Warmongering & Warprofiteering Republicans terrorists

[Scerab]

Let’s reflect on the major conflicts the United States of Lobbyists was engaged in during the 20th and 21st centuries. During The two world wars we, had democratic presidents who were not very keen on spilling American blood nor waste tax dollars on the greedy republican dogs who profit from weapon manufacturing, the industry of death. Yet despite their reluctance to join the conflict, America emerged as a world superpower. The defense budget spiked during those conflicts but then it decline afterwords.
https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/defense_spending

Then lets recollect the bloody party and its warmongering. President Dwight D. Eisenhower /SPIT, got us into the Vietnam war and, to me, is responsible for the deaths of over 58,000 American lives and over a million Vietnamese civilians. Furthermore, There are recorded accounts of rape BY USA SOLDIERS. If that’s not terrorism, I don’t know what is. Of course we LOST the war. So much for the conniving bloody party and it portrayal of this nation as the undefeated champion of the world...

Let’s not forget when AMERICAN soldiers were rented out as mercenaries to the hedonist monarchs of the oil rich Arabian gulf. During the first gulf war, Bush the serpent head rested easy when he bartered the lives of 150 American soldiers for billions of dollars of Arab money. To a bloody president, money trumps American lives any time, any where.

Then of course we have had the most malfeasent bloody president of all... Bush little /SPIT /SPIT /SPIT. Not only did He caused the Great Recession, but he dragged the United States of lobbyists into two unmerited wars... we have suffered approximately 7000 American lives and still counting. The financial burden of these wars are approximately 6 trillion dollars. Yet after all of that, did we make America any safer? Did we stabilize the Middle East? Did we proselytize the absolute monarchies or dictatorships of the Middle East? No, no, and no... all that vacuous bloody president did, was create a power vacuum from which creeped out the horrors of ISIS. This self proclaimed caliphate of ISIS was ones solicited by the US army to preach in prisons. CURSE YOU BUSH LITTLE...

The war in Afghanistan still rages on after more then 15 years. The full might of AMERCIA has failed to subdue a primitive band of cave dwellers. Who will have the guts to pull us out of this war? Not this bigot-in-chief by any account. He actually is increasing the numbers of US boots on the ground. The prejudiced current president, seems all to eager to take up an Israeli cause and get us into a war with Iran. Or start a war with a lunatic dictator in North Korea because he can’t restrain his impulses.

Warfare is more business then blood. And of course the lobbyists solicit congress relentlessly to further their own cause at the cost of the tax payer. By simply buying a media outlet, these companies can indoctrinate simple minded folks and make zombies out of them. These zombies used to chant “brains!”... but now they chat “lock her up” and “make America great again”.

Lastely, don’t be misguided into believing that our military exists to protect us... it is actually scattered across the globe and we are quite vulnerable. Our military is used to protect those who pay for such protections, and it’s not the tax payer...

[nathanbforrest45]

Where did you learn your history? From the University of Moscow?

Our involvement in The First and Second World Wars was started by Democratic Administrations
The Korean Conflict was under the administration of Harry Truman, a Democrat
The Vietnam War was escalated under the JFK and LBG administrations, both Democrats



George HW Bush may have invaded Iraq but William Jefferson Clinton certainly did nothing to stop it. George W Bush may have gotten us involved in Afghanistan but Barack Hussein Obama did nothing to stop it.


Don't give us this shit that Republicans are war mongers and the Democrats are these lily white defenders of Americans.

[Tahuyaman]

Good shit.

[Scerab]

Where did you learn your history? From the University of Moscow?

The First and Second World Wars were started by Democratic Administrations
The Korean Conflict was under the administration of Harry Truman, a Democrat
The Vietnam War was escalated under the JFK and LBG administrations, both Democrats

Don't give us this $#@! that Republicans are war mongers and the Democrats are these lily white defenders of Americans.

The USA had good reason to enter WW1 & WW2. German submarine warfare and Pearl Harbor...
the Vietnam war might have been escalated by JFK and LBJ, but it was started by that scumbag Eisenhower.
What about the two Iraq war? Have you any comments about them?

[nathanbforrest45]

The USA had good reason to enter WW1 & WW2. German submarine warfare and Pearl Harbor...
the Vietnam war might have been escalated by JFK and LBJ, but it was started by that scumbag Eisenhower.
What about the two Iraq war? Have you any comments about them?
With you?

No, because you are just someone who hates America, Hates yourself, and hates all white people in general.

You really are just a waste of band width

And you don't know shit from shinola about history.

[Common]

WW1 Declared by Woodrow Wilson-Democrat

WW2 Declared by Franklin Roosevelt-Democrat

Korean War Declared by Harry Truman-Democrat

Vietnam war Started by JFK and Greatly expanded under Lyndon Baines Johnson Democrat

Somalia- Bill Clinton Democrat

Whos the war mongers ?

[nathanbforrest45]

WW1 Declared by Woodrow Wilson-Democrat

WW2 Declared by Franklin Roosevelt-Democrat

Korean War Declared by Harry Truman-Democrat

Vietnam war Started by JFK and Greatly expanded under Lyndon Baines Johnson Democrat

Somalia- Bill Clinton Democrat

Whos the war mongers ?

He has no idea. He isn't even from America. He is from California.

And our involvement in WW1 was totally unnecessary. We hadn't been attacked. We gained nothing from the war and Wilson had been elected on a promise of "Mother's I won't send your boys to war". That promise didn't last long.

[Ethereal]

The USA had good reason to enter WW1...

Wow.

Way to lose all credibility.

[zelmo1234]

Let’s reflect on the major conflicts the United States of Lobbyists was engaged in during the 20th and 21st centuries. During The two world wars we, had democratic presidents who were not very keen on spilling American blood nor waste tax dollars on the greedy republican dogs who profit from weapon manufacturing, the industry of death. Yet despite their reluctance to join the conflict, America emerged as a world superpower. The defense budget spiked during those conflicts but then it decline afterwords.
https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/defense_spending

Then lets recollect the bloody party and its warmongering. President Dwight D. Eisenhower /SPIT, got us into the Vietnam war and, to me, is responsible for the deaths of over 58,000 American lives and over a million Vietnamese civilians. Furthermore, There are recorded accounts of rape BY USA SOLDIERS. If that’s not terrorism, I don’t know what is. Of course we LOST the war. So much for the conniving bloody party and it portrayal of this nation as the undefeated champion of the world...

Let’s not forget when AMERICAN soldiers were rented out as mercenaries to the hedonist monarchs of the oil rich Arabian gulf. During the first gulf war, Bush the serpent head rested easy when he bartered the lives of 150 American soldiers for billions of dollars of Arab money. To a bloody president, money trumps American lives any time, any where.

Then of course we have had the most malfeasent bloody president of all... Bush little /SPIT /SPIT /SPIT. Not only did He caused the Great Recession, but he dragged the United States of lobbyists into two unmerited wars... we have suffered approximately 7000 American lives and still counting. The financial burden of these wars are approximately 6 trillion dollars. Yet after all of that, did we make America any safer? Did we stabilize the Middle East? Did we proselytize the absolute monarchies or dictatorships of the Middle East? No, no, and no... all that vacuous bloody president did, was create a power vacuum from which creeped out the horrors of ISIS. This self proclaimed caliphate of ISIS was ones solicited by the US army to preach in prisons. CURSE YOU BUSH LITTLE...

The war in Afghanistan still rages on after more then 15 years. The full might of AMERCIA has failed to subdue a primitive band of cave dwellers. Who will have the guts to pull us out of this war? Not this bigot-in-chief by any account. He actually is increasing the numbers of US boots on the ground. The prejudiced current president, seems all to eager to take up an Israeli cause and get us into a war with Iran. Or start a war with a lunatic dictator in North Korea because he can’t restrain his impulses.

Warfare is more business then blood. And of course the lobbyists solicit congress relentlessly to further their own cause at the cost of the tax payer. By simply buying a media outlet, these companies can indoctrinate simple minded folks and make zombies out of them. These zombies used to chant “brains!”... but now they chat “lock her up” and “make America great again”.

Lastely, don’t be misguided into believing that our military exists to protect us... it is actually scattered across the globe and we are quite vulnerable. Our military is used to protect those who pay for such protections, and it’s not the tax payer...
You seem to be giving LBJ a huge pass here.

And you seem to be giving Obama a bit ole pass as well.

[stjames1_53]

Let’s reflect on the major conflicts the United States of Lobbyists was engaged in during the 20th and 21st centuries. During The two world wars we, had democratic presidents who were not very keen on spilling American blood nor waste tax dollars on the greedy republican dogs who profit from weapon manufacturing, the industry of death. Yet despite their reluctance to join the conflict, America emerged as a world superpower. The defense budget spiked during those conflicts but then it decline afterwords.
https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/defense_spending

Then lets recollect the bloody party and its warmongering. President Dwight D. Eisenhower /SPIT, got us into the Vietnam war and, to me, is responsible for the deaths of over 58,000 American lives and over a million Vietnamese civilians. Furthermore, There are recorded accounts of rape BY USA SOLDIERS. If that’s not terrorism, I don’t know what is. Of course we LOST the war. So much for the conniving bloody party and it portrayal of this nation as the undefeated champion of the world...

Let’s not forget when AMERICAN soldiers were rented out as mercenaries to the hedonist monarchs of the oil rich Arabian gulf. During the first gulf war, Bush the serpent head rested easy when he bartered the lives of 150 American soldiers for billions of dollars of Arab money. To a bloody president, money trumps American lives any time, any where.

Then of course we have had the most malfeasent bloody president of all... Bush little /SPIT /SPIT /SPIT. Not only did He caused the Great Recession, but he dragged the United States of lobbyists into two unmerited wars... we have suffered approximately 7000 American lives and still counting. The financial burden of these wars are approximately 6 trillion dollars. Yet after all of that, did we make America any safer? Did we stabilize the Middle East? Did we proselytize the absolute monarchies or dictatorships of the Middle East? No, no, and no... all that vacuous bloody president did, was create a power vacuum from which creeped out the horrors of ISIS. This self proclaimed caliphate of ISIS was ones solicited by the US army to preach in prisons. CURSE YOU BUSH LITTLE...

The war in Afghanistan still rages on after more then 15 years. The full might of AMERCIA has failed to subdue a primitive band of cave dwellers. Who will have the guts to pull us out of this war? Not this bigot-in-chief by any account. He actually is increasing the numbers of US boots on the ground. The prejudiced current president, seems all to eager to take up an Israeli cause and get us into a war with Iran. Or start a war with a lunatic dictator in North Korea because he can’t restrain his impulses.

Warfare is more business then blood. And of course the lobbyists solicit congress relentlessly to further their own cause at the cost of the tax payer. By simply buying a media outlet, these companies can indoctrinate simple minded folks and make zombies out of them. These zombies used to chant “brains!”... but now they chat “lock her up” and “make America great again”.

Lastely, don’t be misguided into believing that our military exists to protect us... it is actually scattered across the globe and we are quite vulnerable. Our military is used to protect those who pay for such protections, and it’s not the tax payer...

..and now you know why we arm ourselves.

[MMC]

With you?

No, because you are just someone who hates America, Hates yourself, and hates all white people in general.

You really are just a waste of band width

And you don't know shit from shinola about history.

Its clear he doesn't know much about History. Especially about NAM.

[stjames1_53]

Its clear he doesn't know much about History. Especially about NAM.

he was born long after 'Nam was over.

[MMC]

he was born long after 'Nam was over.

It shows! :read:

[stjames1_53]

It shows! :read:

of course he could be trying to rewrite history as Dems are want to do............

[Chris]

Scerab, ignoring the histrionics, you miss one thing, all those wars were fought for one thing: https://i.snag.gy/fB8NYA.jpg

[MMC]

of course he could be trying to rewrite history as Dems are want to do............

Therein lies a truth about the left and their Demos.....they want to re-write history. All due to not knowing much about History.

[donttread]

Let’s reflect on the major conflicts the United States of Lobbyists was engaged in during the 20th and 21st centuries. During The two world wars we, had democratic presidents who were not very keen on spilling American blood nor waste tax dollars on the greedy republican dogs who profit from weapon manufacturing, the industry of death. Yet despite their reluctance to join the conflict, America emerged as a world superpower. The defense budget spiked during those conflicts but then it decline afterwords.
https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/defense_spending

Then lets recollect the bloody party and its warmongering. President Dwight D. Eisenhower /SPIT, got us into the Vietnam war and, to me, is responsible for the deaths of over 58,000 American lives and over a million Vietnamese civilians. Furthermore, There are recorded accounts of rape BY USA SOLDIERS. If that’s not terrorism, I don’t know what is. Of course we LOST the war. So much for the conniving bloody party and it portrayal of this nation as the undefeated champion of the world...

Let’s not forget when AMERICAN soldiers were rented out as mercenaries to the hedonist monarchs of the oil rich Arabian gulf. During the first gulf war, Bush the serpent head rested easy when he bartered the lives of 150 American soldiers for billions of dollars of Arab money. To a bloody president, money trumps American lives any time, any where.

Then of course we have had the most malfeasent bloody president of all... Bush little /SPIT /SPIT /SPIT. Not only did He caused the Great Recession, but he dragged the United States of lobbyists into two unmerited wars... we have suffered approximately 7000 American lives and still counting. The financial burden of these wars are approximately 6 trillion dollars. Yet after all of that, did we make America any safer? Did we stabilize the Middle East? Did we proselytize the absolute monarchies or dictatorships of the Middle East? No, no, and no... all that vacuous bloody president did, was create a power vacuum from which creeped out the horrors of ISIS. This self proclaimed caliphate of ISIS was ones solicited by the US army to preach in prisons. CURSE YOU BUSH LITTLE...

The war in Afghanistan still rages on after more then 15 years. The full might of AMERCIA has failed to subdue a primitive band of cave dwellers. Who will have the guts to pull us out of this war? Not this bigot-in-chief by any account. He actually is increasing the numbers of US boots on the ground. The prejudiced current president, seems all to eager to take up an Israeli cause and get us into a war with Iran. Or start a war with a lunatic dictator in North Korea because he can’t restrain his impulses.

Warfare is more business then blood. And of course the lobbyists solicit congress relentlessly to further their own cause at the cost of the tax payer. By simply buying a media outlet, these companies can indoctrinate simple minded folks and make zombies out of them. These zombies used to chant “brains!”... but now they chat “lock her up” and “make America great again”.

Lastely, don’t be misguided into believing that our military exists to protect us... it is actually scattered across the globe and we are quite vulnerable. Our military is used to protect those who pay for such protections, and it’s not the tax payer...


Benefits to the donkephant of constant war

1) Lobbyist money from defense contractors
2) Less underemployment
3) Less resisitance to spending
4) More mindless nationalism
5) Less scrutiny of the complete domestic failure that is the donkephant
6) Keeps the "unholy two " in power regardless of how badly they fuck up.
7) Supports government growth
8) Supports career politicians


Benefits of constant war to the people

0)

[Scerab]

Wilson did not START WW1...
FDR did not start WW2...
but Dwight did start the Vietnam war...
bush little did start the Iraq and Afghanistan war...
truth is you bloody republicans support terrorizing the Middle East and the world but not your selves.
Bush little created ISIS, a disgusting good for nothing bloody president.

[Common]

He has no idea. He isn't even from America. He is from California.

And our involvement in WW1 was totally unnecessary. We hadn't been attacked. We gained nothing from the war and Wilson had been elected on a promise of "Mother's I won't send your boys to war". That promise didn't last long.

lol now that cracked me up

[nathanbforrest45]

Wilson did not START WW1...
FDR did not start WW2...
but Dwight did start the Vietnam war...
bush little did start the Iraq and Afghanistan war...
truth is you bloody republicans support terrorizing the Middle East and the world but not your selves.
Bush little created ISIS, a disgusting good for nothing bloody president.
Wilson did not "start" World War 1, you are correct, but neither did the Republicans.
FDR did not "start" World War 2, you are correct, but neither did the Republicans

However, both committed American troops into what was essentially Europe's wars.
Wilson used the sinking of the Lusitania as a pretext to get involved. The Lusitania was a British ship that may have been illegally carrying ammunitiion

FDR, pushed the Japanese into attacking us because he had wanted to get involved in the war for almost two years but the American people did not wish to become involved. It was FDR's way of ending the Great Depression

Harry Truman did start our involvement in the Korean Conflict. It lasted from 1950 to 1953, the first year of Eisenhower's administration

When Eisenhower left office in 1960 there were less than 1000 American troops in Vietnam. They all served in a strictly advisor capacity. In 1960 there were less than 10 American deaths in Vietnam. JFK put three times that many on the ground by the end of his first year in office. By the time of his assassination there were over 16,000 troops in Vietnam. Two years into LBJ's administration there were almost 200,000 troops, mainly because of the made up fake attack on the Maddox and Turner Joy in the Tonkin Gulf. By the end of LBJ's second term there were half a million troops on the ground. It was under Nixon, a Republican that the number of troops began to decrease.

Both the Korean Conflict and the Vietnam War were fought to halt the spread of Communism, rightly or wrongly but to claim they were the result of Republican Administration "war mongering" is nothing more than the incoherent babblings of a drug addled Left Coaster.

And again, both Clinton and Obama had no particular desire to end the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq.

[stjames1_53]

Wilson did not START WW1...
FDR did not start WW2...
but Dwight did start the Vietnam war...
bush little did start the Iraq and Afghanistan war...
truth is you bloody republicans support terrorizing the Middle East and the world but not your selves.
Bush little created ISIS, a disgusting good for nothing bloody president.

Now you've got me curious...Mideast-oriented or Muslim by some chance?
you keep carping about protecting all Muslims, so I just have to know.....

[Captdon]

The USA had good reason to enter WW1 & WW2. German submarine warfare and Pearl Harbor...
the Vietnam war might have been escalated by JFK and LBJ, but it was started by that scumbag Eisenhower.
What about the two Iraq war? Have you any comments about them?

You know little about little. Why you would come here to prove it is beyond me.

[Mini Me]

Wilson did not START WW1...
FDR did not start WW2...
but Dwight did start the Vietnam war...
bush little did start the Iraq and Afghanistan war...
truth is you bloody republicans support terrorizing the Middle East and the world but not your selves.
Bush little created ISIS, a disgusting good for nothing bloody president.
During the NAM, I remember 100% Rethuglicans voting for it. While Dems wanted us out; Eugene McCarthy, Bobby Keneddy, McGovern, etc.

Since then the Rethugs always support wars!I had 4 good buds come home in a bag from Nam!

[Captdon]

Wilson did not START WW1...
FDR did not start WW2...
but Dwight did start the Vietnam war...
bush little did start the Iraq and Afghanistan war...
truth is you bloody republicans support terrorizing the Middle East and the world but not your selves.
Bush little created ISIS, a disgusting good for nothing bloody president.


Wilson did send us to war to fight for colonialists.

Roosevelt was President during WWII. Start it or nor it explodes your argument.

Obamass created ISIS by withdrawing out troops too soon.

[Captdon]

During the NAM, I remember 100% Rethuglicans voting for it. While Dems wanted us out; Eugene McCarthy, Bobby Keneddy, McGovern, etc.

Since then the Rethugs always support wars!I had 4 good buds come home in a bag from Nam!

The Dems didn't want us out until the Tet offensive. The Dems controlled both House of Congress and never so much as passed a resolution opposing the war.

Johnson fought the war even when he knew we couldn't win under his rules of war. Read MacNamara's book sometime. LBJ should be in hell.

I had family come home in bags. I'll die hating LBJ and Nixon both.

[zelmo1234]

Wilson did not START WW1...
FDR did not start WW2...
but Dwight did start the Vietnam war...
bush little did start the Iraq and Afghanistan war...
truth is you bloody republicans support terrorizing the Middle East and the world but not your selves.
Bush little created ISIS, a disgusting good for nothing bloody president.
And yet? LBJ had a super majority and he escalated the war, it was not much of a war under Eisenhower and Kennedy, but LBJ turned it into a full fledged war. He did not pull all of the troops out of SE Asia, in sent a half million more.

And then Obama was elected telling everyone that he would end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and then Afghanistan became the good war, and he sent more troops. Question for you, were more Americans killed under Obama or Bush in the Middle east?

So it would appear that you have a phobia to telling the truth here? What is up with that.

[zelmo1234]

During the NAM, I remember 100% Rethuglicans voting for it. While Dems wanted us out; Eugene McCarthy, Bobby Keneddy, McGovern, etc.

Since then the Rethugs always support wars!I had 4 good buds come home in a bag from Nam!
Why didn't LBJ take us out then, he did not have any GOP opposition that could have stopped him from doing so?

[zelmo1234]

I hate to say it but once again we have someone on the left that is willing to tell lies and disregard the truth, to try and promote political division in this country.

And it is possible that we have a Muslim or certainly a Muslim apologist that is upset that many of the would be terrorists are now dead. which is the very best place for a would be terrorist to be.

[Mini Me]

Why didn't LBJ take us out then, he did not have any GOP opposition that could have stopped him from doing so?

Baloney! The GOP was all for the war!

https://scontent-lax3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/p180x540/29243765_2327635933914038_7342815611625524690_n.jp g?oh=11bfa1dcad11c131008930bc357b9288&oe=5B2C1E05

[Captdon]

Baloney! The GOP was all for the war!

https://scontent-lax3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/p180x540/29243765_2327635933914038_7342815611625524690_n.jp g?oh=11bfa1dcad11c131008930bc357b9288&oe=5B2C1E05

They were a minority the whole time the War was fought. It was LBJ and the Dems who got us in. Nixon didn't get us out until all support was gone.

So, bullshit. It was all LBJ. If you were around then you'd know that. Your credibility is uncertain. I'm being polite in saying that.

[donttread]

Let’s reflect on the major conflicts the United States of Lobbyists was engaged in during the 20th and 21st centuries. During The two world wars we, had democratic presidents who were not very keen on spilling American blood nor waste tax dollars on the greedy republican dogs who profit from weapon manufacturing, the industry of death. Yet despite their reluctance to join the conflict, America emerged as a world superpower. The defense budget spiked during those conflicts but then it decline afterwords.
https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/defense_spending

Then lets recollect the bloody party and its warmongering. President Dwight D. Eisenhower /SPIT, got us into the Vietnam war and, to me, is responsible for the deaths of over 58,000 American lives and over a million Vietnamese civilians. Furthermore, There are recorded accounts of rape BY USA SOLDIERS. If that’s not terrorism, I don’t know what is. Of course we LOST the war. So much for the conniving bloody party and it portrayal of this nation as the undefeated champion of the world...

Let’s not forget when AMERICAN soldiers were rented out as mercenaries to the hedonist monarchs of the oil rich Arabian gulf. During the first gulf war, Bush the serpent head rested easy when he bartered the lives of 150 American soldiers for billions of dollars of Arab money. To a bloody president, money trumps American lives any time, any where.

Then of course we have had the most malfeasent bloody president of all... Bush little /SPIT /SPIT /SPIT. Not only did He caused the Great Recession, but he dragged the United States of lobbyists into two unmerited wars... we have suffered approximately 7000 American lives and still counting. The financial burden of these wars are approximately 6 trillion dollars. Yet after all of that, did we make America any safer? Did we stabilize the Middle East? Did we proselytize the absolute monarchies or dictatorships of the Middle East? No, no, and no... all that vacuous bloody president did, was create a power vacuum from which creeped out the horrors of ISIS. This self proclaimed caliphate of ISIS was ones solicited by the US army to preach in prisons. CURSE YOU BUSH LITTLE...

The war in Afghanistan still rages on after more then 15 years. The full might of AMERCIA has failed to subdue a primitive band of cave dwellers. Who will have the guts to pull us out of this war? Not this bigot-in-chief by any account. He actually is increasing the numbers of US boots on the ground. The prejudiced current president, seems all to eager to take up an Israeli cause and get us into a war with Iran. Or start a war with a lunatic dictator in North Korea because he can’t restrain his impulses.

Warfare is more business then blood. And of course the lobbyists solicit congress relentlessly to further their own cause at the cost of the tax payer. By simply buying a media outlet, these companies can indoctrinate simple minded folks and make zombies out of them. These zombies used to chant “brains!”... but now they chat “lock her up” and “make America great again”.

Lastely, don’t be misguided into believing that our military exists to protect us... it is actually scattered across the globe and we are quite vulnerable. Our military is used to protect those who pay for such protections, and it’s not the tax payer...

But under Obama's 8 years he showed the war mongers and profiteers and lobbyist. We were only at war for every day of his regime, right?

[Common]

But under Obama's 8 years he showed the war mongers and profiteers and lobbyist. We were only at war for every day of hos regime, right?
And he never closed gitmo and libya was an act of aggression by him denounced even by his good buddy FarrahKhan

[Ethereal]

Wilson did not START WW1...

He bears substantial responsibility for America's involvement in WWI, which was probably the biggest mistake in US history, made on behalf of greedy war-profiteering interests.

By defending that war, you lose any and all credibility as an opponent of warmongering and war profiteering.

[Ethereal]

US involvement in WWI was truly the beginning of the end for the US republic.

It fueled a spectacular orgy of war-profiteering, documented amply by Marine General, Smedley Butler, in his "War Is a Racket" essay.

It caused the level of taxation and debt to skyrocket.

It resulted in the increasing centralization of power with the federal government, including overt restrictions on free speech and political activism.

It promoted mindless nationalistic fervor across the country.

Caused the death of over 100,000 American service members and another 600,000 American civilians from the flu pandemic that came back to the country.

Resulted in massive and permanent restrictions on the free movement of people between countries.

I could go on and on and on and on listing the horrific consequences of our involvement in that STUPID and SENSELESS war.

That someone claiming to OPPOSE "warmongering" and "war profiteering" would try to defend and justify that war is beyond bizarre. It's positively grotesque.

[MisterVeritis]

US involvement in WWI was truly the beginning of the end for the US republic.

All wars lead to wartime socialism. Bigger wars lead to greater levels and it is much harder to recover from after the war's end. It is far better to not have wars, I suppose.

[nathanbforrest45]

Before Wilson America was always referred to as a Republic, because that is what we are. Wilson was the first president to call the United States a democracy. Wilson was the first of the globalist who had no intention of putting America first.

[Ethereal]

All wars lead to wartime socialism.

Imperialist wars do. Wars of defense and necessity do not generally suffer from that defect. Look at the Barbary wars, for example.


Bigger wars lead to greater levels and it is much harder to recover from after the war's end. It is far better to not have wars, I suppose.

Wars ought to be a last resort for obvious reasons.

[nathanbforrest45]

Imperialist wars do. Wars of defense and necessity do not generally suffer from that defect. Look at the Barbary wars, for example.



Wars ought to be a last resort for obvious reasons.


Ayn Rand has stated that no war should be fought except as a last resort and for defense of the country against direct attack only.

Unfortunately, this leaves a very large door open. It can be argued the both the Iraqi War and the Afghanistan War were a result of a direct attack on 9/11 and that ISIS and Al Queda (which have the same aims) are fighting a proxy war against the United States and will eventually attempt a frontal attack against the US.

[Ethereal]

Ayn Rand has stated that no war should be fought except as a last resort and for defense of the country against direct attack only.

Unfortunately, this leaves a very large door open. It can be argued the both the Iraqi War and the Afghanistan War were a result of a direct attack on 9/11 and that ISIS and Al Queda (which have the same aims) are fighting a proxy war against the United States and will eventually attempt a frontal attack against the US.
Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 though. Saddam was keeping a lid on terrorism, not cooperating with it.

[nathanbforrest45]

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 though. Saddam was keeping a lid on terrorism, not cooperating with it.
Bush got bum info from the "intelligence community re WMD's. I think he invaded because he honestly believed the CIA. Remember everyone was claiming Saddam had these weapons.

[Tahuyaman]

Going to war is one of the true bi-partisan efforts.

[MisterVeritis]

Imperialist wars do. Wars of defense and necessity do not generally suffer from that defect. Look at the Barbary wars, for example.
I wonder if the difference is naval skirmishes involving small forces acting at great distances with "ordinary" logistics versus land wars involving larger forces and additional logistical efforts.

Wars ought to be a last resort for obvious reasons.
And some reasons not so obvious.

[donttread]

And he never closed gitmo and libya was an act of aggression by him denounced even by his good buddy FarrahKhan

Democrat warmonger!

[donttread]

Wilson did not START WW1...
FDR did not start WW2...
but Dwight did start the Vietnam war...
bush little did start the Iraq and Afghanistan war...
truth is you bloody republicans support terrorizing the Middle East and the world but not your selves.
Bush little created ISIS, a disgusting good for nothing bloody president.

And Obama? The Peace Prize Prez?

[The Xl]

They're all war profiteering psychopaths, the left and the right are equally to blame.

[Mini Me]

Wars are the result of FAILED DIPLOMACY!

[Mini Me]

They were a minority the whole time the War was fought. It was LBJ and the Dems who got us in. Nixon didn't get us out until all support was gone.

I know LBJ escalated the NAM war ! But if he didn't Nixon sure would have!
Nixon sabotaged the Paris Peace Talks, that LBJ had going, for political gain!

Lets be honest here; all POTUS are in the tank for the warlords!Nowadays, its the PNAC Neocon gang and AIPAC that get us to fight Izrahell's wars for them!
So, bullshit. It was all LBJ. If you were around then you'd know that. Your credibility is uncertain. I'm being polite in saying that.

[Mini Me]

http://theglobalelite.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/hermann-goering-quote.jpg

[Captdon]

Quit misquoting me. I'm tired of it.

I don't do this: ALL CAPS AND BOLDED.

[MisterVeritis]

Quit misquoting me. I'm tired of it.

I don't do this: ALL CAPS AND BOLDED.
Strange is the master of the quote box failure.

[donttread]

Going to war is one of the true bi-partisan efforts.

As is welfare to the rich and government growth

[Tahuyaman]

As is welfare to the rich and government growth

How does that relate to this subject?

[Dr. Who]

Bush got bum info from the "intelligence community re WMD's. I think he invaded because he honestly believed the CIA. Remember everyone was claiming Saddam had these weapons.
Perhaps Bush believed it, but his handlers didn't - Cheney et al. They had an agenda and it wasn't WMDs. Follow the money.

[Tahuyaman]

Perhaps Bush believed it, but his handlers didn't - Cheney et al. They had an agenda and it wasn't WMDs. Follow the money. Every intelligence agancy in the world thought Iraq had nuclear weapons. Hussein's military leadership thought they had them.

[donttread]

How does that relate to this subject?

It relates to your mention of bipartisan efforts of course

[Tahuyaman]

It relates to your mention of bipartisan efforts of course

Uh...... Ok.

[Dr. Who]

Every intelligence agancy in the world thought Iraq had nuclear weapons. Hussein's military leadership thought they had them.
Correct me if I am mistaken, but the action took place right after the last set of UN inspectors said there was nothing left that could be used to create a reactor, let alone a bomb. IIRC that was why there were countries that refused to participate and we only have the Administration's word about what Hussein's military leadership believed but everyone speculated publically that the stockpiles were mysteriously whisked away to Syria and/or Lebanon and/or Iran by the Russians. No mention of the fact that Iraq had been bombed into the 19th century by Bush senior, such that they were lucky just to have electricity at all.

[Common]

Correct me if I am mistaken, but the action took place right after the last set of UN inspectors said there was nothing left that could be used to create a reactor, let alone a bomb. IIRC that was why there were countries that refused to participate and we only have the Administration's word about what Hussein's military leadership believed but everyone speculated publically that the stockpiles were mysteriously whisked away to Syria and/or Lebanon and/or Iran by the Russians. No mention of the fact that Iraq had been bombed into the 19th century by Bush senior, such that they were lucky just to have electricity at all.

You are forgetting that George Tenet appointed CIA Director by Bill Clinton and carry over to the first 4 yrs of the Bush administration strongly disagreed with the UN inspectors and told bush that Saddamn had WMD and thats what Bush reacted too. He said publically that all the intel said that Sadamn had WMD

[Tahuyaman]

Correct me if I am mistaken, but the action took place right after the last set of UN inspectors said there was nothing left that could be used to create a reactor, let alone a bomb. IIRC that was why there were countries that refused to participate and we only have the Administration's word about what Hussein's military leadership believed but everyone speculated publically that the stockpiles were mysteriously whisked away to Syria and/or Lebanon and/or Iran by the Russians. No mention of the fact that Iraq had been bombed into the 19th century by Bush senior, such that they were lucky just to have electricity at all.

For the second time. Every intelligence agency in the world determined that Iraq did possess nuclear weapons. Plus the upper echelons of Iraq’s military leadership believed they had nuclear weapons at their disposal. They even requested their use during the US invasion.

Spin those facts any way way you want.

[Dr. Who]

You are forgetting that George Tenet appointed CIA Director by Bill Clinton and carry over to the first 4 yrs of the Bush administration strongly disagreed with the UN inspectors and told bush that Saddamn had WMD and thats what Bush reacted too. He said publically that all the intel said that Sadamn had WMD
The CIA is not a trustworthy source of information. They have been compromised since at least the 1960's, regardless of which party was/is in power. Although they had their wings severely clipped in the 80's, they have been gradually resuming their SOP since then. They serve special interests.

[Tahuyaman]

Facts don’t take a side. They are what they are.

[Tahuyaman]

The CIA is not a trustworthy source of information. They have been compromised since at least the 1960's, regardless of which party was/is in power. Although they had their wings severely clipped in the 80's, they have been gradually resuming their SOP since then. They serve special interests.
The intelligence agencies of every advanced nation believed Iraq had nuclear weapons. Not just the CIA. Even the Russians and Chinese.

[Dr. Who]

For the second time. Every intelligence agency in the world determined that Iraq did possess nuclear weapons. Plus the upper echelons of Iraq’s military leadership believed they had nuclear weapons at their disposal. They even requested their use during the US invasion.

Spin those facts any way way you want.
Actually, not all and in fact, 54 countries opposed the invasion including some of it's biggest allies. The coalition only comprised the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and Poland.

[Tahuyaman]

Actually, not all and in fact, 54 countries opposed the invasion including some of it's biggest allies. The coalition only comprised the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and Poland.
They may have opposed the invasion, but they all believed Iraq possessed nuclear weapons.


There are several reasons one could oppose the invasion of Iraq.


One more thing. Many of the people who oppose it now, didn’t oppose it when it happened. Maybe some of those are posters here?

[Dr. Who]

They may have opposed the invasion, but they all believed Iraq possessed nuclear weapons.


There are several reasons one could oppose the invasion of Iraq.


One more thing. Many of the people who oppose it now, didn’t oppose it when it happened. Maybe some of those are posters here?
Sure they did. Not. They argued vociferously that there was no reason for the invasion per the UN inspection report. I remember. FYI, I was against the invasion before and after. It was conflated with 911, which was ridiculous. Iraq wasn't funding Saudi terrorists but that was implied. Could it be because in March of 2000 Saddam announced it would be moving to the Euro for oil?

[Tahuyaman]

Sure they did. Not. They argued vociferously that there was no reason for the invasion per the UN inspection report. I remember. FYI, I was against the invasion before and after. It was conflated with 911, which was ridiculous. Iraq wasn't funding Saudi terrorists but that was implied. Coulld it be because in March of 2000 Saddam announced it would be moving to the Euro for oil?

You can’t seem to grasp the facts surrounding the issue

[Dr. Who]

You can’t seem to grasp the facts surrounding the issue
I could say the same.

[Tahuyaman]

I could say the same.
No you can't. You're all over the place. I've stayed on one sprcific point. A point you continue to avoid.

[nathanbforrest45]

Perhaps Bush believed it, but his handlers didn't - Cheney et al. They had an agenda and it wasn't WMDs. Follow the money.His handlers??????????????????????????LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL Stop stop, I'm about to pee myself

[Dr. Who]

His handlers??????????????????????????LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL Stop stop, I'm about to pee myself

Glad you are amused, but while you are laughing, ask yourself if there was anything about Baby Bush that ever suggested he wanted a political career as opposed to being forced into it by Daddy Bush? I have nothing against G.W. He's a guy who was forced into the family business. Cheney was his Daddy's proxy in the Whitehouse.

[Tahuyaman]

Glad you are amused, but while you are laughing, ask yourself if there was anything about Baby Bush that ever suggested he wanted a political career as opposed to being forced into it by Daddy Bush? I have nothing against G.W. He's a guy who was forced into the family business. Cheney was his Daddy's proxy in the Whitehouse.


You are exposing your partisan position.


I've tried to engage you in a discussion by addressing facts. You can't seem to do the same.

[Dr. Who]

You are exposing your partisan position.


I've tried to engage you in a discussion by addressing facts. You can't seem to do the same.

That's not partisanship, it's what I actually believe. That you cannot see what was patently obvious throughout G.W.'s terms of office I cannot explain. G.W. was always a fish out of water in the Whitehouse. His brother was political, George never was. He did what he was told, but he would have been happier as just a rancher.

[Ethereal]

Bush got bum info from the "intelligence community re WMD's. I think he invaded because he honestly believed the CIA. Remember everyone was claiming Saddam had these weapons.

Yea, but Iraq clearly had nothing to do with 9/11 or even AQ. Yet Bush and company consistently tried to connect the two using subtle propaganda techniques. Americans never would have supported an invasion of Iraq MERELY because of "weapons of mass destruction". They had to be deceived into thinking those weapons would somehow find their way into the hands of the terrorists who attacked on us 9/11, which was pure fiction concocted by the Bush administration. Saddam was a violent autocrat, but he was a secular autocrat who kept a firm lid on sectarian violence and religious extremism in Iraq. His removal had nothing to do with fighting terrorism or securing America. It was all about promoting the interests of oligarchs. The only question for me is whether Bush was a party to this conspiracy or just a naive figurehead. I tend to believe he was deceived and manipulated by those around him.

[donttread]

Yea, but Iraq clearly had nothing to do with 9/11 or even AQ. Yet Bush and company consistently tried to connect the two using subtle propaganda techniques. Americans never would have supported an invasion of Iraq MERELY because of "weapons of mass destruction". They had to be deceived into thinking those weapons would somehow find their way into the hands of the terrorists who attacked on us 9/11, which was pure fiction concocted by the Bush administration. Saddam was a violent autocrat, but he was a secular autocrat who kept a firm lid on sectarian violence and religious extremism in Iraq. His removal had nothing to do with fighting terrorism or securing America. It was all about promoting the interests of oligarchs. The only question for me is whether Bush was a party to this conspiracy or just a naive figurehead. I tend to believe he was deceived and manipulated by those around him.

Even back in 2003 in his "war speech" he mentioned NK and Iran before they suddenly cut to commercial. And the "unholy two" continue to pursue that end.

[Tahuyaman]

That's not partisanship, it's what I actually believe. That you cannot see what was patently obvious throughout G.W.'s terms of office I cannot explain. G.W. was always a fish out of water in the Whitehouse. His brother was political, George never was. He did what he was told, but he would have been happier as just a rancher.

What does that have to do with the fact that the intelligence agencies of every developed nation said that Iraq did have nuclear weapons? That has nothing to do with whether or not you approved of the invasion of Iraq. It's just a fact.


George W Bush was a two term governor of Texas before he went to the White House. By all accounts he was a fairly successful and popular governor.

[Scerab]

The bloody Republican Party is nothing short of a terrorist organization.
- it is responsible for starting the Vietnam war that terrorized millions of Vietnamese...
- it is responsible for starting the iraq war, which terrorized millions of Iraqis and gave birth to ISIS..

-it is supplying Saudi Arabia with billions of dollars worth of weapons and intelligence, which is terrorizing millions of Yemeni kids, women and elderly.
- TODAY, it ignores the rohingya blight, yet ironically they staunchly condem the holocaust...
- they want to cut Medicare, Medicaid and all social welfare programs. Throwing Americans on the streets to suffer and die. All while giving many handouts to the “entitled” billionaires in the guise of trickle down economics...

[Captdon]

The CIA is not a trustworthy source of information. They have been compromised since at least the 1960's, regardless of which party was/is in power. Although they had their wings severely clipped in the 80's, they have been gradually resuming their SOP since then. They serve special interests.

You heroine supported the war until it became unpopular. She believed he had them. So did Bubba. Funny how the CIA is a shit organization until they do something you want.

[Captdon]

Actually, not all and in fact, 54 countries opposed the invasion including some of it's biggest allies. The coalition only comprised the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and Poland.

Deflection. The post said they all believed the info; he didn't say they wanted to do anything about it.

[Captdon]

They may have opposed the invasion, but they all believed Iraq possessed nuclear weapons.


There are several reasons one could oppose the invasion of Iraq.


One more thing. Many of the people who oppose it now, didn’t oppose it when it happened. Maybe some of those are posters here?

Perish the thought.

[Captdon]

Sure they did. Not. They argued vociferously that there was no reason for the invasion per the UN inspection report. I remember. FYI, I was against the invasion before and after. It was conflated with 911, which was ridiculous. Iraq wasn't funding Saudi terrorists but that was implied. Could it be because in March of 2000 Saddam announced it would be moving to the Euro for oil?

They sure as hell did. All of them.

[Captdon]

I could say the same.

You could say it but still be wrong. You don't know what you're talking about. You're flailing and failing.

[nathanbforrest45]

We should also bear in mind that Weapons of Mass Destruction include more than just atomic weapons. They could have wiped out entire cities with a barrage of sarin gas for example. So, the fact that he may not have had nuclear weapons makes no difference.

[Captdon]

Glad you are amused, but while you are laughing, ask yourself if there was anything about Baby Bush that ever suggested he wanted a political career as opposed to being forced into it by Daddy Bush? I have nothing against G.W. He's a guy who was forced into the family business. Cheney was his Daddy's proxy in the Whitehouse.

Are you always this goofy? How do you know why GW ran for office? You really can't keep still. The shit still catches up to you.

You ought to take a clue from another member: when you are caught, hide for a while.

[nathanbforrest45]

Glad you are amused, but while you are laughing, ask yourself if there was anything about Baby Bush that ever suggested he wanted a political career as opposed to being forced into it by Daddy Bush? I have nothing against G.W. He's a guy who was forced into the family business. Cheney was his Daddy's proxy in the Whitehouse.


Oh my! The stupidity is strong in this one.

[Captdon]

That's not partisanship, it's what I actually believe. That you cannot see what was patently obvious throughout G.W.'s terms of office I cannot explain. G.W. was always a fish out of water in the Whitehouse. His brother was political, George never was. He did what he was told, but he would have been happier as just a rancher.

I talked to W, as he likes to be called, and he said being President was neat. He got to see all the movies first and fly in the big plane thing.

[nathanbforrest45]

The bloody Republican Party is nothing short of a terrorist organization.
- it is responsible for starting the Vietnam war that terrorized millions of Vietnamese...
- it is responsible for starting the iraq war, which terrorized millions of Iraqis and gave birth to ISIS..

-it is supplying Saudi Arabia with billions of dollars worth of weapons and intelligence, which is terrorizing millions of Yemeni kids, women and elderly.
- TODAY, it ignores the rohingya blight, yet ironically they staunchly condem the holocaust...
- they want to cut Medicare, Medicaid and all social welfare programs. Throwing Americans on the streets to suffer and die. All while giving many handouts to the “entitled” billionaires in the guise of trickle down economics...
And another one bites the dust
And another one bites the dust
And another one gone and another one gone
And another one bites the dust.

Bye bye. You are now officially on ignore

By the way, its "seldom" not "seldem" and United States should be capitalized. If you are going to lecture us with your hysterical rantings perhaps you should learn the English language first.

[MisterVeritis]

And another one bites the dust
And another one bites
And another one bites
And another one bites the dust.

By the way, its "seldom" not "seldem" and United States should be capitalized. If you are going to lecture us with your hysterical rantings perhaps you should learn the English language first.
I believe SC arab erab learned English second.

[nathanbforrest45]

I talked to W, as he likes to be called, and he said being President was neat. He got to see all the movies first and fly in the big plane thing.


He and I were playing putt putt on the White House lawn and he told me the same thing. Must be true then.

[Tahuyaman]

They sure as hell did. All of them.
Revisionist history. The fact is, the intelligence agencies of all the developed nations honestly believed Iraq had nuclear weapons.

Concluding that does not mean that they all also supported the invasion of Iraq. People like Dr. Who believe that if you acknowledge that fact, one aldo supported the invasion.

[Dr. Who]

You heroine supported the war until it became unpopular. She believed he had them. So did Bubba. Funny how the CIA is a shit organization until they do something you want.
What heroine is that? I don't hero worship anyone. I've been reading about CIA shenanigans for the last 40 years. The CIA is as much of a purely "intelligence" agency as the KGB or current FSB. The CIA is just better funded and has been involved in so much dirt and criminal activity that it would take pages to describe. I trust nothing that they do. There are thousands if not millions of people who have been killed on this planet because of CIA machinations.

[Dr. Who]

Are you always this goofy? How do you know why GW ran for office? You really can't keep still. The shit still catches up to you.

You ought to take a clue from another member: when you are caught, hide for a while.
Believe what you wish. I retain the right to my beliefs and I'm not going to hide for your benefit or anyone else's. I've been here a lot longer than you have. Don't like it, you have the freedom to ignore me or let your fingers do the walking ....

[Dr. Who]

Deflection. The post said they all believed the info; he didn't say they wanted to do anything about it.
I have yet to see a link to anything credible or otherwise, that would substantiate the allegation that the entire world believed the info.

As Paul Krugman aptly stated:
"The Iraq war wasn’t an innocent mistake, a venture undertaken on the basis of intelligence that turned out to be wrong. America invaded Iraq because the Bush administration wanted a war. The public justifications for the invasion were nothing but pretexts, and falsified pretexts at that."

[Chris]

Dr Who, you certainly have the liberal version of the story down pat.

[Dr. Who]

Dr Who, you certainly have the liberal version of the story down pat.

Shrug. The evidence before and after never justified the invasion. The administration did it's best to link it all to 911 in order to get public buy-in.

[MisterVeritis]

I have yet to see a link to anything credible or otherwise, that would substantiate the allegation that the entire world believed the info.

As Paul Krugman aptly stated:
"The Iraq war wasn’t an innocent mistake, a venture undertaken on the basis of intelligence that turned out to be wrong. America invaded Iraq because the Bush administration wanted a war. The public justifications for the invasion were nothing but pretexts, and falsified pretexts at that."
Was this one of the first Deep State anti-Republican actions?

[Dr. Who]

Was this one of the first Deep State anti-Republican actions?

Sorry, deep state is not part of my vocabulary.

[Chris]

Shrug. The evidence before and after never justified the invasion. The administration did it's best to link it all to 911 in order to get public buy-in.

Yea, right, but put yourself in the place of a person who given uncertain information must make a choice that could affect the lives of all the citizens you're charged with protecting.

[MisterVeritis]

Sorry, deep state is not part of my vocabulary.
I cannot help your ignorance. Regrets.

[Dr. Who]

I cannot help your ignorance. Regrets.

I know what it is, but I don't use that terminology. It's a trap.

[Chris]

The deep state, sans the conspiracies, is simply the collusion of unelected government bureaucracy with financial and industry sectors. It's nothing more than a new name for the military-industrial complex.

[Tahuyaman]

Sorry, deep state is not part of my vocabulary.
It should be.

[Dr. Who]

It should be.
It's one of those buzz words that locks you into a box. "Conspiracy Theorist".

[gamewell45]

The USA had good reason to enter WW1 & WW2. German submarine warfare and Pearl Harbor...
the Vietnam war might have been escalated by JFK and LBJ, but it was started by that scumbag Eisenhower.
What about the two Iraq war? Have you any comments about them?

Eisenhower sent in Special Forces to act as advisers and help with training of the South Vietnamese Armed Forces so technically he was responsible for sending in the first US Troops into Vietnam. Kennedy and Johnson escalated the involvement of US Troops.

[MisterVeritis]

It's one of those buzz words that locks you into a box. "Conspiracy Theorist".
Do you ever use jargon at work? Deep State is like that.

[Tahuyaman]

It's one of those buzz words that locks you into a box. "Conspiracy Theorist".

No. The deep state is unelected / appointed / career people who are supporters of the political establishment.

[Dr. Who]

Do you ever use jargon at work? Deep State is like that.
I use insurance jargon. There is no judgment there.

[nathanbforrest45]

Eisenhower sent in Special Forces to act as advisers and help with training of the South Vietnamese Armed Forces so technically he was responsible for sending in the first US Troops into Vietnam. Kennedy and Johnson escalated the involvement of US Troops.
Yes from 900 advisors to over 500,000 ground troops in less than eight years.

I remember the reason the left was against our involvement. They tried to make it seem like they cared about us grunts but their watch word was "self determination" i.e. allowing the Communist to take over the South. If we had support Ho chi Minh they would have been all for it.

[MisterVeritis]

I use insurance jargon. There is no judgment there.
Deep State is jargon. It consists primarily of the senior career people in the intelligence, law enforcement and justice departments of the Executive branch. I add in the senior career people at most of the nearly 500 so-called independent agencies in the Executive Department.

[nathanbforrest45]

I use insurance jargon. There is no judgment there.

All industries use jargon. Its a means of keeping outsiders outside. If you can't speak the language you can't sit at the table.

[nathanbforrest45]

Deep State is jargon. It consists primarily of the senior career people in the intelligence, law enforcement and justice departments of the Executive branch. I add in the senior career people at most of the nearly 500 so-called independent agencies in the Executive Department.

Its the petty bureaucrats who actually run the government. Those that interpret and implement policies to their own benefit.

[Dr. Who]

No. The deep state unelected / career people who are supporters of the political establishment.
The political establishment isn't strictly local and hasn't been for a very long time - almost since the ink dried on the Constitution. There are wheels within wheels within ever larger wheels. I will use one expression: globalist interests. The more wealthy the nation, the more control those interests have purchased both within the ranks of the unelected and among the elected. That's why, when you scrape away the Punch and Judy show that is presented for the masses, bills that are antithetical to the best interests of the people are receiving bipartisan support.

America is the globalist's lynchpin. They need America to keep the rest of the west in line and co-operative despite the lack of support of their own voters. Ironically Great Britain, which is ground zero for the origin of globalist interests, is now having one of the hardest times pulling it off politically. So is Germany. When politics becomes the most histrionic, you should be very suspicious, because that is when the population is being the most deliberately distracted.

[Dr. Who]

All industries use jargon. Its a means of keeping outsiders outside. If you can't speak the language you can't sit at the table.
It's not deliberate - it's about laziness and efficiency. Jargon is a shortcut to having to use an entire sentence. It comprises both acronyms and catchphrases that convey in very few words a thing or a concept. It has nothing to do with outsiders. Time is money.

[Scerab]

I believe SC arab erab learned English second.

Actually my user name is S C E R A B...
but thanks for over thinking it...

[Tahuyaman]

The political establishment isn't strictly local and hasn't been for a very long time - almost since the ink dried on the Constitution. There are wheels within wheels within ever larger wheels. I will use one expression: globalist interests. The more wealthy the nation, the more control those interests have purchased both within the ranks of the unelected and among the elected. That's why, when you scrape away the Punch and Judy show that is presented for the masses, bills that are antithetical to the best interests of the people are receiving bipartisan support.

America is the globalist's lynchpin. They need America to keep the rest of the west in line and co-operative despite the lack of support of their own voters. Ironically Great Britain, which is ground zero for the origin of globalist interests, is now having one of the hardest times pulling it off politically. So is Germany. When politics becomes the most histrionic, you should be very suspicious, because that is when the population is being the most deliberately distracted.

Who ever said anything about the deep state or political establishment being strictly local?

[nathanbforrest45]

It's not deliberate - it's about laziness and efficiency. Jargon is a shortcut to having to use an entire sentence. It comprises both acronyms and catchphrases that convey in very few words a thing or a concept. It has nothing to do with outsiders. Time is money.


Some of that is but it is also a means of making you an insider, a special member of the club.

How much longer does it take to say "Standard Carrier Alpha Code" rather than SCAC?

[nathanbforrest45]

actually my user name is s c e r a b...
But thanks for over thinking it...


diligaf

[Dr. Who]

Some of that is but it is also a means of making you an insider, a special member of the club.

How much longer does it take to say "Standard Carrier Alpha Code" rather than SCAC?

Jeez, saying or typing ASAP takes much less time than As Soon As Possible. That's the English language today. Other languages don't have the structural flexibility to use acronyms. It's why English is the business language of the world. Have you ever noticed that where English is translated to another language on product directions, English takes a couple lines and other languages an entire paragraph to say the same thing? Jargon just comes naturally in English. It requires a lot more memory work, but it is unavoidable. It's cultural. English speakers don't generally tolerate wasted time on verbosity.

[nathanbforrest45]

Jeez, saying or typing ASAP takes much less time than As Soon As Possible. That's the English language today. Other languages don't have the structural flexibility to use acronyms. It's why English is the business language of the world. Have you ever noticed that where English is translated to another language on product directions, English takes a couple lines and other languages an entire paragraph to say the same thing? Jargon just comes naturally in English. It requires a lot more memory work, but it is unavoidable. It's cultural. English speakers don't generally tolerate wasted time on verbosity.
ASAP is not jargon, its an abbreviation. Jargon is words that are clearly understood by those in the particular industry but a foreign language to those who are not. It may have, as primary purpose, a way to shorten the word but then it is only understood by those within the profession. Also, not all jargon is short cuts but are words that either only apply within a specific industry or may have other meanings in other industries. For the most part jargon is designed to set you apart from those "not in the know"

[Dr. Who]

ASAP is not jargon, its an abbreviation. Jargon is words that are clearly understood by those in the particular industry but a foreign language to those who are not. It may have, as primary purpose, a way to shorten the word but then it is only understood by those within the profession. Also, not all jargon is short cuts but are words that either only apply within a specific industry or may have other meanings in other industries. For the most part jargon is designed to set you apart from those "not in the know"
That's just not true. It's not a secret society thing. It just evolves in various industries because it's easy. I work in insurance, but I even find terms and expressions that are unique to certain companies when I read their correspondence. They aren't speaking a secret language, they are just using terms that they invented among themselves in order to express concepts quickly. Everyone types now. Just look at all of the acronyms and expressions on the internet that exist to save keystrokes. Within industries, some jargon begins with project names and it sticks. Don't be so paranoid. It's not about being exclusive. I go to accounting and underwriting meetings where the jargon is ubiquitous. I just ask what they are talking about. They don't even realize that everyone doesn't understand what they are saying.

[stjames1_53]

During the NAM, I remember 100% Rethuglicans voting for it. While Dems wanted us out; Eugene McCarthy, Bobby Keneddy, McGovern, etc.

Since then the Rethugs always support wars!I had 4 good buds come home in a bag from Nam!

talk to the people from the UN that encouraged us to get involved. I had a lot of friends that never came home.
How is it you can justify Obama keeping us in war for 8 years? ohhhhhhh, I get it, He was half black and could do not wrong. Delusional, Dr., DELUSIONAL.

[Scerab]

diligaf
I diligaf about you either... and I don’t owe your lot an explanation...
Such language is a great reflection on ones background....

[stjames1_53]

I diligaf about you either... and I don’t owe your lot an explanation...
Such language is a great reflection on ones background....

again, Mid-Eastern alliances or just outright Muslim? you sure seem to hate America.

[Scerab]

again, Mid-Eastern alliances or just outright Muslim? you sure seem to hate America.
I dont hate the United States of lobbyists... I merely hate what it has become, a cesspool of corruption. This bigot-in-chief promised to clean the swamp. He ended up defecating in it..

[Common]

I dont hate the United States of lobbyists... I merely hate what it has become.
Hate is a subjective word and you may not use it, but your rantings demonstrate what others would label hatred or at min great disdain.

[nathanbforrest45]

Who are lobbyist? Everyone sees the word lobbyist and automatically think of some sleazy fat cigar smoking entity handing out money to corrupt Congressmen to pass legislation that goes against the will of the people. While no doubt that are those that fit that description any trade organization, any special interest group, any group will some specific membership has lobbyist. In a representative government lobbyist represent their constituents, be that ACLU, SPCA, NRA, various unions, teacher organizations or sailboat enthusiast. Lobbyist are our way of getting our desires in front of our representatives. It makes far more sense for your Representative to see the lobbyist from the SECU then to read letters from 300,000 government workers. I belong to several groups that fund lobbyist to insure our desires are met, the NRA, BoatUS, National Association of Purchasing Managers, etc.

So, someone who rants about lobbyist don't understand the first thing about their role in our government.

[nathanbforrest45]

"Your lot"

That's a typical British phrase. My guess he is a Muslim from London.

And I see he is glorying in his illiteracy, "Seldem" "god" and "united states". If he wants to be taken seriously he really should correct his vocabulary.

[Chris]

Who are lobbyist? Everyone sees the word lobbyist and automatically think of some sleazy fat cigar smoking entity handing out money to corrupt Congressmen to pass legislation that goes against the will of the people. While no doubt that are those that fit that description any trade organization, any special interest group, any group will some specific membership has lobbyist. In a representative government lobbyist represent their constituents, be that ACLU, SPCA, NRA, various unions, teacher organizations or sailboat enthusiast. Lobbyist are our way of getting our desires in front of our representatives. It makes far more sense for your Representative to see the lobbyist from the SECU then to read letters from 300,000 government workers. I belong to several groups that fund lobbyist to insure our desires are met, the NRA, BoatUS, National Association of Purchasing Managers, etc.

So, someone who rants about lobbyist don't understand the first thing about their role in our government.


Another liberal who hates the Constituttion: "the right of the people...to petition the Government for a redress of grievances" is what lobbying is about.

Of course that can be a nexus of corruption.

Liberal too in that he blames the lobbyists and not the lobbied politicians who offer favors and sell us out. Can't blame what liberals see as the solution, the government.

[Scerab]

"Your lot"

That's a typical British phrase. My guess he is a Muslim from London.

And I see he is glorying in his illiteracy, "Seldem" "god" and "united states". If he wants to be taken seriously he really should correct his vocabulary.

Whats wrong with the Muslim residents of London?
Your words display how prejudiced and bigotic you really are. Too bad for you, the constitution protects all Americans... And there is NOTHING you, or the entire republican terrorist organization, can do about it.
i am not a perfectionist nor suffer from obsessive compulsive disorder, ergo I don’t care about a few typos or minor errors here and there. This is a rather cheap tactic you and your ilk employ in an attempt to digress away from the main issue at hand or even shame those you struggle to refute. had this been an English teaching forum, your comments would have had more credence.

[Chris]

Whats wrong with the Muslim residents of London?
Your words display how prejudiced and bigotic you really are. Too bad for you, the constitution protects all Americans... And there is NOTHING you, or the entire republican terrorist organization, can do about it.
i am not a perfectionist nor suffer from obsessive compulsive disorder, ergo I don’t care about a few typos or minor errors here and there. This is a rather cheap tactic you and your ilk employ in an attempt to digress away from the main issue at hand or even shame those you struggle to refute. had this been an English teaching forum, your comments would have had more credence.


That response was completely disconnected and incoherent to the post you responded to.

[MisterVeritis]

I believe SC arab erab learned English second.

Actually my user name is S C E R A B...
but thanks for over thinking it...
Right S C arab E R A B

You are welcome.

[MisterVeritis]

That's just not true. It's not a secret society thing. It just evolves in various industries because it's easy. I work in insurance, but I even find terms and expressions that are unique to certain companies when I read their correspondence. They aren't speaking a secret language, they are just using terms that they invented among themselves in order to express concepts quickly. Everyone types now. Just look at all of the acronyms and expressions on the internet that exist to save keystrokes. Within industries, some jargon begins with project names and it sticks. Don't be so paranoid. It's not about being exclusive. I go to accounting and underwriting meetings where the jargon is ubiquitous. I just ask what they are talking about. They don't even realize that everyone doesn't understand what they are saying.

Like "Deep State".

[nathanbforrest45]

Whats wrong with the Muslim residents of London?
Your words display how prejudiced and bigotic you really are. Too bad for you, the constitution protects all Americans... And there is NOTHING you, or the entire republican terrorist organization, can do about it.
i am not a perfectionist nor suffer from obsessive compulsive disorder, ergo I don’t care about a few typos or minor errors here and there. This is a rather cheap tactic you and your ilk employ in an attempt to digress away from the main issue at hand or even shame those you struggle to refute. had this been an English teaching forum, your comments would have had more credence.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the Muslim residence of London as long as they stay the Muslim residents of LONDON.

You really should up your medication. It isn't working.

[nathanbforrest45]

What is the true meaning of "Jargon"

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/jargon

[Scerab]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the Muslim residence of London as long as they stay the Muslim residents of LONDON.

You really should up your medication. It isn't working.

You assume I am ill, based on what qualifications? I will trust a real physician to issue any diagnoses and prescribe medication should they be merited. Why are you keen on ostracizing Muslim Americans? They are citizens no less then you or I. The constitution protects them and no body can do anything to change that. To discriminate against a certain group is just as evil as to discriminate against all of humanity. One other thing, Muslim Americans are here to stay and not you or this bigot-in-chief can change that.
Trump displayed clearly how prejudiced he is against Muslims, especially if they are poor. He wanted to have them wear identifying arm bands, now I wonder where did he get that idea from? He also suggest it that he will try and strip them of their citizenship, which is a terrifying prospect. Because if he is successful in accomplishing that, no American citizen is safe from having his nationality striped away from him in a denationalization process. Answer me this, what did this Muslim ban accomplish? Did the American citizens live in peace and harmony at last? No... we were still terrorized by many mass shootings in schools and otherwise. I suppose this bigot-in-chief is running the government according to his own preferences.
Is this how you run a democracy or republic?

[MisterVeritis]

You assume I am ill, based on what qualifications? I will trust a real physician to issue any diagnoses and prescribe medication should they be merited.
He was playing with you.


Why are you keen on ostracizing Muslim Americans?
In theory, there are around 4 million Muslims in the US. Barack Hussein O imported quite a few between 2010 and 2016. I would guess about one-half of the total. So two million Muslims living in the US could be eligible for a return to Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. I think anyone accepting welfare from American taxpayers should be returned to their home.

[nathanbforrest45]

He was playing with you.


In theory, there are around 4 million Muslims in the US. Barack Hussein O imported quite a few between 2010 and 2016. I would guess about one-half of the total. So two million Muslims living in the US could be eligible for a return to Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. I think anyone accepting welfare from American taxpayers should be returned to their home.


He is not only a liberal but a true foaming at the mouth liberal. They are genetically unable to respond to humor.


Even the Muslims who have been granted citizenship can be stripped of that citizenship and sent back to where ever they came from. Muslims are a threat to the peace and good order of this country. Their entire value system cannot assimilate with Western values. Given the millennium old wars in their home countries they need a strong tyrannical king or emperor to keep all the different factions in check. They cannot engage in self government because they lack any concept of individual freedom. If it wasn't for the West and its history of innovation and advancements in science they would still be living in goat skin tents.

[Dr. Who]

He is not only a liberal but a true foaming at the mouth liberal. They are genetically unable to respond to humor.


Even the Muslims who have been granted citizenship can be stripped of that citizenship and sent back to where ever they came from. Muslims are a threat to the peace and good order of this country. Their entire value system cannot assimilate with Western values. Given the millennium old wars in their home countries they need a strong tyrannical king or emperor to keep all the different factions in check. They cannot engage in self government because they lack any concept of individual freedom. If it wasn't for the West and its history of innovation and advancements in science they would still be living in goat skin tents.

You do realize that not all Muslims come from the Middle East? There are many that are ethnic Europeans, Chinese, South Asian, homegrown American - places where there haven't been millennia old wars and dozens of factions.

[nathanbforrest45]

You do realize that not all Muslims come from the Middle East? There are many that are ethnic Europeans, Chinese, South Asian, homegrown American - places where there haven't been millennia old wars and dozens of factions.

I don't care where they came from, they are Muslims and its not the person I object to, its the religion, the government and the culture.

[Captdon]

Believe what you wish. I retain the right to my beliefs and I'm not going to hide for your benefit or anyone else's. I've been here a lot longer than you have. Don't like it, you have the freedom to ignore me or let your fingers do the walking ....

What does you being here longer mean? It sure doesn't make you right as this thread proves. I post responses sine that what this is for. You can ignore me. They have a button or something for that.

Your beliefs are your business. That still doesn't make them facts.

[MisterVeritis]

I know what it is, but I don't use that terminology. It's a trap.
LOL. Okay. Maybe we can develop an acronym for you.

[stjames1_53]

I dont hate the United States of lobbyists... I merely hate what it has become, a cesspool of corruption. This bigot-in-chief promised to clean the swamp. He ended up defecating in it..
How? ya got proof of what you're going to claim?

[Captdon]

You assume I am ill, based on what qualifications? I will trust a real physician to issue any diagnoses and prescribe medication should they be merited. Why are you keen on ostracizing Muslim Americans? They are citizens no less then you or I. The constitution protects them and no body can do anything to change that. To discriminate against a certain group is just as evil as to discriminate against all of humanity. One other thing, Muslim Americans are here to stay and not you or this bigot-in-chief can change that.
Trump displayed clearly how prejudiced he is against Muslims, especially if they are poor. He wanted to have them wear identifying arm bands, now I wonder where did he get that idea from? He also suggest it that he will try and strip them of their citizenship, which is a terrifying prospect. Because if he is successful in accomplishing that, no American citizen is safe from having his nationality striped away from him in a denationalization process. Answer me this, what did this Muslim ban accomplish? Did the American citizens live in peace and harmony at last? No... we were still terrorized by many mass shootings in schools and otherwise. I suppose this bigot-in-chief is running the government according to his own preferences.
Is this how you run a democracy or republic?

After deciphering this:
Trump hasn't tried to strip citizenship from a single person.

He never said a word about armbands.

You are not able to say anything because you don't know anything.

[nathanbforrest45]

You do realize that not all Muslims come from the Middle East? There are many that are ethnic Europeans, Chinese, South Asian, homegrown American - places where there haven't been millennia old wars and dozens of factions.

BTW, I also realize the Muslims from almost every continent are at war with those who are not Muslims. What was the war in Bosnia about? What is the war in the Philippines about? There are Chinese Muslims, Indian Muslims, Black Muslims and a host of others. All are at odds with those who are not Muslim.

[nathanbforrest45]

LOL. Okay. Maybe we can develop an acronym for you.


HEWDONJ

Or He Who Does Not Jargon

[DGUtley]

Oh my! The stupidity is strong in this one.

WARNING - @nathanbforrest45 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=891) - discuss the post topic and not the poster.

[stjames1_53]

Who are lobbyist? Everyone sees the word lobbyist and automatically think of some sleazy fat cigar smoking entity handing out money to corrupt Congressmen to pass legislation that goes against the will of the people. While no doubt that are those that fit that description any trade organization, any special interest group, any group will some specific membership has lobbyist. In a representative government lobbyist represent their constituents, be that ACLU, SPCA, NRA, various unions, teacher organizations or sailboat enthusiast. Lobbyist are our way of getting our desires in front of our representatives. It makes far more sense for your Representative to see the lobbyist from the SECU then to read letters from 300,000 government workers. I belong to several groups that fund lobbyist to insure our desires are met, the NRA, BoatUS, National Association of Purchasing Managers, etc.

So, someone who rants about lobbyist don't understand the first thing about their role in our government.

..........don't forget about Planned Parenthood