« Shamed into a strategy? (updated 17sep14) | Main | Sandbox - 9sep14 »

09 September 2014

Comments

Paul Emery

George

Are you referring to the type of "backbone" that led us to invade pathetic little countries like Grenada or Iraq ? Or lie driven invasions such as Viet Nam Give me an example of "backbone" applied.

Michael R. Kesti

"...lavishly ladled and lapped up line of bullshit..."

Brilliant! I'll be using that line again and again.

Walt

Really Paul? Granada??? I guess going into rescue U.S. collage kids was not on your "to do" list. As for other "interventions", I can see your quite the humanitarian. Unchecked genocide of innocents by thugs and goons is far better than the few civilians we have gone out of our way to avoid in those conflicts.
Viet Nam was a Democrat's war, and fought with Democrat logic, and rules of engagement. No wonder we lost. Recall "Robert McNamara's wiz kids"? Fighting a war with "accountants" counting bullets. That sure made plenty of sense. Taking ground, just to give it back.
Informing the North of where we would attack next. MORE "forward thinking".
And a Repub. got us out of there. ( Nixon)

Backbone is going in, breaking every enemy toy, shoot anyone with a gun in their hand.
They don't play by the old rules of warfare. All that "talking to our enemies" really worked out well.

George Rebane

PaulE 1241pm - At this stage of disclosure I am afraid there is nothing I can add to the type of backbone referenced here. I have described America's necessity to exert its forceful leadership in too many past posts, some of which are cited here. Too bad that you have missed (misunderstood?) them all.

Walt

A personal note on Granada. My squadron was ordered, and in the air to do "our thing".
After the initial strikes, our "services" weren't needed, and our aircraft was sent home.
Yes, we were happy about that, but at the same time felt like we got screwed. All our training, and commitment wasn't used. We didn't join the ranks for the benefits and cut rate schooling, plenty of others signed on the dotted line for. " What? gunfire??? That's not what I signed up for!!"

Gregory

Please join me in applauding Cheryl Cooke for her affirmation that the Second Amendment conveys an individual right that a majority cannot vote away. This is progress.

Walt

George.. Did Hanson Bros. raise the price of sand? Or did the county demand a grading permit? Us feral cats need a place to "go"...

George Rebane

Gregory 253pm - Never saw that positive ray of light in her commentary; well said.

George Rebane

Walt 257pm - Again with belated apologies, a fresh sandbox is now open for business and exposed to your tender mercies.
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2014/09/sandbox-9sep14.html

Walt

The fault is all mine good Doc. I had an itchy trigger finger, and pulled the trigger before you had the powder charge fully in place, and the breach block closed..... ( my bad)

Paul Emery

George

All I was asking for was an example of what you describe as "backbone". Pretty simple. Was it the war in Iraq? Afghanistan? Desert Storm ? Do we need to go back to Korea? Oh yeah, we're still there. How about Panama where we take out CIA collaborator Manuel Noriega (operation "Just Cause" for drug dealing at the same time the CIA was selling crack cocaine on the streets of this country to finance our illegal war in Nicaragua. How about our covert overthrow of the sovereign Democratic nation of that ushered in a 17-year dictatorship under Pinochet. Are any of these examples of "backbone" as you put it. Oh yeah the Mission Complete moment. Whoops, we're going back. In your view we need to keep military forces strategically in every country we invade to keep them from going bad (VietNam Iraq) and you know from your view I understand your position.
I much prefer Ron Pauls view of keeping our military home to defend our borders.

He writes about Obama "Even adjusted for inflation, military spending is 17% higher now than when Obama took office. Even the worst case scenarios of Obama’s “cuts,” adjusted for inflation, still put outlays at 2007 levels, which are 40% higher than a decade ago. Our total spending on overseas adventurism and nation building equals more than the next 13 highest spending countries in the world combined. Even if we were to slash our military budget in half, we would still be the world’s dominant military power, by far."

Walt

You really believe Grenada was about rescuing college kids? It was old school Cold War stuff. Operation "Urgent Fury" it was called.

Todd Juvinall

CIA selling crack? That is an urban myth and I am shocked a "journalist" would say such claptrap.

George Rebane

PaulE 840pm - Yes Paul, I'm afraid we'll have to keep doing all that stuff as long as there are countries and people out there who don't want the kind of world we have helped build since WW2 and then redoubled the benefices after we defeated the spread of international communism. Unfortunately, every time we stop a runaway tyranny, out peaceful nature prompted us to too quickly beat our swords into plowshare, and today we beat them into food stamps.

To provide you and the Cheryl Cookes the right and opportunity to criticize and counter America's global role does require that we continue to act as a prudent balance to forces that have demonstrated their desire to rule the world.

And it may come as news, but our military effectiveness is not a linear function of dollars spent, but a very non-linear beast that has various levels of 'critical thresholds' of capability which come into being suddenly, and not proportionately for every dollar spent as the layman thinks. Yes, to keep from fighting civilization destroying world wars, we have to continue fighting the small ones. The peace you seek comes only after the tyrant has become comfortable standing on your neck.

Paul Emery

George

All that you say sounds good unless you're an innocent person jailed of killed by one of our puppets -Shah of Iran, Pinochet, Saddam Hussein when he was our guy-I can go on and on. I'm not sure I accept the morality of assuming the responsibility of enabling that situation to occur. Who are we to condemn millions of people to the horror of living under one of these U.S. made monsters we install and maintain for our own convenience and profit.

Bill Tozer

Grenada was about kicking Castro back to Cuba, a small island nation located somewhere in Miami. This is our hemisphere, not his.

Ok, it's all about the growing menace of extremists radical Islam. I have been following this for at least 20-25 years now in Central Africa. Over 200,000 Christians have been slaughtered there by "the Arabs" moving south from the Mediterranean. Dr. Rebane has already mentioned Malaysia, Indonesia (4th most populace nation on the planet), North Africa, and parts wide and far, so I keep this to what I know in Central darkest Africa.

For the last 20 years the Islamic extremists have wholesale slaughtered 100s of thousands of Christians on purpose and have taken 10s of thousands more women and children as slaves with the full blessings of the Koran and the teachings of The wife cheating lying Prophet.
Amnesty International, the UN humans rights commission, all western civilization governments have remained silent. Amnesty International went as far to refuse to utter a single word on the topic. Flat refused. Yet Boko Harem kidnaps a couple of hundred school girls and the media is shocked. Shit, this has been doing on for decades now on a weekly basis and is quite old news in my book. The kidnaping of Christian school girls is the least of what Boko did during the last month alone. Those in Central Africa have been moving south and abandoning their homes as ruthless radical extreme jihadists march on, taking more land, slaves,and killing the rest. They do not come in peace, nor have your best interests at heart even on the radar.

I challenge Mr. Paul or any reader to name one Christian nation that is a threat to Western Civ or the world. I can't think one single Christian nation, even the ones in name only. Even Red China is dealing with this threat ruthlessly within her own borders and the former Soviet Union states near the Southern border with Asia is now 90 % Islam and Moscow is smelling the rat and threat.

There is no dialogue, no meetings of the minds.
Convert to sexism the Muslim way or die. If you surrender and not convert to the peaceful teaching of the wife cheating lying Prophet charlatan, deathyou. Not in words, but in reality.

Paul, could you play me that old Carly Simon song "you can't talk to a man with a shotgun in his hand."

Paul Emery

Bill

Thanks for agreeing with me on the reason for our unconstitutional invasion of Grenada.

Do you really think we can pound radical Islam into submission? How would you recommend we do that?

Walt

Here we go again with that "Unconstitutional" bull shit. U.S. citizens were in harms way and Regan wasn't going to have none of it. Fire up another dooby Paul. ( or that horse piss you drink)

If it wasn't for the Lilly livered Left, who cried like little school girls, and demanded we stop when we devastated Husain's pillaging goons as they fled Kuwait, on what's now know as the highway of death,, we should have gone all the way to Bagdad and finished the job we wouldn't have this problem today.
No WMDs you say? Well tell that to the Kurds who got gassed by Sadam. And that was AFTER the cease fire.
LIBS couldn't and haven't won a war to save their sorry butts.
And YES.. We can pound them into submission. Only if our military is allowed too.
Read up on the rules of engagement that our troops must follow. Even the ones back then.
History isn't on your side.
The ONLY reason we have been losing conflicts is because LIBS made it so.

Walt

One more thing Paul, My Son was part of the crew that hauled Noriega's criminal butt back to the states. Score another point for my family's contribution to our national securely.

Bill Tozer

Paul, no way can we pound them into submission. Kingdoms such as the Saudis can do their best to round them up and throw away the key as Egypt is trying, but it will not stem the tide. This Isis thing will get uglier and uglier and never get better. ISIS or whatever cover name the Muslim Brotherhood hides behind, it's all the same and it cannot or will not say "Uncle", ever.

Biggest laugh I have had in years was when Uncle Joe Bidden stood with Obama was repeated that Al Quada is on the run. Sure, the radical Islamic extremist Western Civilization hating jihadists might make some temporary tactical retreats for political expediency or regroup, but even our own commanders and Pentagon Brass have uttered aloud in marvel how they are able to quickly change tactics, alter the game plan, and adapt just as quickly to counter/thwart our tactics and strategies. In short, they are a formidable enemy and we are u on their turf.

Considering the magnitude and will of the enemy, it is not a far stretch of the imagination to go from where we are today to Armageddon.

Now, what were you saying about the seriousness of invading Haiti, or was it Puerto Rico? Or was it Tahiti? I get all them vacation spots confused. Oh yeah, Ford Granada. Seen one, you seen them all.

Paul Emery

Gosh Walt I thought it was Bush the first that pullled the plug on Desert Storm. You learn something new every day on this blog

Walt

Paul. He made the mistake of catering to LIBS. Forget that it was the LIB media that went along for the ride? A "made for TV war". When the pictures and video of war in all it's ugliness hit the screen, who was the first ( demographic) to yell stop!,, before the job was done?
Now we a nutless President who won't do anything of real value. Talk is cheap and worthless.
How many terrorist attacks have happened under "O"'s watch? Now think back to how many there were when Bush was in office. Let me know if your memory has faded on those facts.

George Rebane

PaulE 950pm - IMHO, the error in your thinking is that the only alternatives for, say, NationX were the US installing an immoral (by our lights) tyrant who ravaged his people, to a state where the people came together to form a beneficial government acceptable to all that gave rise to happy dancing in the streets. The reality is quite different. NationX never had a culture of liberal governance, and at our intervention the people were already oppressed and/or fighting among themselves.

At that point the facile and practical choice was to back an autocrat who would serve US national interests, or one who would serve interests inimical to the US - 'nation building' was never then, nor is it now an option with such cultures. And, of course, we wisely chose the autocrat we could control. There is no evidence that any such choices caused more suffering in population of such a NationX. As examples, Iraq and Iran are direct evidence of that.

Nevertheless, the tried and true progressive argument you give of American imperialism as the seed cause of world suffering is effective if the audience is historically unread, and lacks the tools for critical thought, which, sadly, is most often the case.

Paul Emery

George

Can we agree that by our selection, funding and maintenance of xyz dictators for xyz countries they essentially become our agents because of what we expect in return for our investment in treasure and some cases blood?


a·gent/ˈājənt/
noun
a person who acts on behalf of another, in particular.
a person or thing that takes an active role or produces a specified effect.

Walt

We sue are not getting our moneys worth from billions in aid we are welfare(ing) out around
to the third world nations. That sure needs to end.

George Rebane

PaulE 129pm - In this case I think that the second definition is operative. But the individual whom we promote as the new leader (autocrat?) of NationX almost always acts in capacities other than fulfilling our agency (i.e. producing a specified effect that serves our interests). In such acts he is not acting as our agent, the same as, say, in sports or entertainment an agent may have several clients.

I believe the point you're aiming at is that once we put someone in power, then everything he does or fails to do subsequently becomes our responsibility. That I do not accept. Equivalently, I don't accept such responsibility when we fail to prevent a tyrant from assuming power, assuming we could have done so.

To bear the world's burdens our shoulders are only so wide, and when all is said and done, we Americans should come first in the concerns of our government. (At least that is the way it used to be.)

Walt

The Left has a real problem on their hands. "O" (to save his own political hide) may be out to commit boots on the ground to tumble with ISIS. ( led by Sadam's former generals)
Will we hear more of the "illegal" war cry from his minions? Or will they give him a pat on the back and give their undying blessing? ( Whatever he says is good with them.)
He claims to have the authority to side step Congressional approval. ( just like Bush did according to LIBS) Well,, he just might. The only diff. is that HE is the one that piped up, " the war is over". That's a statement Bush didn't make.
Bush went back in after the "cease fire" accords were broken. (cease fire.. temporary halt
in the fighting) No articles of surrender have ever been drawn up.

So in my opinion "O" CAN (just like Bush) commit to a new ground offensive without Congress.
This time leave the lawyers out of it.. ( I know... FAT chance.)

It's in the LIBS corner now.

Remember tomorrow is the 11TH. If terrorists hit ANY target America will hold every elected Lefty accountable. The Democrat mule mascot is already walking " the green mile" towards NOV.

Paul Emery

George

This is a very serious question. You advocate the better good is being served by the US installing and supporting various dictators for our own security and financial benefit re Chile, Iran. At what threshold would you support that kind of leader being installed in this country?

George Rebane

PaulE 519pm - What gave you the idea that I thought the question/topic is not serious?? BTW, while we were very complicit in the Shah's ascendancy in Iran, our involvement in Chile with the Marxist Allende's downfall was incidental. When he fell it was only the far left that mourned.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1008/p25s01-cogn.html

I don't follow your question about "threshold" and leaders being "installed in this country". Pleas ask it another way.

Walt

"threshold" and leaders being "installed in this country".
Are we not dealing with that already? Any of "O"'s background and history
is under lock and key.
Hillary was double digits ahead, then the "Wizard of OZ" stepped in and the next thing we know,, "O" get's the nod.
An "installation" if there ever was one. But who is really running the show Valarie Jerrod. Nothing happens without her approval. Don't believe that?
do some digging.

Walt

Entitle that speech " Broke back" threat address. ( Utterly pitiful)
ISIS must be quaking in their sandals. ( and laughing their ass off)

Paul Emery

George
Only incidental? this is from the CIA's own website. What does "instigate a coup" mean to you? What does "kidmapping" meant to you?

This is from the CIA's own website

"Support for Coup in 1970. Under “Track II” of the strategy, CIA sought to instigate a coup to prevent Allende from taking office after he won a plurality in the 4 September election and before, as Constitutionally required because he did not win an absolute majority, the Chilean Congress reaffirmed his victory. CIA was working with three different groups of plotters. All three groups made it clear that any coup would require the kidnapping of Army Commander Rene Schneider, who felt deeply that the Constitution required that the Army allow Allende to assume power. CIA agreed with that assessment. Although CIA provided weapons to one of the groups, we have found no information that the plotters’ or CIA’s intention was for the general to be killed. Contact with one group of plotters was dropped early on because of its extremist tendencies. CIA provided tear gas, submachine-guns and ammunition to the second group. The third group attempted to kidnap Schneider, mortally wounding him in the attack. CIA had previously encouraged this group to launch a coup but withdrew support four days before the attack because, in CIA’s assessment, the group could not carry it out successfully."

https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/chile/#4

Todd Juvinall

I for one was glad to see the Monroe Doctrine working back then. Of course Grenada and Allende had to go and good riddance. America did the right thing there. Same with Afghanistan. Of course LBJ had Santa Domingo and a few others but someone had to keep the commies out of this hemisphere. Castro has been bottled up but he saw no problem going to Angola in Africa and fighting. Perhaps the wrath of the libs should be against the commie endeavors? And now, maybe others who were so "peaceful" see we as a country have to maintain vigilance since the ISIL head choppers are coming for us.

Walt

Paroozing the stories about the lame speech,, the devout LIBS are in full damage control.
They are all falling on their swards in defense of Dear Leader.

George Rebane

I invite your kind attention to this post's 10sep14 update.

Account Deleted

Paul is right - we backed that awful Shah in Iran. He let gurlz wear lipstick and wear skirts and go to school!!!! Now Paul is much happier with the current regime shooting gays dead on the streets and making sure them womens cover them selves all up or else!
Right Paul? dead silence.
Look Paul - I'm sure you have a brain - please start using it.
No one on earth is perfect and neither is any govt. Please try to put things in perspective and deal with reality. It's currently happening right now at a planet real close to you. When a bad guy comes to your home and starts whupping on you, you don't fail to call the police because one of their officers cited you for speeding and you think maybe he wasn't real honest about how fast you were going. We wouldn't have to spend as much as we do on defence if we would just make sure to go all out on our enemies as we did in WWII. When we fought in Korea, we showed the world we really didn't want to win wars any longer. And that invited all sorts of trouble. It's really quite simple. We are the good guys and the current bad guys are militant Islamists. Being a good guy doesn't mean perfect or even close. Being a bad guy doesn't mean they have no redeeming qualities. But we are the good guys and we go in and kill anyone that raises their hand to being on the other side. We can do that. We have done it before several times and it does work. It doesn't get rid of all the other bad guys but it does make them think a while before they start trouble. Try studying world history - it's not rocket science. But you have to drop your bone headed thinking about how we have to be perfect. There are bad folks out there. They don't care about what color your skin is or what you eat for dinner. They want to kill you. For fun or money or for whatever god they follow. What are you going to do about it? Talk won't do it. Figure it out.

Russ Steele

Scott@09:09PM

Right on! Well said! Problem is that Paul does not understand one sentence of your post. He is still looking under the blanket for the perfect world that exists only in his head.

Walt

Then there is his personal,, "do not respond list". Ignore at all costs.
Now stand by for subject change.

Paul Emery

Even though Obama's approval is not so hot in the polls nowdays he's nothing like the Pubbers in congress that are in the 20's

http://www.pollingreport.com/cong_rep.htm

George Rebane

Walt 949pm - looking at PaulE's 1007pm, you are one prescient sonuvagun ;-)

Paul Emery

I was sticking to the topic raised by our host in his update that included Obama's poll ratings. Good old compare and contrast that we learned in Jr High as a way of expanding on an idea. No subject change.

Russ
you're right. I just don't have the stomach to accept Shah and Pinochet types as being for the good of humanity. I guess that's a personal character weakness.

Walt

Paul may care to see how Dirty Harry has been up too.. And he points his boney finger at the Repubs? LOL! His desk is stacked high with Bills passed by the House, never to see the Senate floor. ( he has Dems to protect. No way can their votes be used against them by the voters. Ummmm ,,, like,,, uh,,, immigration? or jobs Bills?) Yaa. The Repubs have been out playing golf.

Now go dig up something to bitch about say,,, from the civil war?

Paul Emery

Scott writes:

" But we are the good guys and we go in and kill anyone that raises their hand to being on the other side. We can do that. We have done it before several times and it does work."

CAn you tell me the last time this "worked"?

Todd Juvinall

Scott you are correct. The USA has ensured the success of our country and its system by taking out the crap of the planet that tried to do us in or undermine freedom. Excellant.

Paul Emery

Todd What was the last successful de-crapping that we engaged in? Is de-crapping constitutional?

Todd Juvinall

Grenada, Afghanistan, Chile, Iraq, Bosnia, Germany, Japan, Italy, the list goes on and on.

Walt

Well Paul,, Bush did a pretty good job of de-crapping. Then when "O" came along the human filth of radical Islam really started to pile up. Nice cesspool LIBS have allowed to overflow.
Speaking of "Constitutional",, The LIBS haven't cared one bit about what's "Constitutional". ( How bout all that domestic spying? Far beyond what Bush EVER did.)

George Rebane

Expanding a bit on US imperialism. Yes, we were complicit in the demise of Iran's Mossadegh and Chile's Allende. Mossadegh wanted to nationalize British oil interests in Iran. We also had a more geo-strategic concern in that Mossadegh was courting the USSR, and if Iran fell into the Soviet camp then it would provide the home of international communism an unimpeded warm water access to the world's oceans.

Allende was a communist and promised to turn Chile into another workers' paradise like Cuba (we blew it with Castro, believing that he was an 'agrarian reformer' against the evil Batista). During the middle of the cold war we did not want the USSR to gain another foothold in the Americas, this time on the continent itself. So we toppled Allende and accepted Pinochet who fanatically persecuted leftwingers during his reign. Subsequently we were able to guide Chile into the poster child of South American prosperity as a liberal democracy.

In Iran we didn't do so well, and allowed Khomeini back in to banish the Shah and become a greater killer of Iranians and turn the country into an architect and supplier of Islam's war against the west. See also ScottO's 909pm.

All in all, those interludes dovetailed pretty well with the small wars we fought to contain international communism, and allow it to collapse (USSR) and reform (China, Vietnam, ...) to prepare us for the next round of western civilization fighting to preserve itself.

Todd Juvinall

I think the "History of the US MArine Corps" would be a good read for those that want to see where and when our country was over the years in addressing threats.

Paul Emery

George

Thanks for confirming my position that indeed we did subvert sovereign nations for our own economic interest. In the case of Iran it was to support the economic interests of Britain (BP) that was the main reason for our creating a successful coup against a democratically elected leader of a sovereign nation. There was vague concern of course about the "soviet camp" which was the standard reason given for any subversive activities we attempt anywhere in the world.

Also, you say that we "allowed Khomeini back" to take charge of Iran. that's a new one for me. So we were quasi supporters of the Iranian Revolution.

Walt

WOW Paul,, the way your "opinion" reads, Those "sovereign nations" should have free run to oppress, enslave, and if they so choose, mass genocide. We should just sit back and watch.. " Hay,, they put them in power,,,".

Great "forward thinking".

Al

Assad's Syria is still cynically planned to be taken down; Obama, again, proposes to now openly arm the
'moderate' 'Syrian' Sunni rebels now veiled as allies fighting against ISISLSMFT.
Russia will step into the fray using any threats & means necessary.

Old news: "We’re going to take out seven countries..., starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya,
Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran." – General Wesley Clark

None of these countries listed above are among the 60 member banks of the Bank for International Settlements
(BIS), which puts them outside the control of the central bankers' central bank in Switzerland.

Current facts: Other notable non-BIS 'rogue-banking' nations are Ukraine, Egypt, Jordan, Pakistan, Venezuela,
Cuba, North Korea and North Sudan, and (functionally) Russia.

Future news: The hordes of unemployed discouraged Sunni Muslim youth will continue to follow their learned bliss.
Expanded guised Banker's Wars will continue. China and Russia will ally with Iran and back-down the fiat-deflated
multicultural West and Israel. Two global banking systems, fiat and Islamic, will emerge & coexist, for a while.
Thence another mandala of contrived spate will arise, for chaos is the mother's milk of banking and government.

Account Deleted

Good old Paul - refuses to answer any questions and comes right back with his own questions. Then he'll start demanding I answer his questions. I'm done with that, Paul. The ball is in your court.
We don't get easy picks in world politics. It's usually a Hobson's Choice.
There are places in the world that have different values and customs than we.
We just have to pick the least bad of the poor choices we have and go with it. Over time, we can work towards good. We'll never get to perfect. Ever.
The world is a cruel vicious place most of the time. It's been that way long before the USA and will be long after we are gone. We live in a cushy little bubble of sanity and law, but that has always been shaky from the start and is now starting to crumble with folks in the highest offices opening declaring they will be the law and will answer to no higher authority. That attitude invites anarchy and we descend into 2nd rate status in the world. Anyone who thinks China and Russia will behave themselves can't see evil when it urinates right in their face.

Walt

Paul.. Should we have left Hitler alone to do as he wished? He was "dully elected" as you would say.
Let's hear the wisdom of the all knowing Paul on that one.

Paul Emery

Scott writes: We just have to pick the least bad of the poor choices we have and go with it.......

So Scott you are saying that we are the cops of the world and if we don't like a leader of a sovereign nation we have the right to pick and install some one of our choice regardless of the desires of the citizens of that supposed independent country. You further say "We just have to pick the least bad of the poor choices we have and go with it. "

I am far more Conservative and certainly more Libertarian than you in this matter. Can you show me where in the Constitution this action of government is sanctioned?

Paul Emery

Also Scott exactly what question do you want me to answer and I'll give it a go. As far as mass genocide Walt we sat back and let Saddam Hussein gas the Kurds and did nothing to stop him and continued to se4nd billions in military assistance after we knew. We knew because American technology aided in the effort.

Paul Emery

Walt

In the case of Hitler he invaded other countries. Cah you show me where Iran in 1953 or Chile did that?

Walt

If you listened to "O"'s "tough talk" last night, he used plenty of Bush's original language. " we will track you down bla bla bla..." Yet he was the first to condemn Bush for doing the same thing. Only now when it's politically expedient does he try and grow a set of balls.

The speech should have included a little truth.. Like to the effect " As many know, I was born and raised Muslim.... How can I in good faith attack my own people?" He has been doing just that since the day he was elected.

Not to mention the Bush prophecies have come full circle. ( The video is all over the web.)

Walt

And Husain didn't!!!? Good GOD man... What the hell do you think got us started in the Middle East to begin with? Ever hear of KUATE??
Yup,, he gassed the Kurds as well. ( Uh,, no WMDs? )Forget LIBS had both houses when that happened and refused to fund any retaliatory action? That falls right in line with your fractured line of thinking.

Keep digging that hole deeper. Somehow you think you can have it both ways.

Walt

I getting a little tired of teaching you history. You need to send a check back to the taxpayers for the wasted time and occupying a chair in history class. It more than obvious you didn't pay one bit of attention.

Douglas Keachie

Seems both Rubio and Obama consider ISIS a tough nut to crack, and hint not too subtly that USA ground troops may be needed. They both state that a Big Problem with ISIS is that it is well funded with oil money, which they go right on selling on a daily basis.

During WWII, Operation Tidal Wave was unsuccessful, but at least it showed we knew what was important:

KNOCK OUT THE OIL SUPPLIES!

Given our knowledge of oil extraction and transport facilities, it should not be too hard to figure out what surgical strikes are needed to stop this source of revenue without completely destroying the components needed to rebuild after ISIS is no more. Why on earth should there be a hands off attitude on this ever so obvious target?

Is our goal is to knock out ISIS, but only if it can be done without jiggering with the world's oil supply too much? If so, American servicepeople should be notified of what they are fighting for, in this case The Seven Sisters, and allowed to opt out.

Massive solar installs within the USA would strike a blow to ISIS from which they would never recover. Simple simple, but not anything the Seven Sisters will support. Know your enemy, it ain't ISIS. If you look up just "The Seven Sisters" on Wikipedia, you have to scroll way down to find a reference to the book. If you add in Oil Companies, they know the jig is up, and that you already know what the reference means, and they do given you a bit, which is inaccurate, The term goes way back before the 1950's. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Sisters_%28oil_companies%29

My other solution is integrate one way or the other, rounds with C4 in them (so they explode inside the weapon), and a dye to marks the remaining rounds in the vicinity. There is evidence this is already being done, a video on YouTube showing a mortar round exploding the mortar and the operator.

Gregory


"(Keachie)
I could wile away the hours
Conferrin' with the flowers
Consultin' with the rain
And my head I'd be scratchin'
While my thoughts were busy hatchin'
If I only had a brain

I'd unravel any riddle
For any individ'le
In trouble or in pain

(Dorothy)
With the thoughts you'd be thinkin'
You could be another Lincoln
If you only had a brain

(Keachie)
Oh, I would tell you why
The ocean's near the shore
I could think of things I never thunk before
And then I'd sit and think some more

I would not be just a nuffin'
My head all full of stuffin'
My heart all full of pain
I would dance and be merry
Life would be a ding-a-derry
If I only had a brain."


If you want oil prices to crash, encourage fracking and signal to the world the Feds will be fast tracking all extraction projects on Federal leases. Nothing can move faster than speculators sitting on hundreds of tankers storing crude oil on the high seas, and they won't want to be holding the bag.

Paul Emery

Can you read Walt. I'll repeat what I wrote

"In the case of Hitler he invaded other countries. Can you show me where Iran in 1953 or Chile did that?" Not a word about our former partner Saddam who went bad. We had no problem with his invasion of Iran because it was in our interests. We armed and subsidized his invasion!!!

Walt

I swear that pony tail is tied tooo tight... The INVATION,, OF Kuwait,, Maybe you have heard of it.

AHH to Hell with it... There will be no getting through that skull of yours.
Go smoke dope with Ward Churchill.

I'm done with your red herrings to deflect away for this limp dick Obama.
He has no stomach for what needs to be done, and neither do you.

We are the world's defender. Deal with it. No one else will do the damned job.
Even Britain is going to sit this out. They have too many problems of their own right now.

Paul Emery

Walt

Again, what is the Constitutional justification of the US being the Police force of the world?

George Rebane

PaulE 447pm et al - Paul, I don't recall that we had to wait until someone invaded someone else before we acted against in our self interest. Perhaps you are suggesting that as a new rule.

The only constitutional justification for our being the world's hegemon is our own extended (that includes our allies) national security. Today because of globalism, war technology, and instant communications, our national security frontiers have extended way beyond the 12 mile limit for over a century now. Who knows, in the future they may extend to the habitable moons of Jupiter.

The naïfs out there would then vainly be looking for "the habitable moons of Jupiter" in the Constitution, but I know that you would not be among them.

Walt

Maybe the "one world order" types ( doesn't Paul have a bumper sticker to that effect?) would like Nigeria or some other banana republic to police the world
and keep the goons in check. That way we won't have to.
Wait a minute,, how bout the UN? They have shown their usefulness,,(not) Those guys run at the first rock thrown their way. We saw what happened the second there was any gunfire. Israel had to save their bacon.

Maybe Paul can file a lawsuit in the world court against the U.S. to right all the wrongs he feels the U.S. has done. Real, and or imagined.

Gregory

Paul, I suspect you're both smart enough and old enough to recall the realpolitik of cold war alliances and the fears of countries falling into the Soviet or Chinese spheres. The biggest bad guy in early '50's Iran was probably Britain, who were just too bloody greedy about keeping more than half of Iran's oil wealth and when Iran was seen as tipping towards the Soviets, the CIA went to work.

I lived and worked in Santa Barbara for several years, renting a room on a hilltop just east of town from a retired Iranian Air Force pilot whose career started under the Shah and retired with pension under the mullahs. He had good and bad to say about both. Ask me someday.

Paul Emery

George
You take a very liberal and broad view of the Constitution when it comes to foreign adventures with our military. Tom McClintock and Ron Paul both believe the war in Iraq was unconstitutional because war was not declared and we were not in imminent danger. What s your view?

Paul Emery

Gregory
Yes Britain in Iran. That was the last shred of colonialism left to them and they had to rely on their Bastard Son, the USA to do the dirty work for them.

Walt

Once again Paul your info is off base. War WAS declared.
If you took the time to do a simple search on that magic box called a computer
you would find that out. What you won't find is ANY declaration of peace.
While your at it, look into what a "cease fire" is, and what it means, and what could happen if that agreement is broken.
Congressional approval of war is still in effect TODAY.
I will send my bill of your schooling here to KVMR. You can pick it up.

The Iraq Resolution or the Iraq War Resolution (formally the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002,[1] Pub.L. 107–243, 116 Stat. 1498, enacted October 16, 2002, H.J.Res. 114) is a joint resolution passed by the United States Congress in October 2002 as Public Law No: 107-243, authorizing military action against Iraq.

The U.S. Congress has granted President George W. Bush the authorisation he sought to wage war if necessary to disarm Iraq, as the Senate followed the House of Representatives to support him with overwhelming votes.

Handing Bush a major victory, the Democratic-led Senate voted 77-23 for a war powers resolution negotiated between the White House and congressional leaders backing a possible use of force to rid Iraq of suspected weapons of mass destruction and possibly oust Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.
The Republican-led House passed it 296-133.

Now if you care to chisel what Obummer said in stone, " The war is over".
Then creates a whole new can of worms. That would mean he needs to seek approval all over again. Now he claims the war powers act gives him the blessing.

Now head to the UN and bitch. Call Nancy Pelosi.. I' sure she will take your call on the matter. Harry Reid is anxiously awaiting your call as well.

Walt

Don't worry Paul, President nutless isn't going to do much.
He's already backpedaling on what he said in his "stern" speech.
http://dailycaller.com/2014/09/11/pentagon-official-obamas-isis-strategy-is-doomed-to-fail/

Bill Tozer

Waiting for a backbone. When Hades freezes over. Oh, he will do only what is necessary to help the Dems win in 2014 only and solely to preserve his legacy. Right now the Dems are saying Do something! Come up with a plan....but no boots on the ground, until after November.

This is the same President who announced the built up in Afghanistan (the good war) on the same day he set a deadline for withdraw. The word Victory or winning is not in his foreign policy vocabulary. Never has, never will. That would make us exceptional.

Waiting for a backbone? Good luck. There are no bones in the penis, thus the noun boner is a misnomer. He may be a dick, but has no backbone or any bones besides the bones rattling around in his cranium. Thus he wears a lot of suits and ties and collared buttoned up shirts to hide his foreskin poking out around the neck .

driveByPoster


Paul, with bonus Godwin points, sez:

"In the case of Hitler he invaded other countries. Can you show me where Iran in 1953 or Chile did that?" Not a word about our former partner Saddam who went bad. We had no problem with his invasion of Iran because it was in our interests. We armed and subsidized his invasion!!!"


The Iraqis fought Iran with Soviet tanks and small arms, French and Soviet airplanes. They had a French reactor and a mostly German chemical weapons program. US involvement was practically all training and satellite intelligence.

George Rebane

PaulE 1145pm - If by 'liberal and broad view' you imply that it is something new in the use of our military, then I disagree. American presidents, I believe starting with Jefferson, have committed America's arms against foreign powers without a formal congressional war declaration, a practice that now enjoys its third century. And constitutional scholars are predominantly on the side of such impetuous presidents. Perhaps once it was a liberal and broad view of the Constitution, but no longer.

Todd Juvinall

I suggest Paul Emery read "Jefferson's War". It is the beginning of that which George states above.

Walt

Paul doesn't need to worry about the "war" word. Just consider it what's (not)going to happen a "police action". " Two purple hearts" Kerry has dubbed the ISIS wrist slap as "counterterrorism"...
It seems the Left wants to wait for ISIS guys to show up here and do their deeds. That way they can be brought to justice in our court system.
Our lawyers need the work.
Heck.. The one Bengasi attacker we did haul home may walk. All the evidence against him can't be admitted in our courts because of "national security".

Gregory

Paul, lots of dirty work was done by all sides during the Cold War and like the Shah, Pinochet wasn't all bad. His openly Marxist (Karl, not Groucho) predecessor, while democratically elected, quickly began nationalizing industries, payment to be made in the future from increasingly worthless currency he was inflating. A majority of the democratically elected legislature declared his rule to be unconstitutional and called for his removal.

The CIA, egged on by US business interests pissed off from being robbed and by anti-Communists who finally had a real communist as a target, obliged.

Pinochet and the Shah were murderous thugs (or at least had murderous thugs on staff) but were the lesser of two evils in the context of the cold war and it's easy to point fingers back from the future. It was painful, but in the long run, Chile was the better for it (the 'it' not including the murders of the 'disappeared'), and it does appear nothing will stop the current devolvement of the Middle East. Those wretchedly inane borders left behind by the Brits are a gift that keep giving to the likes of ISIS.

Account Deleted

"Massive solar installs within the USA would strike a blow to ISIS from which they would never recover."
Total BS - most of ISIS money comes from the sale of oil to countries other than the US. ISIS would roll no matter what this country's energy policies or energy usage is. DK has no concept of where the US gets it's oil from or how much we produce on our own.
Furthermore - how would 'massive installs' of solar panels put gasoline in the tank of my car? DK has no clue about what fuels are needed in this country to run the infrastructure needed to keep our economy humming.
A massive blow to ISIS would come from the US military, but not a likely scenario under the current regime. Useless has already signalled a limp wristed response to ISIS. No all-out assault is planned. The plain signal from the current admin is "we'll just pretend to do something".

Walt

Scott. "O" has taken most of his cards off the table to deal with ISIS,, ISIS will just place a severed head on that same table.
Just like with Putin,, "O" said "don't you dare... Putin said,, Really? well watch THIS! Now the bastard is flying nuke bombers right off our coasts on a regular basis.

The comments to this entry are closed.