Argus Posted August 11, 2014 Report Posted August 11, 2014 The "crap" that should be given about Benghazi is the coverup. Puts Watergate to shame. At least with Watergate we had an inquisitive, investigative press doing their job. Against Obama, not so much. I have seen nothing which indicates there was anything TO cover up. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
On Guard for Thee Posted August 11, 2014 Report Posted August 11, 2014 Watching the Sunday morning news out of Iraq. There was coverage of drones and other airplanes doing strategic bombing of parts of Iraq. I saw the Americans killing ISIS soldiers - soldiers and an army the AMERICANS created in response to its attacks on Iraq. I saw USA airplanes killing ISIS soldiers (and mercenaries) who were being paid by $billions of AMERICAN dollars taken from Iraqi banks. I saw USA airplanes bombing tanks and anti-aircraft guns - AMERICAN tanks and anti-aircraft guns taken from the Iraqi army. I saw an Iraqi army dropping their weapons and disappearing at the prospect of battle - an Iraqi army trained by AMERICANS (and Canadians). All because of the misguided good intentions of AMERICAN politicians. It would be laughable if it wasn't so tragic. I wouldn't call ISIS "soldiers" I would call them terrorists. If you're mantra is "join my horrifying version of religion or die" then, prepare to die mo fo. Quote
jbg Posted August 11, 2014 Report Posted August 11, 2014 I have seen nothing which indicates there was anything TO cover up.The allegation that a Youtube video caused the violence. The failure of nearby naval units to engage. The list goes on. Obama was not about to allow it to ruin his campaign for re-election. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Big Guy Posted August 11, 2014 Author Report Posted August 11, 2014 (edited) The US didn't create ISIS. Stop trying to make excuses for the religious fanaticism and stupidity of the Middle East. I read the recent posts from the new member "Solidarity" and I read the ones you post to me. Then I realize why you should be ignored. You do not belong with the adults. Stay in your sphere. Edited August 11, 2014 by Big Guy Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Big Guy Posted August 11, 2014 Author Report Posted August 11, 2014 I wouldn't call ISIS "soldiers" I would call them terrorists. If you're mantra is "join my horrifying version of religion or die" then, prepare to die mo fo. The initial reports on this organization were that they were a rag tag group of fanatical anti-Assad revolutionaries who the West was at first considering supporting. In a matter of weeks, this well organized army is now well financed, well equipped and in control of much of Syria, Iraq and probably Afghanistan. This "rag tag" group has just overrun the West created 500,000 man Iraqi army, declared a Caliphate and looks to be expanding their newly created nation. Call then what you want but don't underestimate them. The West has been underestimating the ability and capability of these dedicated and nationalistic fanatics in the Mideast and it has cost us lots of money and lots of blood. They are kicking the bejeebers out of USA friendly countries with USA money, USA supplies and USA military hardware. That I believe to be the issue. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Big Guy Posted August 11, 2014 Author Report Posted August 11, 2014 Takes you long enough.....how's your head and/or the wall? I am a slow learner! Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Argus Posted August 11, 2014 Report Posted August 11, 2014 (edited) The allegation that a Youtube video caused the violence. The failure of nearby naval units to engage. The list goes on. Obama was not about to allow it to ruin his campaign for re-election. The allegation that the youtube video caused the violence was reasonable given it had already caused a lot of violence nearby. It's not like everyone immediately had a perfect explanation of everything which went down and all the motivations of the actors involved. I also frankly don't get how people think that admitting it was attacked by a group of terrorists who hate Americans because they're Americans was somehow going to damage his election campaign more than suggesting it was attacked by a group of terrorists who were provoked by that stupid video. If people were going to blame Obama for not seeing to it the CIA station consulate was properly defended the motivations of the attackers were not likely to play any important part in their thinking. As for military units. I believe 8 congressional investigations have already established there was nothing close enough to be of any use. Edited August 11, 2014 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 11, 2014 Report Posted August 11, 2014 I am a slow learner! The wise are always learning.....always listening for fresh insights. Be not dismayed by those who are not one with the force of knowledge. Proverbs 18:15The Message Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Argus Posted August 11, 2014 Report Posted August 11, 2014 I read the recent posts from the new member "Solidarity" and I read the ones you post to me. Then I realize why you should be ignored. You do not belong with the adults. Stay in your sphere. Uh huh. Yeah, if only I could postulate and prevaricate on the same deep level as you. Your barely coherent postings reek of a desperate attempt to portray yourself as an intellectual who doesn't take sides even while your prejudices shine through oh-so-clearly. Hey, why not find another lunatic conspiracy site to quote so we can all be impressed by your neutrality? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Big Guy Posted August 11, 2014 Author Report Posted August 11, 2014 Uh huh. Yeah, if only I could postulate and prevaricate on the same deep level as you. Your barely coherent postings reek of a desperate attempt to portray yourself as an intellectual who doesn't take sides even while your prejudices shine through oh-so-clearly. Hey, why not find another lunatic conspiracy site to quote so we can all be impressed by your neutrality? Thank you for making my point. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Argus Posted August 11, 2014 Report Posted August 11, 2014 The initial reports on this organization were that they were a rag tag group of fanatical anti-Assad revolutionaries who the West was at first considering supporting. Drivel. This group was portrayed as dangerous and fanatical from the start. The West never had any interest in supporting them, and their expansion was what deterred the West from much involvement in Syria. In a matter of weeks, Years. this well organized army is now well financed, well equipped and in control of much of Syria, ISIS is in control of a small part of Syria, most of which it took off other rebel groups, not the government. Iraq and probably Afghanistan. That it was able to establish control of areas of Iraq is due to the incompetence, corruption, and total lack of motivation of the Iraqi army. Had the US left a single division in place it would have crushed ISIS effortlessly. The idea they're in Afghanistan is simply fantasy. They are kicking the bejeebers out of USA friendly countries with USA money, USA supplies and USA military hardware. They have established control of a part of Iraq and a smaller part of Syria. Iraq could, I suppose be termed somewhat USA friendly, though the US has clearly lacked much influence there. There is no evidence of any kind that US money is behind them, or that they have any US supplies or equipment they didn't take from spiritless Iraqi deserters. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted August 11, 2014 Report Posted August 11, 2014 (edited) Thank you for making my point. If your point was I have a low tolerance for whiny, self-righteous posts then congratulations. Edited August 11, 2014 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted August 11, 2014 Report Posted August 11, 2014 I am a slow learner! ^ Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Keepitsimple Posted August 11, 2014 Report Posted August 11, 2014 (edited) The initial reports on this organization were that they were a rag tag group of fanatical anti-Assad revolutionaries who the West was at first considering supporting. In a matter of weeks, this well organized army is now well financed, well equipped and in control of much of Syria, Iraq and probably Afghanistan. This "rag tag" group has just overrun the West created 500,000 man Iraqi army, declared a Caliphate and looks to be expanding their newly created nation. Call then what you want but don't underestimate them. The West has been underestimating the ability and capability of these dedicated and nationalistic fanatics in the Mideast and it has cost us lots of money and lots of blood. They are kicking the bejeebers out of USA friendly countries with USA money, USA supplies and USA military hardware. That I believe to be the issue. Makes Harper and Baird look pretty smart now - doesn't it? In the face of criticism from the opposition and of course the tut-tutting of the CBC and The Star, they were very clear that it wouldn't be wise to put too much faith in Assad's opposition - because you may not like the alternative. That's why our aid was focused on non-military aid. It appears Canada was the first in taking such a clear, measured stand on the situation. Edited August 11, 2014 by Keepitsimple Quote Back to Basics
Big Guy Posted August 11, 2014 Author Report Posted August 11, 2014 Makes Harper and Baird look pretty smart now - doesn't it? In the face of criticism from the opposition and of course the tut-tutting of the CBC and The Star, they were very clear that it wouldn't be wise to put too much faith in Assad's opposition - because you may not like the alternative. That's why our aid was focused on non-military aid. It appears Canada was the first in taking such a clear, measured stand on the situation. I agree. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 11, 2014 Report Posted August 11, 2014 That's why our aid was focused on non-military aid. It appears Canada was the first in taking such a clear, measured stand on the situation. Yes and no....Canada's aid directly contributed to the oppositions ability to organize through better communications. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Big Guy Posted August 11, 2014 Author Report Posted August 11, 2014 If your point was I love a low tolerance for whiny, self-righteous posts then congratulations. Your posts appear to be adolescent attempts to join the conversation of adults. Cheap shot artists are a dime a dozen on discussion boards giving those who are ignored in the real world an opportunity to read their drivel on line. You continue to take pleasure in being an irritant in discussions which are obviously well above your ability to participate and/or add to the discussion. The behaviour of interrupting serious discussion only to irritate and then take pleasure in the process is an unhealthy way of life. You seem to be begging for attention so I gave you some here. I hope that satiates your questionable needs. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Big Guy Posted August 11, 2014 Author Report Posted August 11, 2014 If your point was I love a low tolerance for whiny, self-righteous posts then congratulations. I trust I will see your point only after you take off your hat. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Argus Posted August 11, 2014 Report Posted August 11, 2014 You continue to take pleasure in being an irritant in discussions which are obviously well above your ability to participate and/or add to the discussion. I'm sorry if it causes you emotional distress when I point out how ludicrously misinformed and intellectually bankrupt your posts are. Perhaps you'd feel better if you stopped posting. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Big Guy Posted August 11, 2014 Author Report Posted August 11, 2014 I'm sorry if it causes you emotional distress when I point out how ludicrously misinformed and intellectually bankrupt your posts are. Perhaps you'd feel better if you stopped posting. An irritation is not an emotional distress. Taking pleasure from being an irritant is an emotional defect. The fact that you find my opinions and postings as ludicrous and intellectually bankrupt reinforces that diagnosis and the fact that you feel that way adds to the credibility of my posts. Thank you for the vote of confidence. As for posting, your cheap shots at my opinions continue to give me the opportunity to point out your rather unique pleasure at baiting, ridiculing and vandalizing serious discussions. Someone has to set a minimal standard for interaction on these boards so it may as well be you. Looking forward to more nonsense from you. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
GostHacked Posted August 11, 2014 Report Posted August 11, 2014 I'm sorry if it causes you emotional distress when I point out how ludicrously misinformed and intellectually bankrupt your posts are. Perhaps you'd feel better if you stopped posting. You spend more time attacking Big Guy than the points he makes. Interesting. Why? Quote
Argus Posted August 11, 2014 Report Posted August 11, 2014 You spend more time attacking Big Guy than the points he makes. Interesting. Why? He doesn't make any points worth attacking. Though of course, he and you tend to share reading material. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted August 11, 2014 Report Posted August 11, 2014 Someone has to set a minimal standard for interaction on these boards so it may as well be you. In that case, may I suggest your posts fall well below any reasonable standard I might set? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
GostHacked Posted August 11, 2014 Report Posted August 11, 2014 He doesn't make any points worth attacking. So attacking him makes for better discussion? Come on Argus. Though of course, he and you tend to share reading material. Weak. Quote
Big Guy Posted August 11, 2014 Author Report Posted August 11, 2014 In that case, may I suggest your posts fall well below any reasonable standard I might set? I have read your posts, they set an appropriate minimal standard. On other boards, I dealt with irritants like you (every board has them) by creating a standard response and repeating it until the irritant got the message. I do not like wasting writing to baiters. Unfortunately, on this board, I was given a warning for using this process by the Admin as it is considering "bumping". So be it, it is their board and their rules. I accept their decision. So instead I am prepared then to play your silly little game and engage in your challenge for the time being. That may keep you busy looking up big words and allow the adults to discuss serious issues here without inane interruptions. Looking forward to your next nonsense after you finish looking through your comic books. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
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.