So we got a new Government, and a new Leader

[Forest]

lets hope hes got the balls to react in a non-Clinton way

What exactly does that mean?

Clinton authorised missiles to be fired into both Iraq, Sudan and Afghanistan without UN approval.

[SARGE]

I wouldn't be surprised if you're right. And I'm sure Mr Putin will be watching closely. If he flinches - bye-bye Georgia, Azerbijan, whateverelsestan.

I'll bet Turkey is watching too. I wouldn't take bets on Kurdistan .

Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, North Korea,..Iran wont be a big problem... we'll let Israel wear them down for a few months first



fuck man.. i cant believe I lost the election.. i could have ended ALL this shit in 3 weeks

[Ixion]

What exactly does that mean?

Clinton authorised missiles to be fired into both Iraq, Sudan and Afghanistan without UN approval.

Bu only in an eco-friendly non-confrontational way.

[SARGE]

What exactly does that mean?

Clinton authorised missiles to be fired into both Iraq and Afghanistan without UN approval.

yea.. that deadly aspirin factory..


Clinton was great for the economy (as all Democrats tend to be) but couldnt fight his way out of a kindy.. George Sr. had the balls, but was hamstrung by the liberal cocksucker media.. W is just a hand puppet trying to impress Daddy.. Regan was our last good president but had his hands tied by Congress

[Ixion]

Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, North Korea,..Iran wont be a big problem... we'll let Israel wear them down for a few months first



fuck man.. i cant believe I lost the election.. i could have ended ALL this shit in 3 weeks

North Korea is a strawman. At worst all they could do is nuke South Korea, who cares. The others are irrelevant except to zionists.
But you haven't addressed the question, how is your POTUS going to protect the ex-USSR satellite states? They have control of major stragetic resources, and are an integral part of Russia's plans to reestablish itself as a superpower. Unless Mr Obama can offer them a meaningful umbrella (and I don't see how it can be a non-nuclear umbrella, the USAF doesn't have the capacity to mount straegic non-nuke offensives that far from home), they'll be forced into Mr Putin's clutches. Personally, I don't think he (Mr Obama) has the balls, or maybe doesn't even undersatand what the game's about. I'd be absolutely certain that the people who voted for him don't.

Ah. we live in interesting times.

[Forest]

yea.. that deadly aspirin factory..


Clinton was great for the economy (as all Democrats tend to be) but couldnt fight his way out of a kindy.. George Sr. had the balls, but was hamstrung by the liberal cocksucker media.. W is just a hand puppet trying to impress Daddy.. Regan was our last good president but had his hands tied by Congress

The operations in Sudan were intended to protect the US against chemical weapons. The fact the the military intelligence was wrong doesn't invalidate Clinton's motive.

It is historical fact that Clinton authorised several pre-emptive militarily strikes to protect the US, and it does you no credit to deny it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Infinite_Reach

Reagan was a senile old fool. I've just been reading Alan Greenspan's book The Age of Turbulence and he makes it clear that Reagan started the US along the path to ruin by massively increasing the cost and size of the Federal Government.

[SARGE]

North Korea is a strawman. At worst all they could do is nuke South Korea, who cares. The others are irrelevant except to zionists.
But you haven't addressed the question, how is your POTUS going to protect the ex-USSR satellite states? They have control of major stragetic resources, and are an integral part of Russia's plans to reestablish itself as a superpower. Unless Mr Obama can offer them a meaningful umbrella (and I don't see how it can be a non-nuclear umbrella, the USAF doesn't have the capacity to mount straegic non-nuke offensives that far from home), they'll be forced into Mr Putin's clutches. Personally, I don't think he (Mr Obama) has the balls, or maybe doesn't even undersatand what the game's about. I'd be absolutely certain that the people who voted for him don't.

Ah. we live in interesting times.

yea.. gonna be a party alright..

you seem to forget that we now have the largest military base in the world now to (Poland for one..) and our detente (big fucking bombs) is as strong as it was in the 70's..possibly stronger since actual numbers are vague at best..Putin is just rattling his saber trying to get a rise ..Obama cant officially do anything yet

[Ixion]

The operations in Sudan were intended to protect the US against chemical weapons. The fact the the military intelligence was wrong doesn't invalidate Clinton's motive.

It is historical fact that Clinton authorised a pre-emptive militarily strike to protect the US, and it does you no credit to deny it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Infinite_Reach

Reagan was a senile old fool. I've just been reading Alan Greenspan's book The Age of Turbulence and he makes it clear that Reagan started the US along the path to ruin by massively increasing the cost and size of the Federal Government.

Hey I protest against that on behalf of all us senile old fools. Mods ! Burn him! And George Washington started the US along the path to ruin by massively increasing the cost and size of the Federal Government. Until he came along the Federal budget was quite reasonable.

Isn't it the POTUS's job to make sure that the military intelligence is right? Or at least ensure it is before he acts on it? That's an excuse that might be sufficient for a company commander , but not for the Commander in Chief.

[Forest]

But hey. Why am I arguing about the US and its role in history.

We got a new government and ditched the bitch!

[SARGE]

The operations in Sudan were intended to protect the US against chemical weapons. The fact the the military intelligence was wrong doesn't invalidate Clinton's motive.

It is historical fact that Clinton authorised several pre-emptive militarily strikes to protect the US, and it does you no credit to deny it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Infinite_Reach

Reagan was a senile old fool. I've just been reading Alan Greenspan's book The Age of Turbulence and he makes it clear that Reagan started the US along the path to ruin by massively increasing the cost and size of the Federal Government.

oh yea.. i forgot i was born in the US and was actually in the Military under Regan and lived there for 40 years.. how silly of me not to believe Alan fucking Greenspan over my own experiences..

[Ixion]

..and our detente (big fucking bombs) is as strong as it was in the 70's..possibly stronger since actual numbers are vague at best....

Big fucking bombs are no use unless the Bod-in-Charge has the balls to use them . I reckon Mr Putin has. I reckon Mr Obama hasn't. (And I reckon Mr Putin shares my opinion) . A sabre that rattles then chops off your head is a better weapon than an H bomb that no-one is prepared to use. I'm more scared of people with knives than people with H bombs.

Oh happy day. Intelligent argument again

[SARGE]

Big fucking bombs are no use unless the Bod-in-Charge has the balls to use them . I reckon Mr Putin has. I reckon Mr Obama hasn't. A sabre that rattles then chops off your head is a better weapon than an H bomb that no-one is prepared to use. I'm more scared of people with knives than people with H bombs.

yea.. i know sweet fuck all about Obama to tell the truth so i guess time will tell

[Forest]

oh yea.. i forgot i was born in the US and was actually in the Military under Reagan and lived there for 40 years.. how silly of me not to believe Alan fucking Greenspan over my own experiences..

I'm happy to take Alan Greenspan's word over yours. He was after all the Chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1987 to 2006.

Reagan dramatically increased government spending and cut taxes - which plunged the US Federal Budget into deficit spending. Did you never wonder why George H. W. Bush was forced to renege on his campaign promises and raise taxes after being elected? It's because Reagan really screwed things up.

But hey. I don't have to pay taxes in the US, so I guess your record budget deficits (and corresponding national debt) aren't really my problem.

[Forest]

I'm more scared of people with knives than people with H bombs.

That's actually quite a rational position to take.

Small arms and knives have killed considerably more people than atomic weapons ever will.

[Ixion]

I'm happy to take Alan Greenspan's word over yours. He was after all the Chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1987 to 2006.

Reagan dramatically increased government spending and cut taxes - which plunged the US Federal Budget into deficit spending. Did you never wonder why George H. W. Bush was forced to renege on his campaign promises and raise taxes after being elected? It's because Reagan really screwed things up.

But hey. I don't have to pay taxes in the US, so I guess your record budget deficits (and corresponding national debt) aren't really my problem.

Hey, it worked for Pitt the Younger. Actually, deficit finance isn't inherently a bad thing. The problem is , it's like P, easy to get started on, hard as hell to come off. Reagan only screwed up with hindsight. Which raises the question, should a POTUS make decisions based on what is best for here-an-now, or what is best for an (indeterminate) future. Reagan went with here and now. So did Muldoon. Both of them got it worngA (note spellling) in terms of the future. But we only know that through hindsight.