GP1 Posted March 14, 2011 Report Share Posted March 14, 2011 From the people who brought us the ongoing War on Terror. Just for the record. In the amount of time we have been fiddle farting around in Iraq and Afghanistan, we could have accomplished the following: 1. Defeated the Huns in the 1940s. 2. Allowed the Huns to have back Europe. 3. Defeated the Huns a second time. 4. Allowed the Huns to have back Europe. 5. Defeated the Huns a third time. These neoconservatives have never seen a war they didn't think the US should participate. Neoconservatives would send in troops to break up a school yard fight between second graders. They are fools and Fox News is full of them. First it will be some bombing, because it is so inexpensive to fly a bomber from Arkansas to the middle east the the bombs cost very little . Then it will be some consultants on the ground. Then it will be a small group of special forces. Then it will be an invasion. Don't trust these people. If Kristol wants ANOTHER war so freaking bad, let him pick up and gun and go over there with his kids and fight it. A real conservative like Pat Buchanan, and the Great GP1, would tell you what is going on in the middle east is a European problem. Let them handle it. Pucker up neoconservatives, the Great GP1 has an ass he would like you to kiss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hilltopper Posted March 14, 2011 Report Share Posted March 14, 2011 The NEOCONS? Arab League backs Libya no-fly zone The UK and France have pushed for the idea, but have failed so far to win firm backing from the EU or Nato. From a Fox News Poll Should U.S. Forces Be Used to Create a No-Fly Zone Over Libya? Should U.S. Forces Be Used to Create a No-Fly Zone Over Libya? Maybe -- I'm concerned about Americans being put in harm's way, and of another Middle East conflict. 7.23% (2,717 votes) Yes -- It's important to limit Qaddafi's military options, and give the opposition a fighting chance. 29.53% (11,099 votes) No -- This would be one step short of war, something we don't need right now. 60.36% (22,686 votes) Other (post a comment) 2.88% (1,084 votes) Total Votes: 37,586 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GP1 Posted March 14, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 14, 2011 The NEOCONS? Arab League backs Libya no-fly zone The UK and France have pushed for the idea, but have failed so far to win firm backing from the EU or Nato. From a Fox News Poll Should U.S. Forces Be Used to Create a No-Fly Zone Over Libya? Should U.S. Forces Be Used to Create a No-Fly Zone Over Libya? Maybe -- I'm concerned about Americans being put in harm's way, and of another Middle East conflict. 7.23% (2,717 votes) Yes -- It's important to limit Qaddafi's military options, and give the opposition a fighting chance. 29.53% (11,099 votes) No -- This would be one step short of war, something we don't need right now. 60.36% (22,686 votes) Other (post a comment) 2.88% (1,084 votes) Total Votes: 37,586 Good link Hilltopper. Neocons? Yes! They are engaged in a political game. If they push hard enough, they can change public opinion in favor against something that isn't in our interest. Don't trust them. Like I said, if England and France want to create a no fly zone, they should. This is in their backyard. We can't do everything for everyone....we're freaking broke. In terms of the poll, the American people are absolutely correct. We need to stay out of this one. If you don't believe me, believe George Washington. Farewell Address Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UAZipster0305 Posted March 14, 2011 Report Share Posted March 14, 2011 The NEOCONS? Arab League backs Libya no-fly zone The UK and France have pushed for the idea, but have failed so far to win firm backing from the EU or Nato. From a Fox News Poll Should U.S. Forces Be Used to Create a No-Fly Zone Over Libya? Should U.S. Forces Be Used to Create a No-Fly Zone Over Libya? Maybe -- I'm concerned about Americans being put in harm's way, and of another Middle East conflict. 7.23% (2,717 votes) Yes -- It's important to limit Qaddafi's military options, and give the opposition a fighting chance. 29.53% (11,099 votes) No -- This would be one step short of war, something we don't need right now. 60.36% (22,686 votes) Other (post a comment) 2.88% (1,084 votes) Total Votes: 37,586 Socially liberal and fiscally conservative here, but I wouldn't trust anything from Fox Noise. If you want to seriously consider balancing the federal budget, start with defense spending! Talk about a waste of money...multiple wars against an ill-defined, ubiquitous enemy that can never truly be defeated while ruining our international credibility...all in the name of redneck patriotism. The War on Terror has always been a battle of common sense and free thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zen Posted March 14, 2011 Report Share Posted March 14, 2011 Socially liberal and fiscally conservative here... When are the libertarians in this country finally going to wake up and realize that they are libertarians Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UAZipster0305 Posted March 14, 2011 Report Share Posted March 14, 2011 Socially liberal and fiscally conservative here... When are the libertarians in this country finally going to wake up and realize that they are libertarians So to you, someone who doesn't fit the democrat (liberal) / republican (conservative) mold is a libertarian? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zen Posted March 14, 2011 Report Share Posted March 14, 2011 Socially liberal and fiscally conservative here... When are the libertarians in this country finally going to wake up and realize that they are libertarians So to you, someone who doesn't fit the democrat (liberal) / republican (conservative) mold is a libertarian? I used to also call myself a social liberal and fiscal conservative, until I realized that this gave me no home at all, because neither party is fiscally conservative, and if you are lucky, you MAY find some representation for your social liberal stances in Washington... MAYBE, but usually not. And what is a "social liberal" anyway? Someone who thinks government should stay out of people's lives? That's a libertarian. What is a fiscal conservative? Someone who thinks government should tax less and spend less? Again, that's not a republican or democrat these days. Oh, you heard republicans pay lip service to it before the recent congressional "sweep", but when they get in, what do they do? The only thing close to it is to slash planned parenthood and public broadcasting, not because they want to cut spending, but because they are icons of left leaning political interests. Liars and hypocrites. All of them. Both parties. PS: Even though I used to call myself a social liberal, that is only because I support people being able to make their own choices and own mistakes in this world. However, I actually tend to live somewhat conservatively. I just don't think others should be forced to live conservatively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave in Green Posted March 15, 2011 Report Share Posted March 15, 2011 Labels, labels, labels. I've worn them all at some point in my life -- liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, libertarian. I tried them all and none of them really fit, because the closer I got to each political ideology, the more apparent the warts on each one. The political ideology that eventually made the most sense to me was one based on the concept of checks and balances. That is, since all humans and all human endeavors are inherently flawed, each must be counterbalanced by others with opposing views to prevent one ideology from gaining too much control for too long and inflicting their various flaws on society for extended periods. So I'll spend the rest of my years as a moderate independent, voting the assorted b*st*rds in and out of office frequently. In an imperfect world filled with imperfect people and their imperfect belief systems, the closest we can get to perfection is to try our best to keep the various flaws in some kind of balance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UAZipster0305 Posted March 15, 2011 Report Share Posted March 15, 2011 Labels, labels, labels. I've worn them all at some point in my life -- liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, libertarian. I tried them all and none of them really fit, because the closer I got to each political ideology, the more apparent the warts on each one. The political ideology that eventually made the most sense to me was one based on the concept of checks and balances. That is, since all humans and all human endeavors are inherently flawed, each must be counterbalanced by others with opposing views to prevent one ideology from gaining too much control for too long and inflicting their various flaws on society for extended periods. So I'll spend the rest of my years as a moderate independent, voting the assorted b*st*rds in and out of office frequently. In an imperfect world filled with imperfect people and their imperfect belief systems, the closest we can get to perfection is to try our best to keep the various flaws in some kind of balance. I hear you DiG! 40% always go to one side and 40% always go to the other. So, it is the independents who end up deciding elections. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GP1 Posted March 19, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 Here we go again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GP1 Posted April 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 4, 2011 First it will be some bombing, because it is so inexpensive to fly a bomber from Arkansas to the middle east the the bombs cost very little . Then it will be some consultants on the ground. Then it will be a small group of special forces. Then it will be an invasion. Don't trust these people. If Kristol wants ANOTHER war so freaking bad, let him pick up and gun and go over there with his kids and fight it. Not exactly as I was saying, but close enough. Kristol not only gets the exact war he would have fought, but with Obama fighting it, now he can have his war and complain about the President at the same time. The guy has to be sticking to his sheets at night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.