Deja Vu All Over Again

Dude you need to stay away from Yahoo that keeps giving you dis-information. That liberal professor failed to offer any support or evidence himself to back up his claims.
Maybe you need to change that dunce cap in for a tin foil cap to stop waves from beaming in to your pea brain.

RELH
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-17-17 AT 02:41PM (MST)[p]I see, and who said there were WMD's in Iraq? you had no doubts you were being fed the truth did you?


I didn't say he is right, but I'm saying we do not have absolute proof. and even if we did how does this involve America?

How much proof does it take to involve the US in yet another losing battle? maybe half as much as a check fraud conviction? wouldn't that be nice. but I can see it from your perspective, who gives a FF it's the younger generation who'll pay for it and fight it if it comes to that .

we want our wars AND we want our tax breaks, post haste.


















Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
RELH, I'm an old geezer so my memory might not be perfect but, do I remember WMDs in Iraq in the 1st war, seems like I remember a NATO plan that Sadam was to show proof they were being destroyed, and inspections to prove it. Also remembering trouble with said inspections and proof of WMD destruction. Then this BUSH guys people said he, Sadam, either hid them or sent them to Syria. Then another BUSH feller said they was still there and there was no verification they had been destroyed as the Sadam guys claimed. THEN another joker named Obummer said he had solved the problem , he had found them in Syria ,but had removed them, he had reputable folks on his side like Susan rice,and John Kerry (who BTW served in VietNam). So now, where do ya think these WMDs came from, Bolivia maybe?
 
Sadaam moved his fighter jets to Iran to prevent their destruction, he may have moved more then just planes.
I have a hard time believing a proven liar like Susan Rice and there is prior history of Assad using chemical weapons on his people. So did Sadaam in Iraq.
I do not want to see another war in Syria like we had in Iraq, but where do you draw the line on dictators committing genocide. Either we, and hopefully NATO, do something or just forget about it and let them kill off millions of civilians. Your choice!!!

RELH
 
I love it, we have the only 2 people in the world who saw proof of WMD's in Iraq. tell Bush & Cheney I bet they'd like to be vindicated. You can't find this chit anywhere else.



RELH would you like to provide proof Rice did anything illegal? nobody else has found it. while you're at it find some proof on those wire tap lies too would you?










Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
>Sadaam moved his fighter jets to
>Iran to prevent their destruction,
>he may have moved more
>then just planes.
> I have
>a hard time believing a
>proven liar like Susan Rice
>and there is prior history
>of Assad using chemical weapons
>on his people. So did
>Sadaam in Iraq.
> I do not
>want to see another war
>in Syria like we had
>in Iraq, but where do
>you draw the line on
>dictators committing genocide. Either we,
>and hopefully NATO, do something
>or just forget about it
>and let them kill off
>millions of civilians. Your choice!!!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> RELH

What are our vital strategic interests in Syria that would require more military intervention from us?

Let's see we are arming the Kurds to fight in Syria. Our NATO ally, Turkey, believes the Kurds are a bigger threat to them than ISIS is, the Shiite and Alawites are in Syria are teamed up with Russia, Iran and Hezbollah. We are helping Iran inside of Iraq to fight ISIS but we don't want to help Iran in Syria so we aid ISIS by attacking Syrian government forces.

Can you name a time we intervened in the Middle East and we got it right? Trump is no smarter than all the other previous administrations when it comes to how the ME works so letting them kill each other would be better than a single dead American service member.

Nemont
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-18-17 AT 10:20AM (MST)[p]Nemont I know this question is for RELH but he will just evade and conflate it. When you are a party hack like RELH objectivity is weakness. Facts are just obstacles that get in the way of opinions and conspiracy theories.

I think Sr. got it right with liberating Kuwait so we are like 1 for 23 in the Middle East. However in Kuwait we had a crystal clear objective, support from the international community and had no plans of occupation.

I do think there is just a tad of irony complaining about foreign governments meddling in our elections. Our record in the ME and South America speaks for itself when it comes to tampering with elections and leadership change.

Unfortunately the ME will always be a tragic enterprise for the U.S. if it involves occupation.

I can rationalize why Obama did not take action after the Ghouta incident in 2013. Anti-war sentiment was very high and Russia's involvement laid the ground work for a possible escalation between superpowers.

Outside of the recent Sarin attack which is still being investigated we did accomplish a few things that would not have happened if Obama had called in a strike.

We were able to get an inventory of Assad's chemical weapons and get them out of country for disposal. We would have never been able to accomplish that if we had struck Syria.

As for the latest attack, Sarin can be made with relative ease unlike Anthrax or VX. Seems the jury is still out as to whether or not Assad, his foes, or the Russians are responsible.
 
It seems we have a few members who need to learn a few lessons by refreshing their world history. They seem to be the reincarnation of Neville Chamberlain. sign a few peace treaties and pull out and it will be "peace in our time".

The middle east is a very complex problem with religious sects fighting each other. Tribal groups hating other tribal groups. The Kurds hating Turkey over their past history of attempted genocide in the first part of the 1900's.

We can pull out and Iran would be very happy to take up the space and dominate the other middle east countries. Only problem is that in a few years they will have nukes, and a standing army that will be far larger then any other country in that area. They are working towards that goal and if you can not see it, you are blind as was Neville Chamberlain was in the 1930's leading up to WW11.

Only problem when Iran flexes it power to dominate it's neighbor countries. Are you really stupid enough to believe that NATO will tolerate their aggression. They will not and we end up sending our grandkids into a large ground war.

To pull out now is downright stupid. Far easier to put out the small fires then to wait until the entire forest catches fire. Bone up on your world history for lessons learned in the past and what mistakes will cost us in the long run. The religious nuts running Iran are just another form of Adolf Hitler with the same goals in mind. The dictator in Syria is another mass killer that will stop at nothing to keep his power and influence.

RELH
 
Don't worry about it Tog the US doesn't send pu55ies like yourself to war. You'd be the idiot that gave away the position to the enemy while posting news links all day. Besides you could't survive without a keybord or computer screen to hide behind all day in moms basement.
 
We have been at war for over 15 years, we have perfected our ability to kill them, the problem is you can kill them all.



We should follow the Powell Doctrine:

The Powell Doctrine states that a list of questions all have to be answered affirmatively before military action is taken by the United States:

1. Is a vital national security interest threatened?
2. Do we have a clear attainable objective?
3. Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
4. Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
5. Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
6. Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
7. Is the action supported by the American people?
8. Do we have genuine broad international support?

As Powell said in an April 1, 2009 interview , the Doctrine denotes the exhausting of all "political, economic, and diplomatic means", which, only if those means prove to be futile, should a nation resort to military force. Powell has expanded upon the Doctrine, asserting that when a nation is engaging in war, every resource and tool should be used to achieve decisive force against the enemy, minimizing U.S. casualties and ending the conflict quickly by forcing the weaker force to capitulate.
 
where in the "Powell Doctrine" does it say we just bug out because some Americans do not like ragheads?
In fact Trump using the cruise missile strike for filled just about all of the doctrine requirements you posted. Why are you beefing Trump? Oh that's right you do not like him and he will never do anything right in your eyes.

RELH
 
But you said you agreed with the missile strike so I'm confused. Was it a good thing to go against the Powell Doctrine and send the missiles or not?
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-18-17 AT 10:45PM (MST)[p]Numb nuts go read what I posted. I said good on him for acting decisively. He has done none of the hard work of explaining to the American people his reason for it, what his strategic objective was or what it did to further America's vital interests.

I don't know why it is so hard for the Trumpites to hear any criticism of him. He wasn't elected king and he has zero legislative wins under his belt. He is government by reality show so far.

Nemont
 
Nemont are you really that dumb and dense or is your dislike for Trump making you sound like Dude and his B.S.

Anyone with reasonable intelligence will figure out that his "strategic objective" was to send the Syrian dictator a message about using chemical weapons and that continue use of chemical weapons will result in more strikes against his delivery system, his planes.

Without his planes he is going to have a tougher time in defeating his enemy and he knows that and will not want to risk losing a very effective weapon to support his ground troops. Damn, I though you had some military common sense.

RELH
 
So his strategic objective is to disarm one of the credible forces fighting against ISIS inside of Syria? Shouldn't Trump pick the higher priority of the two?

Nemont
 
"Without his planes"...wtf? The U.S. says 20 planes destroyed, reports on the ground claim 6 non-operational planes were destroyed. Air assets were moved after notification of the time and place of the strike. So much for not telegraphing our military actions to our enemies.

As for world history and war RELH, it is frighteningly apparent that you do not understand the versatility of chemical weapon delivery systems.
 
FW you are full of crap as usual. Air drop is more efficient over artillery delivery. He got the message as it was intended.

RELH
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-19-17 AT 11:30AM (MST)[p]How do you know he got the message? Or have you been briefed by the Trump team? What was the message?

Was the message that it is okay to go ahead and kill his own people with every other type of weapon just not gas? Why is the deaths of these 84 people so important but the other 400,000 is ignored?

Why would Trump work against the stated goal of defeating ISIS by taking out Assad's ability to use airpower while Assad's forces are in pitched battles with ISIS? Or doesn't that occur to you when you cheer for taking out a couple of planes and aircraft shelters from one airfield in Syria?

So you say it is obvious what Trump Strategic goals are but cannot define them in any coherent manner that makes sense. So we are back to square one on what is America's vital interest in Syria? Is it defeating ISIS, getting rid of Assad, arming the Kurds, letting the Russian fly their missions without interference, keeping Turkey on a leash, battling Iran for influence, keeping Saudi's from funding ISIS? What is the goal and the vital interests? None of that has been defined by this president or any of Trump leg humpers.

Nemont
 
FW you change the subject there very fast. Did you come to the conclusion I might know a little more about chemical weapons then a dope smoking Silicon Valley nerd that bailed out of CA. after voting for the wrong people?

RELH
 
>"Without his planes"...wtf? The U.S. says
>20 planes destroyed, reports on
>the ground claim 6 non-operational
>planes were destroyed. Air assets
>were moved after notification of
>the time and place of
>the strike. So much for
>not telegraphing our military actions
>to our enemies.
>
>As for world history and war
>RELH, it is frighteningly apparent
>that you do not understand
>the versatility of chemical weapon
>delivery systems.
>

WTF did you Think was gonna Happen?

To Be PC It Had to be Reported to Russia/Putin before it Happened!

We Got rid of some Old FireWorks & it Accomplished Absol-F'N-lutely Nothing!

Now Russia is saying We better not Try it again!

And the 3 MM Pro's will Slick it Up!










[Font][Font color = "blue"]I Changed My Signature Just for NVB!
Like 6 Damn Times Now!
 
So killing a bunch of people including children by doing three fly overs is perfectly acceptable to Elkass and his cheering squad. The children killed in three fly overs, meh just the cost of war. If gas was used and ends up Killing 83 people, some children, that requires an $80 million cruise missile barrage that does almost nothing but that is showing Assad we mean business.

However if Assad just wants to kill the same number of kids on a daily basis using conventional arms including aircraft dropping bombs then no biggie, that is just again chocked up the cost of war.

Makes perfect if you don't spend more than a few seconds thinking about, if you have firing brain cell then none of what the Trump leg humpers support makes much sense.

Nemont
 
yes FW, chemical weapons are easy to deliver. I have more knowledge of that then a Silicon valley nerd like you. In the military my MOS was demolition specialist and I received numerous training lessons in CBN warfare. That would be Chemical, biological, & Nuclear warfare. I also had a secrete clearance while assigned to a ADM platoon. That would be Atomic Demolition & Munitions. we ran around with nukes to play with.

What your pea brain does not understand is that the U.S. gave that dictator a message. You use chemical warfare to kill innocent civilians on a mass scale, we will target your delivery system with cruise missiles. Why don't you unwad your liberal panties and just wait and see if Assad continues with deploying chemical weapons, or if it comes to a sudden halt for fear what we will do. I think Assad has already figured out that he is not dealing with a jelly back president who likes to draw red lines in the sand. Hopefully he will stop using chemical warfare on his people.

RELH
 
He gave him a message alright. we're not prepared to do much.

Screw with us and and your runways are going to need some potholes fixed. take that Assad !

















Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
Dude even a moron like you will have to admit that is far more then your hero Obama ever did.

RELH
 
Well crap all this message sending must mean the war in Syria has been won by Trump. Since he has intimidated Assad so much why doesn't Trump just tell Bashar that it is over?

Yet just yesterday Assad's forces launch more air strikes on the same area he gassed and killed civilians. Why are those beautiful children killed by artillery and airstrikes not important enough to send another message? In fact if the message was so effective why would it have to be sent again? I thought Trump's strike changed everything on the ground?

You can convince yourself that this missile strike was some kind of magic solution but it was just a way for Trump to keep his leg humpers believing he is the greatest. It changed nothing on the ground in Syria.

Nemont
 
"Numb nuts go read what I posted. I said good on him for acting decisively. He has done none of the hard work of explaining to the American people his reason for it, what his strategic objective was or what it did to further America's vital interests.

I don't know why it is so hard for the Trumpites to hear any criticism of him. He wasn't elected king and he has zero legislative wins under his belt. He is government by reality show so far.

Nemont "


Wow man I ask a simple question and your answer is to call me names? I thought you were better than that? Oh well it's obvious that I exposed your double standard and it touched a nerve. I didn't defend Trump at all, I simply pointed out your hypocrisy. Now if we're going to resort to name calling, I will play too you inbred dumbass fa**ot.
 
>"Numb nuts go read what I
>posted. I said good on
>him for acting decisively. He
>has done none of the
>hard work of explaining to
>the American people his reason
>for it, what his strategic
>objective was or what it
>did to further America's vital
>interests.
>
>I don't know why it is
>so hard for the Trumpites
>to hear any criticism of
>him. He wasn't elected king
>and he has zero legislative
>wins under his belt. He
>is government by reality show
>so far.
>
>Nemont "
>
>
>Wow man I ask a simple
>question and your answer is
>to call me names?
>I thought you were better
>than that? Oh well
>it's obvious that I exposed
>your double standard and it
>touched a nerve. I
>didn't defend Trump at all,
>I simply pointed out your
>hypocrisy. Now if we're
>going to resort to name
>calling, I will play too
>you inbred dumbass fa**ot.
You like that Nemont ?
 
Jimmy crack corn. If being called a name on an Internet forum hurts your feeling perhaps you should stick to the Mary Kay and vagisil forums.

No hypocrisy in anything I posted. Unlike the fakers on here who were against before they were for it.

Nemont
 
Ever since the election of Trump, NeMont has been really struggling to keep up the fa?ade of being a Conservative.
 
Can anyone prove Trump's little slap to Assad changed anything? why is he too much of a puss to stay at it until the beautiful children are safe?


RELH I know things are fuzzy for you at your advanced age but it's not about Obama or Hillary anymore. it's about your orange squeeze. can we talk about what he's doing, or in this case not doing for a while?


















Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
>
>Can anyone prove Trump's little slap
>to Assad changed anything?
>why is he too much
>of a puss to stay
>at it until the beautiful
>children are safe?
>
>
> RELH I know things
>are fuzzy for you at
>your advanced age but it's
>not about Obama or Hillary
>anymore. it's about your
>orange squeeze. can
>we talk about what he's
>doing, or in this case
>not doing for a while?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Stay Thirsty My Friends
Its what Obama left us,like the Iran deal it could be an orange glow.
 
TOG tell me what Obama did in his eight years that was so great. Let me guess get troops out of the ME just to have ISIS explode and then say send some troops back. That was brilliant wasn't it ?
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-20-17 AT 10:29AM (MST)[p]>Ever since the election of Trump,
>NeMont has been really struggling
>to keep up the fa?ade
>of being a Conservative.


Eel,

Be specific on what you think I have gone liberal on. I can point a myriad of Trump's policies you leg humpers support that have nothing to do with conservatism or even Republican ideals.

A country can't live on it's own blood like the fakers on here believe.

http://www.thegreatfiction.com/2014/02/05/the-conservative-case-against-war/

Quote:

Andrew Bacevich, a West Point graduate, retired Army colonel and conservative historian affirms this in his intriguing book Washington Rules. Bacevich writes,

??the citizens of the United States have essentially forfeited any capacity to ask first-order questions about the fundamentals of national security policy. To cast doubts on the principles of global presence, power projection, and interventionism?is to mark oneself as an oddball or eccentric, either badly informed or less than fully reliable; certainly not someone suitable for holding national office.?

Examples of this are not hard to find. When Ron Paul suggested during a debate in 2012 that the United States should use the Golden Rule as a guide for its foreign policy, he was mercilessly booed by the crowd. This happened in South Carolina, a state where 93% of the population considers themselves to be Christians, a percentage that is likely to be even higher in a conservative Republican crowd.


Even so called Christian conservatives don't believe in the Golden rule and they can't get enough war. Look at the self identified Christians on here who are also Trump leg humpers. They are not conservatives but rather war mongers with a blood lust.

Nemont
 
LAST EDITED ON Apr-20-17 AT 11:51AM (MST)[p]Here I will let Rand Paul further explain why you clowns who cloak yourself in conservatism but say Social Security isn't an entitlement are a fake conservative. I have said all these things that Rand Paul is saying and for it I get called a liberal.


I have railed on debt, the time bombs of Social Security and Medicare. I have pointed out that hypocrisy of the Trump leg humpers who support him on his spending priorities and still call themselves conservatives. Trump said he will not touch Medicare or Social security, he has promised health care for all, he wants paid maternity leave for all, he wants to spend more on the military and not cut a single dollar.

Nemont
 
" Jimmy crack corn. If being called a name on an Internet forum hurts your feeling perhaps you should stick to the Mary Kay and vagisil forums.

No hypocrisy in anything I posted. Unlike the fakers on here who were against before they were for it.

Nemont "


No hypocrisy huh queerbait?

Here is what you said about the cruise missile strike on Syria...



"I applaud Trump on being decisive and responding with a righteous anger after a line was crossed. Hopefully lil Kim was also watching"



Then this is what you said about military action...




"We should follow the Powell Doctrine:

The Powell Doctrine states that a list of questions all have to be answered affirmatively before military action is taken by the United States:

1. Is a vital national security interest threatened?
2. Do we have a clear attainable objective?
3. Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
4. Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
5. Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
6. Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
7. Is the action supported by the American people?
8. Do we have genuine broad international support?

As Powell said in an April 1, 2009 interview , the Doctrine denotes the exhausting of all "political, economic, and diplomatic means", which, only if those means prove to be futile, should a nation resort to military force. Powell has expanded upon the Doctrine, asserting that when a nation is engaging in war, every resource and tool should be used to achieve decisive force against the enemy, minimizing U.S. casualties and ending the conflict quickly by forcing the weaker force to capitulate."



So... sending cruise missiles into a foreign country is suddenly not military action? Or are you too much of a dumbfuck to understand that "applauding" such MILITARY ACTION while promoting the Powell Doctrine is hypocritical.

Shall we elaborate for your stupidity? Yes I believe so.

First, most people including yourself agree that the conflict in Syria isn't a national security interest threat so Powell Doctrine #1 says we shouldn't have taken military action.

Second, Powell Doctrine guidelines #2 through #6 are either unknown or irrelevant but #7 says there should be support by the American people. Um... I don't recall being asked if I supported a cruise missile strike in Syria do you?

Last, #8 says that there should be broad international support. Apparently the other international countries that were notified were the ones directly in the line of fire so I doubt #8 would qualify to support military action.

So there you go, according to Powell Doctrine we should not have had military action in Syria, yet you applaud it, yet you say we should live by the Powell Doctrine.

Hypocrisy? Absolutely you retard.
 
Liberal All Right!

Doesn't want any People/Kids getting Hurt that have been Taught for 1,000's of Years to HATE Americans!

Most of them don't know why they HATE us!

It's just been Born & Bred in to them!

So He Wants Wars Fought in His Own Little PC Way!









[Font][Font color = "blue"]I Changed My Signature Just for NVB!
Like 6 Damn Times Now!
 
I just love how Christ like these good Christians are. you sound like a bunch of sailors on acid. funny crap I'm telling you what.


Trump didn't accomplish chit , let's be honest can we. Assad is still killing and he will keep killing. Trump crawled off with his tail between his legs and changed the subject. just like the Obamacare repeal we're off to bigger and better things now.










Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>I just love how Christ like
>these good Christians are.
>you sound like a bunch
>of sailors on acid.
> funny crap I'm
>telling you what.
>
>
> Trump didn't accomplish chit ,
>let's be honest can we.
> Assad is still killing
>and he will keep killing.
> Trump crawled off with
>his tail between his legs
>and changed the subject.
> just like the Obamacare
>repeal we're off to bigger
>and better things now.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Stay Thirsty My Friends

Hey dude?

You ever figure out where you came from?

Just Askin since you're back on the Religion Kick!








[Font][Font color = "blue"]I Changed My Signature Just for NVB!
Like 6 Damn Times Now!
 
I don't expect any of the war first guys like you will ever get it. Can Trump get parts of things right and still be a clueless twit? Obviously, just like your vagisil tube can fill in for your lack of a pecker.

Trump decided he had a valid reason, he spent $80 million on a middle strike. Good on him, it changed zero on the ground and he has not followed up with now a coherent strategy. So he took what could have been a launching point for a new direction in Syria, bring our allies in etc i.e. Using to Powell doctrine. Instead he did what he also does has an attention span of a two year old.

If you think that is hypocritical I give less that a giant dukie about. Trump has done nothing to change anything in Syria.
 
"done nothing to change anything in Syria."

.......he did convince the Syrians to park their planes at a russian airbase....whatever that is worth.
 
Nemont is blowing smoke for the simple reason he along with us do not know if there is things behind the curtail being discussed with Syria and Russia and being kept quite until some agreement may be reached.
Nemont is no more privy to the inner circle workings then we are, but he sure likes to make you think he is.

RELH
 
RELH

You are the one claiming that Trump's message was taken to heart by Assad not me.

What is the strategy for beating ISIS in Syria. So far we have hit both sides. Trump is also going to further arm Saudi Arabia, Israel's sworn enemy. When has there been enough debt racked up to conduct enough war to satisfy your blood last. 16 years and $3 trillion hasn't done the trick.
 
Saudie Arabia? that rings a bell....I know it was Iraq nationals who brought down the twin towers but I remember something about the Saudies...... oh well I know they're fabulous friends so it's all good.


Trump is taking a chitmess and doubling down on it. America first must mean America is the first one there with a check book.













Stay Thirsty My Friends
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

PXL_20240308_224716626.jpg
3rd season Colorado deer down!
IMG_6137.JPG
20150915_080752_zpssggpuag9.jpg
E57F3457-866D-4F9A-9AA7-374CBA5D5D29.jpeg
20230918_194447~2.jpg
Kyle Before.jpg
IMG_9402.jpeg
IMG_20201021_221827_433.jpg
564FCD4C-9C77-42C9-A55F-4D6DB0B97944.jpeg
IMG_1891.jpeg
Bull Elk
Back
Top Bottom