This is the location for conversations that don't fall anywhere else on FlameFans. Whether its politics, culture, the latest techno stuff or just the best places to travel on the web ... this is your forum.

Moderators: jcmanson, Sly Fox, BuryYourDuke

By From the class of 09
Registration Days Posts
#461647
ATrain wrote:Putin has been hinting he's not afraid of pre-emptive nuclear strikes, including on the US.
This is dumb, no one is about to go throwing nukes at another nuclear armed country. Especially when a country has a dozen or so subs floating around waiting to launch a dozen ballistic missiles each capable of hitting a half dozen targets.
By ATrain
Registration Days Posts
#461649
From the class of 09 wrote:
ATrain wrote:Putin has been hinting he's not afraid of pre-emptive nuclear strikes, including on the US.
This is dumb, no one is about to go throwing nukes at another nuclear armed country. Especially when a country has a dozen or so subs floating around waiting to launch a dozen ballistic missiles each capable of hitting a half dozen targets.
Pretty sure ISIS would if they could get their hands on them...I don't think Putin would, but he has made thinly veiled threats of use of such force when addressing possible interference in Ukraine. I don't remember learning of such saber-rattling occuring between the US and USSR in history class.
User avatar
By jbock13
Registration Days Posts
#461654
One of the ways ISIS is different than other terror groups is that they actually embrace technology rather than dismissing it for religious orthodoxy. That's what makes them so dangerous. If they can with a clear conscience behead someone, why wouldn't they bomb with a nuclear weapon should they ever get their hands on one?

As a libertarian, this is a pretty tricky situation to be in.
By Humble_Opinion
Registration Days Posts
#461655
ATrain wrote:
From the class of 09 wrote:
ATrain wrote:Putin has been hinting he's not afraid of pre-emptive nuclear strikes, including on the US.
This is dumb, no one is about to go throwing nukes at another nuclear armed country. Especially when a country has a dozen or so subs floating around waiting to launch a dozen ballistic missiles each capable of hitting a half dozen targets.
Pretty sure ISIS would if they could get their hands on them...I don't think Putin would, but he has made thinly veiled threats of use of such force when addressing possible interference in Ukraine. I don't remember learning of such saber-rattling occuring between the US and USSR in history class.
Here are over a dozen such instances... Able Archer was a particularly interesting time for this country that few people really even knew about.

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for- ... source.htm
By Humble_Opinion
Registration Days Posts
#461656
At the end of the day, we as a country only have ourselves to blame. In 1980 we faced an eerily similar situation that we did in 2012. Unfortunately, we chose differently in 2012 than we did in 1980 and I believe these issues that are now creeping up are the consequences of the country simply picking the wrong person. The difference maker, in my opinion, is that there are simply too many people that now rely on the government for their standard of living.
User avatar
By bluejacket
Registration Days Posts
#461663
Humble_Opinion wrote:At the end of the day, we as a country only have ourselves to blame. In 1980 we faced an eerily similar situation that we did in 2012. Unfortunately, we chose differently in 2012 than we did in 1980 and I believe these issues that are now creeping up are the consequences of the country simply picking the wrong person. The difference maker, in my opinion, is that there are simply too many people that now rely on the government for their standard of living.
The President and his administration have created a lot of problems and exacerbated many pre-existing problems in United States diplomacy, but the blame cannot be placed squarely on him in every circumstance. Most of the problems that he is facing are rooted in decades of poor decision-making. One president did not create all of the problems and one president is not going to solve all of the problems.
User avatar
By bluejacket
Registration Days Posts
#461667
jbock13 wrote:As a libertarian, this is a pretty tricky situation to be in.
There are a lot of things that I agree with libertarians on. Unfortunately, many libertarians do not understand the threat that radical jihadists present to the United States.
User avatar
By jbock13
Registration Days Posts
#461676
bluejacket wrote:
jbock13 wrote:As a libertarian, this is a pretty tricky situation to be in.
There are a lot of things that I agree with libertarians on. Unfortunately, many libertarians do not understand the threat that radical jihadists present to the United States.
But I must say also that there's no way we can every completely destroy radical jihadists. For thousands of years Muslim strife has caused problems in the world. Even in obscure remote islands in southern Thailand. But, ISIS presents the same struggles of the past with a modern twist, which is scary for me.

Either way I'm glad I don't work in the Pentagon. It really is a complex situation. The only fact that can be agreed upon is that the world would be better off without this religion.
User avatar
By bluejacket
Registration Days Posts
#461680
jbock13 wrote:But I must say also that there's no way we can every completely destroy radical jihadists. For thousands of years Muslim strife has caused problems in the world. Even in obscure remote islands in southern Thailand. But, ISIS presents the same struggles of the past with a modern twist, which is scary for me.

Either way I'm glad I don't work in the Pentagon. It really is a complex situation. The only fact that can be agreed upon is that the world would be better off without this religion.
I agree that we cannot completely eradicate radical jihad from the planet, just like we cannot completely destroy Nazism or other ideologies. There is also no way that we can completely stop radical jihadists (and others) who are committed to die from killing themselves and others.

Nevertheless, the West must recognize that there are strains of Islam that are committed to destroying the United States and the West regardless of the actions that we take. They are fundamentally and diametrically opposed to Western values and willing to do what it takes to triumph (sometimes in the short-term, other times in the long term); in many ways, they are worse than Nazis. Certainly, we have compounded the problem through our actions. But the West and its allies need to stand up for their values, expose these strains for what they are, and fight them militarily if necessary.
User avatar
By Purple Haize
Registration Days Posts
#461692
jbock13 wrote:
bluejacket wrote:
jbock13 wrote:As a libertarian, this is a pretty tricky situation to be in.
There are a lot of things that I agree with libertarians on. Unfortunately, many libertarians do not understand the threat that radical jihadists present to the United States.
But I must say also that there's no way we can every completely destroy radical jihadists. For thousands of years Muslim strife has caused problems in the world. Even in obscure remote islands in southern Thailand. But, ISIS presents the same struggles of the past with a modern twist, which is scary for me.

Either way I'm glad I don't work in the Pentagon. It really is a complex situation. The only fact that can be agreed upon is that the world would be better off without this religion.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't try
User avatar
By bluejacket
Registration Days Posts
#461694
Purple Haize wrote:
jbock13 wrote:RON PAUL 2016
Thank The Lord this won't happen!

Now Mittens 2016 :cheerleader :pbjtime
Please, no. A prime example happened just today. There are only slight differences between what the President laid out tonight and what Romney explains in this interview from today. Most of the differences are in timing and tactics rather than broader geopolitical strategy. (compare with


I would rather see something like this, although I don't agree with him on each issue. [youtube]
[/youtube]
Last edited by bluejacket on September 10th, 2014, 10:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Purple Haize
Registration Days Posts
#461695
bluejacket wrote:
Purple Haize wrote:
jbock13 wrote:RON PAUL 2016
Thank The Lord this won't happen!

Now Mittens 2016 :cheerleader :pbjtime
Please, no. A prime example happened just today. There are only slight differences between what the President laid out tonight and what Romney explains in this interview from today. Most of the differences are in timing and tactics rather than broader geopolitical strategy. (compare with
Considering Romney had the right strategy I'd hope the current President would follow that advice. Of course timing is the thing. He's doing what he's doing now much earlier!
User avatar
By jbock13
Registration Days Posts
#461702
Two years later and the ruling class Republicans are still smitten with Mittens.
User avatar
By Purple Haize
Registration Days Posts
#461704
jbock13 wrote:Two years later and the ruling class Republicans are still smitten with Mittens.
I'm hardly the Ruling Class but a lot of what he said would happen, Economically and Foreign Policy, was right on the money.( pardon the pun). He was the right man at the right time for the right job.
By flamehunter
Registration Days Posts
#461706
Purple Haize wrote:
jbock13 wrote:Two years later and the ruling class Republicans are still smitten with Mittens.
I'm hardly the Ruling Class but a lot of what he said would happen, Economically and Foreign Policy, was right on the money.( pardon the pun). He was the right man at the right time for the right job.
Just because he said it would happen doesn't mean his policies would have necessarily prevented it. (FYI - I would have rather had Mittens over our current "leader" any day, all day)
User avatar
By bballfan84
Registration Days Posts
#461714
Mitt was definitely the better choice..i would love for him to run again..think hes the only one that could beat hilary
By thepostman
#461716
Why does anybody think Mitt has a chance? Third times the charm or something?
User avatar
By bballfan84
Registration Days Posts
#461718
I think a lot of people regret voting for Obama and not throwing there vote to Mitt..thats momentum in itself for a 3rd run..people will be thinking we wont make the same mistake twice..just my two cents
User avatar
By Purple Haize
Registration Days Posts
#461719
flamehunter wrote:
Purple Haize wrote:
jbock13 wrote:Two years later and the ruling class Republicans are still smitten with Mittens.
I'm hardly the Ruling Class but a lot of what he said would happen, Economically and Foreign Policy, was right on the money.( pardon the pun). He was the right man at the right time for the right job.
Just because he said it would happen doesn't mean his policies would have necessarily prevented it. (FYI - I would have rather had Mittens over our current "leader" any day, all day)
No but it's easy to extrapolate that being able to negotiate a SoFA would blunted if not eliminated the rise of ISIS. His more friendly approach towards Poland would have shown Ukraine's President that being bought off by Putin wasn't a good idea.
Economically, the repeal of ACA would have been a huge boost.
No one can predict with certainty what would have happened, but it's pretty obvious what might have happened
User avatar
By bluejacket
Registration Days Posts
#461721
Purple Haize wrote:
jbock13 wrote:Two years later and the ruling class Republicans are still smitten with Mittens.
He was the right man at the right time for the right job.
Yet he did only slightly better than this guy in 2012.....and they wholeheartedly agree with the President that toppling Assad and IS by arming the "moderates" is the right decision.

[youtube]
[/youtube]
User avatar
By jbock13
Registration Days Posts
#461723
The problem wasn't that people loved Obama, it's that they didn't like Mittens either. What else explains him getting 3 million less votes than even McCain did in 2008? I mean he even told folks in Michigan that their trees were exactly the right height and he still lost that state. :)
User avatar
By bballfan84
Registration Days Posts
#461724
the country votes on social issues now..the homosexual agenda, race issues..the republicans are anti women..immigration..republicans are dead in the water
User avatar
By bluejacket
Registration Days Posts
#461730
jbock13 wrote:The problem wasn't that people loved Obama, it's that they didn't like Mittens either.
Exactly. I voted, but I didn't vote for Romney the last time and I wouldn't vote for him in the future.

Nevertheless, all this talk that Republicans are finished is ridiculous.

Back to IS and Russia :typing
User avatar
By bballfan84
Registration Days Posts
#461732
its over as we used to know it..a true republican I don't think can be elected again..Romney was a republican from Massuchusetts..it doesn't really get more liberal than that..the right wing republican is seeing the end of its era
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 12
Coppin State

You are over extending your view to say he has eli[…]

25/26 Season

Therefore, how to adjust with a team this year is […]

Just finished reviewing Manson's outgoing players […]

LU Coaches comings and goings

Actually the proper response to a RD reference is […]