Good for Goode!
- Thread starter OntarioVanMan
- Start date
I was speaking in more general terms and obviously not referring to the likes of Eisenhower or MacArthur. But if you want specifics, here are a couple of examples: (1) The well-known Admiral William Halsey rose to his position of South Pacific Area Commander in Oct. of 1942 by replacing Vice Admiral Robt. Ghormley. (2) In Dec. of 1942 Lt. Gen. Alexander Vandergriff was replaced by Gen. Alexander Patch as Commander of Operations on Guadalcanal.
My broader point was that during conflicts like WW II, Vietnam or Iraq that drag on for several years the more talented and effective officers are going to move up the chain of command and replace the ones that for whatever reason don't produce the desired results. The Commander in Chief might initiate these moves, or they might be done by commanding officers. Let me also say I'm not claiming to be an expert on military operations - I'm just a World War II buff that has read a fair amount about the subject.
My broader point was that during conflicts like WW II, Vietnam or Iraq that drag on for several years the more talented and effective officers are going to move up the chain of command and replace the ones that for whatever reason don't produce the desired results. The Commander in Chief might initiate these moves, or they might be done by commanding officers. Let me also say I'm not claiming to be an expert on military operations - I'm just a World War II buff that has read a fair amount about the subject.
tallcal101
Veteran Expediter
We are not taliking about Linclon or Roosevelt here boys and girls.We are talking about W.It's a civil war now,and we are no longer fighting the insurgents.It's a political problem for the Iraqi's.When it was about the insurgents,the Generals that called for more troops(and dared to go against Rumsfeld and Cheany)were dismissed.Now it's too late.The hornet's nest has been stirred up(as predicted 1 year ago on this very forum)and the Gennie is out of the bottle.
Somebody should have listened to the Generals when this thing started,and let the civilian soldiers stay in their office's.
This nonsence about "we can't afford to lose now,what about the war on terror"is getting old and very moldy.This was never about the war on terror.We invaded this country to take out one man.However,we succesfully created an atomsphere for many terrorists to join in the frey,and now it has become a call to arms throughout the middle east.
Why are we still discussing this anyway?
Somebody should have listened to the Generals when this thing started,and let the civilian soldiers stay in their office's.
This nonsence about "we can't afford to lose now,what about the war on terror"is getting old and very moldy.This was never about the war on terror.We invaded this country to take out one man.However,we succesfully created an atomsphere for many terrorists to join in the frey,and now it has become a call to arms throughout the middle east.
Why are we still discussing this anyway?
greg334
Veteran Expediter
OK I understand you point of view now Pilgrim.
Who is saying this, there is a civil war in Iraq? The media, the UN and the EU. It seems that the Iraqis, some who I talk to and some who have seem to be in control of their country say otherwise. I do tend to believe the people I talk to who have been back in their own country and say that there is a big distinct difference in a civil war, so called sectarian violence and an Islamic fundamentalist war against the world. The latter is what is actually going on there because if it was sectarian violence, it would between other religions that are in Iraq too.
The other thing is that we have had a mind set with the Middle East that it is just like South East Asia and we left our generals plan wars that can not be fought outside of SE Asia because that is where they, the generals, learnt ground warfare. The other problem is we fight with the consensus of the world, not to win. What I mean is we worry about what the EU will say or feel about our actions and that we plan accordingly. We took our position of strength and sold it out for this worry, a thing that the Arab mindset views as a weak and immoral enemy and is to be destroyed at all cost. What I find troublesome to the point it makes me sick is to see the sensitizing of our military that is there to protect us from these people. I want to see terrorist and people who support terrorism dead, nothing less. I want to know that my country is protected over the worry that someone may have their rights violated or in the case of Saddam, not dying a dignified death.
What is the definition of winning? From my point of view, it is the correction of the Carter years when we ran from the area. A stabilized government what will be a stronger buffer against the countries that support terrorism, mainly Iran. The reason many of you don’t understand what is going on there and that you believe the media is that you think we must be soft and have peace at any cost. Sorry you all, this is something that we either do now or we deal with it later. This will eventually drag us down to the point where we will have no choice except make a commitment to fight over there.
Also I keep hearing Pelosi saying we have been in Iraq as long as we have been in WW2, she is lying. We have been in Iraq as an occupational force for how long? 3 years, short time and we are no longer fighting the Iraqi government, which in WW2 we fought the German government from 12/41 to 5/45. Our occupation in Europe started in 1944 and ended in ah, 1989 with the fall of Soviet Union (that is 45 years). Occupying Germany was from 1945 to 1949 when they got the government together (see it took 4 years just to get a government together with Germans who are not dumb people) and we stayed there as an occupation force through 1952.
Who is saying this, there is a civil war in Iraq? The media, the UN and the EU. It seems that the Iraqis, some who I talk to and some who have seem to be in control of their country say otherwise. I do tend to believe the people I talk to who have been back in their own country and say that there is a big distinct difference in a civil war, so called sectarian violence and an Islamic fundamentalist war against the world. The latter is what is actually going on there because if it was sectarian violence, it would between other religions that are in Iraq too.
The other thing is that we have had a mind set with the Middle East that it is just like South East Asia and we left our generals plan wars that can not be fought outside of SE Asia because that is where they, the generals, learnt ground warfare. The other problem is we fight with the consensus of the world, not to win. What I mean is we worry about what the EU will say or feel about our actions and that we plan accordingly. We took our position of strength and sold it out for this worry, a thing that the Arab mindset views as a weak and immoral enemy and is to be destroyed at all cost. What I find troublesome to the point it makes me sick is to see the sensitizing of our military that is there to protect us from these people. I want to see terrorist and people who support terrorism dead, nothing less. I want to know that my country is protected over the worry that someone may have their rights violated or in the case of Saddam, not dying a dignified death.
What is the definition of winning? From my point of view, it is the correction of the Carter years when we ran from the area. A stabilized government what will be a stronger buffer against the countries that support terrorism, mainly Iran. The reason many of you don’t understand what is going on there and that you believe the media is that you think we must be soft and have peace at any cost. Sorry you all, this is something that we either do now or we deal with it later. This will eventually drag us down to the point where we will have no choice except make a commitment to fight over there.
Also I keep hearing Pelosi saying we have been in Iraq as long as we have been in WW2, she is lying. We have been in Iraq as an occupational force for how long? 3 years, short time and we are no longer fighting the Iraqi government, which in WW2 we fought the German government from 12/41 to 5/45. Our occupation in Europe started in 1944 and ended in ah, 1989 with the fall of Soviet Union (that is 45 years). Occupying Germany was from 1945 to 1949 when they got the government together (see it took 4 years just to get a government together with Germans who are not dumb people) and we stayed there as an occupation force through 1952.
>Thank you Pilgram, but so many believe that PEACE IS
>POSSIBLE with reasoning. Reasoning after you, your
>children, are all with a bullet to the back of your head or
>better yet just cut off your heads.
>
>The Radical Factions are not to be ever trusted or taken
>lightly, they will kill you the first chance they can and
>they are trying very hard every single day.
You're right Broompilot . We are the infidels and must be destroyed . I read in "USA Today " about Washington trying that "hearts and minds " stuff with Islamics . Waste of time . The radical thinking cannot be changed , especially when we are invaders in their country .
>POSSIBLE with reasoning. Reasoning after you, your
>children, are all with a bullet to the back of your head or
>better yet just cut off your heads.
>
>The Radical Factions are not to be ever trusted or taken
>lightly, they will kill you the first chance they can and
>they are trying very hard every single day.
You're right Broompilot . We are the infidels and must be destroyed . I read in "USA Today " about Washington trying that "hearts and minds " stuff with Islamics . Waste of time . The radical thinking cannot be changed , especially when we are invaders in their country .
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
Frankly, I don't think we're trying to win the hearts and minds of this generation, as much as the next.
"If I claim to be a wise man, it surely means that I don't know." - Kansas
"If I claim to be a wise man, it surely means that I don't know." - Kansas
tallcal101
Veteran Expediter
Greg,your missing the main point here.Your observations are all well thought out and logical.Here's the problem.
We Americans have been spoon fed pablim by this government for 4 years now."Don't worry folks,we know what we were doing"."We have a plan and the boots on the ground are who I listen too".
Any others were dismissed as "not in step with the big picture."We have wasted more billions(Read "Blood Money)on projects that never got completed then the entire Viet Nam war cost!!Police staions that fall down,water purification plants that don't purify anything(but do launder money,lots of money).If W had listened to the experts 4 yeras ago,we would be done with this mess,and fighting the real terroists.
It does not matter what Nany Palosi thinks,or Ted Kennedy,or any of them.The nation said enough is enough!!
Thats the problem with your argument,it no longer matters,the people have had it.They have heard enough.Now we are back to square one,with a wing and a prayer and a very divided country.
It's up to the Iraq's and their neighbors to sort it out,we are the invaders,and our time to back off is long overdue.We can't change anything for the better with 20,000,30,000 or 100,000 more troops.
We can however,admit our short comings,build a coaliton(not a flimsy coalition like the one that never really existed)and get all parties to begain to talk.If we never try it,who's to say it won't work.We sure as he** know what won't work.Or then again, we can take one of our fellow posters advise drop an A Bomb!!
We Americans have been spoon fed pablim by this government for 4 years now."Don't worry folks,we know what we were doing"."We have a plan and the boots on the ground are who I listen too".
Any others were dismissed as "not in step with the big picture."We have wasted more billions(Read "Blood Money)on projects that never got completed then the entire Viet Nam war cost!!Police staions that fall down,water purification plants that don't purify anything(but do launder money,lots of money).If W had listened to the experts 4 yeras ago,we would be done with this mess,and fighting the real terroists.
It does not matter what Nany Palosi thinks,or Ted Kennedy,or any of them.The nation said enough is enough!!
Thats the problem with your argument,it no longer matters,the people have had it.They have heard enough.Now we are back to square one,with a wing and a prayer and a very divided country.
It's up to the Iraq's and their neighbors to sort it out,we are the invaders,and our time to back off is long overdue.We can't change anything for the better with 20,000,30,000 or 100,000 more troops.
We can however,admit our short comings,build a coaliton(not a flimsy coalition like the one that never really existed)and get all parties to begain to talk.If we never try it,who's to say it won't work.We sure as he** know what won't work.Or then again, we can take one of our fellow posters advise drop an A Bomb!!
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Tallcal, I don’t agree with you, but thanks for the compliment.
I just don’t agree that the public has been fed anything; the media is very left and very controlling of the messages to the public, filtering a lot of facts. Herr Dr. Goebbels would be proud of them with their ability to use polls to shape the opinion results that they want.
Look it is simple, the country is not divided – we are not on the brink of civil war over a war that most of the country does not seem to feel is important. I have yet to see any of the demonstrations, the marches or the rhetoric from common people like in Vietnam. Remember that? I do see occasionally Sheehan mouthing off about this or that (pretty good that she interrupted the Dems meeting – see that?) or hearing about her travels to see her friend Chaves or Castro but outside of that where is the real demonstrations?
Truth is we go along our daily routine without the concern of a terrorist attack, what happened in Baghdad today or what the Ayatollah has predicted for the US in the up coming 2008 election (maybe he will sneak over the border with some Mexicans and register to vote). We are more concern with our pocket book, the latest dirt on Britney, Oprah and Paris than we are with politics or Iraq. With the media only focusing on the negative of Iraq and ignoring the troops themselves with positive things they are doing, all we get is we are divided because of the results of the polls. The sad fact is that we live in a make believe world where terrorism didn’t happen on 9/11 but it is a subject in a history book. It is like we watch as Paris burns and no one understands why or really cares.
The people got fed up with the republicans walking away from their promises, this is the real reason for the change. They got fed up with the politics and the cr*p that has gone on without a veto for so long and all the negativity that came 6 months before the election. I know that many people did not vote the Iraq war as Nancy and Harry has claimed, but rather the invaders, Social Security and to move the country ahead with DOMESTIC ISSUES.
Now you are a traveled man, you know what it is like in places like east Africa, some parts of Asia and South America, so I assume you understand that some cultures and traditions don’t change over night or sometime never. I mean that the Arabs, not only Iraqis but all of them come from a rich background where their religion has been the dominating force behind their past successes. To expect them to respect us after what happened with Carter who ran from Iran instead of standing his ground and fighting for our country is somewhat like expecting Bin Laden to book a flight to Washington to surrender. See Carter pulled the support from the Shah and started to dismantle the intelligence gathering in that region, this is why we have had so many problems with terrorist.
I said this before and will say it again they respect power and if you show weakness, they will destroy weakness. Carter was a very weak leader and a disgusting person.
See Tallcal, if we leave we will lose in the long run because it strengthen their resolve and gives them the propaganda that is needed to bring it to our shores and kill us here. The cr*p about the increase in recruitment is all propaganda and our media portrays the terrorist as winning but they are not. (Which I will bring up another point; are they Americans first or reporters first? If they are reporters first, then we need to treat them as they support terrorism.) The problem is that there are only a finite number of people who are willing to kill themselves over a cause, albeit an unworthy cause and these numbers are actually dwindling because they are killing themselves off – you can only blow yourself up once after that well you get the picture. As the Iraqi I talked to regularly said it is going to be harder for the terrorist to find people because people like the stuff the Americans have brought, cell phones, iPods, DVDs, Mercedes etc.. and especially the freedoms that we have brought, they no longer worry about the possibility of being dragged off in the middle of the night, or have their wife, daughter or son just disappear – never to be heard of again.
As for a coalition, well I am not all for the UN solutions for ‘all the world’s problems’, they still haven’t stopped the killing in Africa after ah… 45 years, how would you expect a group of countries to go in and solve a problem under corrupt leadership? There is a need for one leading and in the case of Iraq, we already have 27 countries involved in one form or another with us leading the way, most of which is never ever reported by our media. Some have removed their troops while others have been steadfast in maintaining some presents in Iraq. The funny thing is that Mongolia, Bosnia and Fiji all have some presents there with Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan too. What you should be concerned is not Iraq but with the dismantling of NATO and how that multinational military organization has live far beyond its need.
I do agree that the nuclear option with Iran is viable solution and may be the only solution if they arm themselves with like weapons. Their real target right now is Israel and I can bet you a dozen doughnuts (or a pound of bacon if you understand the joke) that Israel will not hesitate to wipe Iran off the face of the earth if they try to launch a nuke their way. I think that Iran, Syria and Palestine will cease to exist in one day and no one will do a thing about it. But again the peace at any price crowd may go over there and become human shields so it maybe a good idea to dust them off.
Oh by the way, Keith Ellison, whom grew up in Detroit is not a Muslim, he is a Nation of Islam convert and follower and his leader is Louis Farrakhan. Now you may not know much about Farrakhan if anything, so I would suggest you all hit Google and read up about him, pretty nice and worldly guy. I saw him once when I worked as a sound engineer a long time ago, the company did the sound recordings for him; I have never ever seen a more … well not to insult and NoI followers here, just read his speeches.
I just don’t agree that the public has been fed anything; the media is very left and very controlling of the messages to the public, filtering a lot of facts. Herr Dr. Goebbels would be proud of them with their ability to use polls to shape the opinion results that they want.
Look it is simple, the country is not divided – we are not on the brink of civil war over a war that most of the country does not seem to feel is important. I have yet to see any of the demonstrations, the marches or the rhetoric from common people like in Vietnam. Remember that? I do see occasionally Sheehan mouthing off about this or that (pretty good that she interrupted the Dems meeting – see that?) or hearing about her travels to see her friend Chaves or Castro but outside of that where is the real demonstrations?
Truth is we go along our daily routine without the concern of a terrorist attack, what happened in Baghdad today or what the Ayatollah has predicted for the US in the up coming 2008 election (maybe he will sneak over the border with some Mexicans and register to vote). We are more concern with our pocket book, the latest dirt on Britney, Oprah and Paris than we are with politics or Iraq. With the media only focusing on the negative of Iraq and ignoring the troops themselves with positive things they are doing, all we get is we are divided because of the results of the polls. The sad fact is that we live in a make believe world where terrorism didn’t happen on 9/11 but it is a subject in a history book. It is like we watch as Paris burns and no one understands why or really cares.
The people got fed up with the republicans walking away from their promises, this is the real reason for the change. They got fed up with the politics and the cr*p that has gone on without a veto for so long and all the negativity that came 6 months before the election. I know that many people did not vote the Iraq war as Nancy and Harry has claimed, but rather the invaders, Social Security and to move the country ahead with DOMESTIC ISSUES.
Now you are a traveled man, you know what it is like in places like east Africa, some parts of Asia and South America, so I assume you understand that some cultures and traditions don’t change over night or sometime never. I mean that the Arabs, not only Iraqis but all of them come from a rich background where their religion has been the dominating force behind their past successes. To expect them to respect us after what happened with Carter who ran from Iran instead of standing his ground and fighting for our country is somewhat like expecting Bin Laden to book a flight to Washington to surrender. See Carter pulled the support from the Shah and started to dismantle the intelligence gathering in that region, this is why we have had so many problems with terrorist.
I said this before and will say it again they respect power and if you show weakness, they will destroy weakness. Carter was a very weak leader and a disgusting person.
See Tallcal, if we leave we will lose in the long run because it strengthen their resolve and gives them the propaganda that is needed to bring it to our shores and kill us here. The cr*p about the increase in recruitment is all propaganda and our media portrays the terrorist as winning but they are not. (Which I will bring up another point; are they Americans first or reporters first? If they are reporters first, then we need to treat them as they support terrorism.) The problem is that there are only a finite number of people who are willing to kill themselves over a cause, albeit an unworthy cause and these numbers are actually dwindling because they are killing themselves off – you can only blow yourself up once after that well you get the picture. As the Iraqi I talked to regularly said it is going to be harder for the terrorist to find people because people like the stuff the Americans have brought, cell phones, iPods, DVDs, Mercedes etc.. and especially the freedoms that we have brought, they no longer worry about the possibility of being dragged off in the middle of the night, or have their wife, daughter or son just disappear – never to be heard of again.
As for a coalition, well I am not all for the UN solutions for ‘all the world’s problems’, they still haven’t stopped the killing in Africa after ah… 45 years, how would you expect a group of countries to go in and solve a problem under corrupt leadership? There is a need for one leading and in the case of Iraq, we already have 27 countries involved in one form or another with us leading the way, most of which is never ever reported by our media. Some have removed their troops while others have been steadfast in maintaining some presents in Iraq. The funny thing is that Mongolia, Bosnia and Fiji all have some presents there with Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan too. What you should be concerned is not Iraq but with the dismantling of NATO and how that multinational military organization has live far beyond its need.
I do agree that the nuclear option with Iran is viable solution and may be the only solution if they arm themselves with like weapons. Their real target right now is Israel and I can bet you a dozen doughnuts (or a pound of bacon if you understand the joke) that Israel will not hesitate to wipe Iran off the face of the earth if they try to launch a nuke their way. I think that Iran, Syria and Palestine will cease to exist in one day and no one will do a thing about it. But again the peace at any price crowd may go over there and become human shields so it maybe a good idea to dust them off.
Oh by the way, Keith Ellison, whom grew up in Detroit is not a Muslim, he is a Nation of Islam convert and follower and his leader is Louis Farrakhan. Now you may not know much about Farrakhan if anything, so I would suggest you all hit Google and read up about him, pretty nice and worldly guy. I saw him once when I worked as a sound engineer a long time ago, the company did the sound recordings for him; I have never ever seen a more … well not to insult and NoI followers here, just read his speeches.
tallcal101
Veteran Expediter
Greg,you lose credibilty when you state about Carter"and he is just a disgusting man".I know you have no love for Martin Luther King Jr either,I dare you to call him disgusting,come on big boy,step up!!
It's our day of remeberance for a great American.Are you in mourning?Or is it a little to "toucy"to speak your mind on a black leader on his Birthday.I dare you to use the "D" word Greg,let's see what your made of.
It's our day of remeberance for a great American.Are you in mourning?Or is it a little to "toucy"to speak your mind on a black leader on his Birthday.I dare you to use the "D" word Greg,let's see what your made of.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
>Greg,you lose credibilty when you state about Carter"and he
>is just a disgusting man".I know you have no love for Martin
>Luther King Jr either,I dare you to call him disgusting,come
>on big boy,step up!!
>It's our day of remeberance for a great American.Are you in
>mourning?Or is it a little to "toucy"to speak your mind on a
>black leader on his Birthday.I dare you to use the "D" word
>Greg,let's see what your made of.
Well actually I could not reply because I was making money and just fond this.
OK TallCal, you must be a big Carter fan? Have carter family peanuts in the bowl on the coffee table? No I didn't lose any credibility with my statements, the truth is carter is somewhat a rather old man who craves attention.
Carter is a disgusting old man who has never been the statesman everyone claims to be and speaks with contempt for the office of the president and the sitting president. I found it really amusing that the great president clinton did not first seek the advice of the last democrat president but rather the guy he beat, Bush sr. and Reagan. Clinton finally went to see carter when carter cried about it in the press.
I can not think that Rev. ML King would have sold out his country as Carter did. I also think that Rev. ML King would have been in the position to support a just cause for freedom in the world. (Please dont try to have me expand on freedom in the world, it has a lot more to do with the world than Iraq.)
As for being a fan or not, I am fan of MLK in the sense of his original message (you should read all the stuff he wrote) and the equality he was fighting for but I am a fan of a lot of others who impacted history like the Ghandi. I have been to his church and even the other spots that he had something to do with.
With that said, I do not believe in any way, shape or form in today's society that we should make an exception to the 'seperation of church and state' rulings, the pain and discrimination made over one man, no matter how great he may have been. I mean that he was a man of God first, he was an ordain minister long before he achieving his doctorate and even his grave inscription says "Rev Martin Luther King" not "Dr. Martin Luther King" and he conducted his fight from his church, not a bunker in Atlanta.
Celebrating one's life by words and symbolism instead of the action is really sad. Look around, is everyone actually better since he is gone? I don't think so. I hear people like Cosby critisizing people for thier lack of concern and action with the youth of today, just like MLK. Look at the civil rights movement now, the action that he created, the momentum that was moving it forward and the positive changes that were being made all went away and what leadership you have are sell outs; now we are more concern with a holiday, money and a monument in Washington to a person who would rather have equality instead of all that other stuff - sad.
>is just a disgusting man".I know you have no love for Martin
>Luther King Jr either,I dare you to call him disgusting,come
>on big boy,step up!!
>It's our day of remeberance for a great American.Are you in
>mourning?Or is it a little to "toucy"to speak your mind on a
>black leader on his Birthday.I dare you to use the "D" word
>Greg,let's see what your made of.
Well actually I could not reply because I was making money and just fond this.
OK TallCal, you must be a big Carter fan? Have carter family peanuts in the bowl on the coffee table? No I didn't lose any credibility with my statements, the truth is carter is somewhat a rather old man who craves attention.
Carter is a disgusting old man who has never been the statesman everyone claims to be and speaks with contempt for the office of the president and the sitting president. I found it really amusing that the great president clinton did not first seek the advice of the last democrat president but rather the guy he beat, Bush sr. and Reagan. Clinton finally went to see carter when carter cried about it in the press.
I can not think that Rev. ML King would have sold out his country as Carter did. I also think that Rev. ML King would have been in the position to support a just cause for freedom in the world. (Please dont try to have me expand on freedom in the world, it has a lot more to do with the world than Iraq.)
As for being a fan or not, I am fan of MLK in the sense of his original message (you should read all the stuff he wrote) and the equality he was fighting for but I am a fan of a lot of others who impacted history like the Ghandi. I have been to his church and even the other spots that he had something to do with.
With that said, I do not believe in any way, shape or form in today's society that we should make an exception to the 'seperation of church and state' rulings, the pain and discrimination made over one man, no matter how great he may have been. I mean that he was a man of God first, he was an ordain minister long before he achieving his doctorate and even his grave inscription says "Rev Martin Luther King" not "Dr. Martin Luther King" and he conducted his fight from his church, not a bunker in Atlanta.
Celebrating one's life by words and symbolism instead of the action is really sad. Look around, is everyone actually better since he is gone? I don't think so. I hear people like Cosby critisizing people for thier lack of concern and action with the youth of today, just like MLK. Look at the civil rights movement now, the action that he created, the momentum that was moving it forward and the positive changes that were being made all went away and what leadership you have are sell outs; now we are more concern with a holiday, money and a monument in Washington to a person who would rather have equality instead of all that other stuff - sad.
Black Sheep
Expert Expediter
A strong case could be made for Jimmy Carter being the most incompetent president in the history of the Republic. In addition to what Greg has said, this guy was a failure in almost every phase of the administration of the country. His domestic and economic policies were complete disasters - how many of us are old enough to remember the "Misery Index"? Double-digit inflation, interest rates and unemployment rates. Foreign policy - Carter and his stooge Warren Christopher were the laughing stock of the world. As previously stated, they abandoned Iran when it was a modern and westernized society, thus allowing the Ayatollah Khomeni to return from exile in Paris and re-introduce radical fundamental Islam beliefs and Sharia law to govern the country. This was the beginning of today's terrorism. In addition, Carter gave away the Panama Canal when the Panamanians were in no condition to administrate the operation of this hugely important waterway. So guess who they contract to operate it now? The Chinese, of all people. Carter also emasculated the Military and drastically cut the budgets our other security agencies, leaving Reagan to rebuild our defenses and clean up his mess. The sad thing today is that the media continue to take this guy seriously when his bitter partisan rants should just be ignored.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
But the most important debacle outside of creating the department of education for Carter was the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, something that we need to eliminate and move back to the original intent of the CIA, to gather and analyis information by any means from foreign countries.
I wish he would just stick to building houses.
I wish he would just stick to building houses.
tallcal101
Veteran Expediter
I'm much relieved Greg that words like disgusting are reserved for white peanut farmers who the people(not the supreme court)decided was a decent enough man to be President.After the lies of Nixon,it was uncertain if any individual who sought higher office could ever be trusted.Carter restored our trust,and our faith.We won back world respect after the trickster
We are once again the laughing stock of the western,and eastern worlds,by again having a baffon leading our nation.In times like this,Carter looks pretty da**d good,decent,and honest.
I think you slinked out of my observation quite well,and frankly you have to much class to actually call Dr. King disgusting.But that does not change my point,you have a double standard.I won't press you on this though.
I have called w many things,but I leave disgusting for bad Chinese food.It's a pretty low blow for guy who contiues to NOT show up for photo op's,but actually contributes in many ways to making our country strong.I never saw ronny raygun out helping build homes for the less advantaged when he retired,or taking a hands on approach to aids in Africa(I know Greg,who's cares about aids in some distiant land).
I will reserve disgusting for bad Chinese,I understand you will be using it to attack gentlemen from the South.Watch out Ark,you maybe yesterdays noodles with dumplings if your not careful!
We are once again the laughing stock of the western,and eastern worlds,by again having a baffon leading our nation.In times like this,Carter looks pretty da**d good,decent,and honest.
I think you slinked out of my observation quite well,and frankly you have to much class to actually call Dr. King disgusting.But that does not change my point,you have a double standard.I won't press you on this though.
I have called w many things,but I leave disgusting for bad Chinese food.It's a pretty low blow for guy who contiues to NOT show up for photo op's,but actually contributes in many ways to making our country strong.I never saw ronny raygun out helping build homes for the less advantaged when he retired,or taking a hands on approach to aids in Africa(I know Greg,who's cares about aids in some distiant land).
I will reserve disgusting for bad Chinese,I understand you will be using it to attack gentlemen from the South.Watch out Ark,you maybe yesterdays noodles with dumplings if your not careful!
greg334
Veteran Expediter
TallCal, not to insult you in any way and I say this with the utmost respect but you are hilarious, you make my day.
Ok first I am trying to figure out the double standard thing and decipher the post. But anyway, let’s see…..
Slinked, interesting word. Should I be upset about using a word that means;
1 : to go or move stealthily or furtively (as in fear or shame)
2 : to move in a sinuous provocative manner
Hum……
Well……
……I won’t because I know what you meant, and really I am laughing about it because you know deep down in your soul I am right.
And it is Rev King.
Here we are talking about a former president who for all intent and purpose had destabilized the Middle East with inaction and with great disregard to the country’s future. He single handedly made us weaker, we lost our credibility on the world stage and gutted the military. He is by no means a true diplomat and even today with news that he helped former NAZIs didn’t shock me at all and is clearly more anti-Semitic than Mel Gibson ever dreamed of, I can not see why anyone even considers him a worthy person to be honored by the words Former President Carter.
At one time I knew an appointee of Carter’s, I won’t mention his name but he was an ambassador to Italy or France (don’t remember) during the Carter administration. He was not all too happy with the way Carter conducted himself when dealing with the other world leaders because Carter always gave in on things or gave up too easily when trying to negotiate. He said that Carter was not respected by many and it reflected on the way he and his peers were treated.
Outside of my jabs at Carter, truthfully I can’t find any other word to describe how I and a lot of others feel about him. I mean that he should not criticize a sitting president unless they have done the country a lot of harm, which outside of the invaders issue and not killing more terrorist, we don’t have the divided country that many claim and we are not on the brink of civil war. But Carter has sided with Hamas and other terrorist organizations, written a book that I just got but been told there are a lot of lies in it and has been a big critic of the country, not just the administration. To me this is a disgusting old man who craves the spot light. Gentleman? Yea right.
Now the issue of the Supreme Court electing the president let me tell you that you need to read about Kelo vs. New London before you try to use that argument. It absolutely amazes me that the election is still something that needs to be brought up when defending a loss of two substandard politicians. Kelo is the most important issue that the liberal Supreme Court gave us and no one seems to care. Oh yea that’s right, it is a twisted decision that allows the mean old big Pharma company (read the entire history of the case) to take the land from the poor old retired people who’s family has own it since before the founding of the country and give the land to developers so they can make millions. A liberal cause? Well defining it the Pelosi way, yes it is!
Ok Africa, let me tie this together with carter.
Many of the problems in Africa are due to radical Muslim fanatics, much out of Egypt and the Middle East. Mind you that there are problems with Morocco and a separatist movement which is also due to radical Muslim fanatics and they sometimes filter through the problems areas too.
One of the issues at hand and some of it has been taken care of by of all countries Ethiopia, is the take over of villages and towns by Al-Qaeda and a lesser known group Takfir wal-Hijra in Somalia and other areas of eastern Africa. Recently Ethiopia attacked and weaken them in Somalia but Kenya was not happy with some of the attacks on their soil. Well anyway some of the problems with Africa are due to the fact the terrorist are becoming entrenched in villages and towns and the UN, US or any other nation can not just go in there and provide aid to the needy. One of the biggest issues we had when I was there was who to bribe and how much but now these fanatics don’t care about money, material things or anything other than raw power at the end of a knife or gun. Killing by aids, starvation or a bullet seems to be a thing they all like.
Now what does this have to do with Carter? Well he weaken the aid and help going to Africa and made it clear because of the Iran situation the US will not intervene in Africa. Once the administration policies were set, the Iranian fundamentalist movement went unchecked and grew which spilled over into Africa. We don’t hear about the Muslims in Africa with the killings and cleansings going on, but it is happening. What we hear is about the 34,000 Iraqis killed mostly by terrorist but we don’t hear about villages being leveled, the men being shot on sight, the women are hauled off to be slaves and the children shot if they are too young or drafted if they are just the right age – do we?
When you are on the ground and see things up close and personal, you can understand that we, the US is trying to solve a problem that no one else seems to care about. I mean that Bono and his photo grabbing bunch of idiots and the UN have yet to really make an impact and all turn to us, the US to say we are not doing enough when we are but not throwing money at a problem where there needs to have a change in ideals. Make sense?
Ok first I am trying to figure out the double standard thing and decipher the post. But anyway, let’s see…..
Slinked, interesting word. Should I be upset about using a word that means;
1 : to go or move stealthily or furtively (as in fear or shame)
2 : to move in a sinuous provocative manner
Hum……
Well……
……I won’t because I know what you meant, and really I am laughing about it because you know deep down in your soul I am right.
And it is Rev King.
Here we are talking about a former president who for all intent and purpose had destabilized the Middle East with inaction and with great disregard to the country’s future. He single handedly made us weaker, we lost our credibility on the world stage and gutted the military. He is by no means a true diplomat and even today with news that he helped former NAZIs didn’t shock me at all and is clearly more anti-Semitic than Mel Gibson ever dreamed of, I can not see why anyone even considers him a worthy person to be honored by the words Former President Carter.
At one time I knew an appointee of Carter’s, I won’t mention his name but he was an ambassador to Italy or France (don’t remember) during the Carter administration. He was not all too happy with the way Carter conducted himself when dealing with the other world leaders because Carter always gave in on things or gave up too easily when trying to negotiate. He said that Carter was not respected by many and it reflected on the way he and his peers were treated.
Outside of my jabs at Carter, truthfully I can’t find any other word to describe how I and a lot of others feel about him. I mean that he should not criticize a sitting president unless they have done the country a lot of harm, which outside of the invaders issue and not killing more terrorist, we don’t have the divided country that many claim and we are not on the brink of civil war. But Carter has sided with Hamas and other terrorist organizations, written a book that I just got but been told there are a lot of lies in it and has been a big critic of the country, not just the administration. To me this is a disgusting old man who craves the spot light. Gentleman? Yea right.
Now the issue of the Supreme Court electing the president let me tell you that you need to read about Kelo vs. New London before you try to use that argument. It absolutely amazes me that the election is still something that needs to be brought up when defending a loss of two substandard politicians. Kelo is the most important issue that the liberal Supreme Court gave us and no one seems to care. Oh yea that’s right, it is a twisted decision that allows the mean old big Pharma company (read the entire history of the case) to take the land from the poor old retired people who’s family has own it since before the founding of the country and give the land to developers so they can make millions. A liberal cause? Well defining it the Pelosi way, yes it is!
Ok Africa, let me tie this together with carter.
Many of the problems in Africa are due to radical Muslim fanatics, much out of Egypt and the Middle East. Mind you that there are problems with Morocco and a separatist movement which is also due to radical Muslim fanatics and they sometimes filter through the problems areas too.
One of the issues at hand and some of it has been taken care of by of all countries Ethiopia, is the take over of villages and towns by Al-Qaeda and a lesser known group Takfir wal-Hijra in Somalia and other areas of eastern Africa. Recently Ethiopia attacked and weaken them in Somalia but Kenya was not happy with some of the attacks on their soil. Well anyway some of the problems with Africa are due to the fact the terrorist are becoming entrenched in villages and towns and the UN, US or any other nation can not just go in there and provide aid to the needy. One of the biggest issues we had when I was there was who to bribe and how much but now these fanatics don’t care about money, material things or anything other than raw power at the end of a knife or gun. Killing by aids, starvation or a bullet seems to be a thing they all like.
Now what does this have to do with Carter? Well he weaken the aid and help going to Africa and made it clear because of the Iran situation the US will not intervene in Africa. Once the administration policies were set, the Iranian fundamentalist movement went unchecked and grew which spilled over into Africa. We don’t hear about the Muslims in Africa with the killings and cleansings going on, but it is happening. What we hear is about the 34,000 Iraqis killed mostly by terrorist but we don’t hear about villages being leveled, the men being shot on sight, the women are hauled off to be slaves and the children shot if they are too young or drafted if they are just the right age – do we?
When you are on the ground and see things up close and personal, you can understand that we, the US is trying to solve a problem that no one else seems to care about. I mean that Bono and his photo grabbing bunch of idiots and the UN have yet to really make an impact and all turn to us, the US to say we are not doing enough when we are but not throwing money at a problem where there needs to have a change in ideals. Make sense?
Your right Talcal, Ronny Raygun didn't help build houses for disadvantaged people. All he did was set in motion a healthy economy that gave those people a chance to support themselves. Certainly a more dignified way to get the things in life a person needs. A hands on approach to AIDS? What should he have done, go over there, or here for that matter, and grab people who are about to make a poor behavioral choice? Just imagine if 25 years ago, at risk people would have changed their behavior. AIDS wouldn't be the crisis it is today. It is sad, the toll that this virus takes. Especially when it is so easy to avoid it.
tallcal101
Veteran Expediter
It's very simple Greg,your dancing like a cat on a hot tin roof.Please tell me again why you won't use the word disgusting in describing Dr. King and you will for the peanut farmer that happens to be a white guy.I don't need a history of the world,just an honest,short answer that we can all understand.Actually,I have heard from several members of our little club who would like an answer as well.
One other thing,for a guy driving a truck,it seems you have had more jobs then any of us can fathom!!How many jobs have you had anyway?I'm asking because you profess so many fields of expertise based on your varried and colorful work history ,at things other then driving a truck. You've been a busy guy!
No disrespect intended.
One other thing,for a guy driving a truck,it seems you have had more jobs then any of us can fathom!!How many jobs have you had anyway?I'm asking because you profess so many fields of expertise based on your varried and colorful work history ,at things other then driving a truck. You've been a busy guy!
No disrespect intended.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Simple answer?
OK, I won’t and can’t because it is not applicable.
The word I use describing carter fits him, regardless of his race, which you seem to bring up for some odd reason. (oh that’s right, it’s a liberal thing)
But tall, there are other words maybe I should use instead of or in addition to the word disgusting;
Sedition – promoting disloyalty
Disaffection – loss of allegiance to U.S.
Treason – allegiance to the enemy
All these words apply to Carter (which is derived from his comments, speeches, articles, Op-eds and books) as they do to a few senators and congressmen. So maybe you can come up with some defense for this guy and the others.
As for Rev. King, he at least believed in a cause, was consistent in his message and believed in America can create positive change for all. The disgust I have is knowing that the movement that he was a part of has not lived up to anything he wanted, not with the man himself. But again people will say this is racist and that is what I think you are driving at.
As for jobs and such, well I guess I will stop mentioning what I have done and just drive my truck.
If you find it hard to believe that someone can meet a lot of people, have access to many more and experienced a lot more than what is considered normal, well look around, many of us are all around.
Oh I just thought of this, you have been on the defensive since I made the Keith Ellison comments. Ok you must be a follower of Louis Farrakhan, yep that must be it. And I see you maybe wondering about the sound engineer thing; yes I control the board and was called a sound engineer when I worked at that company one summer. That job lasted less than 6 months when they all of a sudden could not pay any of us but got new cars. Lets see if a lot of my jobs lasted from 6 to 18 months, how many jobs would you have for 25 years?
You’re still funny.
OK, I won’t and can’t because it is not applicable.
The word I use describing carter fits him, regardless of his race, which you seem to bring up for some odd reason. (oh that’s right, it’s a liberal thing)
But tall, there are other words maybe I should use instead of or in addition to the word disgusting;
Sedition – promoting disloyalty
Disaffection – loss of allegiance to U.S.
Treason – allegiance to the enemy
All these words apply to Carter (which is derived from his comments, speeches, articles, Op-eds and books) as they do to a few senators and congressmen. So maybe you can come up with some defense for this guy and the others.
As for Rev. King, he at least believed in a cause, was consistent in his message and believed in America can create positive change for all. The disgust I have is knowing that the movement that he was a part of has not lived up to anything he wanted, not with the man himself. But again people will say this is racist and that is what I think you are driving at.
As for jobs and such, well I guess I will stop mentioning what I have done and just drive my truck.
If you find it hard to believe that someone can meet a lot of people, have access to many more and experienced a lot more than what is considered normal, well look around, many of us are all around.
Oh I just thought of this, you have been on the defensive since I made the Keith Ellison comments. Ok you must be a follower of Louis Farrakhan, yep that must be it. And I see you maybe wondering about the sound engineer thing; yes I control the board and was called a sound engineer when I worked at that company one summer. That job lasted less than 6 months when they all of a sudden could not pay any of us but got new cars. Lets see if a lot of my jobs lasted from 6 to 18 months, how many jobs would you have for 25 years?
You’re still funny.
tallcal101
Veteran Expediter
Race relations is not a liberal thing.There were just as many Democrates(Dixiecrats))attending and participating in lynching's as there were Republicans.It's not a "liberal"thing.I'm sure your comments about Obama have not a hint or a trace of color.Just those old demo's promoting women and blacks,what else is new.
THEY MAYBE THE BEST OUR COUNRTY HAS TO OFFER!!!
If 4 more years of bozo is what you want,backed up by another do nothing congress that worked three days a week and stole our money to go on golfing vacations,then vote for your conservative friends.
I think America has woken up from the bad dream named W,and with the loss of the war in Iraq(it's already lost,but W won't accept it)the American people will vote for the best canidate,and it is very doubtful it will be anyone the Republicans will have to offer.He**,you can't tell most of the ranking Republicans from their friends on the other side of the aisle!!
THEY MAYBE THE BEST OUR COUNRTY HAS TO OFFER!!!
If 4 more years of bozo is what you want,backed up by another do nothing congress that worked three days a week and stole our money to go on golfing vacations,then vote for your conservative friends.
I think America has woken up from the bad dream named W,and with the loss of the war in Iraq(it's already lost,but W won't accept it)the American people will vote for the best canidate,and it is very doubtful it will be anyone the Republicans will have to offer.He**,you can't tell most of the ranking Republicans from their friends on the other side of the aisle!!