Republicans Woefully Out of Touch With Reality...

Page 6 of 9 [ 137 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

18 Jul 2015, 12:57 am

Remember how Donald Rumsfeld went to Iraq in 1983 during the time when Saddam was gassing the kurds and stuff and actually met with the guy and, you know, shook the devil's hand?

Good times.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,586
Location: the island of defective toy santas

18 Jul 2015, 1:02 am

one sociopath shakes hands with another, happens all the time though seldom with as much import as that example.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

18 Jul 2015, 1:08 am

The warmongers couldn't lose in 2000, Gore was the conservative DLC chairman and big time hawk who had supported the first Gulf War and supported all the interventions of the Clinton administration. His VP was Joe Lieberman, a verified true believer like his good friend John McCain whose answer to everything is to bomb or occupy. Most Democrats supported the Iraq War, if they were the party in power when 9/11 then the entire right/left division between the parties might of been completely turned on its head. Kind of makes that whole election look like a joke doesn't it? As if we had a choice.



cathylynn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,045
Location: northeast US

18 Jul 2015, 1:11 am

most democrats supported the iraq war because bush lied to them about WMD. by the way, sanders didn't. i plan to vote for him.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

18 Jul 2015, 1:13 am

blauSamstag wrote:
Remember how Donald Rumsfeld went to Iraq in 1983 during the time when Saddam was gassing the kurds and stuff and actually met with the guy and, you know, shook the devil's hand?

Good times.


Yeah and we basically gave him the green light in his mind to invade Kuwait and to absorb it into Iraq, if we had told Saddam that the US + the rest of the Arab world would defend the territorial integrity of Kuwait then he probably never invades.



blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

18 Jul 2015, 1:17 am

Jacoby wrote:
blauSamstag wrote:
Remember how Donald Rumsfeld went to Iraq in 1983 during the time when Saddam was gassing the kurds and stuff and actually met with the guy and, you know, shook the devil's hand?

Good times.


Yeah and we basically gave him the green light in his mind to invade Kuwait and to absorb it into Iraq, if we had told Saddam that the US + the rest of the Arab world would defend the territorial integrity of Kuwait then he probably never invades.


And then we never get the idea to set up military bases in saudi arabia, and osama bin laden grows out of his mujaheddin days and goes back to being an architect.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

18 Jul 2015, 1:31 am

cathylynn wrote:
most democrats supported the iraq war because bush lied to them about WMD. by the way, sanders didn't. i plan to vote for him.


Watch the last video I posted, Clinton is giving a speech to the Joint Chiefs of Staff about Saddam's alleged WMDs back in the 90s.

Most Democrats supported the Iraq war because they either truly supported it(regime change was signed into US law as the official policy of the United States towards Iraq after that bill in 1998 was passed) or were such cynical liars that they thought that supporting the war would be politically expedient. Political expediency was why the Dems embraced the anti-war movement and political expediency is why they promptly ditched them once Obama had used them to get elected.

Bernie Sanders voted against it and so did Lincoln Chafee who was a Republican at the time, Hilary and Biden were big proponents of invading Iraq. Jim Webb is probably the most antiwar candidate running and it kind of sad that the media completely ignores him. We see the mayor from The Wire Martin O'Malley's dumb face all the time as if we'd want to elect him president based on his accomplishments but Jim Webb can't get a mention? Combat vet in Vietnam, served as Secretary of the Navy at the end of the Ronald Reagan administration too so could actually have crossover appeal.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,643
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

18 Jul 2015, 1:49 am

Jacoby wrote:


And yet, in the end, W. did the exact opposite of what he said he'd do.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Inventor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,014
Location: New Orleans

18 Jul 2015, 3:16 am

Clinton started this cycle.

He launched cruise missiles on the training camps of the Taliban, when they were the government of Afghanistan.

These were our allies when fighting the Russians. No warning, no declaration of war, just Boom!

He also knocked off a baby aspirin factory.

If it was not a false flag, planes crashing into the World Trade Towers could have been a response to the cruise missiles. This is all too deep, as Building 7 collapsed without being damaged?

All of the people involved were Saudi, and none had been to Afghanistan. Before Iran and Syria, Iraq was the major enemy of the Saudis.

Now Islamic State does more than the Taliban or Al Kaida ever thought of, and are supported by the Saudis.

Saddam claimed that the Kuwaitis were slant drilling into Iraq oil deposits, and that Bush I had given the green light to invade. Theft of a few billion in oil is a reason to act. Saddam who had fought Iran for America, did invade, then did retreat, and the convoy was not prepared for the American air attack that killed them all.

It seems he went to arrest the government for oil theft, then left. We will never know because everyone died in fire. If it was a takeover, he would have stayed. Dug in in Kuwait City, would have been a good defense. I think a deal because they left in mass, without anti aircraft or air cover. They were tight packed bumper to bumper when going back to Bagdad, in a single convoy. It looks very much like they were set up.

Saddam was Saudi enemy number one, and there is that picture of Bush II kissing the Saudi King on the lips.

Republicans and Democrats are small fry in the world of Skull and Bones, CIA, Saudis and Zionists.



blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

18 Jul 2015, 11:53 am

Dunno about the pharmaceutical facility bill blew up being a bad move.

it absolutely could have been clandestinely used to make chemical weapons. People don't realize how easy most of them are to make if you have just one talented chemist on your side.

My chemist friend assures me that anyone with access to a tire factory can make mustard agent, for example. The trick is just understanding how the formula works, and he says he actually made about a gram of it on contract for the air force - to test a detection sensor. And there was a lot of fuss about that, but mostly because the army didn't want the air force getting any sensor money that might otherwise go to the army.

All it took was a couple hours thinking about how to make it - applying years of training and experience. Anyone with a firm grasp of chemistry can figure it out.

Similarly, any dairy set up to make cheese or yogurt can be used to produce bioweapons. Though weaponizing anthrax is a nontrivial endeavor. Really hard to get it into a fine powder without cooking it.

The PR was certainly bad, tho.



dianthus
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,138

18 Jul 2015, 1:03 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
No one wants to collect food stamps. Everyone wants a job that pays enough to live comfortably.


YOU are the one out of touch with reality if you believe that. Yes there are people who don't want to work, and would rather receive whatever benefits they can get from the government. I have known plenty of people like that, and they freely admit that's how they feel about it. I've also known women who would openly talk about having more children that they don't want, just so they can get more benefits. This isn't hogwash or speculation, it's reality.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

18 Jul 2015, 1:52 pm

Many people depend on food stamps, it is not that much money and individually I don't really care about people abusing it since it income based not need based. They're not going to investigate poor people eating at the friends and families house who trade their EBT money for cash if they're poor enough to qualify for it, why would I care? Problems more arise when the abuse or fraud is organized and wide spread on the vendor side. It is impossible to stop somebody from trading them tho, it is impossible to stop people from turning what little of an asset they have into cash if they feel they need that more than food.

I don't believe there are too many people that are too lazy to work and would rather stay on food stamps, there is a welfare trap tho where their is no advantage or even disadvantage to work since you lose your benefits and don't make any more money than you did before. That's on the government, not on poor people. Why would you work some god awful minimum wage job if it decreases your QOL? It's just common sense and FWIW most these jobs are filled so its not like you can just say "too bad, work harder and earn less at your crappy job" because that's not an option for everybody. Soon enough retail and fast food will be fully automated and you're going to have a whole segment of the population that has no hope of working with the economic ladder being pulled up.



Last edited by Jacoby on 18 Jul 2015, 1:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,643
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

18 Jul 2015, 1:53 pm

dianthus wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
No one wants to collect food stamps. Everyone wants a job that pays enough to live comfortably.


YOU are the one out of touch with reality if you believe that. Yes there are people who don't want to work, and would rather receive whatever benefits they can get from the government. I have known plenty of people like that, and they freely admit that's how they feel about it. I've also known women who would openly talk about having more children that they don't want, just so they can get more benefits. This isn't hogwash or speculation, it's reality.


I'm sure there are people like that, but I think their numbers have been greatly exaggerated by the right, who have made the poor and disabled the scapegoat for America's problems.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

18 Jul 2015, 2:08 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
dianthus wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
No one wants to collect food stamps. Everyone wants a job that pays enough to live comfortably.


YOU are the one out of touch with reality if you believe that. Yes there are people who don't want to work, and would rather receive whatever benefits they can get from the government. I have known plenty of people like that, and they freely admit that's how they feel about it. I've also known women who would openly talk about having more children that they don't want, just so they can get more benefits. This isn't hogwash or speculation, it's reality.


I'm sure there are people like that, but I think their numbers have been greatly exaggerated by the right, who have made the poor and disabled the scapegoat for America's problems.


At any rate, I am far more offended by things like the development of the F-35 Lightning II -- over 200 billion over budget, can't do the job it was designed for, is inferior to the jet it replaces.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/16/politics/ ... nal-costs/



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

18 Jul 2015, 2:34 pm

blauSamstag wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
dianthus wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
No one wants to collect food stamps. Everyone wants a job that pays enough to live comfortably.


YOU are the one out of touch with reality if you believe that. Yes there are people who don't want to work, and would rather receive whatever benefits they can get from the government. I have known plenty of people like that, and they freely admit that's how they feel about it. I've also known women who would openly talk about having more children that they don't want, just so they can get more benefits. This isn't hogwash or speculation, it's reality.


I'm sure there are people like that, but I think their numbers have been greatly exaggerated by the right, who have made the poor and disabled the scapegoat for America's problems.


At any rate, I am far more offended by things like the development of the F-35 Lightning II -- over 200 billion over budget, can't do the job it was designed for, is inferior to the jet it replaces.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/16/politics/ ... nal-costs/


The military industrial complex in action, of course they want to the F-35 to take the the A-10's place since it costs 10x the amount to build that's without factoring in how much has been spent on the developing the F-35. The whole point of the A-10 was that it could fly at extremely low altitude and take tremendous damage while providing air support so having a much more expensive jet that cannot take nearly the amount of punishment do the same mission is straight up treacherous. The A-10 is probably the best preforming aircraft in the entire US military, maybe ever.

Makes me think about the FDA and CDC, do you they would ever say that natural medicine is the preferred treatment for anything? Only patented billion dollar formulas from Big Pharma will do, you know they always say there is no money in the cure just the treatment.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,643
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

18 Jul 2015, 3:26 pm

blauSamstag wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
dianthus wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
No one wants to collect food stamps. Everyone wants a job that pays enough to live comfortably.


YOU are the one out of touch with reality if you believe that. Yes there are people who don't want to work, and would rather receive whatever benefits they can get from the government. I have known plenty of people like that, and they freely admit that's how they feel about it. I've also known women who would openly talk about having more children that they don't want, just so they can get more benefits. This isn't hogwash or speculation, it's reality.


I'm sure there are people like that, but I think their numbers have been greatly exaggerated by the right, who have made the poor and disabled the scapegoat for America's problems.


At any rate, I am far more offended by things like the development of the F-35 Lightning II -- over 200 billion over budget, can't do the job it was designed for, is inferior to the jet it replaces.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/16/politics/ ... nal-costs/


It isn't popular to criticize the military when so called "parasites milking off of Uncle Sugar's teat" are such an easier target.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer