Here are some guys u may have known
- Thread starter skyraider
- Start date
"So nice of you to take the high road, O'self-absorbed one," he said as he looked up from the rain-soaked low road.
"No... you aren't a whining hypocrite. You're just a conceited punk," he said as he slipped in the mud and fell into the gutter.
"No... you aren't a whining hypocrite. You're just a conceited punk," he said as he slipped in the mud and fell into the gutter.
Dakota
Veteran Expediter
Don't make promises you can't keep ;oPCrap... I need to stop posting then.
Posted with my Droid EO Forum App
If that were true, then POTUS and the Democrats are about to fix that problem by taxing the evil rich and their corporations. When all their dastardly profits are confiscated by the govt, they'll quit making bombs and the problem/mission will go away. No doubt the Iranians and Al Quaeda will go back to minding their own business, peace will break out in Iraq and Afghanistan and voila! - our terrorism problem evaporates right before our eyes.
Yeah right - keep on believing that. The Mexican border is a different problem, and could be solved if we would just enforce the existing laws on our books. Barack Hussein Obama and his so-called Justice Dept. is not only ignoring them, but also preventing the states from enforcing them.
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
If that were true, then POTUS and the Democrats are about to fix that problem by taxing the evil rich and their corporations. When all their dastardly profits are confiscated by the govt, they'll quit making bombs and the problem/mission will go away. No doubt the Iranians and Al Quaeda will go back to minding their own business, peace will break out in Iraq and Afghanistan and voila! - our terrorism problem evaporates right before our eyes.
Yeah right - keep on believing that. The Mexican border is a different problem, and could be solved if we would just enforce the existing laws on our books. Barack Hussein Obama and his so-called Justice Dept. is not only ignoring them, but also preventing the states from enforcing them.
Now why would Congress tax the defense industry? Most of them have stock in defense. In fact, some call it insider trading, as they know before it's announced who will get what contract. It's one of the major reasons I went from being a supporter to being pizzed off. How can these warmongers sleep at night knowing their stock is going up because they're sending kids to their deaths? They're getting rich off of corpses, essentially... theirs and ours. I might be more inclined to believe their hypocrisy if certain senators' family weren't in the defense contracting business. Here that, Feinstein and Reid? They were raking Halliburton over the coals, while they owned stock in them. What a hoot!
I know there is no appeasing hardcore Muslims. But what do you suggest? Keep our forces there forever? That's how long it will take before they start singing the Star-spangled Banner. We don't need to be in Afganistan. We've done all we could in Iraq. Let their governments deal with Al Queada, and threaten to level them if they let the terrorists gain ground.
I know we need to enforce our existing laws. However, like I said, if they were serious about national security... it starts at home, on one's property line. It comes down to... invade us... die.
witness23
Veteran Expediter
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, you aroused my curiosity about this subject so naturally a little Googling was in order. Really - when you or anyone else makes a broad accusation like this, a source or two might be in order just so the rest of us can educate ourselves. But anyway, here's a partial list of sinners:
• Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) $3,001,006 to $5,015,001
• Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) $250,001 to $500,000
• Rep. Kenny Ewell Marchant (R-Tex.) $162,074 to $162,074
• Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) $115,002 to $300,000
• Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.) $115,002 to $300,000
• Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.) $100,870 to $100,870
• Rep. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) $65,646 to $65,646
• Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) $50,008 to $227,000
• Rep. Sam Farr (D-Calif.) $50,001 to $100,000
• Rep. Stephen Ira Cohen (D-Tenn.) $45,003 to $150,000
Source: 151 Congressmen Derive Financial Profit_134
According to this article, about 25% - which hardly qualifies as MOST - of our elected representatives own defense stock. Of course this figure is probably in constant flux, and these guys are likely to be short-selling considering the proposed defense cuts by Obama and the Democrats.
Keep in mind, we've still got troops in Germany, Italy and Korea.
Right now, its invade us...and hit the welfare jackpot.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Keep in mind, we've still got troops in Germany, Italy and Korea.
The question that this invokes is ... do we really need to be there now?
I would think ... nope.
If Korea wants us, they need to pay for us being there - a zero on the balance sheet is what is needed for us to justify our presences, not if someone in NK may do something that may cause them to invade SK.
The question that this invokes is ... do we really need to be there now?
I would think ... nope.
If Korea wants us, they need to pay for us being there - a zero on the balance sheet is what is needed for us to justify our presences, not if someone in NK may do something that may cause them to invade SK.
You thought it would be more appropriate that I call him that name? I wasn't even thinking it, nor would I call him that even if I was. I cannot imagine how you think it would be more appropriate.
While it is generally true that forgiveness is easier to get than permission, in this case you get neither. If you want to call someone names (especially from the peanut gallery), don't use me to do it or try to associate me with it. Just climb out of that hole and do it yourself.
BTW, do you like my new rain slicker and matching hat?
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
Got that right!
The ones that bother me are those who are members of the related subcommittees (the Armed Services Committee and the Foreign Relations Committee in the Senate, and the Defense Committee and the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies Committee in the House). It just seem icky that these people can so directly and blatantly profit from the military industrial complex to which they directly appropriate taxpayer money.
I think these committee members who own stock should have to be required to see their personal holdings in the stocks do the exact opposite of what the stock actually does. For example, if John Kerry earns $50,000 from Electric Boat, then not only should he not get the $50,000, but he should have an additional $50,000 from his personal assets appropriated and the entire $100,000 be put towards the National Debt. Won't see many committee members with defense stocks in their portfolios, that's for sure.
What in the world is a "warmonger" any way? FDR? Truman? Carter? Reagan? Bush?
Easy to toss around ridicule and call names. Funny, those who tend to do that often have zero experience in the "warmonger" field.
Elvis Presley said this much better then I ever did:
"I don't think Americans even want to know about this stuff, " Elvis said. "A lot of people back home think I'm out of my mind doin' what I'm doin'."
He is 100% correct
Most Americans DON'T want to know what is going on. They must not either, they keep voting in idiots that keep putting us into mess after mess after mess. Obama is ample proof of that.
Easy to toss around ridicule and call names. Funny, those who tend to do that often have zero experience in the "warmonger" field.
Elvis Presley said this much better then I ever did:
"I don't think Americans even want to know about this stuff, " Elvis said. "A lot of people back home think I'm out of my mind doin' what I'm doin'."
He is 100% correct
Most Americans DON'T want to know what is going on. They must not either, they keep voting in idiots that keep putting us into mess after mess after mess. Obama is ample proof of that.
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
A warmonger is one who sells war. I also use it to represent someone who profits from war; tho that would be a war profiteer. Warmonger just sounds better. LOL
You know... you expect someone like Hitler (sorry whomever didn't want Hitler used again) to be wringing his hands at the thought of going to war for personal monetary gain. And you KNOW the defense industry would. But somewhere, I think we've lost our way if our elected officials do it.
In this case, the mention of Hitler is justifiable.
I just take offense to comparing Hitler and Nazis to our president (whoever is in the office) and the U.S. govenment.
A person may disagree with the opposing party and their policys, but to compare them to Nazi's and the EVIL they represent is repugnent and insulting.
I contend that is is the other way around. The "defense" industries make what they can sell. They ALL make "peace time" things and would make more if they could. The government subsidizes them to produce the "war" stuff.
Governments in general are the cause of most of our wars. They do "stupid things" that keep getting us into these messes.
Our government has the belief that if we have a weak military that we, and the world, will be safer. Not true. Weakness breeds contempt and invites conflict.
We are now stuck with problems in places like the middle east due governments, not only ours. England is a big part of the problem in that region historically. The Soviet Union is as well.
Governments are the problem but the idea that the US is the cause is not only incorrect but getting old. We are only one part of world problems. If we suddenly became "perfect" and never made another mistake, little would change. We would STILL have enemies and be subject to attack.
One sure way to begin to put an end to this is to stabilize our defenses at a level that deters any attack. Use our military only when needed and ONLY for what it was intended for. IF we use our military in battle, finish the job. Fight to win, just as in WWII, or don't fight.
One thing is certain, isolationism is impossible and does not work.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Layout, it isn't the other way around. The defense industry does not sell what they can, they sell what the government wants to buy. They are what you would call a system that is exclusive to making things that kill people regardless what we are doing - making war or making peace.
People who are arrogant and think they can control others is the reason we have wars, our wars are caused by our stupidity, nothing more. We have fought only one legit war in the last century, and I will give T-Hawk the cold war as a legit war but it really is an extension of the second world war where it was the only time in the 20th century we had to fight an enemy that was trying to destroy our country. ALL other wars were superficially legit and because we had people die, we should never forget them for that sacrifice - soldiers and civilians alike.
NOPE people believe and I am one who feel we do not have to worry about the world but only ourselves because the rest of the world is very capable in taking care of themselves or able to pay us to do the job.
We are not stuck in anything, we choose to be there and we should demand compensation from those people where we are, like the Saudis or Iraq. If it means cheap oil, then that's good, or if it is money, that's great too but we should be paid to be there.
Both England and France have a history there, but so do the germans, the turks and the UN.
Well we will always have enemies and we have to decide to deal with them in different ways but we also have to look at what is really a national interest and what is the interest of other countries. Korea is a very good example, the only thing we suffer with NK invading SK is economical impact, we are not being invaded and NK can not attack us, so if SK wants us there, pay us.
I think this is a good idea but fight like we did in WW2 ... maybe we need to qualify who is strong enough to actually cause us to fight like that - I see two countries, Russia and China.
Well pulling out of NATO, pulling out of the UN peace keeping missions, pulling our troops out of the countries we are in, getting rid of the exclusive bases in Japan and SK - is not isolationism, it is realistic economics in a modern world.