawd the grown-ups
are back in charge.
Post by Stan de SD
Yes, the American Left is intellectually and
morally bankrupt, but you
didn't need to remind us of that - we knew
that already. :O(
It's quite the other way around, Stan, as
evidenced by the fact that
your side has not offered ONE idea, plan,
proposal, whathaveyou, that
any rational person would take seriously.
My side - the conservatives - have come up with
plenty of plans to
deal with political, economic, and national
defense isses, and overall
they have worked quite well. Limited government,
personal
responsibility, and a strong military have made
us the most prosperous
and most free nation on Earth - a stark contrast
to the hell-holes
such as Cuba, North Korea, Zimbabwe and Somalia
that are the logical
extrapolation of the left-wing ideas of
collectivism,
multiculturalism, race/ethnicity based
victimization, and white
liberal guilt. Lefties yell and scream when
things aren't 100%
perfect, because they use Utopianism, not
reality, as their standard
of comparison. The fact that the US isn't
perfect in comparison to
their Utopian one-world vision leads them to
believe that they could
make things better if only THEY were in charge.
The results - the
Vietnam disaster caused by LBJ/McNamara
micromanagement, the fall of
pro-American Iran and the Soviet invasion of
Afghanistan thanks to the
vacillation and misguided crusading of Jimmy
Carter, the escalating
Muslim terror attacks of the 1990's thanks to BJ
Clinton's distraction
with oral sex, and the humiliation of the US in
the hands of a bunch
of illiterate, uneducated Somali pirates thanks
to the cowardice and
clueless of Obama - never seem to sink in with
liberals... :O|
"Worked well"?
What reality do you live in?
The United States. Where are you from - Uranus or Pluto?
Post by sid9
Harding, Coolidge, Hoover, Reagan
Most sucessful president in nearly 100 years.
Post by sid9
The destructive philsophy of Grover Norquist?
Was Grover Norquist president? Didn't think so.
Post by sid9
The "conservatives" who are not at all
conservative, who destroyed the financial reforms
put in place after the Great Depression,
You mean the welfare state that sucked between $5-10 TRILLION out of
the US economy from 1933-1996 was a "financial reform"? Really now...
sid9
2009-04-11 21:55:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held
by
Israel. The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard. When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air
to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on
Sicily. Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and
apprehend the hijackers. After
a standoff between Italian police and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President
Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down. This allowed Abu Abbas,
the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes
would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that
situation.
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Post by Stan de SD
But it's interesting to see how all you
filthy lefties, who crowed about how
the whole world would love and "respect"
us
more now that Obama was in
office, can't deny that your hero is a
weak,
cowardly, incompetent DISASTER,
so instead you have to resort to sliveling
little lies like "But, but,
but Reagan... he groveled and apologized
to
pirates too... see?"
Of course I can deny that Obama is a
disaster.
We are dealing with a
hostage situation here, involving an
American
citizen. Going in with
guns blazing will certainly get him killed.
Thank gawd the grown-ups
are back in charge.
Post by Stan de SD
Yes, the American Left is intellectually
and
morally bankrupt, but you
didn't need to remind us of that - we knew
that already. :O(
It's quite the other way around, Stan, as
evidenced by the fact that
your side has not offered ONE idea, plan,
proposal, whathaveyou, that
any rational person would take seriously.
My side - the conservatives - have come up
with
plenty of plans to
deal with political, economic, and national
defense isses, and overall
they have worked quite well. Limited
government,
personal
responsibility, and a strong military have
made
us the most prosperous
and most free nation on Earth - a stark
contrast
to the hell-holes
such as Cuba, North Korea, Zimbabwe and
Somalia
that are the logical
extrapolation of the left-wing ideas of
collectivism,
multiculturalism, race/ethnicity based
victimization, and white
liberal guilt. Lefties yell and scream when
things aren't 100%
perfect, because they use Utopianism, not
reality, as their standard
of comparison. The fact that the US isn't
perfect in comparison to
their Utopian one-world vision leads them to
believe that they could
make things better if only THEY were in
charge.
The results - the
Vietnam disaster caused by LBJ/McNamara
micromanagement, the fall of
pro-American Iran and the Soviet invasion of
Afghanistan thanks to the
vacillation and misguided crusading of Jimmy
Carter, the escalating
Muslim terror attacks of the 1990's thanks to
BJ
Clinton's distraction
with oral sex, and the humiliation of the US
in
the hands of a bunch
of illiterate, uneducated Somali pirates
thanks
to the cowardice and
clueless of Obama - never seem to sink in
with
liberals... :O|
"Worked well"?
What reality do you live in?
The United States. Where are you from - Uranus
or Pluto?
Post by sid9
Harding, Coolidge, Hoover, Reagan
Most sucessful president in nearly 100 years.
Post by sid9
The destructive philsophy of Grover Norquist?
Was Grover Norquist president? Didn't think so.
Post by sid9
The "conservatives" who are not at all
conservative, who destroyed the financial
reforms
put in place after the Great Depression,
You mean the welfare state that sucked between
$5-10 TRILLION out of
the US economy from 1933-1996 was a "financial
reform"? Really now...
My statements stand.
Stan de SD
2009-04-12 00:16:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by sid9
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held
by
Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air
to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on
Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and
apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President
Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu Abbas,
the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes
would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that
situation.
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Post by Stan de SD
But it's interesting to see how all you
filthy lefties, who crowed about how
the whole world would love and "respect"
us
more now that Obama was in
office, can't deny that your hero is a
weak,
cowardly, incompetent DISASTER,
so instead you have to resort to sliveling
little lies like "But, but,
but Reagan... he groveled and apologized
to
pirates too... see?"
Of course I can deny that Obama is a
disaster.
We are dealing with a
hostage situation here, involving an
American
citizen.  Going in with
guns blazing will certainly get him killed.
Thank gawd the grown-ups
are back in charge.
Post by Stan de SD
Yes, the American Left is intellectually
and
morally bankrupt, but you
didn't need to remind us of that - we knew
that already. :O(
It's quite the other way around, Stan, as
evidenced by the fact that
your side has not offered ONE idea, plan,
proposal, whathaveyou, that
any rational person would take seriously.
My side - the conservatives - have come up
with
plenty of plans to
deal with political, economic, and national
defense isses, and overall
they have worked quite well. Limited
government,
personal
responsibility, and a strong military have
made
us the most prosperous
and most free nation on Earth - a stark
contrast
to the hell-holes
such as Cuba, North Korea, Zimbabwe and
Somalia
that are the logical
extrapolation of the left-wing ideas of
collectivism,
multiculturalism, race/ethnicity based
victimization, and white
liberal guilt. Lefties yell and scream when
things aren't 100%
perfect, because they use Utopianism, not
reality, as their standard
of comparison. The fact that the US isn't
perfect in comparison to
their Utopian one-world vision leads them to
believe that they could
make things better if only THEY were in
charge.
The results - the
Vietnam disaster caused by LBJ/McNamara
micromanagement, the fall of
pro-American Iran and the Soviet invasion of
Afghanistan thanks to the
vacillation and misguided crusading of Jimmy
Carter, the escalating
Muslim terror attacks of the 1990's thanks to
BJ
Clinton's distraction
with oral sex, and the humiliation of the US
in
the hands of a bunch
of illiterate, uneducated Somali pirates
thanks
to the cowardice and
clueless of Obama - never seem to sink in
with
liberals... :O|
"Worked well"?
What reality do you live in?
The United States. Where are you from - Uranus
or Pluto?
Post by sid9
Harding, Coolidge, Hoover, Reagan
Most sucessful president in nearly 100 years.
Post by sid9
The destructive philsophy of Grover Norquist?
Was Grover Norquist president? Didn't think so.
Post by sid9
The "conservatives" who are not at all
conservative, who destroyed the financial
reforms
put in place after the Great Depression,
You mean the welfare state that sucked between
$5-10 TRILLION out of
the US economy from 1933-1996 was a "financial
reform"? Really now...
My statements stand.
Only if your goal was to turn a world military and economic power into
a PC-pussywhipped welfare state - which is what the Left wanted all
along.
sid9
2009-04-12 00:29:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 2:40 pm, "sid9"
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized
the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners
held
by
Israel. The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard. When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by
air
to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase
on
Sicily. Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the
Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and
apprehend the hijackers. After
a standoff between Italian police and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President
Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down. This allowed Abu
Abbas,
the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked
the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes
would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had
even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that
situation.
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do
anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually
unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Post by Stan de SD
But it's interesting to see how all you
filthy lefties, who crowed about how
the whole world would love and
"respect"
us
more now that Obama was in
office, can't deny that your hero is a
weak,
cowardly, incompetent DISASTER,
so instead you have to resort to
sliveling
little lies like "But, but,
but Reagan... he groveled and
apologized
to
pirates too... see?"
Of course I can deny that Obama is a
disaster.
We are dealing with a
hostage situation here, involving an
American
citizen. Going in with
guns blazing will certainly get him
killed.
Thank gawd the grown-ups
are back in charge.
Post by Stan de SD
Yes, the American Left is
intellectually
and
morally bankrupt, but you
didn't need to remind us of that - we
knew
that already. :O(
It's quite the other way around, Stan, as
evidenced by the fact that
your side has not offered ONE idea, plan,
proposal, whathaveyou, that
any rational person would take seriously.
My side - the conservatives - have come up
with
plenty of plans to
deal with political, economic, and
national
defense isses, and overall
they have worked quite well. Limited
government,
personal
responsibility, and a strong military have
made
us the most prosperous
and most free nation on Earth - a stark
contrast
to the hell-holes
such as Cuba, North Korea, Zimbabwe and
Somalia
that are the logical
extrapolation of the left-wing ideas of
collectivism,
multiculturalism, race/ethnicity based
victimization, and white
liberal guilt. Lefties yell and scream
when
things aren't 100%
perfect, because they use Utopianism, not
reality, as their standard
of comparison. The fact that the US isn't
perfect in comparison to
their Utopian one-world vision leads them
to
believe that they could
make things better if only THEY were in
charge.
The results - the
Vietnam disaster caused by LBJ/McNamara
micromanagement, the fall of
pro-American Iran and the Soviet invasion
of
Afghanistan thanks to the
vacillation and misguided crusading of
Jimmy
Carter, the escalating
Muslim terror attacks of the 1990's thanks
to
BJ
Clinton's distraction
with oral sex, and the humiliation of the
US
in
the hands of a bunch
of illiterate, uneducated Somali pirates
thanks
to the cowardice and
clueless of Obama - never seem to sink in
with
liberals... :O|
"Worked well"?
What reality do you live in?
The United States. Where are you from -
Uranus
or Pluto?
Post by sid9
Harding, Coolidge, Hoover, Reagan
Most sucessful president in nearly 100 years.
Post by sid9
The destructive philsophy of Grover
Norquist?
Was Grover Norquist president? Didn't think
so.
Post by sid9
The "conservatives" who are not at all
conservative, who destroyed the financial
reforms
put in place after the Great Depression,
You mean the welfare state that sucked
between
$5-10 TRILLION out of
the US economy from 1933-1996 was a
"financial
reform"? Really now...
My statements stand.
Only if your goal was to turn a world military
and economic power into
a PC-pussywhipped welfare state - which is what
the Left wanted all
along.
We were strong until "The Acting President, and
the two bushes ran us into the ground.

We will rebuild and be strong again, but we will
never be able to undo the damage done
Stan de SD
2009-04-12 02:24:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by sid9
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 2:40 pm, "sid9"
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized
the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners
held
by
Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by
air
to
Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase
on
Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the
Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and
apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President
Ronald
Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu
Abbas,
the
mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked
the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes
would
have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had
even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that
situation.
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do
anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually
unilaterally.
Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Post by Stan de SD
But it's interesting to see how all you
filthy lefties, who crowed about how
the whole world would love and
"respect"
us
more now that Obama was in
office, can't deny that your hero is a
weak,
cowardly, incompetent DISASTER,
so instead you have to resort to
sliveling
little lies like "But, but,
but Reagan... he groveled and
apologized
to
pirates too... see?"
Of course I can deny that Obama is a
disaster.
We are dealing with a
hostage situation here, involving an
American
citizen.  Going in with
guns blazing will certainly get him
killed.
Thank gawd the grown-ups
are back in charge.
Post by Stan de SD
Yes, the American Left is
intellectually
and
morally bankrupt, but you
didn't need to remind us of that - we
knew
that already. :O(
It's quite the other way around, Stan, as
evidenced by the fact that
your side has not offered ONE idea, plan,
proposal, whathaveyou, that
any rational person would take seriously.
My side - the conservatives - have come up
with
plenty of plans to
deal with political, economic, and
national
defense isses, and overall
they have worked quite well. Limited
government,
personal
responsibility, and a strong military have
made
us the most prosperous
and most free nation on Earth - a stark
contrast
to the hell-holes
such as Cuba, North Korea, Zimbabwe and
Somalia
that are the logical
extrapolation of the left-wing ideas of
collectivism,
multiculturalism, race/ethnicity based
victimization, and white
liberal guilt. Lefties yell and scream
when
things aren't 100%
perfect, because they use Utopianism, not
reality, as their standard
of comparison. The fact that the US isn't
perfect in comparison to
their Utopian one-world vision leads them
to
believe that they could
make things better if only THEY were in
charge.
The results - the
Vietnam disaster caused by LBJ/McNamara
micromanagement, the fall of
pro-American Iran and the Soviet invasion
of
Afghanistan thanks to the
vacillation and misguided crusading of
Jimmy
Carter, the escalating
Muslim terror attacks of the 1990's thanks
to
BJ
Clinton's distraction
with oral sex, and the humiliation of the
US
in
the hands of a bunch
of illiterate, uneducated Somali pirates
thanks
to the cowardice and
clueless of Obama - never seem to sink in
with
liberals... :O|
"Worked well"?
What reality do you live in?
The United States. Where are you from -
Uranus
or Pluto?
Post by sid9
Harding, Coolidge, Hoover, Reagan
Most sucessful president in nearly 100 years.
Post by sid9
The destructive philsophy of Grover
Norquist?
Was Grover Norquist president? Didn't think
so.
Post by sid9
The "conservatives" who are not at all
conservative, who destroyed the financial
reforms
put in place after the Great Depression,
You mean the welfare state that sucked
between
$5-10 TRILLION out of
the US economy from 1933-1996 was a
"financial
reform"? Really now...
My statements stand.
Only if your goal was to turn a world military
and economic power into
a PC-pussywhipped welfare state - which is what
the Left wanted all
along.
We were strong until "The Acting President, and
the two bushes ran us into the ground.
Your lefty illusions obscure your grip with reality.
M***@dick.com
2009-04-12 03:34:45 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 14:46:09 -0700 (PDT), Stan de SD
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
Harding, Coolidge, Hoover, Reagan
Most sucessful president in nearly 100 years.
Haw, haw.

Reagan presided over the "most criminal administration
in history"----143 fired, indicted, tried, convicted,
reprimanded, resigned and disgraced HIGH level officers
and cabinet posts.

His own Budget director called his economic policies
"voodoo economics", .....

He ran the nation into debt...

He factionalized the nation

he pandered to the wealth class

He passed law to make billionaires out of mere
millionaires

Not one fucking dime "trickled down" from his tax cuts.

not one.
Spartakus
2009-04-12 00:47:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held by Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air to Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police and American special forces that
lasted through the night, President Ronald Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu Abbas, the mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes would have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that situation.
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually unilaterally.  Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Post by Stan de SD
But it's interesting to see how all you filthy lefties, who crowed about how
the whole world would love and "respect" us more now that Obama was in
office, can't deny that your hero is a weak, cowardly, incompetent DISASTER,
so instead you have to resort to sliveling little lies like "But, but,
but Reagan... he groveled and apologized to pirates too... see?"
Of course I can deny that Obama is a disaster.  We are dealing with a
hostage situation here, involving an American citizen.  Going in with
guns blazing will certainly get him killed.  Thank gawd the grown-ups
are back in charge.
Post by Stan de SD
Yes, the American Left is intellectually and morally bankrupt, but you
didn't need to remind us of that - we knew that already. :O(
It's quite the other way around, Stan, as evidenced by the fact that
your side has not offered ONE idea, plan, proposal, whathaveyou, that
any rational person would take seriously.  
My side - the conservatives - have come up with plenty of plans to
deal with political, economic, and national defense isses, and overall
they have worked quite well. Limited government, personal
responsibility, and a strong military ...
Those aren't plans.

Republicans never have plans for anything. Reagan had no plan for
dealing with Hamas in Lebanon. The result of that was the bombing of
the Marine barracks, resulting in the biggest single day in U.S.
casualties since World War II. Bush I had no economic plan, resulting
in his politically fatal reneging of his "read my lips - no new taxes"
promise. Bush II had no plans for occupying and rebuilding Iraq after
the invasion, resulting in 6 years of death and misery for Americans
and Iraqis alike. Right now, Congressional Republicans have *nothing*
in the way of an alternative budget that deserves serious
consideration. In fact, they made laughingstocks out of themselves
for their first budget proposal, which had no actual budget figures -
just the same bromides you tried to palm off as "plans" - limited
government, personal responsibility, and a strong military.

That's how you guys roll, and look at the results. The only reason
why the U.S. economy "grew" during this decade was because of an
unparalleled wave of borrowing by the government, by corporations and
by private individuals. The national debt was roughly 10 trillion
dollars when President Obama took office. ***8 trillion*** of that
debt was run up by Reagan, Bush I and Bush II. ***5 trillion*** of
that was run up by Bush II. That's what happens when you substitute
bromides for plans.

Public approval of Republican politicians is at an all-time low. Do
the math, and figure out what that means for your party and your
flavor of politics.
Stan de SD
2009-04-12 02:25:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held by Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air to Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police and American special forces that
lasted through the night, President Ronald Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu Abbas, the mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes would have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that situation.
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually unilaterally.  Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Post by Stan de SD
But it's interesting to see how all you filthy lefties, who crowed about how
the whole world would love and "respect" us more now that Obama was in
office, can't deny that your hero is a weak, cowardly, incompetent DISASTER,
so instead you have to resort to sliveling little lies like "But, but,
but Reagan... he groveled and apologized to pirates too... see?"
Of course I can deny that Obama is a disaster.  We are dealing with a
hostage situation here, involving an American citizen.  Going in with
guns blazing will certainly get him killed.  Thank gawd the grown-ups
are back in charge.
Post by Stan de SD
Yes, the American Left is intellectually and morally bankrupt, but you
didn't need to remind us of that - we knew that already. :O(
It's quite the other way around, Stan, as evidenced by the fact that
your side has not offered ONE idea, plan, proposal, whathaveyou, that
any rational person would take seriously.  
My side - the conservatives - have come up with plenty of plans to
deal with political, economic, and national defense isses, and overall
they have worked quite well. Limited government, personal
responsibility, and a strong military ...
Those aren't plans.
Republicans never have plans for anything.  Reagan had no plan for
dealing with Hamas in Lebanon.  The result of that was the bombing of
the Marine barracks, resulting in the biggest single day in U.S.
casualties since World War II.  
And he learned from that. What plan did Clinton have in dealing with
the first attack on the WTC in 1993, the USS Cole, Khobar Towers, and
the embassy bombings to avoid a 9/11 from happening?
sid9
2009-04-12 02:52:00 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 11, 5:47 pm, Spartakus
On Apr 11, 1:51 pm, Stan de SD
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held
by Israel. The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard. When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air
to Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase
on Sicily. Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and
apprehend the hijackers. After
a standoff between Italian police and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President
Ronald Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down. This allowed Abu Abbas,
the mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes
would have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that
situation.
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually
unilaterally. Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Post by Stan de SD
But it's interesting to see how all you
filthy lefties, who crowed about how
the whole world would love and "respect"
us more now that Obama was in
office, can't deny that your hero is a
weak, cowardly, incompetent DISASTER,
so instead you have to resort to
sliveling little lies like "But, but,
but Reagan... he groveled and apologized
to pirates too... see?"
Of course I can deny that Obama is a
disaster. We are dealing with a
hostage situation here, involving an
American citizen. Going in with
guns blazing will certainly get him killed.
Thank gawd the grown-ups
are back in charge.
Post by Stan de SD
Yes, the American Left is intellectually
and morally bankrupt, but you
didn't need to remind us of that - we
knew that already. :O(
It's quite the other way around, Stan, as
evidenced by the fact that
your side has not offered ONE idea, plan,
proposal, whathaveyou, that
any rational person would take seriously.
My side - the conservatives - have come up
with plenty of plans to
deal with political, economic, and national
defense isses, and overall
they have worked quite well. Limited
government, personal
responsibility, and a strong military ...
Those aren't plans.
Republicans never have plans for anything.
Reagan had no plan for
dealing with Hamas in Lebanon. The result of
that was the bombing of
the Marine barracks, resulting in the biggest
single day in U.S.
casualties since World War II.
And he learned from that. What plan did Clinton
have in dealing with
the first attack on the WTC in 1993, the USS
Cole, Khobar Towers, and
the embassy bombings to avoid a 9/11 from
happening?
The first WTC bombers were tracked down, tried in
our courts, convicted, and are presently in jail
for life.

If bush,jr was not on a permanent vacation and
paid attention to his job, WTC II would have been
thwarted.

He was warned.

bush,jr was asleep at the switch.
Stan de SD
2009-04-12 02:59:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 5:47 pm, Spartakus
On Apr 11, 1:51 pm, Stan de SD
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held
by Israel.  The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard.  When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air
to Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase
on Sicily.  Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and
apprehend the hijackers.  After
a standoff between Italian police and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President
Ronald Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down.  This allowed Abu Abbas,
the mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes
would have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that
situation.
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually
unilaterally.  Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Post by Stan de SD
But it's interesting to see how all you
filthy lefties, who crowed about how
the whole world would love and "respect"
us more now that Obama was in
office, can't deny that your hero is a
weak, cowardly, incompetent DISASTER,
so instead you have to resort to
sliveling little lies like "But, but,
but Reagan... he groveled and apologized
to pirates too... see?"
Of course I can deny that Obama is a
disaster.  We are dealing with a
hostage situation here, involving an
American citizen.  Going in with
guns blazing will certainly get him killed.
Thank gawd the grown-ups
are back in charge.
Post by Stan de SD
Yes, the American Left is intellectually
and morally bankrupt, but you
didn't need to remind us of that - we
knew that already. :O(
It's quite the other way around, Stan, as
evidenced by the fact that
your side has not offered ONE idea, plan,
proposal, whathaveyou, that
any rational person would take seriously.
My side - the conservatives - have come up
with plenty of plans to
deal with political, economic, and national
defense isses, and overall
they have worked quite well. Limited
government, personal
responsibility, and a strong military ...
Those aren't plans.
Republicans never have plans for anything.
Reagan had no plan for
dealing with Hamas in Lebanon.  The result of
that was the bombing of
the Marine barracks, resulting in the biggest
single day in U.S.
casualties since World War II.
And he learned from that. What plan did Clinton
have in dealing with
the first attack on the WTC in 1993, the USS
Cole, Khobar Towers, and
the embassy bombings to avoid a 9/11 from
happening?
The first WTC bombers were tracked down, tried in
our courts, convicted, and are presently in jail
for life.
Oh yes, the old "bring them to justice" approach of the liberals.
Well, THAT was certainly successful in preventing future terrorist
attacks... NOT!

Sorry, but for all his faults, Bush had the right idea. Treat it as
the declaration of war that it is, bring the fight to them, kill them
over there.
sid9
2009-04-12 03:14:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
On Apr 11, 5:47 pm, Spartakus
On Apr 11, 1:51 pm, Stan de SD
On Apr 11, 12:40 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized
the
cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners
held
by Israel. The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish
American
passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and
wheelchair overboard. When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by
air
to Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO
airbase
on Sicily. Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the
Italian
authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane
and
apprehend the hijackers. After
a standoff between Italian police
and
American special forces that
lasted through the night, President
Ronald Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down. This allowed Abu
Abbas,
the mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked
the
Italians, a NATO partner, you
and the rest of you left-wing assholes
would have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or
apologize to anyone.
He backed down before the standoff had
even
lasted 24 hours, even
though we had the upper hand in that
situation.
Post by Stan de SD
He did everything in his power but was
frustrated by the type of
spineless, ineffectual EU-weenies that
liberals think we need to
form a "consensus" before we do
anything
militarily...
As opposed to acting virtually
unilaterally. Look at the last 6 years
- how did that work out for us?
Post by Stan de SD
But it's interesting to see how all
you
filthy lefties, who crowed about how
the whole world would love and
"respect"
us more now that Obama was in
office, can't deny that your hero is a
weak, cowardly, incompetent DISASTER,
so instead you have to resort to
sliveling little lies like "But, but,
but Reagan... he groveled and
apologized
to pirates too... see?"
Of course I can deny that Obama is a
disaster. We are dealing with a
hostage situation here, involving an
American citizen. Going in with
guns blazing will certainly get him
killed.
Thank gawd the grown-ups
are back in charge.
Post by Stan de SD
Yes, the American Left is
intellectually
and morally bankrupt, but you
didn't need to remind us of that - we
knew that already. :O(
It's quite the other way around, Stan,
as
evidenced by the fact that
your side has not offered ONE idea,
plan,
proposal, whathaveyou, that
any rational person would take
seriously.
My side - the conservatives - have come up
with plenty of plans to
deal with political, economic, and
national
defense isses, and overall
they have worked quite well. Limited
government, personal
responsibility, and a strong military ...
Those aren't plans.
Republicans never have plans for anything.
Reagan had no plan for
dealing with Hamas in Lebanon. The result
of
that was the bombing of
the Marine barracks, resulting in the
biggest
single day in U.S.
casualties since World War II.
And he learned from that. What plan did
Clinton
have in dealing with
the first attack on the WTC in 1993, the USS
Cole, Khobar Towers, and
the embassy bombings to avoid a 9/11 from
happening?
The first WTC bombers were tracked down, tried
in
our courts, convicted, and are presently in
jail
for life.
Oh yes, the old "bring them to justice" approach
of the liberals.
Well, THAT was certainly successful in
preventing future terrorist
attacks... NOT!
Sorry, but for all his faults, Bush had the
right idea. Treat it as
the declaration of war that it is, bring the
fight to them, kill them
over there.
bush,jr was an incompetent arrogant asshole who
did serious damage to America.

Kill who?
Attack who?

bush,jr attacked the WRONG country.
A "country" didn't attack us.
Terrorists were mostly from Saudi Arabia (Friends
of the bushes)
bush,jr attacked Iraq.
THERE WERE NO IRAQIS AMONG THE WTC MURDERERS.
M***@dick.com
2009-04-12 03:55:12 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 19:59:39 -0700 (PDT), Stan de SD
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
The first WTC bombers were tracked down, tried in
our courts, convicted, and are presently in jail
for life.
Oh yes, the old "bring them to justice" approach of the liberals.
Isn't the United States of American supposed to be a
"rule of law" nation?

Are you seriously advocating that any group in power
can, at will, alter or change the law to affect the
outcome?
Stan de SD
2009-04-12 19:48:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@dick.com
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 19:59:39 -0700 (PDT), Stan de SD
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
The first WTC bombers were tracked down, tried in
our courts, convicted, and are presently in jail
for life.
Oh yes, the old "bring them to justice" approach of the liberals.
Isn't the United States of American supposed to be a
"rule of law" nation?
Are you seriously advocating that any group in power
can, at will, alter or change the law to affect the
outcome?
You obviously missed the point. One of the reasons that the Clinton
administration failed to stop the progression of terrorist attacks was
through it's treatment of the matter as merely a law enforcement or
criminal justice issue. This resulted merely in a reactive course of
action - find the person who set off the bomb, pulled the trigger,
etc. and punish them after the fact. Bush, who all you lefties hate
with such a passion, was astute enough to understand that a certain
group of people - Islamofascist militants - have declared WAR on us,
and treated it as such. The rules of war are far different than the
rules of the criminal justics system, something that lefties simply
can't handle.
Clairbear
2009-04-12 20:10:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by M***@dick.com
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 19:59:39 -0700 (PDT), Stan de SD
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
The first WTC bombers were tracked down, tried in
our courts, convicted, and are presently in jail
for life.
Oh yes, the old "bring them to justice" approach of the liberals.
Isn't the United States of American supposed to be a
"rule of law" nation?
Are you seriously advocating that any group in power
can, at will, alter or change the law to affect the
outcome?
You obviously missed the point. One of the reasons that the Clinton
administration failed to stop the progression of terrorist attacks was
through it's treatment of the matter as merely a law enforcement or
criminal justice issue. This resulted merely in a reactive course of
action - find the person who set off the bomb, pulled the trigger,
etc. and punish them after the fact. Bush, who all you lefties hate
with such a passion, was astute enough to understand that a certain
group of people - Islamofascist militants - have declared WAR on us,
and treated it as such. The rules of war are far different than the
rules of the criminal justics system, something that lefties simply
can't handle.
Damn good thing the leftist were'nt running the Nuremburg Trials.
Iarnrod
2009-04-12 20:26:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by M***@dick.com
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 19:59:39 -0700 (PDT), Stan de SD
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
The first WTC bombers were tracked down, tried in
our courts, convicted, and are presently in jail
for life.
Oh yes, the old "bring them to justice" approach of the liberals.
Isn't the United States of American supposed to be a
"rule of law" nation?
Are you seriously advocating that any group in power
can, at will, alter or change the law to affect the
outcome?
You obviously missed the point. One of the reasons that the Clinton
administration failed to stop the progression of terrorist attacks was
through it's treatment of the matter as merely a law enforcement or
criminal justice issue.
Wrong.
Post by Stan de SD
This resulted merely in a reactive course of
action - find the person who set off the bomb, pulled the trigger,
etc. and punish them after the fact. Bush, who all you lefties hate
with such a passion, was astute enough to understand that a certain
group of people - Islamofascist militants - have declared WAR on us,
and treated it as such. The rules of war are far different than the
rules of the criminal justics system, something that lefties simply
can't handle.
What YOU don't understand is that the terrorists don't give a shit
about being shot at or killed. For krissakes, they killed themselves
in the 9/11 attacks. What you fail to grasp is that they WANT the
fight. Clinton's method was much more effective.
Clairbear
2009-04-12 21:22:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Iarnrod
Post by Stan de SD
Post by M***@dick.com
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 19:59:39 -0700 (PDT), Stan de SD
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
The first WTC bombers were tracked down, tried in
our courts, convicted, and are presently in jail
for life.
Oh yes, the old "bring them to justice" approach of the liberals.
Isn't the United States of American supposed to be a
"rule of law" nation?
Are you seriously advocating that any group in power
can, at will, alter or change the law to affect the
outcome?
You obviously missed the point. One of the reasons that the Clinton
administration failed to stop the progression of terrorist attacks was
through it's treatment of the matter as merely a law enforcement or
criminal justice issue.
Wrong.
Post by Stan de SD
This resulted merely in a reactive course of
action - find the person who set off the bomb, pulled the trigger,
etc. and punish them after the fact. Bush, who all you lefties hate
with such a passion, was astute enough to understand that a certain
group of people - Islamofascist militants - have declared WAR on us,
and treated it as such. The rules of war are far different than the
rules of the criminal justics system, something that lefties simply
can't handle.
What YOU don't understand is that the terrorists don't give a shit
about being shot at or killed. For krissakes, they killed themselves
in the 9/11 attacks. What you fail to grasp is that they WANT the
fight. Clinton's method was much more effective.
As far as I am concerned give the terrorists what the want and kill them
all. You can't negotiate with a man who's goal is to die for a misguided
cause
Stan de SD
2009-04-13 01:07:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Iarnrod
Post by Stan de SD
Post by M***@dick.com
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 19:59:39 -0700 (PDT), Stan de SD
Post by Stan de SD
Post by sid9
The first WTC bombers were tracked down, tried in
our courts, convicted, and are presently in jail
for life.
Oh yes, the old "bring them to justice" approach of the liberals.
Isn't the United States of American supposed to be a
"rule of law" nation?
Are you seriously advocating that any group in power
can, at will, alter or change the law to affect the
outcome?
You obviously missed the point. One of the reasons that the Clinton
administration failed to stop the progression of terrorist attacks was
through it's treatment of the matter as merely a law enforcement or
criminal justice issue.
Wrong.
Post by Stan de SD
 This resulted merely in a reactive course of
action - find the person who set off the bomb, pulled the trigger,
etc. and punish them after the fact. Bush, who all you lefties hate
with such a passion, was astute enough to understand that a certain
group of people - Islamofascist militants - have declared WAR on us,
and treated it as such. The rules of war are far different than the
rules of the criminal justics system, something that lefties simply
can't handle.
What YOU don't understand is that the terrorists don't give a shit
about being shot at or killed. For krissakes, they killed themselves
in the 9/11 attacks. What you fail to grasp is that they WANT the
fight. Clinton's method was much more effective.
How would have Clinton's methods stopped the 9/11 attacks, dipstick?
Frank Pittel
2009-04-13 20:36:57 UTC
Permalink
In alt.politics.usa.republican Iarnrod <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
: On Apr 12, 1:48??pm, Stan de SD <***@gmail.com> wrote:
: > On Apr 11, 8:55??pm, ***@dick.com wrote:
: >
: > > On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 19:59:39 -0700 (PDT), Stan de SD
: >
: > > <***@gmail.com> wrote:
: > > >> The first WTC bombers were tracked down, tried in
: > > >> our courts, convicted, and are presently in jail
: > > >> for life.
: >
: > > >Oh yes, the old "bring them to justice" approach of the liberals.
: >
: > > Isn't the United States of American supposed to be a
: > > "rule of law" nation?
: >
: > > Are you seriously advocating that any group in power
: > > can, at will, alter or change the law to affect the
: > > outcome?
: >
: > You obviously missed the point. One of the reasons that the Clinton
: > administration failed to stop the progression of terrorist attacks was
: > through it's treatment of the matter as merely a law enforcement or
: > criminal justice issue.


: Wrong.

: > This resulted merely in a reactive course of
: > action - find the person who set off the bomb, pulled the trigger,
: > etc. and punish them after the fact. Bush, who all you lefties hate
: > with such a passion, was astute enough to understand that a certain
: > group of people - Islamofascist militants - have declared WAR on us,
: > and treated it as such. The rules of war are far different than the
: > rules of the criminal justics system, something that lefties simply
: > can't handle.

: What YOU don't understand is that the terrorists don't give a shit
: about being shot at or killed. For krissakes, they killed themselves
: in the 9/11 attacks. What you fail to grasp is that they WANT the
: fight. Clinton's method was much more effective.

If the islamic cultist want to die what's wrong with killing them before
they kill us?? The smart thing to do is to kill them before they kill us.
--
-------------------
Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
Iarnrod
2009-04-13 21:43:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Frank Pittel
: >
: > > On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 19:59:39 -0700 (PDT), Stan de SD
: >
: > > >> The first WTC bombers were tracked down, tried in
: > > >> our courts, convicted, and are presently in jail
: > > >> for life.
: >
: > > >Oh yes, the old "bring them to justice" approach of the liberals.
: >
: > > Isn't the United States of American supposed to be a
: > > "rule of law" nation?
: >
: > > Are you seriously advocating that any group in power
: > > can, at will, alter or change the law to affect the
: > > outcome?
: >
: > You obviously missed the point. One of the reasons that the Clinton
: > administration failed to stop the progression of terrorist attacks was
: > through it's treatment of the matter as merely a law enforcement or
: > criminal justice issue.
: Wrong.
: >  This resulted merely in a reactive course of
: > action - find the person who set off the bomb, pulled the trigger,
: > etc. and punish them after the fact. Bush, who all you lefties hate
: > with such a passion, was astute enough to understand that a certain
: > group of people - Islamofascist militants - have declared WAR on us,
: > and treated it as such. The rules of war are far different than the
: > rules of the criminal justics system, something that lefties simply
: > can't handle.
: What YOU don't understand is that the terrorists don't give a shit
: about being shot at or killed. For krissakes, they killed themselves
: in the 9/11 attacks. What you fail to grasp is that they WANT the
: fight. Clinton's method was much more effective.
If the islamic cultist want to die what's wrong with killing them before
they kill us??
Idiot, you need to know which ones they are.
Post by Frank Pittel
The smart thing to do is to kill them before they kill us.
If that's the smart thing, how did you think of it?
M***@dick.com
2009-04-13 23:06:46 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 15:36:57 -0500, Frank Pittel
Post by Frank Pittel
If the islamic cultist want to die what's wrong with killing them before
they kill us??
The number of "Islamic cultists" is about the same as
Southern Baptist fundamentalists killing anyone they
disagree with.

THink we should kill ALL southern Baptists?
Frank Pittel
2009-04-14 00:16:21 UTC
Permalink
In alt.politics.usa.republican ***@dick.com wrote:
: On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 15:36:57 -0500, Frank Pittel
: <***@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote:

: >If the islamic cultist want to die what's wrong with killing them before
: >they kill us??

: The number of "Islamic cultists" is about the same as
: Southern Baptist fundamentalists killing anyone they
: disagree with.

Your credible evidence is...................??????
--
-------------------
Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
Spartakus
2009-04-13 01:05:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
Republicans never have plans for anything.  Reagan had no plan for
dealing with Hamas in Lebanon.  The result of that was the bombing
of the Marine barracks, resulting in the biggest single day in U.S.
casualties since World War II.  
And he learned from that. What plan did Clinton have in dealing with
the first attack on the WTC in 1993, the USS Cole, Khobar Towers,
and the embassy bombings to avoid a 9/11 from happening?
Glad you asked!

* 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured 1000.

The "blind Mullah" and his helpers were arrested, tried and convicted,
and are in prison for life.

* 1995 and 1996 bombings in Saudi Arabia, which killed a total of 24
and injured 200 U.S. military personnel.

The perpretrators were caught by Saudi Arabian security, most likely
with CIA help. Saudi Arabia had them beheaded.

* 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed a total of
224 and injured 5000.

The perpetrators were captured and are in jail for life. Also,
Clinton bombed the hell out of Al Qaeda camps, which Republicans
characterized as "wagging the dog".

* 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 39 U.S.
sailors.

Proof that the USS Cole bombing was the work of Al Qaeda didn't come
to light until February 2001. Who was President at that time? And how
did this President perform on his promise to bring Osama bin Laden to
justice?

And speaking of bin Laden, you remember that canard about Clinton
refusing extradition of bin Laden from Sudan? At the time (1996), bin
Laden was not under indictment - the FBI advised Clinton that they did
not have enough evidence to charge him with any crimes or terrorist
acts committed in the U.S. Remember, LOUIS FREEH, a Republican, was
director of the FBI at that time.

If bin Laden had been extradited here, he would have walked. So
Clinton asked Saudi Arabia to request extraditon to bring him there
for some swift Islamic justice, but the Saudis, fearing a backlash
from their own people, didn't want him. In fact, nobody except
Afghanistan would accept him, and that's where he ended up going.

According to a Washington Post article that appeared on October 3,
2001:

"The Clinton administration struggled to find a way to
accept the offer in secret contacts that stretched from
a meeting at a Rosslyn hotel on March 3, 1996, to a fax
that closed the door on the effort 10 weeks later. Unable
to persuade the Saudis to accept bin Laden, and lacking
a case to indict him in U.S. courts at the time, the
Clinton administration finally gave up on the capture."

And...

"'The FBI did not believe we had enough evidence to indict
bin Laden at that time, and therefore opposed bringing him
to the United States,' said Samuel R. 'Sandy' Berger, who
was deputy national security adviser then."

Got that? The FBI, under the direction of a *Republican* (Louis
Freeh), *opposed* bin Laden's extradition.

By contrast, in 2001 the Bush Junta had specific information from the
CIA and the FBI that something big was up and did nothing. At the
very least, this shows gross incompetence, and they should have held
themselves accountable for their own screw-ups instead of riding that
tired "Blame Clinton" pony.

Clinton followed through on his commitments to fight terrorism during
his entire term in office. The Bush Junta responded to intelligence
reports that Al Qaeda was planning to hijack airplanes and do
something spectacular by going on vacation.
Stan de SD
2009-04-13 01:11:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
Republicans never have plans for anything.  Reagan had no plan for
dealing with Hamas in Lebanon.  The result of that was the bombing
of the Marine barracks, resulting in the biggest single day in U.S.
casualties since World War II.  
And he learned from that. What plan did Clinton have in dealing with
the first attack on the WTC in 1993, the USS Cole, Khobar Towers,
and the embassy bombings to avoid a 9/11 from happening?
Glad you asked!
* 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured 1000.
The "blind Mullah" and his helpers were arrested, tried and convicted,
and are in prison for life.
And that of course stopped the next attack, right?
Post by Spartakus
* 1995 and 1996 bombings in Saudi Arabia, which killed a total of 24
and injured 200 U.S. military personnel.
The perpretrators were caught by Saudi Arabian security, most likely
with CIA help.  Saudi Arabia had them beheaded.
And how was Clinton involved with that?
Post by Spartakus
* 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed a total of
224 and injured 5000.
The perpetrators were captured and are in jail for life.  Also,
Clinton bombed the hell out of Al Qaeda camps, which Republicans
characterized as "wagging the dog".
Which may or may not have helped. Now how did that stop the next
attack?
Post by Spartakus
* 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 39 U.S.
sailors.
Proof that the USS Cole bombing was the work of Al Qaeda didn't come
to light until February 2001. Who was President at that time?  
And who was President when the attacks occurred?
Post by Spartakus
And how
did this President perform on his promise to bring Osama bin Laden to
justice?
And speaking of bin Laden, you remember that canard about Clinton
refusing extradition of bin Laden from Sudan?  At the time (1996), bin
Laden was not under indictment - the FBI advised Clinton that they did
not have enough evidence to charge him with any crimes or terrorist
acts committed in the U.S.  Remember, LOUIS FREEH, a Republican, was
director of the FBI at that time.
One of Bush's fatal mistaked was not dismissing Freeh - I acknowledge
that openly.
Post by Spartakus
If bin Laden had been extradited here, he would have walked.  So
Clinton asked Saudi Arabia to request extraditon to bring him there
for some swift Islamic justice, but the Saudis, fearing a backlash
from their own people, didn't want him.  In fact, nobody except
Afghanistan would accept him, and that's where he ended up going.
According to a Washington Post article that appeared on October 3,
     "The Clinton administration struggled to find a way to
      accept the offer in secret contacts that stretched from
      a meeting at a Rosslyn hotel on March 3, 1996, to a fax
      that closed the door on the effort 10 weeks later.  Unable
      to persuade the Saudis to accept bin Laden, and lacking
      a case to indict him in U.S. courts at the time, the
      Clinton administration finally gave up on the capture."
And...
     "'The FBI did not believe we had enough evidence to indict
      bin Laden at that time, and therefore opposed bringing him
      to the United States,' said Samuel R. 'Sandy' Berger, who
      was deputy national security adviser then."
Got that?  The FBI, under the direction of a *Republican* (Louis
Freeh), *opposed* bin Laden's extradition.
By contrast, in 2001 the Bush Junta
What "Bush Junta"? Was Bush president of Argentina or something like
that?
sid9
2009-04-13 02:16:42 UTC
Permalink
On Apr 12, 6:05 pm, Spartakus
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
Republicans never have plans for anything.
Reagan had no plan for
dealing with Hamas in Lebanon. The result
of that was the bombing
of the Marine barracks, resulting in the
biggest single day in U.S.
casualties since World War II.
And he learned from that. What plan did
Clinton have in dealing with
the first attack on the WTC in 1993, the USS
Cole, Khobar Towers,
and the embassy bombings to avoid a 9/11 from
happening?
Glad you asked!
* 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed
six and injured 1000.
The "blind Mullah" and his helpers were
arrested, tried and convicted,
and are in prison for life.
And that of course stopped the next attack,
right?
Post by Spartakus
* 1995 and 1996 bombings in Saudi Arabia, which
killed a total of 24
and injured 200 U.S. military personnel.
The perpretrators were caught by Saudi Arabian
security, most likely
with CIA help. Saudi Arabia had them beheaded.
And how was Clinton involved with that?
Post by Spartakus
* 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Africa,
which killed a total of
224 and injured 5000.
The perpetrators were captured and are in jail
for life. Also,
Clinton bombed the hell out of Al Qaeda camps,
which Republicans
characterized as "wagging the dog".
Which may or may not have helped. Now how did
that stop the next
attack?
Post by Spartakus
* 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17
and injured 39 U.S.
sailors.
Proof that the USS Cole bombing was the work of
Al Qaeda didn't come
to light until February 2001. Who was President
at that time?
And who was President when the attacks occurred?
Post by Spartakus
And how
did this President perform on his promise to
bring Osama bin Laden to
justice?
And speaking of bin Laden, you remember that
canard about Clinton
refusing extradition of bin Laden from Sudan?
At the time (1996), bin
Laden was not under indictment - the FBI
advised Clinton that they did
not have enough evidence to charge him with any
crimes or terrorist
acts committed in the U.S. Remember, LOUIS
FREEH, a Republican, was
director of the FBI at that time.
One of Bush's fatal mistaked was not dismissing
Freeh - I acknowledge
that openly.
Post by Spartakus
If bin Laden had been extradited here, he would
have walked. So
Clinton asked Saudi Arabia to request
extraditon to bring him there
for some swift Islamic justice, but the Saudis,
fearing a backlash
from their own people, didn't want him. In
fact, nobody except
Afghanistan would accept him, and that's where
he ended up going.
According to a Washington Post article that
appeared on October 3,
"The Clinton administration struggled to
find a way to
accept the offer in secret contacts that
stretched from
a meeting at a Rosslyn hotel on March 3,
1996, to a fax
that closed the door on the effort 10
weeks later. Unable
to persuade the Saudis to accept bin
Laden, and lacking
a case to indict him in U.S. courts at
the time, the
Clinton administration finally gave up on
the capture."
And...
"'The FBI did not believe we had enough
evidence to indict
bin Laden at that time, and therefore
opposed bringing him
to the United States,' said Samuel R.
'Sandy' Berger, who
was deputy national security adviser
then."
Got that? The FBI, under the direction of a
*Republican* (Louis
Freeh), *opposed* bin Laden's extradition.
By contrast, in 2001 the Bush Junta
What "Bush Junta"? Was Bush president of
Argentina or something like
that?
"...bin Laden determined to attack the United
States"

We'll never forget the loser, liar, and world
class incompetent that bush,jr and his Republican
administration was.
Spartakus
2009-04-14 15:42:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
Republicans never have plans for anything.  Reagan had no plan for
dealing with Hamas in Lebanon.  The result of that was the bombing
of the Marine barracks, resulting in the biggest single day in U.S.
casualties since World War II.
And he learned from that. What plan did Clinton have in dealing with
the first attack on the WTC in 1993, the USS Cole, Khobar Towers,
and the embassy bombings to avoid a 9/11 from happening?
Glad you asked!
* 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured 1000.
The "blind Mullah" and his helpers were arrested, tried and convicted,
and are in prison for life.
And that of course stopped the next attack, right?
It stopped the perpetrators.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
* 1995 and 1996 bombings in Saudi Arabia, which killed a total of 24
and injured 200 U.S. military personnel.
The perpretrators were caught by Saudi Arabian security, most likely
with CIA help.  Saudi Arabia had them beheaded.
And how was Clinton involved with that?
What part of "most likely with CIA help" didn't you understand?
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
* 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed a total of
224 and injured 5000.
The perpetrators were captured and are in jail for life.  Also,
Clinton bombed the hell out of Al Qaeda camps, which Republicans
characterized as "wagging the dog".
Which may or may not have helped. Now how did that stop the next
attack?
Once again, the perpetrators were stopped.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
* 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 39 U.S.
sailors.
Proof that the USS Cole bombing was the work of Al Qaeda didn't come
to light until February 2001. Who was President at that time?  
And who was President when the attacks occurred?
George W. Bush was President when it was proven that Al Qaeda was
responsible for the USS Cole.

Did he follow up on that information? Did he do anything about it?
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
And how did this President perform on his promise to bring Osama bin
Laden to justice?
That's kind of a poser, isn't it?
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
And speaking of bin Laden, you remember that canard about Clinton
refusing extradition of bin Laden from Sudan?  At the time (1996), bin
Laden was not under indictment - the FBI advised Clinton that they did
not have enough evidence to charge him with any crimes or terrorist
acts committed in the U.S.  Remember, LOUIS FREEH, a Republican,
was director of the FBI at that time.
One of Bush's fatal mistaked was not dismissing Freeh - I acknowledge
that openly.
And it was Clinton's mistake to appoint him in the first place.
Clinton did a lot of good things, but that wasn't one of them.

[--stuff about bin Laden deleted--]
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
By contrast, in 2001 the Bush Junta
What "Bush Junta"? Was Bush president of Argentina or something like
that?
Where have you been the past several years? A lot of people thought
of the Bush administration as a banana republic. Hence, "Bush Junta".
RichTravsky
2009-04-12 05:29:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Spartakus
In 1985, four PLO hijackers seized the cruise ship Achille Lauro and
demanded the release of prisoners held by Israel. The terrorists shot
and killed a disabled Jewish American passenger named Leon
Klinghoffer, dumping his body and wheelchair overboard. When Egypt
gave the hijackers safe passage by air to Tunisia, American warplanes
forced them to land at a NATO airbase on Sicily. Even though a U.S.
citizen had been murdered, the Italian authorities refused to let Navy
SEALs board the terrorists' plane and apprehend the hijackers. After
a standoff between Italian police and American special forces that
lasted through the night, President Ronald Reagan ordered U.S. troops
to stand down. This allowed Abu Abbas, the mastermind of the
hijacking, to escape to Yugoslavia.
And of course if the US had attacked the Italians, a NATO partner, you
Why would they attack the Italians???? Strawman.

Bonzo let a couple hundred marines get blown to shreds in Lebanon and
left with his tail between his legs
Post by Stan de SD
and the rest of you left-wing assholes would have been screaming
bloody murder. Reagan didn't grovel or apologize to anyone. He did
everything in his power but was frustrated by the type of spineless,
ineffectual EU-weenies that liberals think we need to form a
"consensus" before we do anything militarily... But it's interesting
to see how all you filthy lefties, who crowed about how the whole
world would love and "respect" us more now that Obama was in office,
can't deny that your hero is a weak, cowardly, incompetent DISASTER,
so instead you have to resort to sliveling little lies like "But, but,
but Reagan... he groveled and apologized to pirates too... see?"
Yes, the American Left is intellectually and morally bankrupt, but you
didn't need to remind us of that - we knew that already. :O(
MioMyo
2009-04-12 14:56:57 UTC
Permalink
No one believes your lies about Reagan; INDISPUTABLY he was the greatest
president in the last half century.

But I can see "Safe" to you is bamby sucking the king's dick. Next it will
mean him sucking Bin Laden's dick......
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 16:36:08 -0700, "MioMyo"
It's been a Israeli policy---sometimes adopted by us
Wrong, but then again bamby doesn't care about protocols established for
the
reason to keep Americans safe.
So "Safe" to you was Reagan Arming and kissing Saddam's
ass;
or "safe" to you was Reagan honoring Dead SS death camp
guards?
Or, Lying under oath about selling arms to Iran,
Or, Lying about sending arms to South America where
another rightwing dictator was slaughtering people?
What fucking set of "principles" guide you
dingbats-----the hot fart air you spout all the time?
Frank Pittel
2009-04-12 17:06:39 UTC
Permalink
In alt.politics.usa.republican MioMyo <***@somewhere.com> wrote:
: No one believes your lies about Reagan; INDISPUTABLY he was the greatest
: president in the last half century.

: But I can see "Safe" to you is bamby sucking the king's dick. Next it will
: mean him sucking Bin Laden's dick......

You need to remember that the dick wasn't even born when Reagan was president.
All the moron knows about Reagan are the lies he reads at the kook sites he goes
to for his information.

: <***@dick.com> wrote in message
: news:***@4ax.com...
: > On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 16:36:08 -0700, "MioMyo"
: > <***@Somewhere.com> wrote:
: >
: >>> It's been a Israeli policy---sometimes adopted by us
: >>
: >>Wrong, but then again bamby doesn't care about protocols established for
: >>the
: >>reason to keep Americans safe.
: >
: > So "Safe" to you was Reagan Arming and kissing Saddam's
: > ass;
: >
: > or "safe" to you was Reagan honoring Dead SS death camp
: > guards?
: >
: > Or, Lying under oath about selling arms to Iran,
: >
: > Or, Lying about sending arms to South America where
: > another rightwing dictator was slaughtering people?
: >
: > What fucking set of "principles" guide you
: > dingbats-----the hot fart air you spout all the time?
--
-------------------
Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
MioMyo
2009-04-12 19:13:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Frank Pittel
: No one believes your lies about Reagan; INDISPUTABLY he was the greatest
: president in the last half century.
: But I can see "Safe" to you is bamby sucking the king's dick. Next it will
: mean him sucking Bin Laden's dick......
You need to remember that the dick wasn't even born when Reagan was president.
All the moron knows about Reagan are the lies he reads at the kook sites he goes
to for his information.
Which is no excuse just like I wasn't alive during WWII, yet I know Japan
attacked Pear Harbor and Hitler committed atrocities not the other way
around.

Plus there is really no excuse for the sucks-moby's-dick because he has been
around during the recent Iraq war & yet the demagogue still lies about
it......
Post by Frank Pittel
: > On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 16:36:08 -0700, "MioMyo"
: >
: >>> It's been a Israeli policy---sometimes adopted by us
: >>
: >>Wrong, but then again bamby doesn't care about protocols established for
: >>the
: >>reason to keep Americans safe.
: >
: > So "Safe" to you was Reagan Arming and kissing Saddam's
: > ass;
: >
: > or "safe" to you was Reagan honoring Dead SS death camp
: > guards?
: >
: > Or, Lying under oath about selling arms to Iran,
: >
: > Or, Lying about sending arms to South America where
: > another rightwing dictator was slaughtering people?
: >
: > What fucking set of "principles" guide you
: > dingbats-----the hot fart air you spout all the time?
--
-------------------
Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
M***@dick.com
2009-04-12 21:27:49 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 12:13:48 -0700, "MioMyo"
Post by MioMyo
Which is no excuse just like I wasn't alive during WWII, yet I know Japan
attacked Pear Harbor and Hitler committed atrocities not the other way
around.
So what would you have said if FDR turned around and
attacked Burma for what Japan did?

You seem to think your lying sack of shit Bush was
doing great job by Attacking a nation that had nothing
to do with us.
M***@dick.com
2009-04-12 21:29:36 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 12:13:48 -0700, "MioMyo"
Post by MioMyo
Plus there is really no excuse for the sucks-moby's-dick because he has been
around during the recent Iraq war & yet the demagogue still lies about
it......
Oh?

Then where are the WMD

Where's the "yellow cake"

The Aluminum tubes for Nuclear weapons

The hundreds of missiles ready to be launched at us

The Mobile labs churning out "tons of CB agents"?

The evidence of Bin Laden and Saddam together plotting

Or, even Al Queda training with Saddam

Hmmm?
M***@dick.com
2009-04-12 21:26:30 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 12:06:39 -0500, Frank Pittel
Post by Frank Pittel
All the moron knows about Reagan are the lies he reads at the kook sites he goes
to for his information.
Did, or did not, Ronnie Raygun go on television and
(wagging his finger) claim the United States did NOT
sell arms to Iran.

Did he, or did he not, Deny giving arms to South
America?

Did Raygun honor SS concentration camp guards, or not?

How about taking credit (falsely) for the collapse of
the Soviet Union after a Generation of Eastern
Europeans placed THEIR Lives and families in jepoardy
defying the Soviet Union?

Reagan NEVER did a fucking think for America except
make the wealth class a lot richer.
M***@dick.com
2009-04-12 21:23:38 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 07:56:57 -0700, "MioMyo"
Post by MioMyo
No one believes your lies about Reagan; INDISPUTABLY he was the greatest
president in the last half century.
A lying, perjuring, factionalizing, greedy,
self-serving idiot whose own budget directer told him
that his economics was "voodoo"
MioMyo
2009-04-12 15:10:44 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 02:22:13 -0700 (PDT), James Of
Scenario: You're working on a cargo ship. You are attacked.
The attackers have several ships and a land base with a full scale
industrial dock facility.
They have several ships and are well organized. They have satellite
radio, radar, and sonar.
The group that boards your ship is armed with rocket propelled
grenades and automatic rifles.
To defend yourself, your fellow crew members, your ship and your
cargo, you have high-pressure
water hoses and your wits.
Now tell us how you proceed.
"Proceed"?
What you "do" is to assemble the UN, decide on a
rational course to Control Somalia and erradicate the
problem by military action if necessary
Nit-picking individual events or instances simply would
escalate the pirates.
What a liberal solution.

Here's a better one:

Arm every shipmate on the cargo vessel with automatic rifles and one trained
& with a RPG.

Then let the UN cry over the deaths of a few pirate thugs while debating ad
nauseam how to stop these high seas crimes.....
GO'Pukes
2009-04-12 17:12:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by MioMyo
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 02:22:13 -0700 (PDT), James Of
Scenario: You're working on a cargo ship. You are attacked.
The attackers have several ships and a land base with a full scale
industrial dock facility.
They have several ships and are well organized. They have satellite
radio, radar, and sonar.
The group that boards your ship is armed with rocket propelled
grenades and automatic rifles.
To defend yourself, your fellow crew members, your ship and your
cargo, you have high-pressure
water hoses and your wits.
Now tell us how you proceed.
"Proceed"?
What you "do" is to assemble the UN, decide on a
rational course to Control Somalia and erradicate the
problem by military action if necessary
Nit-picking individual events or instances simply would
escalate the pirates.
What a liberal solution.
Arm every shipmate on the cargo vessel with automatic rifles and one trained
& with a RPG.
Then let the UN cry over the deaths of a few pirate thugs while debating ad
nauseam how to stop these high seas crimes.....
Fucking morons...
--
At the RNC incest is PRIORITY-1 because that's how the GO'Pukes got started,
all the way back to the Virgin Birth ;)
Stan de SD
2009-04-12 19:54:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by GO'Pukes
Post by MioMyo
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 02:22:13 -0700 (PDT), James Of
Scenario:  You're working on a cargo ship.  You are attacked.
The attackers have several ships and a land base with a full scale
industrial dock facility.
They have several ships and are well organized.  They have satellite
radio, radar, and sonar.
The group that boards your ship is armed with rocket propelled
grenades and automatic rifles.
To defend yourself, your fellow crew members, your ship and your
cargo, you have high-pressure
water hoses and your wits.
Now tell us how you proceed.
"Proceed"?
What you "do" is to assemble the UN, decide on a
rational course to Control Somalia and erradicate the
problem by military action if necessary
Nit-picking individual events or instances simply would
escalate the pirates.
What a liberal solution.
Arm every shipmate on the cargo vessel with automatic rifles and one trained
& with a RPG.
Then let the UN cry over the deaths of a few pirate thugs while debating ad
nauseam how to stop these high seas crimes.....
Fucking morons...
--
At the RNC incest is PRIORITY-1 because that's how the GO'Pukes got started,
all the way back to the Virgin Birth ;)-
And here is how a lefty responds when he in intellectually incapable
of refuting the arguments of others.
a***@hotmail.com
2009-04-12 20:49:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by GO'Pukes
Post by MioMyo
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 02:22:13 -0700 (PDT), James Of
Scenario:  You're working on a cargo ship.  You are attacked.
The attackers have several ships and a land base with a full scale
industrial dock facility.
They have several ships and are well organized.  They have satellite
radio, radar, and sonar.
The group that boards your ship is armed with rocket propelled
grenades and automatic rifles.
To defend yourself, your fellow crew members, your ship and your
cargo, you have high-pressure
water hoses and your wits.
Now tell us how you proceed.
"Proceed"?
What you "do" is to assemble the UN, decide on a
rational course to Control Somalia and erradicate the
problem by military action if necessary
Nit-picking individual events or instances simply would
escalate the pirates.
What a liberal solution.
Arm every shipmate on the cargo vessel with automatic rifles and one trained
& with a RPG.
Then let the UN cry over the deaths of a few pirate thugs while debating ad
nauseam how to stop these high seas crimes.....
Fucking morons...
--
At the RNC incest is PRIORITY-1 because that's how the GO'Pukes got started,
all the way back to the Virgin Birth ;)-
And here is how a lefty responds when he in intellectually incapable
of refuting the arguments of others.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
"And here is how a lefty responds when he in intellectually incapable
of refuting the arguments of others". -Stan de SD
um, i am STILL waiting for your response to my provision of evidence
regarding Reagan's sellout of the Iran hostages some 41 posts ago.
Looks like you "respond" only when you have a faint chance of winning
an argument, loser - dax
More-on GO'Pukelickcans
2009-04-12 23:10:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Stan de SD
Post by GO'Pukes
Post by MioMyo
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 02:22:13 -0700 (PDT), James Of
Scenario:  You're working on a cargo ship.  You are attacked.
The attackers have several ships and a land base with a full scale
industrial dock facility.
They have several ships and are well organized.  They have satellite
radio, radar, and sonar.
The group that boards your ship is armed with rocket propelled
grenades and automatic rifles.
To defend yourself, your fellow crew members, your ship and your
cargo, you have high-pressure
water hoses and your wits.
Now tell us how you proceed.
"Proceed"?
What you "do" is to assemble the UN, decide on a
rational course to Control Somalia and erradicate the
problem by military action if necessary
Nit-picking individual events or instances simply would
escalate the pirates.
What a liberal solution.
Arm every shipmate on the cargo vessel with automatic rifles and one trained
& with a RPG.
Then let the UN cry over the deaths of a few pirate thugs while debating ad
nauseam how to stop these high seas crimes.....
Fucking morons...
--
At the RNC incest is PRIORITY-1 because that's how the GO'Pukes got started,
all the way back to the Virgin Birth ;)-
And here is how a lefty responds when he in intellectually incapable
of refuting the arguments of others.
My (sic) solution (argument) was in the subject line ya'fucking moron...(lol)
Post by a***@hotmail.com
"And here is how a lefty responds when he in intellectually incapable
of refuting the arguments of others". -Stan de SD
um, i am STILL waiting for your response to my provision of evidence
regarding Reagan's sellout of the Iran hostages some 41 posts ago.
Looks like you "respond" only when you have a faint chance of winning
an argument, loser - dax
--
I'm a compASSionate CUNTservative neoCONdescender with
a twist of blASSphemy thrown in for truth :)))

BTW...fuck the jesus myth
Stan de SD
2009-04-13 01:13:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Stan de SD
Post by GO'Pukes
Post by MioMyo
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 02:22:13 -0700 (PDT), James Of
Scenario:  You're working on a cargo ship.  You are attacked.
The attackers have several ships and a land base with a full scale
industrial dock facility.
They have several ships and are well organized.  They have satellite
radio, radar, and sonar.
The group that boards your ship is armed with rocket propelled
grenades and automatic rifles.
To defend yourself, your fellow crew members, your ship and your
cargo, you have high-pressure
water hoses and your wits.
Now tell us how you proceed.
"Proceed"?
What you "do" is to assemble the UN, decide on a
rational course to Control Somalia and erradicate the
problem by military action if necessary
Nit-picking individual events or instances simply would
escalate the pirates.
What a liberal solution.
Arm every shipmate on the cargo vessel with automatic rifles and one trained
& with a RPG.
Then let the UN cry over the deaths of a few pirate thugs while debating ad
nauseam how to stop these high seas crimes.....
Fucking morons...
--
At the RNC incest is PRIORITY-1 because that's how the GO'Pukes got started,
all the way back to the Virgin Birth ;)-
And here is how a lefty responds when he in intellectually incapable
of refuting the arguments of others.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
"And here is how a lefty responds when he in intellectually incapable
of refuting the arguments of others". -Stan de SD
um, i am STILL waiting for your response to my provision of evidence
regarding Reagan's sellout of the Iran hostages some 41 posts ago.
How did he "sell out" the Iran hostages, given that they were released
on the day he took office?
a***@hotmail.com
2009-04-13 12:26:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by a***@hotmail.com
Post by Stan de SD
Post by GO'Pukes
Post by MioMyo
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 02:22:13 -0700 (PDT), James Of
Scenario:  You're working on a cargo ship.  You are attacked.
The attackers have several ships and a land base with a full scale
industrial dock facility.
They have several ships and are well organized.  They have satellite
radio, radar, and sonar.
The group that boards your ship is armed with rocket propelled
grenades and automatic rifles.
To defend yourself, your fellow crew members, your ship and your
cargo, you have high-pressure
water hoses and your wits.
Now tell us how you proceed.
"Proceed"?
What you "do" is to assemble the UN, decide on a
rational course to Control Somalia and erradicate the
problem by military action if necessary
Nit-picking individual events or instances simply would
escalate the pirates.
What a liberal solution.
Arm every shipmate on the cargo vessel with automatic rifles and one trained
& with a RPG.
Then let the UN cry over the deaths of a few pirate thugs while debating ad
nauseam how to stop these high seas crimes.....
Fucking morons...
--
At the RNC incest is PRIORITY-1 because that's how the GO'Pukes got started,
all the way back to the Virgin Birth ;)-
And here is how a lefty responds when he in intellectually incapable
of refuting the arguments of others.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
"And here is how a lefty responds when he in intellectually incapable
of refuting the arguments of others". -Stan de SD
um, i am STILL waiting for your response to my provision of evidence
regarding Reagan's sellout of the Iran hostages some 41 posts ago.
How did he "sell out" the Iran hostages, given that they were released
on the day he took office?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
" How did he "sell out" the Iran hostages, given that they were
released
on the day he took office?"
did you even READ the material?
Didn't think so.
Want your answer? READ IT! - dax
Frank Pittel
2009-04-13 14:22:30 UTC
Permalink
In alt.politics.usa.republican Stan de SD <***@gmail.com> wrote:
: On Apr 12, 1:49??pm, "***@hotmail.com" <***@hotmail.com>
: wrote:
: > On Apr 12, 3:54??pm, Stan de SD <***@gmail.com> wrote:
: >
: >
: >
: >
: >
: > > On Apr 12, 10:12??am, GO'Pukes <***@comcast.net> wrote:
: >
: > > > >> <***@dick.com> wrote in message
: > > > >news:***@4ax.com...
: > > > >> On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 02:22:13 -0700 (PDT), James Of
: > > > >> Tucson <***@gmail.com> wrote:
: >
: > > > >>> Scenario: ??You're working on a cargo ship. ??You are attacked.
: >
: > > > >>> The attackers have several ships and a land base with a full scale
: > > > >>> industrial dock facility.
: > > > >>> They have several ships and are well organized. ??They have satellite
: > > > >>> radio, radar, and sonar.
: > > > >>> The group that boards your ship is armed with rocket propelled
: > > > >>> grenades and automatic rifles.
: >
: > > > >>> To defend yourself, your fellow crew members, your ship and your
: > > > >>> cargo, you have high-pressure
: > > > >>> water hoses and your wits.
: >
: > > > >>> Now tell us how you proceed.
: >
: > > > >> "Proceed"?
: >
: > > > >> What you "do" is to assemble the UN, decide on a
: > > > >> rational course to Control Somalia and erradicate the
: > > > >> problem by military action if necessary
: >
: > > > >> Nit-picking individual events or instances simply would
: > > > >> escalate the pirates.
: >
: > > > > What a liberal solution.
: >
: > > > > Here's a better one:
: >
: > > > > Arm every shipmate on the cargo vessel with automatic rifles and one trained
: > > > > & with a RPG.
: >
: > > > > Then let the UN cry over the deaths of a few pirate thugs while debating ad
: > > > > nauseam how to stop these high seas crimes.....
: >
: > > > Fucking morons...
: >
: > > > --
: > > > At the RNC incest is PRIORITY-1 because that's how the GO'Pukes got started,
: > > > all the way back to the Virgin Birth ;)-
: >
: > > And here is how a lefty responds when he in intellectually incapable
: > > of refuting the arguments of others.- Hide quoted text -
: >
: > > - Show quoted text -
: >
: > "And here is how a lefty responds when he in intellectually incapable
: > of refuting the arguments of others". -Stan de SD
: > um, i am STILL waiting for your response to my provision of evidence
: > regarding Reagan's sellout of the Iran hostages some 41 posts ago.

: How did he "sell out" the Iran hostages, given that they were released
: on the day he took office?

It's an almost 30 year old fantasy of the looney tune brain dead lying fascist
loser lib dems. Not much different then the 911 kookers.
--
-------------------
Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
M***@dick.com
2009-04-13 17:15:22 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 09:22:30 -0500, Frank Pittel
Post by Frank Pittel
: How did he "sell out" the Iran hostages, given that they were released
: on the day he took office?
It's an almost 30 year old fantasy of the looney tune brain dead lying fascist
loser lib dems. Not much different then the 911 kookers.
--
It was brought out that he told Iran he would sell them
weapons if they made arrangements for the release of
the hostages.

Reagan ran one on of the most criminal adminstrations
in history (not to mention greedy and self-serving),
lied to Congress, Lied to the American people about his
lying, then commited Perjury in his Pointdexter
Deposition

When caught----he admitted he lied under oath----But
didn't think it was bad.
Frank Pittel
2009-04-13 22:48:53 UTC
Permalink
In alt.politics.usa.republican ***@dick.com wrote:
: On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 09:22:30 -0500, Frank Pittel
: <***@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote:

: >: How did he "sell out" the Iran hostages, given that they were released
: >: on the day he took office?
: >
: >It's an almost 30 year old fantasy of the looney tune brain dead lying fascist
: >loser lib dems. Not much different then the 911 kookers.
: >--

: It was brought out that he told Iran he would sell them
: weapons if they made arrangements for the release of
: the hostages.

Sure. Your credible proof is........................?????

: Reagan ran one on of the most criminal adminstrations
: in history (not to mention greedy and self-serving),
: lied to Congress, Lied to the American people about his
: lying, then commited Perjury in his Pointdexter
: Deposition

Your credible proof is.............?????
--
-------------------
Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
M***@dick.com
2009-04-13 23:04:04 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 17:48:53 -0500, Frank Pittel
Post by Frank Pittel
: On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 09:22:30 -0500, Frank Pittel
: >: How did he "sell out" the Iran hostages, given that they were released
: >: on the day he took office?
: >
: >It's an almost 30 year old fantasy of the looney tune brain dead lying fascist
: >loser lib dems. Not much different then the 911 kookers.
: >--
: It was brought out that he told Iran he would sell them
: weapons if they made arrangements for the release of
: the hostages.
Sure. Your credible proof is........................?????
If I told you that the world is round, not flat, you'd
ask for "proof". That's stupid, because demanding
"proof" of a historical fact is the last refuge of a
whipped and beaten moron
Post by Frank Pittel
: Reagan ran one on of the most criminal adminstrations
: in history (not to mention greedy and self-serving),
: lied to Congress, Lied to the American people about his
: lying, then commited Perjury in his Pointdexter
: Deposition
Your credible proof is.............?????
Again, the public historical record is replete with
Reagans lies, the litany of HIGH RANKING indicted,
fired, tried, convicted, reprimanded and resigned
administration (many of who were pardoned prior to
jail)

The perjury in the Pointdexter deposition can be
googled, as can most of the list of indicted, fined,
jailed and pardoned criminals in his administraton

Reagan's denial about selling arms to Iran is
histrorical FACT

Reagan's eventual press conference admitting perjury is
Historical fact

I don't need to "prove" what is common, accepted fact.
Post by Frank Pittel
=======================================================================
REAGAN TREACHERY, LIES, TREASON
It was in late 1985 that the "Iran" portion of the conspiracy
began. An Iranian arms dealer, Manucher Ghorbanifar, had offered
to obtain the release of American hostages in Lebanon if the U.S.
would sell anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles to Iran. Arms sales
to Iran had been illegal since 1979 under an arms embargo. Even
without an embargo, an arms sale of this size would have required
a "finding" by the president, and notification of Congress.
President Reagan approved the sale, but did not sign a finding
at that time.
The sale was undertaken, primarily through Bud McFarland, a National
Security Advisor. He ended up selling more than 500 TOW antitank
missiles and 18 Hawk anti-aircrat missiles to Iran. The missiles
traveled through Israel, and Europe before making their way to
Iran. The hawks had been replaced with some Israeli castoffs, making
the Iranians furious. Overall, only one hostage had been released.
In late November 1985, President Reagan signed a retroactive finding.
In January, 1986 the president ordered John Poindexter to drop
the Israelis out of the deal, and sell arms to Iran directly.
Poindexter and Oliver North were the main architects of the deal,
with Richard Secord being the go-between. They had marked up the
missiles by 300%, and placed the profits, money which belonged
to the U.S. government, in Swiss bank accounts. That money was
then later funneled to the Contras in violation of the Boland
amendments.
When a Lebanese newspaper exposed the Iranian arms deals on November
3, 1986, the conspiracy began to be revealed. It was then that
the coverup began.
The Independent Prosecutor
In late November 1985, President Reagan signed a
retroactive finding.

In January, 1986 the president ordered John Poindexter
to drop
the Israelis out of the deal, and sell arms to Iran
directly.
Poindexter and Oliver North were the main architects of
the deal,
with Richard Secord being the go-between. They had
marked up the
missiles by 300%, and placed the profits, money which
belonged
to the U.S. government, in Swiss bank accounts. That
money was
then later funneled to the Contras in violation of the
Boland
amendments.

When a Lebanese newspaper exposed the Iranian arms
deals on November
3, 1986, the conspiracy began to be revealed. It was
then that
the coverup began.

The Independent Prosecutor
Frank Pittel
2009-04-14 00:39:06 UTC
Permalink
In alt.politics.usa.republican ***@dick.com wrote:
: On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 17:48:53 -0500, Frank Pittel
: <***@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote:

: >In alt.politics.usa.republican ***@dick.com wrote:
: >: On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 09:22:30 -0500, Frank Pittel
: >: <***@warlock.deepthought.com> wrote:
: >
: >: >: How did he "sell out" the Iran hostages, given that they were released
: >: >: on the day he took office?
: >: >
: >: >It's an almost 30 year old fantasy of the looney tune brain dead lying fascist
: >: >loser lib dems. Not much different then the 911 kookers.
: >: >--
: >
: >: It was brought out that he told Iran he would sell them
: >: weapons if they made arrangements for the release of
: >: the hostages.
: >
: >Sure. Your credible proof is........................?????

: If I told you that the world is round, not flat, you'd
: ask for "proof". That's stupid, because demanding
: "proof" of a historical fact is the last refuge of a
: whipped and beaten moron

Couldn't find the proof I see.

: >: Reagan ran one on of the most criminal adminstrations
: >: in history (not to mention greedy and self-serving),
: >: lied to Congress, Lied to the American people about his
: >: lying, then commited Perjury in his Pointdexter
: >: Deposition
: >
: >Your credible proof is.............?????

: Again, the public historical record is replete with
: Reagans lies, the litany of HIGH RANKING indicted,
: fired, tried, convicted, reprimanded and resigned
: administration (many of who were pardoned prior to
: jail)

Name them ones convicted.

: The perjury in the Pointdexter deposition can be
: googled, as can most of the list of indicted, fined,
: jailed and pardoned criminals in his administraton

: Reagan's denial about selling arms to Iran is
: histrorical FACT

: Reagan's eventual press conference admitting perjury is
: Historical fact

: I don't need to "prove" what is common, accepted fact.


Couldn't find any credible proof I see.
--
-------------------
Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
M***@dick.com
2009-04-14 20:13:23 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 13 Apr 2009 19:39:06 -0500, Frank Pittel
Post by Frank Pittel
: I don't need to "prove" what is common, accepted fact.
Couldn't find any credible proof I see.
Not that any dumb bastard like you would accept

You ain't interested in "proof", you're interested in
evasion, revisionist history, and whatever limpballs
tells you.

RichTravsky
2009-04-12 22:01:03 UTC
Permalink
Stan de SD wrote:
Stan de SD
2009-04-13 01:14:25 UTC
Permalink
(nothing)
Most people who had nothing to add to the conversation wouldn't have
posted like you, Ricky.
M***@dick.com
2009-04-13 12:41:30 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 18:14:25 -0700 (PDT), Stan de SD
Post by Stan de SD
(nothing)
Most people who had nothing to add to the conversation wouldn't have
posted like you, Ricky.
Most people like you are like this guy, StanDeLoon
Post by Stan de SD
------------------------------­--------------------------------------
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=author:Dana+author:Raffaniello&hl=e...
houston toilet for ladies
use me as your toilet. will be toilet for female parties.
can also be used as a rug, so you can walk on me.
M***@dick.com
2009-04-12 21:12:36 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 08:10:44 -0700, "MioMyo"
Post by MioMyo
Arm every shipmate on the cargo vessel with automatic rifles and one trained
& with a RPG.
Yeah, that runs about as stupid as arming all college,
highschool students, Retirement homes, or any POSSIBLE
venues where a gunloon will strike.
Stan de SD
2009-04-13 02:13:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by M***@dick.com
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 08:10:44 -0700, "MioMyo"
Post by MioMyo
Arm every shipmate on the cargo vessel with automatic rifles and one trained
& with a RPG.
Yeah, that runs about as stupid as arming all college,
highschool students, Retirement homes, or any POSSIBLE
venues where a gunloon will strike.
Why is it stupid? Merely because you say so?
M***@dick.com
2009-04-13 12:39:28 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 19:13:16 -0700 (PDT), Stan de SD
Post by Stan de SD
Post by M***@dick.com
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 08:10:44 -0700, "MioMyo"
Post by MioMyo
Arm every shipmate on the cargo vessel with automatic rifles and one trained
& with a RPG.
Yeah, that runs about as stupid as arming all college,
highschool students, Retirement homes, or any POSSIBLE
venues where a gunloon will strike.
Why is it stupid? Merely because you say so?
On face value, it's stupid

More evidence that you're not intellectually capable of
understanding much
MioMyo
2009-04-12 18:32:36 UTC
Permalink
HELL NO!!
However,
Obama says these pirates are just misunderstood
Making up what President Obama says. How clever.
Cry us a river, libtard, explaining how you rabid idiots on the fringe left
never did the same for the former Honorable President GW Bush........
r wiley
2009-04-12 20:23:07 UTC
Permalink
Navy snipers took out the pirates and rescued the Merchant Marine
captain. What kind of wimpy rescue is that. George W. Bush and
Dick Cheney would have "shock and awe" bombed Syria. Now that's
a proper rescue.

rw
M***@dick.com
2009-04-12 21:30:34 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 15:23:07 -0500, "r wiley"
Post by r wiley
Navy snipers took out the pirates and rescued the Merchant Marine
captain. What kind of wimpy rescue is that. George W. Bush and
Dick Cheney would have "shock and awe" bombed Syria. Now that's
a proper rescue.
BWHAHAHAHAHAHA

Nice one.

Pirates take Hostage off Somalia-----Attack Iceland

SNICKER
M***@dick.com
2009-04-12 21:29:56 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 11:32:36 -0700, "MioMyo"
Post by MioMyo
HELL NO!!
However,
Obama says these pirates are just misunderstood
Making up what President Obama says. How clever.
Cry us a river,
Lie us one like Bush
Loading...