you are too stoned, my friend. everyone else is understanding me just fine.
Obama is flat out a wuss.
- Thread starter JustAnotherFriedDay
- Start date
Purplekrunchie
Well-Known Member
What secret? They have nothing to hide. If you think Israel and Iran having nukes is same same, than you are quite offbase.
hippietoker18
Active Member
I think that the whole system is wrong and there shouldnt be any president you know man. long story short we have been using this system for a long time and still more tha half of america hates either the president or the whole government.
Fuck the man!
haha
Fuck the man!
haha
doobnVA
Well-Known Member
LOL! This is pretty much what I was going to say.
Iran contends that they are not interested in nuclear weapons, and they want nuclear technology for power plants, etc. So, why would Obama insist they talk about nuclear weapons, when they have already denied wanting to pursue them?
So, instead of the roundabout conversation Iron Lion just outlined for us - there can be a REAL discussion about other topics such as *gasp* diplomacy between the US and Iran, European relations with Iran, etc.
Iran has historically been considered our "enemy" because they are Israel's enemy. We are slowly starting to recognize (far behind the rest of the world, I might add) that perhaps Israel isn't as innocent in these matters as they'd have us believe. This means we need to consider the possibility that Iran is NOT our enemy. It seems to me this is exactly what Obama is doing now. Considering possibilities.
Would you rather him refuse talks with Iran unless they agree to talk about nuclear weapons? That would get us NOWHERE.
It's time we, as a nation, stop acting like a bunch of spoiled children and consider that maybe WE are part of the problem instead of the solution.
doobnVA
Well-Known Member
Um... do you know why half the country hates the current president? Same reason as half the country hated the LAST president. The half that hate Obama now are the republicans, and the half that hated Bush were the democrats.I think that the whole system is wrong and there shouldnt be any president you know man. long story short we have been using this system for a long time and still more tha half of america hates either the president or the whole government.
Fuck the man!
haha
Kinda the same cycle that's been going on for a long time, right? A democrat in the white house = republicans are mad. A republican in the white house = angry democrats. That's just the way it works.
Iron Lion Zion
Well-Known Member
doobnVA
Well-Known Member
I bet there are more than a few people who are now realizing they should have supported Ron Paul for president. If the democrats lose the white house in 2012, it'll be to Ron Paul. I hope.
MexicanWarlord420
Active Member
Iraq was an illegal war which costed American lives and lots of money. Iran would be the same thing. Even if there were good reasons to go to war with them, we wouldn't be able to do it because we can't afford it, and our troops are tied up in Afg/Iraq anyways. You come in these forums posting regurgitated fox news propaganda so it's really hard to give you any credibility. You made this thread because you're mad at Obama(surprise) for being diplomatic instead of being a dumbass warmonger like Bush.
cbtwohundread
Well-Known Member
be civil.,.,for they teach us in school how to be uncivilized and tell us a whole lotta lies.,.,war is not the answer.,.,the fo0l and his money shall now depart.,.nuclear weapons cant stop time no matter where they drop em.,.,i say stop em.,.,people like u,are the reason war is upon us now.,.,u want a leader to rule with a iron fist,but other times probably talk down on war.,.,with the methods u are talking it will do nothing but forward this war.,.,"hands as smo0th as silk yet there drawing sword,words soft as clouds yet war was in his heart"wolfves in sheeps clothing are everywhere nowadays.,., fire
cbtwohundread
Well-Known Member
hippietoker18
Active Member
yea which sucks though. there needs to be something that makes everyone happy. not saying thats gonna be easy though
..........
doobnVA
Well-Known Member
There's never one solution that would make everyone happy.yea which sucks though. there needs to be something that makes everyone happy. not saying thats gonna be easy though
Closest thing I can think of would be ACTUAL democracy, like letting the voters decide what laws pass, etc. Some states have initiative processes where measures can be added to the ballot and voted on by the public, but not all of them do. Also we have the highest number of people who aren't allowed to vote of any country in the world, so we'd have to figure out how to include those people in the process.
It wouldn't even be that difficult. There could be electronic ballot stations in designated localities where people could weigh in on the day's issue. the results would be published, so we can see what the PEOPLE actually want, instead of relying on corporate controlled media to tell us what we supposedly want.
I'm up in the air as to whether or not our party system is part of the problem. It's impossible to do away with "parties", because people will always align themselves into certain sets of ideals, but I think we should recognize that there are more than 2 schools of thought being subscribed to in our country. Categorizing everyone as simply "democrat" "republican" or "independent" is an awfully broad generalization of a rather complex spectrum of philosophies.
hippietoker18
Active Member
there is always a positive solution
cbtwohundread
Well-Known Member
all SYSTEMS are made to rule.,.,governmaent doesnt want PEOPLE POWER because they want seperation.,.,as long as we are seperated they can divide and conquer.,.,they want us to have false faiths in man.iman dont lo0k to these false judges,rulers or false isms and skisms.,.,i lo0k to H.I.M
Green Cross
Well-Known Member
I couldn't find a post on the Afghan war - which seems odd - but this thread seems like the appropriate place, because it seems like Obama is big pussy - like most libs - and having trouble making a decision, while our men die on the battlefield.
If we don't need to be fighting in Afghanistan then let's GTF out! Otherwise give the 160,000 brave men and women who are risking their lives there, the support they need!
Do Obama and Biden really believe they know more about how to win this war than the people on the ground, or is it the fact that Obama - like most libs - is a Muslim, or a Muslim extremist (terrorist) sympathizer?
And the F***ing news media, they're just getting around to reporting what happened last weekend? Is anyone - including FOX - reporting that 8 US soldiers were killed last weekend in an ambush, where the Muslim adversary used a mosque as an ambush point, or are we so politically correct that we first tie the military's hands when it comes to rules of engagement, and then pretend that the enemy isn't engaging us from their "place of worship"? These Muslim religious zealots are cetainly setting themselves apart from the peaceful religions of the world, like Christianity, but apparently we are supposed to accept Muslim radicals without question?
U.S. Afghanistan Base: Death Trap From The Beginning
'We're Sitting Ducks' Soldiers Told Reporter on 2006 Visit
By MATTHEW COLE
Oct. 6, 2009
The remote base in northern Afghanistan where eight U.S. soldiers were killed this weekend in a deadly battle was well-known inside the military as extremely vulnerable to attack since the day it opened in 2006, according to U.S. soldiers and government officials familiar with the area.
A U.S. Soldier scans the adjacent mountains above a base in Kamdesh, Nuristan in 2006. This past weekend insurgents attacked the base and killed at least 8 US soldiers, one of the deadliest single attacks since the war began eight years ago.
(Courtesy Sergio Caro)
More Photos
When a reporter visited the base a few months after it opened, soldiers stationed in Kamdesh complained the base's location low in a valley made most missions in the area difficult.
"We're primarily sitting ducks," said one soldier at the time.
Known as Camp Keating, the outpost was "not meant for engagements," said one senior State Department official assigned to Afghanistan, and brings "a sad and terrible conclusion" to a three-year effort to secure roads and connect the Nuristan province to the central government in Kabul.
The boulder strewn road that led into the valley was referred to by U.S. soldiers stationed there as "Ambush Alley."
In addition to the eight dead Americans, at least two Afghan Army officers were killed, with as many as a dozen Afghan National Policemen missing, according to military and Afghan officials.
The base, located less than 10 miles from the Pakistan border and nestled in the Hindu Kush mountains, was attacked almost every day for the first two months it was opened, hit by a constant stream of rocket-propelled grenades and small arms fire.
By the third or fourth month of the base's existence, resupply had been limited to nighttime helicopter flights because the daytime left helicopters and road convoys too exposed to insurgent attacks. That remained true through the weekend.
The base had several near-misses with enemy fire over the years. In 2006, all daytime helicopter flights landing at the valley floor were cancelled when an American Blackhawk was nearly hit with an incoming rocket as it was taking off. After the incident, helicopters were banned from landing anywhere but an observation post some three hours' walk above the base on a nearby ridgeline. Even then, helicopters filled with troops or equipment were rushed during offloading, as pilots were keen to take off before drawing hostile fire.
And like many other remote and rural parts of Afghanistan, the local population had begun souring on the American presence after airstrikes had hit civilians in the neighboring villages.
the rest here here...link
Why is it the democrats won't support our men and women in uniform?!!
If we don't need to be fighting in Afghanistan then let's GTF out! Otherwise give the 160,000 brave men and women who are risking their lives there, the support they need!
Do Obama and Biden really believe they know more about how to win this war than the people on the ground, or is it the fact that Obama - like most libs - is a Muslim, or a Muslim extremist (terrorist) sympathizer?
And the F***ing news media, they're just getting around to reporting what happened last weekend? Is anyone - including FOX - reporting that 8 US soldiers were killed last weekend in an ambush, where the Muslim adversary used a mosque as an ambush point, or are we so politically correct that we first tie the military's hands when it comes to rules of engagement, and then pretend that the enemy isn't engaging us from their "place of worship"? These Muslim religious zealots are cetainly setting themselves apart from the peaceful religions of the world, like Christianity, but apparently we are supposed to accept Muslim radicals without question?
U.S. Afghanistan Base: Death Trap From The Beginning
'We're Sitting Ducks' Soldiers Told Reporter on 2006 Visit
By MATTHEW COLE
Oct. 6, 2009
The remote base in northern Afghanistan where eight U.S. soldiers were killed this weekend in a deadly battle was well-known inside the military as extremely vulnerable to attack since the day it opened in 2006, according to U.S. soldiers and government officials familiar with the area.
(Courtesy Sergio Caro)
More Photos
When a reporter visited the base a few months after it opened, soldiers stationed in Kamdesh complained the base's location low in a valley made most missions in the area difficult.
"We're primarily sitting ducks," said one soldier at the time.
Known as Camp Keating, the outpost was "not meant for engagements," said one senior State Department official assigned to Afghanistan, and brings "a sad and terrible conclusion" to a three-year effort to secure roads and connect the Nuristan province to the central government in Kabul.
The boulder strewn road that led into the valley was referred to by U.S. soldiers stationed there as "Ambush Alley."
In addition to the eight dead Americans, at least two Afghan Army officers were killed, with as many as a dozen Afghan National Policemen missing, according to military and Afghan officials.
The base, located less than 10 miles from the Pakistan border and nestled in the Hindu Kush mountains, was attacked almost every day for the first two months it was opened, hit by a constant stream of rocket-propelled grenades and small arms fire.
By the third or fourth month of the base's existence, resupply had been limited to nighttime helicopter flights because the daytime left helicopters and road convoys too exposed to insurgent attacks. That remained true through the weekend.
The base had several near-misses with enemy fire over the years. In 2006, all daytime helicopter flights landing at the valley floor were cancelled when an American Blackhawk was nearly hit with an incoming rocket as it was taking off. After the incident, helicopters were banned from landing anywhere but an observation post some three hours' walk above the base on a nearby ridgeline. Even then, helicopters filled with troops or equipment were rushed during offloading, as pilots were keen to take off before drawing hostile fire.
And like many other remote and rural parts of Afghanistan, the local population had begun souring on the American presence after airstrikes had hit civilians in the neighboring villages.
the rest here here...link
Why is it the democrats won't support our men and women in uniform?!!
doobnVA
Well-Known Member
Hmm.. won't support them? Really? You mean like proposing legislation to increase funding, provide them with the tools they need to get the job done? You're trying to rewrite history. The Democrats have consistently tried to support the troops, and have consistently been shot down by Republicans.
Democrats have consistently supported legislation to provide more body armor for U.S. troops in Iraq. For instance, on March 20, 2003, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) introduced legislation which would have provided funding to correct what she described as the "underfunding [of] our Guard and Reserve" and "the lack of equipment, the lack of money in this budget to fund their current operations." She added, "For too long, the Guard and Reserve have received hand-me-downs from the Active component. ... Let's give them their rifles, their helmets, and their tactical equipment so we can, as we know we will, win this war." In a March 26, 2003, press release, Landrieu further explained that the bill "targets shortfalls identified by the National Guard and Reserve in their Unfunded Requirement lists," including the "shortage of helmets, tents, bullet-proof inserts, and tactical vests." On April 2, 2003, Senate Republicans unanimously voted to table (or kill) Landrieu's amendment to the fiscal year 2003 supplemental appropriations bill for the Iraq war. The amendment was tabled by a vote of 52-47. Additionally, on October 2, 2003, Senate Republicans voted against a Democratic amendment to the $87 billion Iraq-war funding emergency supplemental bill to increase the amount of funding devoted to body armor and battlefield clearance to ensure that both needs were met. The amendment, proposed by Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), would have added $322 million to the $300 million the Senate Appropriations Committee had already attached to an underlying bill for small arms protection inserts (SAPI) body armor and "the clearance of weapons and mines still lingering on Iraqi battlefields." Dodd repeatedly made clear in his October 2, 2003, floor statement that his intent in offering the amendment was to make certain that U.S. forces in Iraq were provided adequate body armor, which he described as a "top priorit[y]." No Republican voted against tabling Dodd's amendment.
Also, Democrats have consistently supported funding to provide for "up-armored" military's combat Humvees. For instance, in 2005, Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) proposed an amendment "[t]o appropriate an additional $213,000,000 for ... the procurement of Up-Armored High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles (UAHMMWVs)." Bayh's amendment passed 61-39 (38 of the senators who voted against the funding were Republicans).
medicineman
New Member
These Muslim religious zealots are cetainly setting themselves apart from the peaceful religions of the world, like Christianity, but apparently we are supposed to accept Muslim radicals without question?
Are you fucking kidding???
Are you fucking kidding???
CrackerJax
New Member
Actually Obama has lost traction in the polls with every party group, dem's, rep's, and ind.'s. It's more of a general slide of severe disappointment than ideology based. Obama is either not performing on any given issue, or he is underperforming.
He doesn't have a single issue he campaigned on in the win column as of today.
He doesn't have a single issue he campaigned on in the win column as of today.