Members banned from this thread: LV426


Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 98

Thread: U.S. Sam is a Sucker

  1. #61 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2022
    Posts
    1,452
    Thanks
    258
    Thanked 551 Times in 355 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 62 Times in 55 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    not our war, but we cant help ourselves.. The goal is regime change (as always) in Russia

    20,000 Ukrainians jumped U.S. border in April
    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...-border-april/
    I'd love to see regime change in Russia, since Putin is a war criminal. However, the immediate goal is simply to stop Russia's military expansionism. That's very much something that should be an objective for everyone on earth, because the precedent set here ends up mattering elsewhere. If Russia fails to acquire new territory, such that this is just a huge loss of life and national value for nothing, it sends a message around the world that military expansionism remains a counter-productive and doomed policy, so we'll see fewer such attempts. If, on the other hand, they come away with a bigger Russian empire as a reward for this lawbreaking, then that sends a signal that such a strategy can pay off, and we'll see more of it elsewhere -- e.g., China going after Taiwan, and maybe even eventually trying to swipe islands from Japan. So, we all have a vested interest in making sure this gamble fails for Russia.

    That's the same reason that even if you, say, were wise enough to oppose Bush's regime-change invasion of Iraq, it was still possible to think that liberating Kuwait was a good policy, back in the early 1990's, because the world had to send a signal to other potential conquerors that military acquisition of new land was never going to be allowed to stand. Only if we send that message clearly and consistently will such gambits be kept from becoming commonplace. Every would-be expansionist needs to understand that the world will come together to make sure that plan fails.

  2. #62 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    41,963
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,041 Times in 13,848 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,042 Times in 2,838 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Dillon View Post
    Fuck off, shitbird. None of that makes anybody's world go 'round. Democrats cheating the election and installing a Weekend at Bernie's motherfucker is hurting most Americans right fucking

    now, you piece of dogshit. Go take a long walk off a short pier into tiger shark infested water, ok?

    You are a useless piece of shit.

    Oh damn, one of the fellers today said he was bitching about 58 cents a gallon gas when he first moved here. (from a different American state)

    Gas was fine for 80 years until Carter, and then Bush with the diesel fuckery, wtf was that about?

    That was definitely an intentional Bah Fongula to Americans.

    Diesel always used to be a little more than half the price of gas for around a century. It's a byproduct of refining gas.

    True story, look it up!
    Neither Sean, Tucker, Bill, Adam, Laura, Joe, nor any other of the umpteen Fox/talk radio demagogues could have said it any better

  3. #63 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    43,479
    Thanks
    12,574
    Thanked 23,756 Times in 16,563 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,622 Times in 1,532 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mina View Post
    I'd love to see regime change in Russia, since Putin is a war criminal. However, the immediate goal is simply to stop Russia's military expansionism. That's very much something that should be an objective for everyone on earth, because the precedent set here ends up mattering elsewhere. If Russia fails to acquire new territory, such that this is just a huge loss of life and national value for nothing, it sends a message around the world that military expansionism remains a counter-productive and doomed policy, so we'll see fewer such attempts. If, on the other hand, they come away with a bigger Russian empire as a reward for this lawbreaking, then that sends a signal that such a strategy can pay off, and we'll see more of it elsewhere -- e.g., China going after Taiwan. So, we all have a vested interest in making sure this gamble fails for Russia.

    That's the same reason that even if you, say, were wise enough to oppose Bush's regime-change invasion of Iraq, it was still possible to think that liberating Kuwait was a good policy, back in the early 1990's, because the world had to send a signal to other potential conquerors that military acquisition of new land was never going to be allowed to stand. Only if we send that message clearly and consistently will such gambits be kept from becoming commonplace. Every would-be expansionist needs to understand that the world will come together to make sure that plan fails.
    - learn brevity/paragraphs. everytime i look at your posts is a freaking wall of partisan text.
    Or such blandishment geopolitics it;s barely worth a response..
    ~~
    Start here: Russia couldn't touch a NATO state if it wanted to and it doesn't
    If you can't see the difference between Uk -with long established cultural, linguistic and economic ties to Russia...well join the club..i'll give you than much

    I'm sitting around healing a swollen cornea after cataract surgery, I can give you the predicate for this war but it ain't "Russian empire" "expansionism" or any of that crap
    It's because the USA turned Ukraine into a hostile defacto NATO state- intolerable for Russia

  4. #64 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    41,963
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,041 Times in 13,848 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,042 Times in 2,838 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by anatta View Post
    $54 billion (not million) can easily run a proxy war. do you have any idea of the quantity
    of expensive high tech weapons we've given ( by Lend Lease) to Ukraine? obviously not

    The $40 billion Rand Paul has stalled passage will probably get thru the Senate this week
    I bet yours and mine bottom dollar they'll be back for more soon enough - they are committed to "victory"

    54 billion is more then it costs for a year of funding our Marine Corps
    Yes indeed we are warring against Russia.

    Not our "boots"
    but training , real time intelligence, logistical support and baskets full of our most advanced weaponry

    If you think it's worth it to war against Russia we can have that discussion,
    but dont delude yourself otherwise we aren't in a hot war against Russia
    We are not in a hot war with Russia, as I said, if we were, fifty billion would a fraction of the cost, we spent over 300 million a day just to keep a presence in Afghanistan, so doing the math, how much do you think a full scale war would cost

    Plus the Gov’t also shells out close to fifty billion a year to corporations, and last I knew they weren’t in war with anyone

  5. #65 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    32,827
    Thanks
    19,711
    Thanked 9,447 Times in 7,737 Posts
    Groans
    835
    Groaned 509 Times in 502 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    Neither Sean, Tucker, Bill, Adam, Laura, Joe, nor any other of the umpteen Fox/talk radio demagogues could have said it any better
    Yeah, you proved your shitbird moniker to be accurate.

  6. #66 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    43,479
    Thanks
    12,574
    Thanked 23,756 Times in 16,563 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,622 Times in 1,532 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    We are not in a hot war with Russia, as I said, if we were, fifty billion would a fraction of the cost, we spent over 300 million a day just to keep a presence in Afghanistan, so doing the math, how much do you think a full scale war would cost

    Plus the Gov’t also shells out close to fifty billion a year to corporations, and last I knew they weren’t in war with anyone
    corps have nothing to do with anything
    ~~
    we dont have a zillion boots on the ground like we did Afghan -hence the costs
    but the uber-weaponizaton of Afghan is similar in costs -
    if different because we didn't have our advanced weaponry in Afghan

    Between 2010 to 2012, when the US for a time had more than 100,000 soldiers in the country, the cost of the war grew to more than $100bn a year, -not too far off without the personnel..and more to come..

    Austin: U.S. believes Ukraine 'can win' war against Russia -wise up

  7. #67 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    43,479
    Thanks
    12,574
    Thanked 23,756 Times in 16,563 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,622 Times in 1,532 Posts

    Default

    We're all confused, what's to lose?
    You can call this all the United States Blues.
    Wave that flag, wave it wide and high.
    (US Blues)

  8. #68 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    41,963
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,041 Times in 13,848 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,042 Times in 2,838 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    corps have nothing to do with anything
    ~~
    we dont have a zillion boots on the ground like we did Afghan -hence the costs
    but the uber-weaponizaton of Afghan is similar in costs -
    if different because we didn't have our advanced weaponry in Afghan

    Between 2010 to 2012, when the US for a time had more than 100,000 soldiers in the country, the cost of the war grew to more than $100bn a year, -not too far off without the personnel..and more to come..

    Austin: U.S. believes Ukraine 'can win' war against Russia -wise up
    Wasn’t only a zillion boots on the ground, point being it was a limited involvement, nothing compare to what the cost and effort of a “hot war” would require

  9. #69 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    41,963
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,041 Times in 13,848 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,042 Times in 2,838 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    We're all confused, what's to lose?
    You can call this all the United States Blues.
    Wave that flag, wave it wide and high.
    (US Blues)
    Different era, different war

  10. #70 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    43,479
    Thanks
    12,574
    Thanked 23,756 Times in 16,563 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,622 Times in 1,532 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    Wasn’t only a zillion boots on the ground, point being it was a limited involvement, nothing compare to what the cost and effort of a “hot war” would require
    sticking your head in the sand
    Is this a hot war? -yes
    Did not a few let the cat out of the bag -it's about "degradng Russian military"
    "victory" and "Putin must go? -yes

    are we training Uk soldiers in the USA, sharing intel, sharing real time target acqusition -yes
    training in Ukraine, sending our best weapons specific to countering Russian assets? - yes

    It's everything but the boots -because we dont need the boots

  11. #71 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    43,479
    Thanks
    12,574
    Thanked 23,756 Times in 16,563 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,622 Times in 1,532 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    Different era, different war
    same old mindset
    Cold War 2.0- but now it's morphed to Hot War 1

  12. #72 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    41,963
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,041 Times in 13,848 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,042 Times in 2,838 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    sticking your head in the sand
    Is this a hot war? -yes
    Did not a few let the cat out of the bag -it's about "degradng Russian military"
    "victory" and "Putin must go? -yes

    are we training Uk soldiers in the USA, sharing intel, sharing real time target acqusition -yes
    training in Ukraine, sending our best weapons specific to countering Russian assets? - yes

    It's everything but the boots -because we dont need the boots
    You can employ the same scenario for just about any proxy war the U.S. has been involved in going back to the Monroe Doctrine, but only a handful of those turned into a “hot war.” If we were in a hot war with Russia it would be comparable to one of the World Wars, and fifty billion would be a drop in the bucket

  13. #73 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    41,963
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,041 Times in 13,848 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,042 Times in 2,838 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dukkha View Post
    same old mindset
    Cold War 2.0- but now it's morphed to Hot War 1
    No, 60’s were all about one war inwhich we had conscripted troops in harms way

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to archives For This Post:

    Phantasmal (05-18-2022)

  15. #74 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    43,479
    Thanks
    12,574
    Thanked 23,756 Times in 16,563 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,622 Times in 1,532 Posts

    Default

    Friedman pointed to two recent leaks; one that the United States provided Ukrainian forces with intelligence used to kill Russian generals, and the second that America provided intelligence to Ukrainian forces to sink Russia’s Moskva, its flagship battleship.

    Friedman reported how President Biden never intended for the U.S.’s involvement in these strikes to be known, and was "livid" when said knowledge became public.

    "From everything I have been able to glean from senior U.S. officials, who spoke to me on condition of anonymity, the leaks were not part of any thought-out strategy, and President Biden was livid about them," he wrote. "The staggering takeaway from these leaks is that they suggest we are no longer in an indirect war with Russia but rather are edging toward a direct war — and no one has prepared the American people or Congress for that."
    https://www.foxnews.com/media/new-yo...uGrw6DSOdHvZ6Q

  16. #75 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    43,479
    Thanks
    12,574
    Thanked 23,756 Times in 16,563 Posts
    Groans
    249
    Groaned 1,622 Times in 1,532 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    You can employ the same scenario for just about any proxy war the U.S. has been involved in going back to the Monroe Doctrine, but only a handful of those turned into a “hot war.” If we were in a hot war with Russia it would be comparable to one of the World Wars, and fifty billion would be a drop in the bucket
    what?? we never shard target acquisition, real time intel and our best weapons with any other nation
    No it's NOT comparable with "world war" those are wars with many countries involved
    NATO isn't involved anything near to want we are. a few token weapons is about it

    we are upto our eyeballs in this - and it's escalating, and we dont want peace because we never condition talks on weapons

    I give you a bunch of evidence that shows we are depolying all of our war machine, less boots
    into Ukraine -and the target is Russia. our Congress critters, POTUS and Defense officials have all said so

Similar Threads

  1. Don't Be a Sucker!
    By Joe Capitalist in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-17-2021, 02:28 PM
  2. Obama got the sucker (fly and Bin Laden)
    By Walt in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-08-2020, 06:47 PM
  3. Don't Be A Sucker!
    By Nomad in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 08-23-2017, 04:11 AM
  4. US FREEDUMB IS A COCK SUCKER
    By The Anonymous in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 08-04-2010, 08:26 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •