Palin to resign

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Wrong - The Iranians knew Reagan would bring the full military might of the U.S. to bear to secure the release of the hostages, that's why they completed the deal with the Carter Admin.

from wiki: However, special ops personnel involved in the preparations for the second rescue attempt believed that incoming President Ronald Reagan was involved in the planning and timing of the second rescue attempt, and that these intentions were either implied or made known to the de facto Iranian government, leading to the hostages' release just minutes after Reagan's inauguration, and it is widely believed that Reagan capitalized on the "trigger happy" reputation he had been lambasted with during the 1980 campaign and used it to lead the Iranian leadership to believe that if they didn't release the hostages immediately upon his inauguration, Reagan's first act as President would be to bomb Iran's oil facilities, the main source of their nation's revenue, out of existence. [72][73]


Wrong again - I did state that Reagan provided funding for Bin Laden and other rebels/terrorist organizations and the reasons for that funding. We just disagree on whether it was a mistake or not.


You may want to read this, particularly the Presidency - Second Term section. You don't change a leopard's spots.

Vladimir Putin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



The actual DOD Budget is below: $653B, much of it for paying our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines and Operations / Maintenance. I know where you're coming up with the additional 300+B, but securing our nuclear arsenal and providing medical care to our veterans sure isn't on the same lines as "more bombs" and F-22s (which I agree is a waste with the F-35 on the horizon).

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy...et/defense.pdf

And I'm sure the Swedes sleeep pretty damn good knowing we are spending $ 653B and will come to save their hind-quarters if the Soviets or some other world power decides to get stupid.

1. Carter gets all the blame and Reagan gets all the glory, dot it.
2. Oh, Putin was such a bad man, as if our own country lacked leadership crisis and controversy. As if we are somehow superior in our methods of governance during Mr. Bush's reign. Even worse you imply that Russia use to be free (thanks to RR) and now it is not. You have excused your account at Bank Morally Superior.
3. Sweden does sleep better, they did just fine during the Nazi descent on Europe and I'm not convinced we would or could stop a Russian invasion of Sweden. There is a reason why "peak softly" comes before "carry a big stick" and sadly Obama gets flack for speaking softly from you lot.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by saden1

1. Carter gets all the blame and Reagan gets all the glory, dot it.

What's not to like there. And you need to get on-board before the train leaves the station, President Obama is already aboard and I'm holding a seat for you.

President Signs Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission Act Alongside Mrs. Reagan - Political Punch

- Oh, Putin was such a bad man, as if our own country lacked leadership crisis and controversy. As if we are somehow superior in our methods of governance during Mr. Bush's reign. Even worse you imply that Russia use to be free (thanks to RR) and now it is not. You have excused your account at Bank Morally Superior.

As long as the U.S. remains the greatest agent for freedom and democracy for all peoples that the world has ever seen, I'll keep the account open, thank you.

Sweden does sleep better, they did just fine during the Nazi descent on Europe and I'm not convinced we would or could stop a Russian invasion of Sweden. There is a reason why "peak softly" comes before "carry a big stick" and sadly Obama gets flack for speaking softly from you lot.

I'll bet that $ 653B we would have no problem decimating any Russian invasion of Sweden with minimal U.S. casualties, without going nuclear, as long as the politicans stayed out of the way and let the military do its job.

I've got no problem with Obama speaking softly as long as other nations believe he'll use the stick when necessary. But there is no need to not negotiate from a position of strength when you have the biggest stick, by far.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

What's not to like there. And you need to get on-board before the train leaves the station, President Obama is already aboard and I'm holding a seat for you.

President Signs Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission Act Alongside Mrs. Reagan - Political Punch


As long as the U.S. remains the greatest agent for freedom and democracy for all peoples that the world has ever seen, I'll keep the account open, thank you.

I'll bet that $ 653B we would have no problem decimating any Russian invasion of Sweden with minimal U.S. casualties, without going nuclear, as long as the politicans stayed out of the way and let the military do its job.

I've got no problem with Obama speaking softly as long as other nations believe he'll use the stick when necessary. But there is no need to not negotiate from a position of strength when you have the biggest stick, by far.

1. I'm talking Carter as it relates to releasing the hostages. Even I know RR was a better president than Carter.
2. You can't keep your account open when you detain people indefinitely and torture them. You just don't have enough chips to keep it open.
3. Ah, but they have nukes, that's the point. We walked into Iraq and if they wanted to they could walk into Sweden.
4. If you have the biggest stick and in a position of strength you're of the opinion that you need not speak softly? What a shame...stick diplomacy is an oxymoron.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by saden1

- You can't keep your account open when you detain people indefinitely and torture them. You just don't have enough chips to keep it open.

We've been down this road several times, but I am amazed that you are equating the waterboarding of three dangerous terrorists to the Mexican torture: The techniques included beatings, suffocation with plastic bags, electric shocks, the insertion of needles under suspects’ finger nails, water torture, and other abuses.

I guess the millions of lives we've saved and the demcracies we've helped foster go by the wayside.

Ah, but they have nukes, that's the point. We walked into Iraq and if they wanted to they could walk into Sweden.

That's why we continue to develop the missle defense shield and why the Russians are so against/afraid of it. And they would be walking into a massacre if they tried to walk into Sweden.

If you have the biggest stick and in a position of strength you're of the opinion that you need not speak softly?

Speaking softly IMO is not imposing our will by military might on other countries....unless absolutely necessary (see LeMay doctrine). Speaking softly is giving diplomacy a chance, but understanding that diplomacy doesn't work when dealing with dictators/thugs/inherently evil people.