Jump to content

Can We Afford Another "Trust Me" Engagement/Strike/War?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

As a nation, we should never go to war based on a "trust me" statement from any President. American lives are far too precious and American treasure far too scarce to throw away for anything other than an absolute and direct threat to the United States; and for this, evidence is required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure we can. We make money out of thin air. As long as corporations staff and influence Washington, we don't need evidence. If American lives were precious and our standard of living was a concern, they wouldn't ship jobs over seas and promote scarcity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure. "Strikes" are low-risk, high-reward. Lob a few cruise missiles, accomplish nothing, but you get to pretend you're actually accomplishing something.

I've been trying to edit the US's wikipedia page to change our leading national export to cruise missiles but those jerks keep deleting my accounts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure we can. We make money out of thin air. As long as corporations staff and influence Washington, we don't need evidence. If American lives were precious and our standard of living was a concern, they wouldn't ship jobs over seas and promote scarcity.

Right...it's the corporations who got up a year ago and talked about a "red line". :lol:

 

I'm trying to visualize what this stretch would look like, if you were actually forced to make it with your body.

 

Perhaps this?

kenner_stretch_armstrong.jpg

 

Nah, this couldn't be the fault of the incompetent boob you may have supported, who had no experience whatsoever, and told us running his campaign = leadership. Nothing is ever his fault. Let's blame corporate people! :rolleyes:

 

Let's ignore the fact that corporate people are routinely recruited heavily, by the political machinery of both parties...because the rank and file government employee tends to be inferior, and the political hackery appeals to the corporate person's sense of duty, to get them to take the pay cut and serve the country.

 

This is hilarious. As if I, or any other "corporate American" would want to leave what I do, and go work for those clowns...without a genuine and necessary feeling that I was being selfless and sacrificing personal gain for the good of the country.

 

People that talk about "corporate people"? 9/10 they don't know any at all.

 

EDIT: However, I've done 4 projects for the government, and passed on 3 others. I know government employees plenty. When I call them inferior, that because I've seen them in action.

Edited by OCinBuffalo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Russia is moving more warships into the eastern Med and the US is expanding the list of potential targets in Syria. I didn't want BHO answering the telephone at 2:00 AM and I don't want him in the saddle when the Syrian question really heats up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Russia is moving more warships into the eastern Med and the US is expanding the list of potential targets in Syria. I didn't want BHO answering the telephone at 2:00 AM and I don't want him in the saddle when the Syrian question really heats up.

 

Yeah, this is getting fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Yeah, this is getting fun.

 

What frightens the hell out of me is that Obama is too arrogant to know that he doesn't know. He is in way over his head, politically out maneuvered at every turn and is desperately trying to save face and "prove" to the world and his critics that he is brilliant obama and he knows best.

 

How bad can he screw this up....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What frightens the hell out of me is that Obama is too arrogant to know that he doesn't know. He is in way over his head, politically out maneuvered at every turn and is desperately trying to save face and "prove" to the world and his critics that he is brilliant obama and he knows best.

 

How bad can he screw this up....

 

Well, let's see...he's going up against one of the coolest and most calculating world leaders since Stalin, and he's acting like a community organizer. And now he's in a position to accidentally attack a Russian surface action group. Of the coast of a country that's already used chemical weapons. On Netanyahoo's doorstep.

 

Oh, we'll be fine, I'm sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched a few YouTube videos last night of what's going on over there. Why we are chosing sides where one is more insane that the other? Why on earth do we even care if these jackwads shoot, decapitate, eat the hearts of or gas each other? Both are !@#$ed and we're !@#$ed for chosing one side over the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched a few YouTube videos last night of what's going on over there. Why we are chosing sides where one is more insane that the other? Why on earth do we even care if these jackwads shoot, decapitate, eat the hearts of or gas each other? Both are !@#$ed and we're !@#$ed for chosing one side over the other.

 

Probably one of the better arguments I've heard regarding Syria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched a few YouTube videos last night of what's going on over there. Why we are chosing sides where one is more insane that the other? Why on earth do we even care if these jackwads shoot, decapitate, eat the hearts of or gas each other? Both are !@#$ed and we're !@#$ed for chosing one side over the other.

 

We're not "choosing sides." We just have to punish the guy who used chemical weapons, but in a manner that doesn't punish him at all. Otherwise, we're letting bad things happen, and thus look weak.

 

But we have to talk about it a lot first, because if we act decisively in ineffectively punishing someone, we might look strong, and we can't afford that either.

 

The bottom line is that, at this point, we just have to bomb SOMEBODY to save face. Doesn't matter who it is. We could bomb Mali for all it matters at this point. Just so we drop bombs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're not "choosing sides." We just have to punish the guy who used chemical weapons, but in a manner that doesn't punish him at all. Otherwise, we're letting bad things happen, and thus look weak.

 

But we have to talk about it a lot first, because if we act decisively in ineffectively punishing someone, we might look strong, and we can't afford that either.

 

The bottom line is that, at this point, we just have to bomb SOMEBODY to save face. Doesn't matter who it is. We could bomb Mali for all it matters at this point. Just so we drop bombs.

 

Let me ask you if Obama had not made that red line remark would we have to bomb someone/anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a nation, we should never go to war based on a "trust me" statement from any President. American lives are far too precious and American treasure far too scarce to throw away for anything other than an absolute and direct threat to the United States; and for this, evidence is required.

Haven't you seen the commercials? The military is now a "Global force for good". Interesting wording. No longer to defend the United States. With this kind of mindset and tag line anything is justifiable.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...