You may see her as Sec of Def...Redbrickbear said:Realitybites said:whiterock said:
RDS had a good night. Haley getting exposed for her softness on social issues.
RDS proving himself to be a fighter. Process making him stronger.
The fourth GOP debate basically ended the political careers of Haley and Christie. Even weak college indoctrinated GOP suburbanites who will tolerate the globalist agenda for a paycheck aren't on board with the trans the kids agenda... Especially when it costs little Susie her kick the spotted ball scholarship at the alma mater.
Unfortunely I think Haley is here to stay on the national scene.
There is just too much Defense industry and Corporate big money in the GOP to let her go....they want a spokeswoman and she fits the bill.
I would even imagine in a new possible Republican Presidential cabinet she will get some kind of position.
She checks all the boxes they want.
Interventionist and aggressive on foreign policy...check
Female...check
Can claim "person of color"...check
Moderate to even liberal on social issues or at least very flexible on such issues...check.
No real moral code or political philosophy...check
2024
757,744 Views |
11014 Replies |
Last: 11 hrs ago by boognish_bear
FLBear5630 said:You may see her as Sec of Def...Redbrickbear said:Realitybites said:whiterock said:
RDS had a good night. Haley getting exposed for her softness on social issues.
RDS proving himself to be a fighter. Process making him stronger.
The fourth GOP debate basically ended the political careers of Haley and Christie. Even weak college indoctrinated GOP suburbanites who will tolerate the globalist agenda for a paycheck aren't on board with the trans the kids agenda... Especially when it costs little Susie her kick the spotted ball scholarship at the alma mater.
Unfortunely I think Haley is here to stay on the national scene.
There is just too much Defense industry and Corporate big money in the GOP to let her go....they want a spokeswoman and she fits the bill.
I would even imagine in a new possible Republican Presidential cabinet she will get some kind of position.
She checks all the boxes they want.
Interventionist and aggressive on foreign policy...check
Female...check
Can claim "person of color"...check
Moderate to even liberal on social issues or at least very flexible on such issues...check.
No real moral code or political philosophy...check
Oh yikes....I could see that actually
Under Trump...Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:You may see her as Sec of Def...Redbrickbear said:Realitybites said:whiterock said:
RDS had a good night. Haley getting exposed for her softness on social issues.
RDS proving himself to be a fighter. Process making him stronger.
The fourth GOP debate basically ended the political careers of Haley and Christie. Even weak college indoctrinated GOP suburbanites who will tolerate the globalist agenda for a paycheck aren't on board with the trans the kids agenda... Especially when it costs little Susie her kick the spotted ball scholarship at the alma mater.
Unfortunely I think Haley is here to stay on the national scene.
There is just too much Defense industry and Corporate big money in the GOP to let her go....they want a spokeswoman and she fits the bill.
I would even imagine in a new possible Republican Presidential cabinet she will get some kind of position.
She checks all the boxes they want.
Interventionist and aggressive on foreign policy...check
Female...check
Can claim "person of color"...check
Moderate to even liberal on social issues or at least very flexible on such issues...check.
No real moral code or political philosophy...check
Oh yikes....I could see that actually
I could, she would wield a big stick
FLBear5630 said:Under Trump...Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:You may see her as Sec of Def...Redbrickbear said:Realitybites said:whiterock said:
RDS had a good night. Haley getting exposed for her softness on social issues.
RDS proving himself to be a fighter. Process making him stronger.
The fourth GOP debate basically ended the political careers of Haley and Christie. Even weak college indoctrinated GOP suburbanites who will tolerate the globalist agenda for a paycheck aren't on board with the trans the kids agenda... Especially when it costs little Susie her kick the spotted ball scholarship at the alma mater.
Unfortunely I think Haley is here to stay on the national scene.
There is just too much Defense industry and Corporate big money in the GOP to let her go....they want a spokeswoman and she fits the bill.
I would even imagine in a new possible Republican Presidential cabinet she will get some kind of position.
She checks all the boxes they want.
Interventionist and aggressive on foreign policy...check
Female...check
Can claim "person of color"...check
Moderate to even liberal on social issues or at least very flexible on such issues...check.
No real moral code or political philosophy...check
Oh yikes....I could see that actually
I could, she would wield a big stick
She would make herself even richer shilling for the Big War Inc.
And probably get us into a shooting war with Russia and China if a strong President did not reign her insanity in
She would not get us in a shooting war. Geez, her strategy, like Reagan, is to be strong enough and tough enough that you don't have to get in a shooting war. US would be safest with Trump, Haley or DeSantis.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:Under Trump...Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:You may see her as Sec of Def...Redbrickbear said:Realitybites said:whiterock said:
RDS had a good night. Haley getting exposed for her softness on social issues.
RDS proving himself to be a fighter. Process making him stronger.
The fourth GOP debate basically ended the political careers of Haley and Christie. Even weak college indoctrinated GOP suburbanites who will tolerate the globalist agenda for a paycheck aren't on board with the trans the kids agenda... Especially when it costs little Susie her kick the spotted ball scholarship at the alma mater.
Unfortunely I think Haley is here to stay on the national scene.
There is just too much Defense industry and Corporate big money in the GOP to let her go....they want a spokeswoman and she fits the bill.
I would even imagine in a new possible Republican Presidential cabinet she will get some kind of position.
She checks all the boxes they want.
Interventionist and aggressive on foreign policy...check
Female...check
Can claim "person of color"...check
Moderate to even liberal on social issues or at least very flexible on such issues...check.
No real moral code or political philosophy...check
Oh yikes....I could see that actually
I could, she would wield a big stick
She would make herself even richer shilling for the Big War Inc.
And probably get us into a shooting war with Russia and China if a strong President did not reign her insanity in
FLBear5630 said:She would not get us in a shooting war. Geez, her strategy, like Reagan, is to be strong enough and tough enough that you don't have to get in a shooting war. US would be safest with Trump, Haley or DeSantis.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:Under Trump...Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:You may see her as Sec of Def...Redbrickbear said:Realitybites said:whiterock said:
RDS had a good night. Haley getting exposed for her softness on social issues.
RDS proving himself to be a fighter. Process making him stronger.
The fourth GOP debate basically ended the political careers of Haley and Christie. Even weak college indoctrinated GOP suburbanites who will tolerate the globalist agenda for a paycheck aren't on board with the trans the kids agenda... Especially when it costs little Susie her kick the spotted ball scholarship at the alma mater.
Unfortunely I think Haley is here to stay on the national scene.
There is just too much Defense industry and Corporate big money in the GOP to let her go....they want a spokeswoman and she fits the bill.
I would even imagine in a new possible Republican Presidential cabinet she will get some kind of position.
She checks all the boxes they want.
Interventionist and aggressive on foreign policy...check
Female...check
Can claim "person of color"...check
Moderate to even liberal on social issues or at least very flexible on such issues...check.
No real moral code or political philosophy...check
Oh yikes....I could see that actually
I could, she would wield a big stick
She would make herself even richer shilling for the Big War Inc.
And probably get us into a shooting war with Russia and China if a strong President did not reign her insanity in
How exactly is it being "tough" to engage in endless 3d world occupations in the Muslim world?
How is it "tough" to engaged in supporting coups in places like Ukraine and then funding billion dollar boondoggle proxy wars?
Her policies are neo-con dreck and warmed over Bush foreign policy disasters
Ok... Last I saw Ukraine is Biden's.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:She would not get us in a shooting war. Geez, her strategy, like Reagan, is to be strong enough and tough enough that you don't have to get in a shooting war. US would be safest with Trump, Haley or DeSantis.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:Under Trump...Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:You may see her as Sec of Def...Redbrickbear said:Realitybites said:whiterock said:
RDS had a good night. Haley getting exposed for her softness on social issues.
RDS proving himself to be a fighter. Process making him stronger.
The fourth GOP debate basically ended the political careers of Haley and Christie. Even weak college indoctrinated GOP suburbanites who will tolerate the globalist agenda for a paycheck aren't on board with the trans the kids agenda... Especially when it costs little Susie her kick the spotted ball scholarship at the alma mater.
Unfortunely I think Haley is here to stay on the national scene.
There is just too much Defense industry and Corporate big money in the GOP to let her go....they want a spokeswoman and she fits the bill.
I would even imagine in a new possible Republican Presidential cabinet she will get some kind of position.
She checks all the boxes they want.
Interventionist and aggressive on foreign policy...check
Female...check
Can claim "person of color"...check
Moderate to even liberal on social issues or at least very flexible on such issues...check.
No real moral code or political philosophy...check
Oh yikes....I could see that actually
I could, she would wield a big stick
She would make herself even richer shilling for the Big War Inc.
And probably get us into a shooting war with Russia and China if a strong President did not reign her insanity in
How exactly is it being "tough" to engage in endless 3d world occupations in the Muslim world?
How is it "tough" to engaged in supporting coups in places like Ukraine and then funding billion dollar boondoggle proxy wars?
Her policies are neo-con dreck and warmed over Bush foreign policy disasters
You engage over there to avoid engaging over here.
That is not what I am talking about. I am talking China, Russia and Iran.
Finally, we know your foreign policy, you would give New England and the Pacific NW before believing there is a problem. Hawaii and Alaska would be gone the first day you were in office!
1. There is not a lot of light between the neo-con dreck of the Bush wing of the GOP and the libearl interventionist wing of the Dems.FLBear5630 said:Ok... Last I saw Ukraine is Biden's.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:She would not get us in a shooting war. Geez, her strategy, like Reagan, is to be strong enough and tough enough that you don't have to get in a shooting war. US would be safest with Trump, Haley or DeSantis.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:Under Trump...Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:You may see her as Sec of Def...Redbrickbear said:Realitybites said:whiterock said:
RDS had a good night. Haley getting exposed for her softness on social issues.
RDS proving himself to be a fighter. Process making him stronger.
The fourth GOP debate basically ended the political careers of Haley and Christie. Even weak college indoctrinated GOP suburbanites who will tolerate the globalist agenda for a paycheck aren't on board with the trans the kids agenda... Especially when it costs little Susie her kick the spotted ball scholarship at the alma mater.
Unfortunely I think Haley is here to stay on the national scene.
There is just too much Defense industry and Corporate big money in the GOP to let her go....they want a spokeswoman and she fits the bill.
I would even imagine in a new possible Republican Presidential cabinet she will get some kind of position.
She checks all the boxes they want.
Interventionist and aggressive on foreign policy...check
Female...check
Can claim "person of color"...check
Moderate to even liberal on social issues or at least very flexible on such issues...check.
No real moral code or political philosophy...check
Oh yikes....I could see that actually
I could, she would wield a big stick
She would make herself even richer shilling for the Big War Inc.
And probably get us into a shooting war with Russia and China if a strong President did not reign her insanity in
How exactly is it being "tough" to engage in endless 3d world occupations in the Muslim world?
How is it "tough" to engaged in supporting coups in places like Ukraine and then funding billion dollar boondoggle proxy wars?
Her policies are neo-con dreck and warmed over Bush foreign policy disasters
You engage over there to avoid engaging over here.
2. This "we have to fight them over there or they will come here" stuff is exaclty the insanity that has to be purged from the mentality of DC.
Iraqi forces were not going to come to the Western hemisphere to fight us. Russians tanks are not going to be showing up in New Jersey
You are so full of ***** You guys love throwing around "uniparty", "neo-con". Neither of the Bushs were like Biden in the least.Redbrickbear said:1. There is not a lot of light between the neo-con dreck of the Bush wing of the GOP and the libearl interventionist wing of the Dems.FLBear5630 said:Ok... Last I saw Ukraine is Biden's.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:She would not get us in a shooting war. Geez, her strategy, like Reagan, is to be strong enough and tough enough that you don't have to get in a shooting war. US would be safest with Trump, Haley or DeSantis.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:Under Trump...Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:You may see her as Sec of Def...Redbrickbear said:Realitybites said:whiterock said:
RDS had a good night. Haley getting exposed for her softness on social issues.
RDS proving himself to be a fighter. Process making him stronger.
The fourth GOP debate basically ended the political careers of Haley and Christie. Even weak college indoctrinated GOP suburbanites who will tolerate the globalist agenda for a paycheck aren't on board with the trans the kids agenda... Especially when it costs little Susie her kick the spotted ball scholarship at the alma mater.
Unfortunely I think Haley is here to stay on the national scene.
There is just too much Defense industry and Corporate big money in the GOP to let her go....they want a spokeswoman and she fits the bill.
I would even imagine in a new possible Republican Presidential cabinet she will get some kind of position.
She checks all the boxes they want.
Interventionist and aggressive on foreign policy...check
Female...check
Can claim "person of color"...check
Moderate to even liberal on social issues or at least very flexible on such issues...check.
No real moral code or political philosophy...check
Oh yikes....I could see that actually
I could, she would wield a big stick
She would make herself even richer shilling for the Big War Inc.
And probably get us into a shooting war with Russia and China if a strong President did not reign her insanity in
How exactly is it being "tough" to engage in endless 3d world occupations in the Muslim world?
How is it "tough" to engaged in supporting coups in places like Ukraine and then funding billion dollar boondoggle proxy wars?
Her policies are neo-con dreck and warmed over Bush foreign policy disasters
You engage over there to avoid engaging over here.
2. This "we have to fight them over there or they will come here" stuff is exaclty the insanity that has to be purged from the mentality of DC.
Iraqi forces were not going to come to the Western hemisphere to fight us. Russians tanks are not going to be showing up in New Jersey
No, Russians are not going to show up in NJ, how about AK? China not going to invade the West Coast, how about American Samoa, Marshall Islands? Wake? Midway? Or bases and ports in Venezula, Mexico and other Central American locations?
Iraqi forces didn't come to the Western Hemisphere, but they did take Kuwait. You think we have no vested interest in the Middle East? Keeping the Suez Canal and the Straits of Homuz open? You think we have no interest in keeping Taiwan free? The Halley globalist view keeps those markets open. The same markets that many on here touting their investing accumen took advantage of to get well off.
But, you have no problem with the US becoming Canada. See how your lifestyle is then..
What do you think keeps them out? A foreign policy that says we will only intervene if you invade NJ?
FLBear5630 said:You are so full of ***** You guys love throwing around "uniparty", "neo-con".Redbrickbear said:1. There is not a lot of light between the neo-con dreck of the Bush wing of the GOP and the libearl interventionist wing of the Dems.FLBear5630 said:Ok... Last I saw Ukraine is Biden's.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:She would not get us in a shooting war. Geez, her strategy, like Reagan, is to be strong enough and tough enough that you don't have to get in a shooting war. US would be safest with Trump, Haley or DeSantis.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:Under Trump...Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:You may see her as Sec of Def...Redbrickbear said:Realitybites said:whiterock said:
RDS had a good night. Haley getting exposed for her softness on social issues.
RDS proving himself to be a fighter. Process making him stronger.
The fourth GOP debate basically ended the political careers of Haley and Christie. Even weak college indoctrinated GOP suburbanites who will tolerate the globalist agenda for a paycheck aren't on board with the trans the kids agenda... Especially when it costs little Susie her kick the spotted ball scholarship at the alma mater.
Unfortunely I think Haley is here to stay on the national scene.
There is just too much Defense industry and Corporate big money in the GOP to let her go....they want a spokeswoman and she fits the bill.
I would even imagine in a new possible Republican Presidential cabinet she will get some kind of position.
She checks all the boxes they want.
Interventionist and aggressive on foreign policy...check
Female...check
Can claim "person of color"...check
Moderate to even liberal on social issues or at least very flexible on such issues...check.
No real moral code or political philosophy...check
Oh yikes....I could see that actually
I could, she would wield a big stick
She would make herself even richer shilling for the Big War Inc.
And probably get us into a shooting war with Russia and China if a strong President did not reign her insanity in
How exactly is it being "tough" to engage in endless 3d world occupations in the Muslim world?
How is it "tough" to engaged in supporting coups in places like Ukraine and then funding billion dollar boondoggle proxy wars?
Her policies are neo-con dreck and warmed over Bush foreign policy disasters
You engage over there to avoid engaging over here.
2. This "we have to fight them over there or they will come here" stuff is exaclty the insanity that has to be purged from the mentality of DC.
Iraqi forces were not going to come to the Western hemisphere to fight us. Russians tanks are not going to be showing up in New Jersey
Funny I was thinking the same thing about idiots who use lines like "we have to fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here"
And if you personally want to go fight Russians…then get your fat butt on a plane and head over and join Zelensky forces.
You will find out being a keyboard war monger is a lot more fun than the real thing
I already did mine. And my butt is not fat. I am big boned...Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:You are so full of ***** You guys love throwing around "uniparty", "neo-con".Redbrickbear said:1. There is not a lot of light between the neo-con dreck of the Bush wing of the GOP and the libearl interventionist wing of the Dems.FLBear5630 said:Ok... Last I saw Ukraine is Biden's.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:She would not get us in a shooting war. Geez, her strategy, like Reagan, is to be strong enough and tough enough that you don't have to get in a shooting war. US would be safest with Trump, Haley or DeSantis.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:Under Trump...Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:You may see her as Sec of Def...Redbrickbear said:Realitybites said:whiterock said:
RDS had a good night. Haley getting exposed for her softness on social issues.
RDS proving himself to be a fighter. Process making him stronger.
The fourth GOP debate basically ended the political careers of Haley and Christie. Even weak college indoctrinated GOP suburbanites who will tolerate the globalist agenda for a paycheck aren't on board with the trans the kids agenda... Especially when it costs little Susie her kick the spotted ball scholarship at the alma mater.
Unfortunely I think Haley is here to stay on the national scene.
There is just too much Defense industry and Corporate big money in the GOP to let her go....they want a spokeswoman and she fits the bill.
I would even imagine in a new possible Republican Presidential cabinet she will get some kind of position.
She checks all the boxes they want.
Interventionist and aggressive on foreign policy...check
Female...check
Can claim "person of color"...check
Moderate to even liberal on social issues or at least very flexible on such issues...check.
No real moral code or political philosophy...check
Oh yikes....I could see that actually
I could, she would wield a big stick
She would make herself even richer shilling for the Big War Inc.
And probably get us into a shooting war with Russia and China if a strong President did not reign her insanity in
How exactly is it being "tough" to engage in endless 3d world occupations in the Muslim world?
How is it "tough" to engaged in supporting coups in places like Ukraine and then funding billion dollar boondoggle proxy wars?
Her policies are neo-con dreck and warmed over Bush foreign policy disasters
You engage over there to avoid engaging over here.
2. This "we have to fight them over there or they will come here" stuff is exaclty the insanity that has to be purged from the mentality of DC.
Iraqi forces were not going to come to the Western hemisphere to fight us. Russians tanks are not going to be showing up in New Jersey
Funny I was thinking the same thing about idiots who use lines like "we have to fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here"
And if you personally want to go fight Russians…then get your fat butt on a plane and head over and join Zelensky forces.
You will find out being a keyboard war monger is a lot more fun than the real thing
DeSantis is not a warm person but he gets results.
Hurricane recovery is constantly praised, the state can count all their votes in one night making other states look stupid and he has taken a firm stance on cultural issues that I think most Americans would agree with.
Hurricane recovery is constantly praised, the state can count all their votes in one night making other states look stupid and he has taken a firm stance on cultural issues that I think most Americans would agree with.
We’ve built a nationwide coalition of moms who are mobilized to help elect @RonDeSantis: Mamas for DeSantis.
— Casey DeSantis (@CaseyDeSantis) December 8, 2023
While voting in the Iowa caucus is limited to registered voters in Iowa, there is a way for others to participate. I’m calling on mamas and grandmamas from all over the… pic.twitter.com/vlVLIHiiUF
Disagree on Christie, completely. His time at NJ he did absolutely nothing to turn that state red. Rather the opposite.....FLBear5630 said:Didn't say he would win or even be liked. You are talking winning the election, I am talking effectiveness in the position. I said he and DeSantis have the ability to use the system to defeat the Dems. I don't believe the other 3 can for various reasons.whiterock said:Christie is the biggest loser of all. Only the neverTrumpers like him, and even then only for the purposes of bashing Trump, which he's not been terribly effective doing. Nobody even tries to make the case that he is a superior prospect either as candidate or President. You want a devastating landslide loss, put up Christie and watch what happens. He's a less-likeable version of Trump, a caricature with even more negatives and not one single positive.FLBear5630 said:He is a process guy. Personally, I think either he or Christie are the only 2 that can give the Dems a fight. Not ideologically, but process. They both know how to use the systems in place to their advantage, something the Dems have had the high ground on for years.whiterock said:
RDS had a good night. Haley getting exposed for her softness on social issues.
RDS proving himself to be a fighter. Process making him stronger.
Trump will be bogged down fighting personal fights for four years.
Haley is perceived to be in big businesses pocket, whether true or not the perception is hard to fight. If you are explaining you are losing.
Vivek? What can I say, if he wins I give up. Time to admit the world has passed me by and go find a small beach town to manage...
Vivek is giving voice to a far bigger slice of the electorate than you realize. But I think he was too shrill at this last debate, which perhaps suggests his envelope is closing. He's not making any headway in polling in any of the early primary states. He has to make a flash early if he's going to remain relevant. But if all he does is drive Christie out of the race, he will have done creditable public service.
I don't think either have a shot at winning, sadly.
You are out over the tips of both of your skis.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:You are so full of ***** You guys love throwing around "uniparty", "neo-con".Redbrickbear said:1. There is not a lot of light between the neo-con dreck of the Bush wing of the GOP and the libearl interventionist wing of the Dems.FLBear5630 said:Ok... Last I saw Ukraine is Biden's.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:She would not get us in a shooting war. Geez, her strategy, like Reagan, is to be strong enough and tough enough that you don't have to get in a shooting war. US would be safest with Trump, Haley or DeSantis.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:Under Trump...Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:
You may see her as Sec of Def...
Oh yikes....I could see that actually
I could, she would wield a big stick
She would make herself even richer shilling for the Big War Inc.
And probably get us into a shooting war with Russia and China if a strong President did not reign her insanity in
How exactly is it being "tough" to engage in endless 3d world occupations in the Muslim world?
How is it "tough" to engaged in supporting coups in places like Ukraine and then funding billion dollar boondoggle proxy wars?
Her policies are neo-con dreck and warmed over Bush foreign policy disasters
You engage over there to avoid engaging over here.
2. This "we have to fight them over there or they will come here" stuff is exaclty the insanity that has to be purged from the mentality of DC.
Iraqi forces were not going to come to the Western hemisphere to fight us. Russians tanks are not going to be showing up in New Jersey
Funny I was thinking the same thing about idiots who use lines like "we have to fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here"
And if you personally want to go fight Russians…then get your fat butt on a plane and head over and join Zelensky forces.
You will find out being a keyboard war monger is a lot more fun than the real thing
First, FL and I are two of the most ardent supporters of current Ukraine policy. We have stood the ramparts (in two different ways) against the exact threat we are talking about. Further, my daughter next summer is taking over command of a unit that will be first-deployed should we engage in conflict with Russia. So some of us do, actually have some skin in the game. Do you?
Second, and more to the point...... You, as policy opponents always do, are conflating the policy of helping Ukraine fight Russia, with a straw man of directly engaging US forces with Russia. We support the former precisely to prevent the latter. Proximity matters a ton in national security posture, because of the logistics it takes to overcome distance is highly valuable.
The idiots are the ones who say what happens in Ukraine is irrelevant. Takes an advanced degree in dumbassery to argue that.
What happens in Ukraine is irrelevant to the United States. What happens in our hemisphere is not. I supported Reagan's intervention in Grenada and still do. I would have invaded Cuba and crushed Castro's communist revolution about five minutes after it began. I would never have turned the Panama Canal over to anyone even if it meant turning Panama into the 51st state.
The United States does have legitimate geopolitical interests close to home. Meddling in Ukraine (or Taiwan in a world where everything from Harley Davidson parts to antibiotics to the boots our enlisted men and women are given come from China) do not rise to that level. The neocon foreign policy you propose is like sending a cancer patient to the olympics.
I wore the uniform for the better part of a decade. If you are content with your daughter being deployed to Ukraine to fight Russia your understanding of world events is worse than I imagined.
The United States does have legitimate geopolitical interests close to home. Meddling in Ukraine (or Taiwan in a world where everything from Harley Davidson parts to antibiotics to the boots our enlisted men and women are given come from China) do not rise to that level. The neocon foreign policy you propose is like sending a cancer patient to the olympics.
I wore the uniform for the better part of a decade. If you are content with your daughter being deployed to Ukraine to fight Russia your understanding of world events is worse than I imagined.
Again, we see the conflated argument. My daughter is not being deployed to Ukraine. I do not want that to happen, to her or any other soldier. She is being deployed to one of our larger bases in Europe, to command a unit whose sole mission is to surge into Eastern Europe (should need arise). The best way to keep her (and all others in uniform) out of direct conflict with Russia is to fund the Ukraine miliary to force a shattered Russian Army back to Russia. Withdrawing such funding and allowing Russia to subsume Ukraine back into the Russian state would be EXACTLY the kind of development that would put her in harm's way.Realitybites said:
What happens in Ukraine is irrelevant to the United States. What happens in our hemisphere is not. I supported Reagan's intervention in Grenada and still do. I would have invaded Cuba and crushed Castro's communist revolution about five minutes after it began. I would never have turned the Panama Canal over to anyone even if it meant turning Panama into the 51st state.
The United States does have legitimate geopolitical interests close to home. Meddling in Ukraine (or Taiwan in a world where everything from Harley Davidson parts to antibiotics to the boots our enlisted men and women are given come from China) do not rise to that level. The neocon foreign policy you propose is like sending a cancer patient to the olympics.
I wore the uniform for the better part of a decade. If you are content with your daughter being deployed to Ukraine to fight Russia your understanding of world events is worse than I imagined.
I agree that we are ignoring issues closer to home, to include the border. But that does not reduce by a nanometer the importance of issues elsewhere. As long as we belong to Nato, what happens in Ukraine matters significantly, as developments there strategically threaten allies we are sworn to defend, with nuclear weapons if necessary. We have to walk & chew gum at the same time. We have the ability to do so. And we must....no matter how profoundly obtuse policy opponents are.
You are just as bad as the Democrats on this. You're just focusing/ignoring different parts of the portfolio.
Your assumption is based on the false premise that not to confront Russia is to guarantee a broader European war. In fact, the exact opposite is true. The closer NATO creeps to Russia's borders, the more animosity is generated in the relations between our two nations. Russia and the United States are not (outside of the Bolshevik period) natural enemies. Russia has no desire to march through Paris as Hitler did.
Ukraine is not part of the American portfolio.
The biggest problem in Europe is not Russia, but demographic suicide that will turn the EU into a caliphate in two generations.
Ukraine is not part of the American portfolio.
The biggest problem in Europe is not Russia, but demographic suicide that will turn the EU into a caliphate in two generations.
whiterock said:Again, we see the conflated argument. My daughter is not being deployed to Ukraine. I do not want that to happen, to her or any other soldier. She is being deployed to one of our larger bases in Europe, to command a unit whose sole mission is to surge into Eastern Europe (should need arise). The best way to keep her (and all others in uniform) out of direct conflict with Russia is to fund the Ukraine miliary to force a shattered Russian Army back to Russia. Withdrawing such funding and allowing Russia to subsume Ukraine back into the Russian state would be EXACTLY the kind of development that would put her in harm's way.Realitybites said:
What happens in Ukraine is irrelevant to the United States. What happens in our hemisphere is not. I supported Reagan's intervention in Grenada and still do. I would have invaded Cuba and crushed Castro's communist revolution about five minutes after it began. I would never have turned the Panama Canal over to anyone even if it meant turning Panama into the 51st state.
The United States does have legitimate geopolitical interests close to home. Meddling in Ukraine (or Taiwan in a world where everything from Harley Davidson parts to antibiotics to the boots our enlisted men and women are given come from China) do not rise to that level. The neocon foreign policy you propose is like sending a cancer patient to the olympics.
I wore the uniform for the better part of a decade. If you are content with your daughter being deployed to Ukraine to fight Russia your understanding of world events is worse than I imagined.
I agree that we are ignoring issues closer to home, to include the border. But that does not reduce by a nanometer the importance of issues elsewhere. As long as we belong to Nato, what happens in Ukraine matters significantly, as developments there strategically threaten allies we are sworn to defend, with nuclear weapons if necessary. We have to walk & chew gum at the same time. We have the ability to do so. And we must....no matter how profoundly obtuse policy opponents are.
You are just as bad as the Democrats on this. You're just focusing/ignoring different parts of the portfolio.
100% correct.
I would suggest there is a happy medium in there somewhere. The idea that your daughter should go fight Russia over Ukraine is one of the dumbest ideas in the history of US foreign policy. I mean, speaking of dumbassery, that idea takes the cake. I know you neocons have never found a war you didn't like, but take off the neocon hat for a moment and try to imagine worst case scenario with that idea. Do we really want to start a nuclear war - even a limited one - over Ukraine? Is it worth your daughter's life? Of course it isn't.whiterock said:You are out over the tips of both of your skis.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:You are so full of ***** You guys love throwing around "uniparty", "neo-con".Redbrickbear said:1. There is not a lot of light between the neo-con dreck of the Bush wing of the GOP and the libearl interventionist wing of the Dems.FLBear5630 said:Ok... Last I saw Ukraine is Biden's.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:She would not get us in a shooting war. Geez, her strategy, like Reagan, is to be strong enough and tough enough that you don't have to get in a shooting war. US would be safest with Trump, Haley or DeSantis.Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:Under Trump...Redbrickbear said:FLBear5630 said:
You may see her as Sec of Def...
Oh yikes....I could see that actually
I could, she would wield a big stick
She would make herself even richer shilling for the Big War Inc.
And probably get us into a shooting war with Russia and China if a strong President did not reign her insanity in
How exactly is it being "tough" to engage in endless 3d world occupations in the Muslim world?
How is it "tough" to engaged in supporting coups in places like Ukraine and then funding billion dollar boondoggle proxy wars?
Her policies are neo-con dreck and warmed over Bush foreign policy disasters
You engage over there to avoid engaging over here.
2. This "we have to fight them over there or they will come here" stuff is exaclty the insanity that has to be purged from the mentality of DC.
Iraqi forces were not going to come to the Western hemisphere to fight us. Russians tanks are not going to be showing up in New Jersey
Funny I was thinking the same thing about idiots who use lines like "we have to fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here"
And if you personally want to go fight Russians…then get your fat butt on a plane and head over and join Zelensky forces.
You will find out being a keyboard war monger is a lot more fun than the real thing
First, FL and I are two of the most ardent supporters of current Ukraine policy. We have stood the ramparts (in two different ways) against the exact threat we are talking about. Further, my daughter next summer is taking over command of a unit that will be first-deployed should we engage in conflict with Russia. So some of us do, actually have some skin in the game. Do you?
Second, and more to the point...... You, as policy opponents always do, are conflating the policy of helping Ukraine fight Russia, with a straw man of directly engaging US forces with Russia. We support the former precisely to prevent the latter. Proximity matters a ton in national security posture, because of the logistics it takes to overcome distance is highly valuable.
The idiots are the ones who say what happens in Ukraine is irrelevant. Takes an advanced degree in dumbassery to argue that.
Now, fighting a proxy war with Russia over Ukraine? I have no problem with supplying them a limited amount of weaponry. But as the past few months have shown, Ukraine lacks the ability to take back ground Russia has taken, and Vlad is not going to give it up. Yes, it's terrible and it sucks, but are we to continue spending billions we don't have on a proxy war that will at best end in a stalemate indefinitely? Is that really the solution? Of course it isn't.
It should have happened already, but our foreign policy has to shift from supplying weapons to working out a solution that Ukraine and Russia will not like. And unfortunately, that stalemate is going to have to end up with Russia keeping parts of Ukraine. We all know this. Ukraine is unable to adequately defend itself. And we know from history that the US supplying a country with weapons to fight a losing battle never works. Never. The goal of severely weakening Russia has been accomplished. Any number of countries could kick its ass in a conventional war. We know that now. So let's stop pretending that it's going to take any aggressive acts against NATO countries.
...and I'll add that the EU Caliphate that arises is going to be one of the most dangerous thing to confront humanity in its history. Think the Ottoman Empire, the Mongols, or the Soviet Union built on the technocracy that the atheists in Brussels are standing up as we speak.
Malarkey. The idea that Russia fighting to a stalemate in Ukraine "strategically threatens allies" is baseless and unsupported rhetoric. Russia is having to ask Iran for weapons just to keep this thing going, for goodness sake. Iran.whiterock said:As long as we belong to Nato, what happens in Ukraine matters significantly, as developments there strategically threaten allies we are sworn to defend, with nuclear weapons if necessary.Realitybites said:
What happens in Ukraine is irrelevant to the United States. What happens in our hemisphere is not. I supported Reagan's intervention in Grenada and still do. I would have invaded Cuba and crushed Castro's communist revolution about five minutes after it began. I would never have turned the Panama Canal over to anyone even if it meant turning Panama into the 51st state.
The United States does have legitimate geopolitical interests close to home. Meddling in Ukraine (or Taiwan in a world where everything from Harley Davidson parts to antibiotics to the boots our enlisted men and women are given come from China) do not rise to that level. The neocon foreign policy you propose is like sending a cancer patient to the olympics.
I wore the uniform for the better part of a decade. If you are content with your daughter being deployed to Ukraine to fight Russia your understanding of world events is worse than I imagined.
You neocons have lost it. What do you think your boy Trump is going to do about this situation?
50% malarkey.Bear8084 said:whiterock said:Again, we see the conflated argument. My daughter is not being deployed to Ukraine. I do not want that to happen, to her or any other soldier. She is being deployed to one of our larger bases in Europe, to command a unit whose sole mission is to surge into Eastern Europe (should need arise). The best way to keep her (and all others in uniform) out of direct conflict with Russia is to fund the Ukraine miliary to force a shattered Russian Army back to Russia. Withdrawing such funding and allowing Russia to subsume Ukraine back into the Russian state would be EXACTLY the kind of development that would put her in harm's way.Realitybites said:
What happens in Ukraine is irrelevant to the United States. What happens in our hemisphere is not. I supported Reagan's intervention in Grenada and still do. I would have invaded Cuba and crushed Castro's communist revolution about five minutes after it began. I would never have turned the Panama Canal over to anyone even if it meant turning Panama into the 51st state.
The United States does have legitimate geopolitical interests close to home. Meddling in Ukraine (or Taiwan in a world where everything from Harley Davidson parts to antibiotics to the boots our enlisted men and women are given come from China) do not rise to that level. The neocon foreign policy you propose is like sending a cancer patient to the olympics.
I wore the uniform for the better part of a decade. If you are content with your daughter being deployed to Ukraine to fight Russia your understanding of world events is worse than I imagined.
I agree that we are ignoring issues closer to home, to include the border. But that does not reduce by a nanometer the importance of issues elsewhere. As long as we belong to Nato, what happens in Ukraine matters significantly, as developments there strategically threaten allies we are sworn to defend, with nuclear weapons if necessary. We have to walk & chew gum at the same time. We have the ability to do so. And we must....no matter how profoundly obtuse policy opponents are.
You are just as bad as the Democrats on this. You're just focusing/ignoring different parts of the portfolio.
100% correct.
Is that the metric? Turning the State red? NJ is not going Red, it is built on Unions. Christie moved NJ to the Center and was a competent and able Governor.whiterock said:Disagree on Christie, completely. His time at NJ he did absolutely nothing to turn that state red. Rather the opposite.....FLBear5630 said:Didn't say he would win or even be liked. You are talking winning the election, I am talking effectiveness in the position. I said he and DeSantis have the ability to use the system to defeat the Dems. I don't believe the other 3 can for various reasons.whiterock said:Christie is the biggest loser of all. Only the neverTrumpers like him, and even then only for the purposes of bashing Trump, which he's not been terribly effective doing. Nobody even tries to make the case that he is a superior prospect either as candidate or President. You want a devastating landslide loss, put up Christie and watch what happens. He's a less-likeable version of Trump, a caricature with even more negatives and not one single positive.FLBear5630 said:He is a process guy. Personally, I think either he or Christie are the only 2 that can give the Dems a fight. Not ideologically, but process. They both know how to use the systems in place to their advantage, something the Dems have had the high ground on for years.whiterock said:
RDS had a good night. Haley getting exposed for her softness on social issues.
RDS proving himself to be a fighter. Process making him stronger.
Trump will be bogged down fighting personal fights for four years.
Haley is perceived to be in big businesses pocket, whether true or not the perception is hard to fight. If you are explaining you are losing.
Vivek? What can I say, if he wins I give up. Time to admit the world has passed me by and go find a small beach town to manage...
Vivek is giving voice to a far bigger slice of the electorate than you realize. But I think he was too shrill at this last debate, which perhaps suggests his envelope is closing. He's not making any headway in polling in any of the early primary states. He has to make a flash early if he's going to remain relevant. But if all he does is drive Christie out of the race, he will have done creditable public service.
I don't think either have a shot at winning, sadly.
4th and Inches said:been telling yall.. Trumps base is growing and it isnt the typical GOP baseRedbrickbear said:I know the media likes to look at polling to explain minority support for Trump, but I think it tells you a lot less than watching videos like this and trying to imagine if any other Republicans could get such enthusiastic support from the same people. pic.twitter.com/IFjg5ZEVyk
— Richard Hanania (@RichardHanania) December 7, 2023
Looks like these guys are a band or something that perform
https://www.forbes.com/sites/hughmcintyre/2023/09/18/donald-trump-is-back-on-the-billboard-chartssort-of/
didnt know thar but look at his polling showing increasing minority popularity with blacks and latinosboognish_bear said:4th and Inches said:been telling yall.. Trumps base is growing and it isnt the typical GOP baseRedbrickbear said:I know the media likes to look at polling to explain minority support for Trump, but I think it tells you a lot less than watching videos like this and trying to imagine if any other Republicans could get such enthusiastic support from the same people. pic.twitter.com/IFjg5ZEVyk
— Richard Hanania (@RichardHanania) December 7, 2023
Looks like these guys are a band or something that perform
https://www.forbes.com/sites/hughmcintyre/2023/09/18/donald-trump-is-back-on-the-billboard-chartssort-of/
“The Internet is just a world passing around notes in a classroom.”
Jon Stewart
Jon Stewart
I am really looking forward to an actual Primary and we can get some actual votes. This poll **** is BS and only muddies the water, which is what is the intent.4th and Inches said:didnt know thar but look at his polling showing increasing minority popularity with blacks and latinosboognish_bear said:4th and Inches said:been telling yall.. Trumps base is growing and it isnt the typical GOP baseRedbrickbear said:I know the media likes to look at polling to explain minority support for Trump, but I think it tells you a lot less than watching videos like this and trying to imagine if any other Republicans could get such enthusiastic support from the same people. pic.twitter.com/IFjg5ZEVyk
— Richard Hanania (@RichardHanania) December 7, 2023
Looks like these guys are a band or something that perform
https://www.forbes.com/sites/hughmcintyre/2023/09/18/donald-trump-is-back-on-the-billboard-chartssort-of/
Pretty much this….
With Trump leading Biden in the latest @WSJ poll as the Ivies reel from the inept performance of their deeply mediocre leaders, this is less the Rise of Trump than the moral and intellectual collapse of the American Establishment. Sad. Tragic, really. Scary. But real.
— Walter Russell Mead (@wrmead) December 9, 2023
Realitybites said:
Your assumption is based on the false premise that not to confront Russia is to guarantee a broader European war. In fact, the exact opposite is true. The closer NATO creeps to Russia's borders, the more animosity is generated in the relations between our two nations. Russia and the United States are not (outside of the Bolshevik period) natural enemies. Russia has no desire to march through Paris as Hitler did.
Ukraine is not part of the American portfolio.
The biggest problem in Europe is not Russia, but demographic suicide that will turn the EU into a caliphate in two generations.
Good Grief. You are STILL making the argument that it matters not whether Russian armies are stationed in Russia's border with Ukraine, or Ukraine's border with Romania, Hungary, Slovakia, and Poland.
Complete and utter dumbassery
Mothra said:Malarkey. The idea that Russia fighting to a stalemate in Ukraine "strategically threatens allies" is baseless and unsupported rhetoric. Russia is having to ask Iran for weapons just to keep this thing going, for goodness sake. Iran.whiterock said:As long as we belong to Nato, what happens in Ukraine matters significantly, as developments there strategically threaten allies we are sworn to defend, with nuclear weapons if necessary.Realitybites said:
What happens in Ukraine is irrelevant to the United States. What happens in our hemisphere is not. I supported Reagan's intervention in Grenada and still do. I would have invaded Cuba and crushed Castro's communist revolution about five minutes after it began. I would never have turned the Panama Canal over to anyone even if it meant turning Panama into the 51st state.
The United States does have legitimate geopolitical interests close to home. Meddling in Ukraine (or Taiwan in a world where everything from Harley Davidson parts to antibiotics to the boots our enlisted men and women are given come from China) do not rise to that level. The neocon foreign policy you propose is like sending a cancer patient to the olympics.
I wore the uniform for the better part of a decade. If you are content with your daughter being deployed to Ukraine to fight Russia your understanding of world events is worse than I imagined.
You neocons have lost it. What do you think your boy Trump is going to do about this situation?
Well, that wasn't the scenario I argued, counselor. Ending the war at current battle lines is, however, a clear and significant improvement in Russian strategic position (insert Liddel-Hart's Maxim here.). That incentivizes resumption of conflict as soon as Russia rebuilds. We can and should fund Ukrainian victory, complete withdrawal of Russian armies from Ukrainian sovereign territory. It won't be hard. Russia cannot keep up its supply chain, which as you note, is quite ragged.
As you alluded, Russia is struggling. Why on earth should we let them win, when their defeat is of such significant advantage to NATO? That is not a sink cost argument; it's a "we have them by the nuts" argument.
boognish_bear said:
If Mr. Trump is returned to office, people close to him have vowed to "come after" the news media, open criminal investigations into onetime aides who broke with the former president and purge the government of civil servants deemed disloyal. When critics said Mr. Trump's language about ridding Washington of "vermin" echoed that of Adolf Hitler, the former president's spokesman said the critics' "sad, miserable existence will be crushed" under a new Trump administration.
Osodecentx said:boognish_bear said:
If Mr. Trump is returned to office, people close to him have vowed to "come after" the news media, open criminal investigations into onetime aides who broke with the former president and purge the government of civil servants deemed disloyal. When critics said Mr. Trump's language about ridding Washington of "vermin" echoed that of Adolf Hitler, the former president's spokesman said the critics' "sad, miserable existence will be crushed" under a new Trump administration.
Dems are already doing worse, so I'm not sure what yer *****in' about.
Fascinating…..
WSJ POLL: If Trump is convicted of a felony in either the classified documents case or Jan. 6th federal trials, would you vote for...?
— InteractivePolls (@IAPolls2022) December 10, 2023
Biden 46%
Trump 45%
—
If Biden is impeached the House of Representatives due to his involvement with his son Hunter foreign influence peddling,… https://t.co/exLyzvp2VA pic.twitter.com/YAMJWZjbXS
whiterock said:Mothra said:Malarkey. The idea that Russia fighting to a stalemate in Ukraine "strategically threatens allies" is baseless and unsupported rhetoric. Russia is having to ask Iran for weapons just to keep this thing going, for goodness sake. Iran.whiterock said:As long as we belong to Nato, what happens in Ukraine matters significantly, as developments there strategically threaten allies we are sworn to defend, with nuclear weapons if necessary.Realitybites said:
What happens in Ukraine is irrelevant to the United States. What happens in our hemisphere is not. I supported Reagan's intervention in Grenada and still do. I would have invaded Cuba and crushed Castro's communist revolution about five minutes after it began. I would never have turned the Panama Canal over to anyone even if it meant turning Panama into the 51st state.
The United States does have legitimate geopolitical interests close to home. Meddling in Ukraine (or Taiwan in a world where everything from Harley Davidson parts to antibiotics to the boots our enlisted men and women are given come from China) do not rise to that level. The neocon foreign policy you propose is like sending a cancer patient to the olympics.
I wore the uniform for the better part of a decade. If you are content with your daughter being deployed to Ukraine to fight Russia your understanding of world events is worse than I imagined.
You neocons have lost it. What do you think your boy Trump is going to do about this situation?
Well, that wasn't the scenario I argued, counselor. Ending the war at current battle lines is, however, a clear and significant improvement in Russian strategic position (insert Liddel-Hart's Maxim here.). That incentivizes resumption of conflict as soon as Russia rebuilds. We can and should fund Ukrainian victory, complete withdrawal of Russian armies from Ukrainian sovereign territory. It won't be hard. Russia cannot keep up its supply chain, which as you note, is quite ragged.
As you alluded, Russia is struggling. Why on earth should we let them win, when their defeat is of such significant advantage to NATO? That is not a sink cost argument; it's a "we have them by the nuts" argument.
Sounds all good in a fairytale world where we "have them by the nuts." But we don't. Reality is Ukraine doesn't have them by the anything and likely never will. Russia has solidified its positions and isn't giving them up - just like the precious territories it took many years ago. And as we have seen repeatedly, Ukraine doesn't have the ability to take them back.
The idea that continuing to supply Ukraine with weapons will change that years long dynamic is complete and utter foolishness. But you want to keep sinking billions into a losing proposition. Hilarious.
Reality:
https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4305675-ukraine-is-waking-up-to-reality/amp/
This all ends if Trump gets elected, FYI.