Putin tells Obama to stop fighting ISIS in Syria
The Russians have been building up their military presence in Syria the last few weeks in support of the Assad government against rebels, and now, Fox News reports that Russian diplomats have issued instructions to the Obama Administration to cease military operations in Syria;
“There is nothing to indicate that we are changing operations over Syria,” a senior defense official said.
“We have had every indication in recent weeks that (the Russians) were going to do something given the build-up,” another defense official added.
The move by Moscow marks a major escalation in ongoing tensions between the two countries over military action in the war-torn country and comes moments after Russian lawmakers formally approved a request from the country’s president, Vladimir Putin, to authorize the use of troops in Syria.
Yeah, well, it was bound to happen – the Obama Administration diddled and fiddled long enough that someone was bound to take a lead in the civil war. That seems to be their strategy in everything we do – half-ass a strategy that doesn’t accomplish anything but looks like we’re struggling to do something. The world needs US leadership, and they’re just not getting it and look at the mess that has been created in the vacuum. Evil is advancing everywhere on the planet.
Category: Terror War
Vlad, the leader with hair on his ass, has told oBaMa, the scrotum shaver, to cease air strikes in Syria because Vlad is ‘putin’ boots on the ground. I understand that the Hairless One’s response was, “I’m not stopping the air strikes because I’m afraid of you. I was planning on stopping them anyway. Really. Michele can back me up on this. I told her and the girls last Thursday that I was going to order the end to the strikes.”
Hey, I don’t mind, personally, if Russian blood, not American, will be spilled in Syria. And I don’t mind if Syria becomes the next Russian republic. The only thing I do mind is that Vlad is in charge and telling us (!) what we are not to do. But that’s what happens when transgenders and gays become the chief policy concern of the military and the C-in-C is a scrotum shaver.
Spilling Russian blood is okay with me too, but I think US “leadership” will rue the day they gave away the initiative in the region. It’s shithole, but it’s a strategically important shithole and Vladimir will wring every last bit of goodness out of it.
I have to hand it to the KGBeshnik. He is a leader, unlike someone else we all know.
What is done will not be undone. Vlad isn’t acting out of love and concern for Syria. oBaMa screwed the pooch in the ME/No Afr in so many ways I can’t count them. Amateurs will do that. Rebellion fomenters will do that. We’ll see but it’s a safe bet Vlad will not screw around. If it’s moving, it’s as good as dead. You can count on it.
Bingo. The former Soviet Union worked for decades, unsuccessfully, to get overt permission to station combat troops on the ground in the Middle East. Due to this Administration’s foreign policy incompetence, the Soviet Union’s successor – Russia – has now accomplished that long-term goal.
I’m guessing those combat troops won’t be going back to Russia any time soon.
2/17,
“Scrotum shaver”. HA! Love it! May I borrow that for future use?
More like “Sphincter-sniffer” to me!
‘Taint tickler
This is what happens when you have a community organizer in charge!
Something a little off topic.
Any bets on whether the Russian military leadership would discipline an SF soldier who smacked around a pedophile?
Yeah, I don’t think so either.
Such a soldier might get disciplined if he didn’t kill the child molester.
I tend to think that the molester would be quite dead, sans his genitalia, and unable to complain to anyone about the rough treatment he received. It’s one of those cultural things we hear about, I guess. I am waiting for the molester to sue—and for us to settle the case, if we haven’t paid him already, through the State Department
I’m waiting for some jackass grad student to inform us all that child rape has taken place for 100,000 years or more, and as such, there is an inherent human right to rape a child.
I also expect said jackass to inform us that Dear Leader finally has Putin right where he wants him, and you guys are all bullies.
Racist bullies
Oh, darling! That’s already happening. What, you didn’t hear about the pedo apologists in the social justice [bowel] movement?
Well, let me enlighten you!
http://thelibertyzone.com/2015/09/02/smells-like-pedo-bear/
Take a bath in hand sanitizer afterward. Don’t say you haven’t been warned.
Vile motherfucking, scumbag pieces of dogshit.
Oh, you have *got* to be fucking kidding me.
Nope. Shit you not. This was a huge deal that blew up in another community I belong to. These SJWs will apologize for all sorts of things as long as you belong to the correct victim group.
And what irritates me about this, is I’m actually willing to get my hands into some issues involving civil rights, but this… this is a ballgame far from what should even be considered proper. This is the type of shit that gets people beat back home– and you mean to tell me there are people who want to legalize it!?
Man, /fuck/ humanity.
This has nothing to do with civil rights and everything to do with the blind devotion they have to their social and political cause. Nyberg is a trans. Nyberg is a SJW. Nyberg is a “victim,” so she can do no wrong.
Nope. Nope. Nope. Sorry.
Ugh. Two hours, a hacksaw, a blowtorch, and a cold Corona, and I could have taken care of that. >.>
Well, that was a whole lot of putrid shit I didn’t need to see.
So because I argued that the right to migrate is a human right and has been necessary for human survival for hundreds of thousands of years you think I would argue that child rape is a human right?
You are seriously comparing migration to child rape? You really think migration is as bad as child rape?
You really are a piece of shit.
It shows how completely wacked in the head right wing idiots like you are. You seriously think someone trying to find a better place for them or their family is as bad as child rape?
You worthless evil piece of dirt.
I put my name on this forum. You hide behind a pseudonym like a cowardly little weasel. Then while hiding behind anonymity you think it is ok to claim I would support child rape?
Using my name? On a public forum?
You crossed a line accusing me of something like this.
This board is full of reprehensible asshats but you take the cake. Cowardly internet bully that trie to destroy the reputations of anyone they disagree with.
Hey man, you want to self identify as a jackass, go right ahead. I did not accuse you of anything you fucking moron, nor did I equate anything.
Look in your course catalog and see if your “institution” offers any courses in logic. If so, sign up.
Your eniter justification of “the human right of migrations’ was that it had occurred for over 100,000 years or some bullshit. You established the criteria to identify “a human right”, not me, jackass. When I asked you where that bullshit right ends, all I heard out of you was crickets.
So in summary. Go fuck yourself.
I was not pissed at what you posted. I thought it was just petty bullshit. I knew you were referring to my post about the human right to migrate but you did not post my name in the post so I did not care.
However, “instinct” did post my name as a direct response.
It has been irritating that cowardly little anonymous weasels have been posting my name in THEIR posts. But since most of the time it is just someone pointless ad hominem in the post I dismissed it.
However, this is more that just a personal attack. This is damn near libel. By a anonymous little coward. Since his post is not making the claim I would support child rape but asking if I am the one you think would support child rape he dodges libel. But just barely.
But he lands smack dab in being a little fucking coward. Hiding behind anonymity to try to destroy the reputation of a “fellow” veteran.
Instinct is a piece of shit.
Instinct and GDContractor beat you at your own game, Larsie Limp-Dick. You’re still an idiot.
My own game? When have I ever called anyone out by name?
Most of you fucks claim service but do not post using your names so service can never be verified. Meanwhile anonymously attacking others for their service. Ot anonymously attacking them personally.
That is not the game I play. That is your game. That is a cowards game.
I never claimed service, Larsie. Quite the opposite, in fact. Again, you’re an idiot.
Most of you fucks claim service..
Most of you…
Most…
I’ve seen a thousand like you, Limp-Dick. Morons with delusions of genius. Please feel free to continue proving me right with your inane and self-righteous horseshit.
STFU PLEASE, I HAVE A DAMN MIGRAINE HEADACHE FROM READING YOUR CRAP.
Actually, it was a valid critique of your argument vice petty BS.
The initial argument you made elsewhere in support of the nonexistent “right of migration” can logically be expressed as follows:
1. Premise 1: a longstanding human practice defines a “right”.
2. Premise 2: human migration is a longstanding human practice.
3. Conclusion: therefore, migration is a “right”.
Essentially, that was your initial justification for the “right of migration” – e.g., that humans had been doing it for a long time. If either premise is invalid, the argument is logically unsound.
What GDContractor did was to use your own logical construct to demonstrate the absurdity justification of the “right” of migration by applying it to a diffrent, abhorrent, but regrettably longstanding, human practice: child rape. He could equivalently have used murder, theft, or any one of a number of morally abhorrent acts. Essentially, he used the “proof by contradiction” technique to prove your original assertion of a “right to migration” false by showing that it’s truth leads to an absurd result.
Obviously, your logical error rests in one of your two premises. Since Premise 2 is obviously correct in both cases, Premise 1 must be incorrect.
Specifically, it means that long practice alone does nothing to confirm a human practice as being a “right”. If that were the case, murder, rape, and all other known crimes known from prehistory would be “rights”; like migration, they’re also known throughout human history.
Perhaps you should follow GDContractor’s advice and get some instruction in basic logic. Based on this and other half-baked arguments you’ve posted here at TAH, you appear to need such instruction rather badly.
No. The key point was not that it was old. It was that it was fundamental to human survival. The reference to it being old is to highlight that it is something human have done before nations and borders.
Child rape is not necessary for human survival.
It is ridiculous that you would be so against the right to migrate that you would claim someone thinking people had the right to migrate is the SAME as thinking people have the right to rape children.
That is flat asinine. One of the stupidest things I have ever seen anyone claim.
You likely have migrated. You probably moved in your life and do not live in the same community in which you were born. Migration is not just something YOU WOULD DO FOR YOUR FAMILY if the situation was reversed and you were in a desperate situation unable to adequately provide for the health, safety, and needs of yourself or your family. It is something you have DONE in you life while in a far less desperate situation merely to IMPROVE your life.
Yet you claim others do not have this right. That humans should not have this right. So it is just a privilege. Something the government allows. And a government have the right to prevent you from moving if they choose? Without any just cause. Just whenever the government sees an advantage in doing so.
It is not a right after all.
Apparently, according to you, it is not an inalienable right. It was not endowed by the creator. Apparently, it is a privilege the government ALLOWS and can make illegal at any time at their discretion.
Is that what you claim?
You can’t have it both ways. You can’t claim that the AMERICAN right to migrate is inalienable and endowed by the creator but the HUMAN right is not.
Here is your entire initial comment on the subject.
My comment above referenced your initial attempt to justify that nonexistent right. There is no mention in that first comment of necessity, or anything else other than longstanding practice.
Further, it is equally absurd to argue that necessity creates rights. As I recall, Aztecs believed human sacrifice to their gods “necessary” to ensure their own well-being and survival. Are you seriously arguing that that perceived necessity conferred on them the “right” to select and murder an innocent? Or that a starving man has the right to steal his neighbor’s food, and live – while his neighbor starves? Or to kill his neighbor to take his food?
“Need” does not equal or create a “right”. Just because someone needs an item, service, or thing, they do not have any moral right to steal that item from its rightful owner.
If you can’t see the difference between someone having the right to move to a place where they can provide for the health, safety, and needs of themselves and their family and the “right” to murder someone else in the name of your religion then there is no point in furthering this discussion.
Apparently, to you and other members of this board someone trying to move to a place where they can be safe and healthy is the SAME as child rape and the SAME as murdering innocent people in the name of religion.
Those are asinine comparisons.
It is a waste of time to discuss it further if you are going to ridiculously make outlandish claims like that.
If that is where you stand then there is no getting through to you.
To claim that a superstitious society murdering people because they thought it was “necessary” to appease their god’s is the same use of the word “necessary” as someone trying to find a way to provide for the basic needs and safety of their family is absurd.
That is equivocating on the word “necessary” changes the context and meaning to create a straw man of my claims.
I am sick of this shit at this point.
I am astonished that people are so hateful of “other” nationalities and ethnicities that you cannot even comprehend that they have a “right” to find live in a place where they can provide for the basic needs and safety of their families.
That is astonishing.
Is THIS how you get when you try to wean yourself off of bong water?
I’m awake and my phone is in my hands. YOUR CRAP CAN TRIGGER headaches in non military personnel and I slept until now because I needed a double dose of morphine injections something I don’t want or like.
Please, delete yourself from this group, your a pain in the ass and you just cost me $1,000. Tomorrow morning my crew works double time because I’m on bed rest.
Someone needs to super glue your hands over your mouth, no more posts again. ??
LARS..so I don’t confuse people I respect ?
If you honestly think that “Apparently, to you and other members of this board someone trying to move to a place where they can be safe and healthy is the SAME as child rape and the SAME as murdering innocent people in the name of religion.” Then you truly are an idiot. Hypothesis confirmed.
Now, to address the idiocy in your latest comment. There is absolutely no inconsistency in stating that there is freedom of movement within the US (or within any nation, if that nation’s laws permits) but no right to migrate across national boundaries. Free movement within the US is guaranteed by the Constitution – specifically, by Article IV, Section 2, and the 9th, 10th, and 14th Amendments. Collectively, that Article/Section and those Amendments require all citizens to be treated equally, state clearly that other rights not enumerated in the Constitution exist within the United States, reserve those other rights to the states/people, and mandate personal freedom absent due process of law. Those rights guaranteed by the Constitution end at the US border. When not in the US, ones right to free movement WITHIN THE USA become irrelevant. Why? Because, “You’re not in Kansas any more, Toto.” In fact, you’re no longer in the USA; foreign law governs. Virtually all nations have immigration restrictions. Nations have every right to institute them – just like you have the right to tell someone whether or not they can visit your house, or can sleep on your couch. Or eat the food in your refrigerator, or use your money to pay for their next movie. Why? Because collectively, that nation owns its land – just like you own your house, your car, and your bank account. They therefore have the right to prescribe who can visit – and who can live there. If they say, “You can’t come here” – that’s it. End of discussion. Try it and you’ll end up incarcerated – or worse. Don’t believe me? Then why don’t you try it – at the Korean DMZ, going northward. The logical conclusion of your position is that no nation has the right to control its borders, or defend itself against an incursion by an armed group intent on permanently occupying its territory, and making it their own – because that group is merely “exercising their right to migrate”. That conclusion is absurd; if you’re actually advocating that position, we have nothing further to… Read more »
Sticks and stones,Lars.
And I didn’t say it, you inferred it.
So, in the immortal words of GDContractor – Go fuck yourself.
“When I asked you where that bullshit right ends, all I heard out of you was crickets.”
I did not respond to your question of a where the right ends because I did not see the question. I either missed it when scanning your response or I did not see you response at all.
I do not have an obligation or the time to respond to every single reply to my posts. Sometimes I miss one.
So, because I missed your post or did not respond you decided to post this trollish bullshit on an entirely different thread about an entirely different topic?
What the hell?
The right to migrate ends in the same place all human and civil rights end; they are balanced against the rights of others. Including the right to be secure from harm. So, necessary security on boarders to hinder or screen threats who may be entering is just. Turning away these potential threats is just. But turning away everyone and essentially arguing nobody has a right to migrate anywhere in the world due to borders is an unjust structure.
It is not even just according the the free market principles most on this board claim to support. When you allow goods and finance to freely move across boarders but you restrict the movement of labor you undermine the negotiating power of labor on both side of the border.
*borders and other errors.
Right to migrate… wow, that’s rich.
Take your meds Lars.
The notion is very old. It is also a free market principle.
So is the concept of ownership of land – collective and/or private. Ditto the concept of “no trespassing”.
Those concepts also extend into antiquity – to prehistory, actually. Even early hunter-gatherer societies knew that defending their hunting grounds against invasion by outsiders was necessary if they wanted to live through the next winter.
free movement of labor is as fundamental to a free market as the free movement of goods and capital.
That is an absolute unequivocal fact.
We don’t live in a free market. No society does. But it is hypocritical to claim you support a free market and also to supper restrictions on migration.
If you are against the free movement of labor you are against a free market.
Which is fine, in of itself, free markets do not work.
I was pointing out the ideological hypocrisy of some members of this board.
Did we strike a nerve, Larsy-poo?
Pathetic coward. It is a reprehensible and pathetic thing to do to post someone else’s real name and try to associate them with supporting child rape.
And doing it anonymously.
That is not just striking a nerve. That is revealing what a pathetic little piece of worthless cowardly shit you are.
That is the culture of this board. You don’t like something someone says so you attack them relentlessly.
I made a mistake trusting this board. I posted my name because I knew what I would say would be against the prevailing ideology of this board. I figured if I was going to hold an opposing viewpoint I should have the integrity of posting my real name. I trusted that despite the fact that this board would likely not appreciate my posts they would respect certain boundaries.
They would not use my real name to their advantage to try to attack me in my personal life or my personal reputation.
This community was a community of veterans I expected it to have more integrity and honor than that.
I did not expect civility. Service members to not worry about hurt feelings.
But I never imagined that there would be cowardly little worthless pieces of shit like you that would cross a line and use someone’s real name to try to harm their character by associating them with support for child rape on a public forum.
If the situation were reversed you would be outraged. It would more than strike a nerve.
But that is not something you have to worry about, because you are an anonymous coward that does not use their real name when attacking others, and because despite the negative associations you try to make against me you know that I have more honor and integrity than you and would not use the same tactics.
Keep it up, Limp-Dick! It’s honestly hilarious to watch you get your ass handed to you.
Had you bothered to do your homework beforehand, you’d have noted that many longtime commenters here do post anonymously. That is because some of the lying bastards exposed for stolen valor on this site have tried to get them fired, filed baseless lawsuits, and otherwise attempted to exact revenge. Others do so to protect business interests
Others choose to post under their own name, or make no secret of who they are. That’s similarly their choice. The site owner permits either.
It was your choice to post here under your own name. No one forced you to do that. So how about you take responsibility for that decision if your failure to think things through ahead of time led to problems you didn’t expect, okay?
After all, you alone were the one who made that decision. Quit whining and live with it.
As I said, “I made a mistake trusting this board.”
Based on your criteria, posting anonymous disagreeable speech should be a basic human right. Folks have been doing it for a long time. Think of it as an unequivocal fact.
No, Lars, you made the mistake of thinking that you’re better and smarter than everybody else.
Then why don’t you “exercise your right to migrate” and leave the site – permanently.
Or not. Your choice.
I never said any of those things you delusional man-child. You inferred it.
And actually, I wouldn’t be outraged about anything you accused me of you warthog faced buffoon. I would instead consider the source and ignore it.
Bullshit. You are a coward and a liar.
You responded to a post speculating about a jackass claiming child rape was a human right by asking if the jackass was me using my real name.
You chose to use my real name and you chose to do it in a manner that associates me with supporting child rape.
You are also full of shit when you claim it would not bother you. If your full name was being posted anonymously on public forums speculating whether you support child rape it would sure as shit tick you off.
You really are a complete piece of shit. I cannot even find the words to describe what a worthless little fuck you are.
Still hiding. Still anonymous. Still a coward.
Always taking the other side, huh Lars?
What did that change in your pocket buy you for lunch?
LARSIE! Hey my sparkly little Twinkie-puff, it’s likely that I’m not the only one here who sees you as comedy, once someone points out the truth about what you spew you go off screaming madder than Richard Simmons in a Pet Shop that has no gerbils!
Well, Lars, you can always come and find me.
SHUT up ?. Another morphine shot reading your crap. Great! Their going to take my phone away. Thanks ?
It would probably be along the lines of what happened to the Somali pirates after the Russian navy stormed the ship Moscow University.
“Pirates? They were fine last time we saw them.”
Link for those who want to read about it. For the pirates’ case, it’s not wise to poke the bear.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Moscow_University_hijacking
I LOVE this part of that article:
“After the pirates had been disarmed and had their ladders and boats seized, they were set adrift in an inflatable boat after being provided with food and water but with no navigation equipment, some 300 nautical miles (560 km) off Somalia. According to the Russian Ministry of Defence, they did not reach the coast and likely died at sea.”
LMFAO!
If you liked that, read the Wikipedia article on Alpha Group – specifically, their activities in Beirut in 1985. Though the truth of that account has been questioned, it would not surprise me one bit if it were completely true.
Amazing what one can accomplish in a war if you’re not worried about upsetting your enemies or liberals.
Was that redundant?
what a Facking Mess
I second the motion that it is a fucking mess beyond belief.
Stupid libs…
My concern is that this will come back to bite us right in the ass…
and it will sooner then later…
One final comment from me–at least for a while today: Wanna bet oBaMa the Scrotum Shaver actually attends his daily intel briefing today? No, not for that reason. It’s raining and the course is closed.
Why is this no surprise?
If Vlad makes bodaprez look like the twinklefart he is, that’s fine by me. I prefer the REAL hunkalicious guy over some skinny metrosexual ball dribbler who can’t even play as well as a 12-year-old girl.
I’m starting to feel sorry for Teh Won, given he keeps getting sand kicked in his face by a “real man.”
I know! I’ll sign him up for that Charles Atlas body-building course.
Well, as much as I hate to say it, at least Putin is doing something about ISIS.
I do not like his support for Assad, to be sure, but at least he is shoring up his “red line in the sand”.
I don’t much like Assad either, GT. But given the almost certain alternative – an ISIS/al Nursa dominated Syrian government – I think Assad is the better choice.
Unfortunately, our current Regime is too naive to comprehend how to “play ball” in the real world.
This is what the majority of Americans wanted. They wanted us out of the Middle East. They elected a President and a Congress to do exactly that.
They left a void and the vacuum is simply being filled. Under the current political climate we are unfit to conduct military operations to provide a stabilizing force in the region.
The world is a better place with all the hope and change permeating the globe. Respect for religious law is being given a chance. The people of Crimea are free from the oppression of Ukraine. Syria is being allowed to protect its sovereign right to exist .
The current global trend toward world peace is going to have a few bumps in the road. Why cant you people just give peace a chance?
I just break out in tears when I think about how this could have all been worked out differently if John Forbes Kerry had been given permission to conduct an almost unbelievably small airstrike.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Is that “seared into his brain?”
Alll we are saYYYYYYYYing…!
I beg to differ.
It is ‘give pissants a chance’.
Hey, they were old-school hippies. I always thought they were singing “. . . please drop your pants. . . . “
Col Kurtz once told me: “It’s impossible for words to describe what is necessary to those who do not know what horror means. Horror. Horror has a face… and you must make a friend of horror. Horror and moral terror are your friends. If they are not then they are enemies to be feared. They are truly enemies. I remember when I was with Special Forces. Seems a thousand centuries ago. We went into a camp to inoculate the children. We left the camp after we had inoculated the children for Polio, and this old man came running after us and he was crying. He couldn’t see. We went back there and they had come and hacked off every inoculated arm. There they were in a pile. A pile of little arms. And I remember… I… I… I cried. I wept like some grandmother. I wanted to tear my teeth out. I didn’t know what I wanted to do. And I want to remember it. I never want to forget it. I never want to forget. And then I realized… like I was shot… like I was shot with a diamond… a diamond bullet right through my forehead. And I thought: My God… the genius of that. The genius. The will to do that. Perfect, genuine, complete, crystalline, pure. And then I realized they were stronger than we. Because they could stand that these were not monsters. These were men… trained cadres. These men who fought with their hearts, who had families, who had children, who were filled with love… but they had the strength… the strength… to do that. If I had ten divisions of those men our troubles here would be over very quickly. You have to have men who are moral… and at the same time who are able to utilize their primordial instincts to kill without feeling… without passion… without judgment… without judgment. Because it’s judgment that defeats us.”
“Mistah Kurtz – he dead.”
That one monologue scene made that whole movie.
Absolutely awesome scene which now that I read it scares the shit out of me.
All I could think of while reading it were the letters ISIL.
Respectfully disagree about any “majority” in either of Obama’s victories. In 2008 ~131 million votes were cast out of over 300 million citizens. Barry got about 52.9% of those votes, or ~69.5 million. Not a majority as the participation rate was 61.6%, which gives slightly more than half of the less than two-thirds actually voting. Same problem for 2012; Barry got 51.1% of the vote, but participation dropped to 58.2%. Still not anywhere near a majority.
And while the GOP got trounced in ’06 and ’08, they whupped the Dems in 2010 and now hold a respectable part of both Congress and state legislatures. So, no, I have to disagree that “we” voted for this.
My apologies for interrupting your otherwise excellent sarcasm. 🙂
Everybody who is eligible to vote votes in an election. Everybody.
Some people vote by casting a ballot. Others ‘vote’ by staying home. What the stay-at-home people are saying is “I’m OK with whatever the rest of you guys want.” That’s their vote.
Voters had a chance to put Obama on the street in 2012 and they chose not to. Like it or not, the American people spoke.
Wrong. Let’s say you are approached by two imposing gentlemen in a shadowy alley. One says “give me your wallet or I’ll stab your its this knife.” The other says “give me your wallet or I’ll beat you with this club.” Are you somehow complicit in whatever happens if you choose not to lend your support to either of the two crooks trying to strong-arm you? Did you, by refusing to volunteer yourself for an assault, still volunteer yourself for an assault? Only a fucking child would think so.
Sorry, that doesn’t fly with me. I guess that makes me a child, eh?
How amusing, 63 going on 5 …
Well, it seems to me that an election is a fundamentally different thing than being robbed in an alley. So your comparison here to me seems rather absurd.
However, it’s mathematically provable that every vote not cast reduces the number of votes the winner needs by one. So not voting out of pique has the same effect as voting for the candidate you like least – e.g., it reduces the number of other votes that candidate needs to win by one.
Protest votes (for Perot) are essentially what gave us Clintoon as POTUS in 1992. Stay at home non-voters may well have given us our current POTUS during both of his elections.
Bingo!
Once again our reporters were able to meet up with Russian president Vladimir Putin in his rec room in the Kremlin fortress for a brief interview. It took tremendous effort on the part of our reporters to avoid looking distracted by the three nubile strippers in Mr. Putin’s lap, and to avoid showing their fear to his pet Siberian tiger that purred menacingly at his feet. As he drank stolychnaya straight from the bottle, Putin reasserted his long-term goal of world domination and said that the Syrian situation would make a nice tune-up fight for future conquests. “Georgia was too easy. My guys didn’t even have time to find their stride,” opined the Russian president as the strippers proceeded to perform oral sex on him in plain view of our reporters and several heavily-armed staffers. “Besides, they gave up too fast. We never got to establish a single mass-grave! Massacres are an art unto themselves, you know. You can’t be sloppy about these things. I learned that from my grandfather. He was one of the commissars who ran the show at Katyn Forest back in the day–let me tell ya, those guys did WORK back then! That shit can’t be taught in class. You need practice” Taking another swig, he continued, “Anyway, we’ve had to keep the Ukraine thing on the down-low, so we haven’t really been able to do any major combined-arms ass-kicking over there. So this will be a good thing. Hell, I might even have them fly my personal T-90 down to Damascus. It’s been a while since my last joyride.” In response to questions concerning his diplomatic interaction with President Obama, Putin had this to say: “Pigeon Boy is out of his depth, as usual. To be perfectly honest, it’s a little too easy to make an ass out of that guy–which doesn’t mean I won’t continue to do it, mind you! If he’s stupid enough to push me on this, I’ll slap him around. Literally, if he does it face-to-face. I mean, seriously, he won’t even let your troops have BULLETS in the war zone!… Read more »
Whitey, I piss myself laughing every time I read this. I’d dare to say this the public perception of Putin… Not saying its accurate but who gives a shit if you’re kicking ass and taking names. His optics are better than any western leader.
I’m going to send Vlad a fan letter with big red hearts drawn all over it.
NJ’s Christie has called Vlad a smart, articulate thug, saying that Vlad has been pushing oBaMa the Scrotum Shaver (well, he didn’t actually use that term for oBaMa) around for seven years. First, Christie had better hope he doesn’t meet Vlad, ever. Second, where the #@!^%! has Christie been while oBaMa has been having his way with his phone and pen? Christie reminds me (as if I needed reminding) of what’s terribly wrong with the R party. No balls. Meaningless tough talk. Did I say no balls?
A little louder for those in the back.
NO, No … turn up the gain and speak into the mic, AirCav!
I know Dave Hardin was being facetious above but he’s right. This is what the American people wanted, this is what they voted for. They wanted a world where the US doesn’t throw its weight around or spend its blood and treasure to fight other people’s battles.
Well, this is what that world looks like. Get used to it because it’s unlikely to change no matter who resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
That’s one possibility, Martinjmpr. The other is one in which the US is unwilling to spend its blood and treasure to defend its own vital interests.
The possibility you identify – not fighting other people’s conflicts, which presumably means those in which we have no real interest at stake – has much to recommend it. However, the latter possibility (unwillingness to defend one’s own vital interests) is the mark of a Great Power gone to seed – and which will not be a Great Power very much longer.
I am not yet convinced that we’re heading down that latter path – but I fear we may well be.
I honestly believe there is still hope. Call me naïve, but, I look at the young Marines I work with everyday, and I still see that same spark, that same pride that has always defined us as Americans.
You have to remember who is in charge right now, the same ones who burned their draft cards, escaped to Canada (or Germany), treated with the enemy without legal permission. Those same hippies and flower children of the 60’s are the ones running our Government today. Because you see, the hippy movement was never about peace, but instead about self interest and preservation, the exact same traits we are seeing in our elected officials today. The former hippies are in charge, but I promise you, there is a new generation on the rise, the children of the 80’s and the 90’s, who saw the fall of the U.S.S.R., the crushing defeat of the Iraqis in ’91, the pride that Reagan was able to instill into the country.
These are the same people who fought and bleed in two different wars, saw their fellow Americans at both their worst and their best. This is the generation that people like Rep. Duncan Hunter Jr belong and we are just now starting to see enter government positions.
America isn’t done yet, so long as we can weather the current storm. We made it through the Carter years and we can make it through these.
Hondo what makes you think most Americans WANT their country to be “a great power?” What makes you think most Americans are willing to make the commitment of treasure and blood to keep the US as the world’s remaining superpower? As the average American what he or she is willing to sacrifice, personally, to save the poor refugees of Syria.
In fact, isn’t that exactly what the elections of 2006, 2008 and 2012 were about? Didn’t Obama appeal to exactly that portion of the electorate that was tired of all this and just wants to say, in the words of South Park’s Eric Cartman, “screw you guys, I’m going home?”
We’ve been carrying water for most of the world for damn near a century and it seems like all it’s gotten us is hated, envied and castigated at every turn.
One of the reasons I don’t much care about the Iran deal is that it seems like the last time we tried to deal with the problem of a rogue nation in the middle east obtaining WMD’s, the world (with a few notable exceptions like Great Britain and Australia) crapped its collective pants, gnashed its teeth and rent its clothes at the outcome.
So now Iran is a threat? Not to us it isn’t . As long as we retain the capability to turn any adversary into a field of radioactive glass – and we do – the “community of nations” can damn well figure out what to do with Iran on their own as far as I’m concerned. And that goes for Syria and Ukraine, too.
Actually, yes – IMO most Americans do want the US to remain a Great Power. But they don’t want the US to be the “world policeman”, which more accurately describes what you’re alluding to above. There is a difference. All nations have vital interests – e.g., those defined as being worth fighting to protect. The US IMO has five: A. the well-being of our trading partners in Europe; B. the well-being of our trading partners in the Pacific; C. access to critical raw materials; D. the prevention of an unfriendly power having hegemony in the Middle East; and E. physical security of US homeland and surrounding areas. A, B, and C are vital because our economic well being depends on them. D is vital because such a hegemonic power has the ability to disrupt existing world trade and security arrangements to an unacceptable degree – and could have an unacceptable impact on A and B. The reason for E is obvious. If we’re not willing to protect those by force, then we’re not willing to protect our own national interests. Iraq under Hussein was not a threat because Hussein was an evil man, or because he might have acquired WMD – but because he had aspirations for Iraq eventually to become a modern-day secular Caliphate ruling an empire covering much of the Middle East. The Iranian regime and radical Islam are similar threats, for largely the same reason – except that they are theocratic, not secular, and would likely not stop at the borders of the Middle East. If were not willing to defend our vital national interests, then that means we as a nation are tacitly accepting relegation to “also-ran” status behind India, China, the EU, Russia, and others. I don’t believe the US population buys into the US becoming a second-rate power, but I do have to say I’m not positive any more that I’m correct. Unlike the Cold War, the world today is definitely multipolar vice bipolar. I see six to eight major world power centers in the next 20 years: NorthAM (US/Canada), the EU, Russia, China,… Read more »
Regarding your alphabetical interests:
A & B: In the wake of WWII our allies in Europe and the Pacific were devastated, broke, broken, and tired and it was necessary for us to assist them both financially and militarily. Today they are vibrant, wealthy economies so I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect that our trading partners in Europe and the Pacific should be responsible for their own defense. They’ve been riding on our coat tails and sponging off the US taxpayers long enough.
As for D, why should we care if an “unfriendly power” has hegemony over the Middle East? It’s not like that region of the world has ever been particularly friendly to us, unless they wanted something from us.
But all this is beside the point: You may believe that the American people want to remain “a great power” and I suppose if you asked most of them, they would say that they do.
But talk is cheap. What are the American people willing to DO to keep the US as a great power?
Are they willing to send their sons and daughters off to die in some God forsaken desert on the other side of the world because it helps to assert US dominance?
Are they willing to see their tax dollars go to finance a gigantic military structure that supports these expeditionary forces?
Are they even willing to do the minimal thing of electing politicians to office who will advocate these things?
I think the elections of 2006, 2008 and 2012 show that they are NOT. So, the fact that they might “want” the US to be a “great power” is meaningless if they’re not willing to endure the inevitable sacrifices that will be necessary in order to bring that about.
No argument that the EU and the non-China entities in WestPac can do more for their own defense. But if push comes to shove, it’s still in the US interest to ensure they remain free from domination by any power hostile to the US. They still account for the the bulk of US trade; disrupt them, and we go down the tubes economically.
D is necessary because – particularly if it were to occur under a theocratic hegemon – the potential for worldwide economic disruption becomes great. I also don’t think we want to see a hostile, expansionist power with control over ALL of the Middle East’s resources. That didn’t work out too well for the world between 600 and about 1500 AD.
Like it or not, we still have overseas vital interests – some positive, and some negative. So long as we restrict our overseas efforts to protecting those, we can IMO afford to do so – and the US population will support it. However, if we keep p!ssing away US lives and treasure in idiotic missions to “promote democracy” and “save humanity”, they’ll quickly tire of supporting any overseas mission. Bosnia is a prime example of what I’m talking about.
Those are good arguments and I don’t disagree with them but I don’t see them gaining traction with most of the voters either.
Do Joe or Jane American really want to go to war with another country in the middle east? Because when you cut to the chase, that’s what this means: Who are we willing to go to war with.
The Half hearted, half-way, half-assed approach is what brought us the morass in Vietnam and that’s why the “war” against ISIS is such a joke right now. Obama is half assing it because he has no stomach for war and he believes (with some justification) that the American people are tired of war, too.
You can’t be “a little bit” at war. you’re either in, or your out. Our enemies have come to the (entirely correct) conclusion that as long as they don’t attack the US proper, the American people’s enthusiasm for any conflict is going to be as short as the attention span of a 2 year old.
Sometimes doing nothing is better than doing something half-assed and I think Syria is one of those cases.
If an effective military operation is off the table (and we can safely assume it is) then why should we continue these pointless and primarily symbolic air strikes? They don’t make us look “strong”, instead they highlight our weakness.
Yep.
“But talk is cheap. What are the American people willing to DO to keep the US as a great power?”
That, I believe, is the nut of it.
Putin is a KGB Thug, and has only the interest of a new Russian Empire at heart. He cares little about ISIS, other than it as well as the Free Syrian Army (who have been the only targets struck by Russians so far) threaten Russias presence in Syria. He s now seeking to make an even large presence there, and keeping Assad or someone a little more palatable to the world as his puppet.
Anyone who thinks this is something laudable that the Russians are doing… As much as I hate Obama, and give him full credit for creating the shitstorm we see today in the middle east, and for handing the opportunity to Vlad, I won’t be sending Putin any praise. He is a brutal, regressive, thug.
Praise or not, one does have to admit that Putin appears to see reality clearly – and has the stones to act accordingly.
It would be quite nice to have a US Administration that did likewise once again.
To be fair, Putin does not have to answer to his people, so he has a lot more freedom of action than any American politician.
Remember the Aesop’s fable of the frogs who wanted a king, and be careful what you wish for. 😉
Above, nowhere did I suggest I wanted to see a US leader emulate Putin across the board.
What I said – fairly clearly, I think – was that I wanted a US Administration that (1) accurately perceived how the real world worked, and (2) had the guts to act in such a way as to protect US interests.
Until the recent past, virtually all if not all US Presidents acted in such a manner – at least in terms of US foreign policy. However, IMO since 1960 several have not. Those who have not have either obsessed with “not losing a war” they never should have fought in the first place, or have naively misunderood how the real world operates.
LBJ was the one obsessed with “not losing a war” that was not in the US national interest and never should have been fought. The others should be pretty damn obvious – and IMO do not include either Bush.
Thug he may be, but at least he is smart and realistic enough to see the world for what it is, rather than what they wish it was.
When we have “leadership” who thinks the bad actors in the world can be dealt with using only kind words and capitulation, well, becoming Putin’s (and everyone else’s) bitch is going to be the inevitable result.
Also, I don’t give two craps about what happens in Syria. Putin? Sure, why not?
For those who fear “what might happen if Russia exerts its influence in the Middle East”, the old USSR exerted a lot of influence there all through the Cold War (mostly in the form of military equipment) so I don’t see how reestablishing Russian presence in the Levant is the kind of world-ending catastrophe that so many furrowed-brow pundits seem to think it is.
I can almost understand Putin’s frustration. Obama doesn’t want to do anything in Syria other than half-assed air strikes, he doesn’t want anyone ELSE to do anything about it, but it’s a major problem and it has to be dealt with?
As Private Frost in “Aliens” said “What are we supposed to use, harsh language?”
The Russians (Soviets) were our mortal enemies before WWII, but we still let them do a lot of our dirty work in Eastern Europe. It’s something Russians are good at.
I say, “Cry ‘Havoc!’ and let slip the Dogs of War.”
Maybe it’s time that the land of opportunity starts thinking about making a coherent, sustainable, and self sufficient energy policy a priority that will finally, once and for all, end the strangle hold the Middle East has on us.
The people have spoken. They are war weary and are not willing to continue to foot the bill. Maybe it is time to let the savages in the Middle East destroy each other without us intervening and trying to “modernize” them. Let those other nations who have interest start worrying about it.
We put a man on the moon, have electric cars and invented the internet. Surely we can overcome our energy needs with the resources we have in plentiful amounts.
We are criticized, hated and way overextended. If I were president, I would pull out of everything East of London and West of Midway and concentrate on our prosperity and an energy policy for this hemisphere. Let the Europeans worry about Europe, the Asians worry about Asia and if the Russians want Syria–let them have it. The whole of the Levant sucks and frankly, the Israeli’s can more than take care of themselves.
Where have I heard this sentiment before?
Oh yeah that’s right, pre-WW1 and WW2. Didn’t work then, and isn’t going to work now.
Rerun: I actually agree with you, but in a representative republic, we get a government that reflects the character of the people.
Leaders are supposed to do that – to lead. They are supposed to be the ones who make US believe that these sacrifices are necessary.
But, as Patton famously said, you can’t push a piece of spaghetti. If the people aren’t in the mood to hear, then they won’t, no matter how stirring the rhetoric.
It certainly wouldn’t be the first example in history that a people have had to re-learn a lesson that their ancestors paid a heavy price in blood to learn the first time.
And it probably won’t be the last example either.
Yeah. Rah rah, we go over in a somewhat unclear mission using untenable rules of engagement, taking another 30k casualties to kill some of the bad guys (using other bad guys to help us) while spending 10 years pissing away billions on contracts to “rebuild” shit until the taxpayer gives up and demands we get out and then we give it all back to an even worse enemy. Yeah I’ve heard that one too and it didn’t work out so well either.
Well, if you think Vlad’s assistance to the region will end with Assad and Syria, it won’t. He has Iran on his plate right now and we have a silly piece of paper. The power is shifting in the world, just as oBaMa wanted. He had hoped that his undeserved Peace Prize and undeserved and unearned internationalist reputation would translate into UN world governance. Unfortunately, he didn’t consult with either Russia or China first. But he’ll remain on the cutting edge of #BlackLivesMatter and entertain Mohammed the Clock Maker at the White House, in between golf rounds and fundraisers. Congress is positively useless. It is hard to believe that both the House and Senate are controlled by Republicans. It is harder to believe what has become of this country in a handful of years.
Wait, so Putin will make Assad his client and then stomp his boot on Iran?
Ummmm…that’s a BAD thing?
Wouldn’t a corrupt thug or a brutal dictator be a better ruler of Iran than a religious zealot who longs to bring about the apocalypse? The difference between Putin and the mullahs is that I’ll bet Putin cares very much whether HE lives or dies tomorrow, the mullahs, not so much.
Gee, that sounds kinda like . . . a Shah. What a concept!
Thanks again, Mr. Peanut.
Regarding energy policy – we’re almost there, actually. Last year was a 28 year low re: imported oil. And the trend for the last decade has been nearly linearly down.
https://www.uschamber.com/above-the-fold/shale-boom-drives-net-petroleum-imports-28-year-low
What I would love to see the US do is (1) figure out how to use hydrogen gas in place of liquid hydrocarbon fuels (do-able, but would require serious work in distribution/storage infrastructure); (2) go nuclear bigtime for electrical generation, with substantial excess capacity; (3) use the excess electrical capacity from (2) for hydrogen production; then (4) use our domestic oil reserves for economic/military purposes only. But our “good friends” the enviro-whacko-lobby say “Nuclear . . . baaaaad!”
Hondo, I like hydrogen too, but one of the unappreciated challenges is that teeny little molecule tends to leak through things, yanno? That’s gonna be a tough one to crack.
Also (dunno if you’ve head) at least a few green leaders have publicly admitted the logical answer to CAGW is nuclear power. They’re just not that popular yet. 🙂
I did say there would be “serious work in distribution/storage infrastructure” work required. That was precisely what I was speaking about – hydrogen diffuses into and forms hydrides with many common materials, including metals. As you note, addressing that problem – which I believe practically do-able – is indeed non-trivial.
You’ve alluded to one of my pet peeves with the enviro-whacko crowd. Most of them want perfect solutions – literally. None are willing to accept any form of trade-off for the overall good.
As you say, that crowd should logically be the biggest proponents of nuclear power – but they damn near killed the US nuclear power industry single-handedly after TMI.
Most of those idiots aren’t really pro-environment IMO. Rather, they’re really anti-human; the benefit to the environment is secondary.
We could do it. If we put half the energy we put into developing the third world (or the F-35 your choose lol)we could make it work. America is just that good. But the point it that this constant war is doing nothing for us. Nothing. And our leaders are terrible. Ant our government has go serious priority problems. Being independent of Foreign Influence has got to be our priority.
The nuclear industry is basically regulating itself out of business on several levels, Hondo. From a regulation/safety standpoint, INPO is far worse (or harder) on the nuclear industry than even the NRC. Nuke plants have so many layers of redundant regulation, documentation, etc., for even the smallest operational or maintenance procedures that being able to run like a oil/gas plant is impossible. Fracking has also put a huge strain on utilities as far as keeping nukes competitive in the deregulated market. As “base load” plants, nukes get a much lower rate for their power (typically in the $35-40 per MwH range) than a plant that operates in the day-ahead or hour-ahead market, which can get over $100 on the day-ahead, or $500-1000 in the hour-ahead market under the right conditions. Nuclear plants don’t even make a profit until they hit 80-85 percent of their rated power, and sometimes, not even then. Building a nuke plant is literally 10-15 times more expensive per MW than a combined cycle plant. The AP1000 plants at Vogtle were supposed to be constructed for about $7B each. That figure died about the time they broke ground, and they’re now looking at about $17-18B, assuming there are no further delays (they’re already about 18 months behind.) Compare that to the $1B a combined cycle plant of roughly similar size costs today, with a construction time of under two years. Bottom line, is nuclear construction costs more than negate any savings they might have had from not having to buy gas/oil to run the plant. It’s gotten so bad that utilities are shutting down single unit plants, and even places like Quad Cities, Clinton, et al, are in serious danger of being closed simply because they aren’t able to compete with the current cost of gas plants. But all this is a discussion for another day. What matters is that as long as the lights are on and the trains run on time, people really don’t have any sense of urgency or even care how guys like Putin can put the squeeze on us through second, third,… Read more »
Correction to last, the $17-18B figure was for TWO plants at Vogtle, or almost $9B each. NextERA/FPL was looking at building two AP1000 plants in Florida (Turkey Point?) but basically said hell no when the Florida PUC didn’t approve their rate case several years ago, and their own estimates showed by the time all was said and done, those units could well cost $10B each.
So what happens next? Do we give the Free Syrian Army a load of Stingers to defend against the Russian air force like we did with the Mujahideen in Afghanistan? If history repeats itself ISIS will get them in short order. One of the problems with proxy wars is that it’s hard to keep your friends in your camp if they see an advantage in changing sides. Arabs have never been reliable allies when the chips are down.
Since when haven’t they been known to switch sides every time the wind changes direction?
Gawd, I hope not, Roger. That would be stupid as hell–so oBaMa the Scrotum Shaver is probably thinking of doing exactly that. Let Vlad’s boys handle the killing of ISIS and any opposition to Assad. By my scorecard, that’s a good thing. Vlad told oBaMa what he was about to do (they just met) and the fact that Vlad did it means that oBaMa had nothing. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that Vlad told him previously, “I know you can kill Assad. If you do, I will kill you. We have people in your house, you know.”
Funny you should say that, 2/17 Air Cav.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/26/us-mideast-crisis-usa-equipment-idUSKCN0RP2HO20150926
HEY Larsie-parsie Puddin’-tame, yeah you o precious little sugar-coated gumdrop of a precious Smurf-hugging snowflake, DO TELL US how B. Hussein 0bama is being a leader all through this current mess, I’m waiting!! Now stop kicking your stuffed animals around the room and get to ‘splaining, my little Rudy-poo!
Oh, jeez, API, I haven’t finished mopping up that last lachrymose mess. Don’t get him started again.
It looks like you got your wish, at least for now. He proclaimed on the other thread that he was taking his ball and going STRAIGHT HOME! 😀 I’m sure he’ll show up to be a chew toy once again.
The latest is that the Scrotum Shaver told Vlad that no, that despites Vlad’s order, he may not cease bombing in Syria. Oh bullshit. Bridge. Cheap. Great income producer.
Putin. Martial artist. Shooter. Horseback rider. Swimmer. Boxer. Hockey player. Former KGB colonel.
oBaMa. Rides bike. Wears mom jeans. Can’t shoot a basketball. Can’t throw a baseball. Former local community organizer. Won Nobel Peace Prize. Shaves scrotum.
More like he rides a bike wearing mom jeans and a helmet and eats ice cream like a high school cheerleader!
Can’t stop what he never started. He’s been blocking effective action since he got in; why would he suddenly change that now?
Syria has been a Russian client state for decades. Russia was always going to have a say in the disposition of Syria. Like it or not we will have to have some form of coordination / deconfliction to hopefully prevent events from happening that could push all parties past the point of no return. President Obama has terrible military and strategic advisors!!! Its either that or he isn’t interested in anything that contradicts his beliefs. IMHO Iran, Syria and Russia are strengthened. US. Iraq and Israel weakened as a result of our terrible leaders beginning with Bush and certainly exacerbated with Obama.
We (US) keep asserting that Syria needs to be democratic and to that I ask why? This is the main reason we keep fucking up in the middle east. The only democracy in the region is Israel. The truth of the matter is there are certain countries that almost require a ruler with an iron fist to function. The only way to change the conditions within that country is from within by their citizens when THEY have had enough. When you force democracy in this region sometimes you get Hamas and Hezbollah as duly elected representatives.
What Lars, the disconnected from the real world individual, does not seem to understand is that potential employers do extensive searches on the internet now to determine whether someone is going to be an asset to their companies, or more likely to be an annoying asshole who will contribute nothing but will drink a lot of coffee and not make a new pot. They do look at things like a lack of willingness or ability to follow-through, and whether or not someone is argumentative about everything. As Hondo has noted above, some of the more egregious SV creatures have done their best to ruin the lives of people here. It’s because the attention whores don’t want anyone to expose their lies to the light of day. Some of them are, in fact, rather erratic beings who have checkered histories. If you really want to find one of them stalking people you give a crap about, then PLEASE let them know who you are, where you live, your phone number, etc., and wait for the shit to start raining on you. The internet holds a lot of stuff. It allows social morons the room to carry on grudge matches. It even lets stalkers and predators find their prey more easily. Witness those two murdering thugs in Ohio a couple of years ago who placed a ‘help wanted’ ad on Craigslist for the sole purpose of luring victims to be murdered. Yes, they were caught. And need I bring up pedophiles? I don’t think so. The point is that the greater an ass you make of yourself in a public place, the more you may be seen as not an asset to a company, including the government. Seriously, who was that pea-brained blonde who worked for the State Department a while back, and said ISIS just needed jobs? Well, she doesn’t work there any more. I hope she doesn’t starve. You really can’t fix stupid. She’d probably screw up opening a jar of baby food. My point is that Lars refuses to accept someone else’s opinion as valid. This doesn’t work well… Read more »