bush_cheney2004 Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 Speak softly and carry a big stick. Wonderful proverb. Problem with Bush was that he spoke loudly and brashly...and carried a big stick (which he used foolishly). What was he suppose to do? Sue for peace with Al Qaeda? What is the best way to keep other people from hating you and wanting to attack you? It's to give them as little reasons as possible to WANT to hate you and attack you...within reason of course. Of course....LOL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 Walk with diginty and grace - and class - and leave the stick carrying to the peasants. Like I said - if you are truely a faithful thinking man - you do not need a weapon..For instance the most successsful negotiators and diplomats are those that can enter any nation - or group - and carry themselves like honourable men - they get results and respect - those with sticks get the stick! Even honourable men need to lock their doors at night. Some people, like drugs addicts & hooligans, don't give a poop about honour. I work for the Salvation Army and we have things stolen and broken into all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 What was he suppose to do? Sue for peace with Al Qaeda? Not invading Iraq on the basis of lies would have been a good start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 Not invading Iraq on the basis of lies would have been a good start. The USA was attacked during the 1990's.....9/11 was 2001. Invasion of Iraq was 2003. Little late for your approach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 The USA was attacked during the 1990's.....9/11 was 2001.Invasion of Iraq was 2003. Little late for your approach. is there ever a wrong time to reinforce that the unwarranted U.S. invasion of Iraq was based on lies... and "darn good intelligence"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 The USA was attacked during the 1990's.....9/11 was 2001.Invasion of Iraq was 2003. Little late for your approach. For some, linear time like linear thinking is beyond their grasp... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 For some, linear time like linear thinking is beyond their grasp... the unwarranted Iraq war, precipitated on a progressive series of Bush administration/PNAC lies, each successive lie dependent upon the response to a preceding lie... very linear indeed. the nonlinear flushing out of the lies... all in good linear time... all in good linear time! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 the unwarranted Iraq war, precipitated on a progressive series of Bush administration/PNAC lies, each successive lie dependent upon the response to a preceding lie... very linear indeed. Starting in 1991.....very linear indeed the nonlinear flushing out of the lies... all in good linear time... all in good linear time! Not for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 Starting in 1991.....very linear indeedNot for you. A convolution or twisting of chronology along with deletions and subtle additions to realty are almost impossible to untwist. These so-called liars are experts in deception - and when they come up short - they hire someone like Rove to give it another twisty turny..do we really want to spend ten years undoing the lies and prosecuting the liar? Best to move on - Bush and Cheney and the boys have wasted enough of our time - move forward and leave Dick in the past to mutter to himself as he becomes more senile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 (edited) The USA was attacked during the 1990's.....9/11 was 2001.Invasion of Iraq was 2003. Little late for your approach. My approach would very arguably have saved lives & probably a trillion+ dollars in the end. I know a few billion people living in poverty who could have used that money for a decent meal. The best defense from Muslim terrorists is to not piss off Muslims by avoiding needlessly bombing them & ripping up their country for their resources. 9/11 happened in large part due to blowback. What is blowback called when the initial provoking aggression is done in front of the whole world to see? War? Edited May 23, 2009 by Moonlight Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 (edited) My approach would very arguably have saved lives & probably a trillion+ dollars in the end. I know a few billion people living in poverty who could have used that money for a decent meal. Now you're adding even more unrelated and non-linear axes to your grind. The budget would not have gone to feed a few billion people regardless of what had happened. The best defense from Muslim terrorists is to not piss off Muslims by avoiding needlessly bombing them & ripping up their country for their resources. Too late yet again...see Gulf War I. Maybe you are too young to remember that joint....even Canada played. From 1999, still waiting for the Serbian terrorists. 9/11 happened in large part due to blowback. What is blowback called when the initial provoking aggression is done in front of the whole world to see? War? I need to take you to 'Vegas. You could tell me all the wager outcomes after the fact. Edited May 23, 2009 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 the unwarranted Iraq war, precipitated on a progressive series of Bush administration/PNAC lies, each successive lie dependent upon the response to a preceding lie... very linear indeed.Starting in 1991.....very linear indeed gulf2 and the fly-over stuff was just the off-broadway production... dubya brought it home! the nonlinear flushing out of the lies... all in good linear time... all in good linear time!Not for you. any lack of patience is tempered with such gains as the Obama win, seeing Bush directives repealed and observing the absolute devastation that's hit the GOP and it's leader, Rush Limpballs... and let's not forget Palin and Bachmann warming up! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 gulf2 and the fly-over stuff was just the off-broadway production... dubya brought it home! This just means that you were asleep during gulf v1.5. Typical.... any lack of patience is tempered with such gains as the Obama win, seeing Bush directives repealed and observing the absolute devastation that's hit the GOP and it's leader, Rush Limpballs... and let's not forget Palin and Bachmann warming up! Not gains for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 This just means that you were asleep during gulf v1.5. Typical.... c'mon... that was off-off-broadway... not anywhere ready for prime time!Not gains for you.I'll keep my personal attachments - personal... so you'll have to accept some of my gains are realized living vicariously through you... some of my gains are at the expense of your pain in recognizing the failed Bush presidency and the devastation Bush has wrecked upon the GOP. No pain... no gain! Don't try to hide/ignore your pain in Bush failure... it's readily evident in many of your posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 c'mon... that was off-off-broadway... not anywhere ready for prime time! Everything can't be so sexy.....the USA has been in Germany, Korea, and Japan for over 50 years. Now you can add Iraq to the list. I'll keep my personal attachments - personal... so you'll have to accept some of my gains are realized living vicariously through you... some of my gains are at the expense of your pain in recognizing the failed Bush presidency and the devastation Bush has wrecked upon the GOP. No pain... no gain! Don't try to hide/ignore your pain in Bush failure... it's readily evident in many of your posts. I sure hope so....as Canada's domestic offerings are very off-broadway (gee..another American reference) and rather very boring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 I sure hope so....as Canada's domestic offerings are very off-broadway (gee..another American reference) and rather very boring. more an acquired taste... that you seem to partake in - often, with zest. Yes, I was aware I was giving you a freebee with the broadway tag, but what the hey... the Americanization of waldo is tough to mask (all the time) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 You guys remember I said on these forums that this futurists said that there would be a mini-nuke war, (is that possible) sometime in 2009? Please no tinfoil !!!!! I'm just the messenger and the guy has been right 95% of the time. If Iran goes after Israel, the US will have Russia and China to fight too, IF they get involved. Who knows maybe Israel could do the job without any outside help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 You guys remember I said on these forums that this futurists said that there would be a mini-nuke war, (is that possible) sometime in 2009? Please no tinfoil !!!!! I'm just the messenger and the guy has been right 95% of the time. Not very likely...besides...battles of the conventional variety are much more popular right now. Hard to keep bullets in stock. Did he predict that? If Iran goes after Israel, the US will have Russia and China to fight too, IF they get involved. Who knows maybe Israel could do the job without any outside help. Israel always has "outside" help these days....heh-heh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeyStone Posted May 28, 2009 Report Share Posted May 28, 2009 While Obama "talks" the talk...Iran walks the walk.Clearly the pre-election rhetoric suggesting that if we all just sing cumbaya together...if only we're a little nicer to those who hate us, then everyone will love us - is proving to be a load of crap. The inevitable conclusion is one of two: 1. Iran blows up another country or 2. Obama grows a backbone and - more than he already has - again flip flops on his pre election language and reaffirms the correctness of his predecessor in the tough backbone approach. OMG. Iran has a rocket that can reach Israel? That's horrible. Israel should get out all of their top scientists to work on a rocket that should reach Iran so that it's fair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrustyKidd Posted May 28, 2009 Report Share Posted May 28, 2009 OMG. Iran has a rocket that can reach Israel? That's horrible. Israel should get out all of their top scientists to work on a rocket that should reach Iran so that it's fair. Israel has not alluded to destroying Iran and never did hence, Iran which has on numerous occasions as well as supporting groups that have that as their cornerstone has now, the means to reach out and actually do it. So, if you believe in being fair, then soon as Iran has a nuke to put on top of those missiles, they will stop being anti Israel. After all, fair is fair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted May 28, 2009 Report Share Posted May 28, 2009 You guys remember I said on these forums that this futurists said that there would be a mini-nuke war, (is that possible) sometime in 2009? Please no tinfoil !!!!! I'm just the messenger and the guy has been right 95% of the time. Take a guess why many think you are a nutbar... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted May 28, 2009 Report Share Posted May 28, 2009 Take a guess why many think you are a nutbar... Dancer, when I saw Dancer as last person to put their view, I knew your answer would be like this. You have your views and I have mine and I did say that it wasn't my idea but someone elses. I pray we don't have a mini nuke war, but in these times when men are pounding their chests to one another, anything is possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted May 28, 2009 Report Share Posted May 28, 2009 Dancer, when I saw Dancer as last person to put their view, I knew your answer would be like this. You have your views and I have mine and I did say that it wasn't my idea but someone elses. I pray we don't have a mini nuke war, but in these times when men are pounding their chests to one another, anything is possible. And you bring to the table a psychic ....and like any gullible tinfoil wearing toaster listening flake, you think the psychic is 95% right.... says a lot... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironstone Posted May 29, 2009 Report Share Posted May 29, 2009 nothing to see here... move along now... just a bit of ole pomp & circumstanceya see Jerry - for some time now, Iran has had missiles with the range to reach Israel. Your speaking of pre-election rhetoric is most timely as Iran is in the midst of its own election campaign... this was nothing more than Ahmadinejad exercising for his (presumed) internal benefit. At this point in the campaign, several polls have Ahmadinejad behind a more moderate opponent. that "correctness of his predecessor" you speak of reflects your ignorance of the generally accepted understanding that a series of Bush administration diplomatic blunders has put the Iranian hardliners in the driver's seat... most notable being the U.S. unilateral sanctions that only acted to boost the hardliners position and embolden them in the face of a Bush administration that offered no diplomatic alternatives. so Obama offers suggestion of a new day - a new approach... however... apparently, this shift towards diplomacy first (away from the Bush doctrine) does not sit well with many of the knuckle-draggers in the U.S (and apparently here at MLW, as well) Sooooooooo you mean that but for a "different approach",something like WW2 could have/would have been completely avoided?All they had to do was use nothing more than diplomacy against Hitler?And then he would love everyone? Thanks for opening up my eyes Waldo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted May 30, 2009 Report Share Posted May 30, 2009 Israel sees one missle coming - they launch 100 back - Iran is not that stupid...well either was Japan... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.