Check out some similar questions!

paraclete · Sep 22, 2009, 06:06 PM

Originally Posted by Catsmine

If it hadn't been for Mr. Peanut in 1979 allowing an act of war to go unremarked, Persia would already be a glass lake.

Yes, remarkably perceptive of him wasn't it

ETWolverine · Sep 23, 2009, 07:15 AM

Originally Posted by paraclete

Then by your own argument building a missile shield in Poland is pointless. The US should make one massive nuclear strike on Iran and take them out, and of course, the rest of the world with them

First of all, please keep in mind that the area of Poland is 121,000 square miles, compared to Israel's 20,000 square miles of area... Poland is over 6 times larger than Israel.

Second, Poland's missile defense system was to be integrated into a larger missile system that covered a large portion of Europe. Poland was not the only one slated to receive the missile defense system... it was to be an INTERNATIONAL system that integrated several countries into the system... thus widening the effective area. That's why I spoke about a multi-tiered defensive system wherein one country covers another country's flank and vice versa. Israel, however, is a stand-alone country in the Middle East. No other Middle Eastern country would want to integrate its defense with Israel, and you know it. So an integrated anti-missile system for Israel is out of the question, where it is perfectly feasible for European countries to work together.

Third, who's talking about nuclear strikes against Iran? You and excon and NK are the only ones calling for nuclear strikes on Iran. I'm talking about conventional strikes to take out their nuclear facilities, and you are equating that with a nuclear strike. Why are you drawing that conclusion? Why are you stuck on nuking Iran? It sure wasn't anything I said or even intimated.

Elliot

ETWolverine · Sep 23, 2009, 07:18 AM

Originally Posted by paraclete

yes, remarkably perceptive of him wasn't it

So you're saying you LIKE terrorists in charge of large countries and working to obtain nuclear weapons. You like the fact that Carter didn't nip the Mad Mullahs in the bud before they took a foothold in Iran.

NeedKarma · Sep 23, 2009, 07:29 AM

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

So you're saying you LIKE terrorists in charge of large countries and working to obtain nuclear weapons. You like the fact that Carter didn't nip the Mad Mullahs in the bud before they took a foothold in Iran.

Look, you're putting words in people's mouths again. Why do you feel the need to do that? It doesn't lend well to civil discourse.

ETWolverine · Sep 23, 2009, 07:31 AM

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Look, you're putting words in people's mouths again. Why do you feel the need to do that? It doesn't lend well to civil discourse.

My post was directed to Paraclete. Look at who I was quoting in my post. Please pay attention. And stop making unfounded accusations.

NeedKarma · Sep 23, 2009, 07:33 AM

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

My post was directed to Paraclete. Look at who I was quoting in my post. Please pay attention. And stop making unfounded accusations.

I know. Doesn't stop the fact that your tactics are very juvenile.

ETWolverine · Sep 23, 2009, 07:42 AM

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

I know. Doesn't stop the fact that your tactics are very juvenile.

What "tactic" do you think I'm using? Clete said that he thought Carter was being very perceptive when he didn't take stronger actions against Iran during the Iran Hostage Crisis. That means that he approves of Carters actions, or lack thereof.

Do you have a different way of interpreting his comments?

In what way is my interpretation juvenile?

Elliot

paraclete · Sep 23, 2009, 02:32 PM

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

So you're saying you LIKE terrorists in charge of large countries and working to obtain nuclear weapons. You like the fact that Carter didn't nip the Mad Mullahs in the bud before they took a foothold in Iran.

I can see sarcasm is lost on you

ETWolverine · Sep 23, 2009, 02:33 PM

Originally Posted by paraclete

I can see sarcasm is lost on you

Sorry... It's hard to tell sometimes.

My mistake.

speechlesstx · Oct 21, 2009, 01:23 PM

It appears Obama has re-reversed his support for missile defense in Poland. In April he was for it, last month he was against it, now he's for it again. At least he's finally headed in the right direction again but it sure is confusing trying to keep up with wherever it is he stands on anything.

paraclete · Oct 21, 2009, 02:21 PM

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

It appears Obama has re-reversed his support for missile defense in Poland. In April he was for it, last month he was against it, now he's for it again. At least he's finally headed in the right direction again but it sure is confusing trying to keep up with wherever it is he stands on anything.

This is of course in response to Russia's recent sabre rattling. Things change, foreign policy is fluid, particularly when it's not your long suit or you failed to realise that any concession to Russia will be seen as weakness. Now I wonder what would have happened if Evita were in the chair

speechlesstx · Oct 21, 2009, 02:43 PM

Originally Posted by paraclete

This is of course in response to Russia's recent sabre rattling. Things change, foreign policy is fluid, particularly when it's not your long suit or you failed to realise that any concession to Russia will be seen as weakness. Now I wonder what would have happened if Evita were in the chair

Clete, ALL of Obama's policy is fluid just like the last Democrat. Clinton got out of bed every morning and stuck his finger in the air to see which way the wind was blowing before deciding where he stood that day.

Obama should have known how the Russians would respond and he probably did, but he's too idealistic to deal with the reality on the ground.

I would much rather be discussing how Evita was handling things than Obama. That is if she's not still making stuff up.

tomder55 · Oct 21, 2009, 03:23 PM

Good God! Does Joe Biden ever read the Obama playbook before he goes out on junkets ?

If the President gets tough on the Ruskies and escalates in Afghanistan will he have to decline the peace prize ? The peace prize is going to be an albatross hanging on the President's foreign policy for the rest of his term.

paraclete · Oct 21, 2009, 06:40 PM

Originally Posted by tomder55

Good God !! Does Joe Biden ever read the Obama playbook before he goes out on junkets ?

If the President gets tough on the Ruskies and escalates in Afghanistan will he have to decline the peace prize ? The peace prize is going to be an albatross hanging on the President's foreign policy for the rest of his term.

Might have been an excellent method of emascalating him, very suble those Europeans and Biden has his own agenda which probably includes jumping in the chair.

Obama will have to do something spectacular to justify that prize. Could it be that the quiet winddown of the Iraqi occuption is part of that justification or is it just budget reality. If he has an sense, and the jury is out on that one, he will hold the Afghan occupation at its present level and slowly step back from the corrupt regime of Khazai

tomder55 · Oct 22, 2009, 03:55 AM

the quiet winddown of the Iraqi occuption is part of that justification or is it just budget reality

Have to be careful here. Yes there is an opportunity to an orderly withdrawal from Iraq .But, if there is a perception of abandonment then there is no chance of achieving anything in either Afghanistan ,or the whole ummah.

If he has an sense, and the jury is out on that one, he will hold the Afghan occupation at its present level and slowly step back from the corrupt regime of Khazai

The support for a run-off election is an important step. Th big mistake in the 1st try was letting the UN be the lead agency in monitoring the election.

tomder55 · Oct 22, 2009, 08:02 AM

This article might be an explanation for Joe Biden's lampoon-like East European vacation .
RealClearWorld - The Cleaner Goes to Europe

At least it seems to... I can never tell if he is going rogue or is just not schooled on the policy of the administration he serves.
While in Poland I wonder if the Bob Uecker look-a-like unleashed a dumb Polish joke... or maybe they entertained him with dumb Biden jokes.
How many Joe Bidens does it take to screw in a light bulb?

speechlesstx · Oct 22, 2009, 08:39 AM

Originally Posted by tomder55

At least it seems to ....I can never tell if he is going rogue or is just not schooled on the policy of the administration he serves.
While in Poland I wonder if the Bob Uecker look-a-like unleashed a dumb Polish joke...or maybe they entertained him with dumb Biden jokes.
How many Joe Bidens does it take to screw in a light bulb?

Two, one to screw it in and one to screw it up.

Two, one to screw it in and one to pry his foot out of his mouth before he climbs the ladder.

tomder55 · Oct 22, 2009, 09:42 AM

How many Joe Bidens does it take to screw in a light bulb?Two, one to screw it in and one to screw it up.

Two, one to screw it in and one to pry his foot out of his mouth before he climbs the ladder.

Or None... he hires the Indians from the 7-11 to do the job.