patriotic torturers
Quote: GandlerQuote: TankoStolen Valor:
If anyone is in a uniform at a mall or store they are fake. (unless they are obviously a recruiter).
You can't wear that uniform offpost when you are not working.
This is not true at all I mean it might be against the rules but trust me living in a military town I've seen plenty of people wear their uniform while shopping and it just makes sense if you are off duty and want to go to the store to get a case of beer your not going to go home change and then come back to the store you're going to swing by the store on your way home.
That is great! I respect the heck out of PCR, I like to use him as a reference partially because he is from the Reagan Admin, not a lefty by anybody's definition, and an all around honorable man. Any post I make isn't about trying to get "my side" to win. I don't have a side other than a nation state and a government supported by it's people should do the same in return. I don't have an axe to grind with any other country, same as our founders, but I think our government should put America first, as do I, and other gov's can do the same for their people. Either Jeffersonian or as Ron Paul in foreign policy.Quote: GandlerQuote:In the process of reading them now.
Well this is going to be tough. You have one person who you believe to be a true neocon and he isn't even an American.Quote:But I want to ask you, what is your definition of a NeoCon? Because I think you (not just you, most people in general) claim that a lot of people have this philosophy incorrectly. I can't think of a single American politician that is a true NeoCon by the strict philosophical definition. And very view public figure in general.
Douglas Murray (posted video of him earlier) who is British is one who comes to mind as a true NeoCon, but he is just a writer.
IMO, as a definition, this is close:http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Neo-conservativeQuote:But who do you view as NeoCon? And what would you call Neoconservative?
< neocon) is part of a U.S. based political movement rooted in liberal Cold War anticommunism and a backlash to the social liberation movements of the 1960s and 1970s. These liberals drifted toward conservatism: thus they are new (neo) conservatives. They favor an aggressive unilateral U.S. foreign policy>
<The early leaders of the neoconservative movement were Irving Kristol (author of 1983 book Reflections of a Neoconservative) and Norman Podhoretz, both of whom have served as editors of Commentary Magazine, the flagship publication of the American Jewish Committee,centrist American-Jewish organization.>
IMHO, they [neocons] seem to be the war party, and it is heating up in Ukraine, this from today:[[Wall Street would dump a few hundred trillion in derivatives on the laps of US taxpayers once again (it did), quietly and unanimously both houses passed The Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014, which authorizes "providing lethal assistance to Ukraine’s military"]] We are now admitting to giving lethal assistance to Ukraine, Putin will do the same for Kiev and this isn't good for anyone.[Except bankers and the mic] The neocons are waste deep in promoting this. This, just like Syria is none of our business and to me it's not worth American lives.
If the congress that voted for this were on the front line, the vote would be extremely different. Bring back conscription, for everybody. They vote like this because they know they will never have "skin in the game", and a revolving door policy which makes them millions of dollars in gratuities after there terms are over. To me they are criminals.
Quote: petroglyph
IMHO, they [neocons] seem to be the war party, and it is heating up in Ukraine, this from today:[[Wall Street would dump a few hundred trillion in derivatives on the laps of US taxpayers once again (it did), quietly and unanimously both houses passed The Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014, which authorizes "providing lethal assistance to Ukraine’s military"]] We are now admitting to giving lethal assistance to Ukraine, Putin will do the same for Kiev and this isn't good for anyone.[Except bankers and the mic] The neocons are waste deep in promoting this. This, just like Syria is none of our business and to me it's not worth American lives.
If the congress that voted for this were on the front line, the vote would be extremely different. Bring back conscription, for everybody. They vote like this because they know they will never have "skin in the game", and a revolving door policy which makes them millions of dollars in gratuities after there terms are over. To me they are criminals.
That is pretty accurate summary (as far as foreign policy) though I am less pessimistic than you. The general principle of Neocons (true NeoCons) is grounded in Classical Liberalism, freedom of the individual, free thought. However, it says Liberal values cannot protect themselves and need to be protected with force if need be.
For example No true NeoCon would be against gay marriage. Nor would they let religion influence the law. Nor would they restrict free speech.
Douglas Murray is the best (public figure) I can name off of the top of my head who is the definition of actual Neo-conservatism, because he follows all of the principles socially and militarily. Very Socially liberal, very strong militarily, very capitalistic economically.
-I actually found out about him from his debates against religion. But I later found out a book he wrote some years ago "Neoconservatism: Why We Need It". Which is where I found out he is actually one of the few people who can be labelled a true NeoCon, and pretty much all of his debates remain constant to his views.
Unfortunately I can't name an American Politician I can say the same of.
Quote: terapinedWow, modern Indians wear headdress?
Sigh. It's ironic dramatization to make
a point. She passed herself off as
a Native American for years to gain
favor in getting college jobs. Just
another lying scheming Lib.
Quote: TwirdmanQuote: GandlerQuote: TankoStolen Valor:
If anyone is in a uniform at a mall or store they are fake. (unless they are obviously a recruiter).
You can't wear that uniform offpost when you are not working.
This is not true at all I mean it might be against the rules but trust me living in a military town I've seen plenty of people wear their uniform while shopping and it just makes sense if you are off duty and want to go to the store to get a case of beer your not going to go home change and then come back to the store you're going to swing by the store on your way home.
Well its against the uniform code (AR670-1).
Stopping to quickly grab something is one thing (You are technically allowed to do a quick stop for "essentials" if on the way home and still in uniform and need be) . But you certainly should not be shopping or strolling around. Its against the rules, not to mention looks unprofessional.
If somebody is casually strolling around the mall they are fake, or just being a douche and trying to impress females and/or get free stuff...
You can always bring regular clothes to change into after work.
Quote: GandlerQuote: TwirdmanQuote: GandlerQuote: TankoStolen Valor:
If anyone is in a uniform at a mall or store they are fake. (unless they are obviously a recruiter).
You can't wear that uniform offpost when you are not working.
This is not true at all I mean it might be against the rules but trust me living in a military town I've seen plenty of people wear their uniform while shopping and it just makes sense if you are off duty and want to go to the store to get a case of beer your not going to go home change and then come back to the store you're going to swing by the store on your way home.
Well its against the uniform code (AR670-1).
Stopping to quickly grab something is one thing (You are technically allowed to do a quick stop for "essentials" if on the way home and still in uniform and need be) . But you certainly should not be shopping or strolling around. Its against the rules, not to mention looks unprofessional.
If somebody is casually strolling around the mall they are fake, or just being a douche and trying to impress females and/or get free stuff...
You can always bring regular clothes to change into after work.
I wouldn't advise anyone to call out people in uniform "fakes" in the mall unless they know the specific area, since base commanders sometimes specify wear requirements. Also, uniform requirements change over time. The working uniform has even been completely disallowed at times even for short stops outside bases.
But the situation is not permanent, so you really have to know the local requirements.
Quote: rxwineQuote: GandlerQuote: TwirdmanQuote: GandlerQuote: TankoStolen Valor:
If anyone is in a uniform at a mall or store they are fake. (unless they are obviously a recruiter).
You can't wear that uniform offpost when you are not working.
This is not true at all I mean it might be against the rules but trust me living in a military town I've seen plenty of people wear their uniform while shopping and it just makes sense if you are off duty and want to go to the store to get a case of beer your not going to go home change and then come back to the store you're going to swing by the store on your way home.
Well its against the uniform code (AR670-1).
Stopping to quickly grab something is one thing (You are technically allowed to do a quick stop for "essentials" if on the way home and still in uniform and need be) . But you certainly should not be shopping or strolling around. Its against the rules, not to mention looks unprofessional.
If somebody is casually strolling around the mall they are fake, or just being a douche and trying to impress females and/or get free stuff...
You can always bring regular clothes to change into after work.
I wouldn't advise anyone to call out people in uniform "fakes" in the mall unless they know the specific area, since base commanders sometimes specify wear requirements. Also, uniform requirements change over time. The working uniform has even been completely disallowed at times even for short stops outside bases.
But the situation is not permanent, so you really have to know the local requirements.
I would. But I can easily tell if somebody is wearing it improperly. Like in that video somebody above posted, somebody on the first day of Basic would know more about where the patches go than that guy did.
If somebody is wearing the ACU (uniform above) in public for long periods of time it is suspect. In my experience they are usually fakers, or people who just graduated basic and think they are cool or trying to impress people.
I don't know anyone who keeps their uniform on after work for a second longer than they have to.
Now bear in mind, ASU (dress uniform) is a different story as they may be going to a formal occasion, and Dress Uniforms as long as they are worn properly can be worn virtually anywhere anytime (you can even drink in them!).
But seeing people going around in ACUs is suspect. But if you live in a military town, I am sure there are already a plethora of current and former military people who will take care of calling them out (like in the above video).
I live nowhere near a military base (closest is Fort Dix, 2 hours a way, and nowadays it is mostly a Reserve base, not too many Active Duty Army there) , and am very possibly the only person in the Army in my town (that I know of) so I never run into this issue.
What "lethal assistance" would you say that Ukraine has received from the U.S. under that act?Quote: petroglyphQuietly and unanimously both houses passed The Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014, which authorizes "providing lethal assistance to Ukraine’s military" We are now admitting to giving lethal assistance to Ukraine.
Geez Sancho, I'm not there I am in Arizona.Quote: SanchoPanzaWhat "lethal assistance" would you say that Ukraine has received from the U.S. under that act?
From what I have read the Ukraine was/is nearly bankrupt. Their militia a few months ago didn't have much to fight with and was asking for aid. Now they are wearing bulletproof armor and have modern gear.
Easy to pull up:http://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/ukraine-freedom-support-act-of-2014/
http://www.foreign.senate.gov/press/chair/release/senate-foreign-relations-committee-unanimously-passes-ukraine-freedom-support-act-of-2014
I don't see the need for the US to get involved in yet another confrontation, especially with the Ukraine when the deal was at the end of the cold war that NATO wouldn't expand. Now there are missiles in Poland, I think Putins ire is justifiable.
With NG supplies being cut off/back going into winter, opposing militants/armies getting involved I don't see what the US has to gain?
http://www.c-span.org/video/?321426-1/ukrainian-president-petro-poroshenko-address-congress&live
This is supposedly hacked documents from VP Joe Bidens visit:http://cyber-berkut.org/en/
The way I see it whenever we or anyone supplies "non-lethal" aid, it just frees up capitol that whatever country would otherwise have used for non lethal-aid to be redirected to lethal aid. So, the 5 billion we spent changing the regime in the Ukraine with Nulands now famous quote:<, Just two days after the phone recording of Victoria Nuland emerged in which she not only made it explicitly clear it was the US who was the puppetmaster behind the Ukranian opposition with the traditional CIA tractics as was expected all along, but also explained just how the US freels toward the EU with the now infamous "Fuck the EU" comment, Angela Merkel called the obscene remark "absolutely unacceptable.",> can be used to poke the bear in the eye.
Quote: EvenBobSigh. It's ironic dramatization to make
a point. She passed herself off as
a Native American for years to gain
favor in getting college jobs. Just
another lying scheming Lib.
So Sen. Warren, who everyone from every side in the Senate acknowledges understands this part of the bill better than anyone except maybe Citicorp which wrote it, gets up and explains what it means and what traps are in it, and your whole response is to disparage her and her heritage? That's not even relevant to this. Bad form.
Giving the banks back the power to gamble our money (because taxpayers will pay back their losses if they guess wrong on derivatives, if this rider is allowed to stand) is a BIG deal, one that both parties swore they would not allow happen again, but here the crooks are, back at the trough. This is not an acceptable piece of legislation, which is why it was tucked in as a midnight rider on an essential funding bill instead of standalone legislation. If those poison pills are not called out and eliminated, then we're right back where we were. There is NO reason the taxpayers should be responsible for any private bank debts incurred through churning money instruments with no value behind them. And that's all she's saying; the proof is in the bill itself, and her integrity, political party, and heritage have no place in the conversation.
Quote: SanchoPanzaSo it stands for the record that neither chamber of Congress has passed unanimously or otherwise any "lethal aid" for Ukraine and that no documentation can be supplied for any specific "lethal aid" to that country where the U.S. was instrumental in stripping its defenses.
I'm not sure what you are saying? Are you saying they [congress] didn't pass legislation for lethal aid or that they have plausible deniability or nothing of the sort in the way of giving lethal aid?
Do you think we have not sent advisors as well as covert opps which are armed to Ukraine as well as munitions?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/11337518
From this article:<The Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014, which passed the Senate and House unanimously, authorizes -- but doesn’t require -- providing lethal assistance to Ukraine’s military as well as sweeping sanctions on Russia’s energy sector. The measure mandates sanctions against Rosoboronexport, the state agency that promotes Russia’s defense exports and arms trade>
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/226833-senate-passes-russian-sanctions-bill
<S. 2828, the Ukraine Freedom Support Act, directs the president to sanction members of the Russian Federation and businesses controlled by the Russian government. >
Quote: petroglyphI'm not sure what you are saying? Are you saying they [congress] didn't pass legislation for lethal aid or that they have plausible deniability or nothing of the sort in the way of giving lethal aid?
Do you think we have not sent advisors as well as covert opps which are armed to Ukraine as well as munitions?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/11337518
From this article:<The Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014, which passed the Senate and House unanimously, authorizes -- but doesn’t require -- providing lethal assistance to Ukraine’s military as well as sweeping sanctions on Russia’s energy sector. The measure mandates sanctions against Rosoboronexport, the state agency that promotes Russia’s defense exports and arms trade>
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/226833-senate-passes-russian-sanctions-bill
<S. 2828, the Ukraine Freedom Support Act, directs the president to sanction members of the Russian Federation and businesses controlled by the Russian government. >
I see no problem with Arming Ukraine. They are being attacked by seperist militants trying to break out of the country.
Ukraine is an ally, so it should be our duty to help them.
Quote: Gandler
I would. But I can easily tell if somebody is wearing it improperly.
My son was an officer in the AF for
17 years and I never once saw him
in uniform. I've seen pics, but when
he was on leave he never wore it.
Quote: beachbumbabsand your whole response is to disparage her and her heritage?
Her faked heritage? If she is dumb enough
to run in 2016, I won't be the only one you
hear it from. And that's all we need, another
former professor and first term senator trying
to get elected. Didn't we learn not to that in
the 2008 election?
http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/05/genealogist-who-claimed-elizabeth-warren-was-132-cherokee-goes-silent-as-source-document-exposed-as-false/
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/14/her-heritage-claims-utterly-disproven-elizabeth-warren-doubles-down
Quote: EvenBobMy son was an officer in the AF for
17 years and I never once saw him
in uniform. I've seen pics, but when
he was on leave he never wore it.
Exactly my point. There is no reason to wear it off base at all.
National Guard I commute (far) to my weekend drills, I bring it in a bag and I change there, I don't wear it around (nowadays there is also the terrorism factor, it's not good for people to know you are in, plus also nowadays especially where I live, you have to deal with the anti-war liberals who will try to debate you or just say stupid things/heckle to you if they see you in uniform).
Plus it's just not comfortable (especially if you are in an infantry unit as I am, it will likely be dirty and sweaty), I don't know why somebody would want to wear it off base or more than they have to...
Quote: GandlerExactly my point. There is no reason to wear it off base at all.
I don't remember the last time I
saw a military person in uniform
in person. 20 years, maybe.
Quote: EvenBobI don't remember the last time I
saw a military person in uniform
in person. 20 years, maybe.
How far away do you live from a military base because you see it plenty of times while on a base and even in the city surrounding a base but off the base itself you occasionally see people in uniform at the store. I mean yeah you're not going to see it if you live hundreds of miles from a military base but if you live near one you'll see it fairly often.
Quote: GandlerQuote: petroglyphI'm not sure what you are saying? Are you saying they [congress] didn't pass legislation for lethal aid or that they have plausible deniability or nothing of the sort in the way of giving lethal aid?
Do you think we have not sent advisors as well as covert opps which are armed to Ukraine as well as munitions?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/11337518
From this article:<The Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014, which passed the Senate and House unanimously, authorizes -- but doesn’t require -- providing lethal assistance to Ukraine’s military as well as sweeping sanctions on Russia’s energy sector. The measure mandates sanctions against Rosoboronexport, the state agency that promotes Russia’s defense exports and arms trade>
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/226833-senate-passes-russian-sanctions-bill
<S. 2828, the Ukraine Freedom Support Act, directs the president to sanction members of the Russian Federation and businesses controlled by the Russian government. >
I see no problem with Arming Ukraine. They are being attacked by seperist militants trying to break out of the country.
Ukraine is an ally, so it should be our duty to help them.
Ukraine is an ally? Of who and since when? If you want to aid them so much go clean up Chernobyl.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster
That is smack dab in Russian territorial influence and has nothing to do with the US. We have 47 million of our citizens on food stamps who presumably can't feed themselves and you are ready to finance another conflict. In all these disputes that you want us to get into, where the hell is the money suppose to come from?
Do you recall that the Iraq regime change was going to pay for itself? Four trillion or so later, that ain't working out so well. Do you somehow see military conflicts as a jobs program to get everybody working again? That's Orwellian, 1984 was not a how too manual. BTW did you know that was HRC's favorite book?
Do you want to print the money [devalue the dollars in existence] and let our great, great, great grandchildren still be paying the interest on it to the banks?
Tax and spend, a neolib tactic, or borrow [from central banks] and print the money to just pay the interest, a neocon tactic. This country is failing from spending on wars we can't and shouldn't afford. You can't have it both ways. Somebody, sometime has got to give a damn about this country's future economically, before all that is left is the mega rich and the ultra poor.
How do you want to pay for this aid? We can't afford any more friends.
Quote: EvenBobI don't remember the last time I
saw a military person in uniform
in person. 20 years, maybe.
Just watch the news. There are dozens and dozens of stories of military parents surprising their kids at their school, the mall or wherever else they can think of. They are usually in uniform. It's a thing now.
Quote: 1BBJust watch the news. There are dozens and dozens of stories of military parents surprising their kids at their school, the mall or wherever else they can think of. They are usually in uniform. It's a thing now.
What does that have to do with me
seeing one in person? Believe it or
not, seeing something on TV isn't
like you actually being there.
Quote: 1BBJust watch the news. There are dozens and dozens of stories of military parents surprising their kids at their school, the mall or wherever else they can think of. They are usually in uniform. It's a thing now.
That's different, that is usually right when they get off the plane home from a deployment.
Quote: petroglyphQuote: GandlerQuote: petroglyphI'm not sure what you are saying? Are you saying they [congress] didn't pass legislation for lethal aid or that they have plausible deniability or nothing of the sort in the way of giving lethal aid?
Do you think we have not sent advisors as well as covert opps which are armed to Ukraine as well as munitions?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/11337518
From this article:<The Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014, which passed the Senate and House unanimously, authorizes -- but doesn’t require -- providing lethal assistance to Ukraine’s military as well as sweeping sanctions on Russia’s energy sector. The measure mandates sanctions against Rosoboronexport, the state agency that promotes Russia’s defense exports and arms trade>
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/226833-senate-passes-russian-sanctions-bill
<S. 2828, the Ukraine Freedom Support Act, directs the president to sanction members of the Russian Federation and businesses controlled by the Russian government. >
I see no problem with Arming Ukraine. They are being attacked by seperist militants trying to break out of the country.
Ukraine is an ally, so it should be our duty to help them.
Ukraine is an ally? Of who and since when? If you want to aid them so much go clean up Chernobyl.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster
That is smack dab in Russian territorial influence and has nothing to do with the US. We have 47 million of our citizens on food stamps who presumably can't feed themselves and you are ready to finance another conflict. In all these disputes that you want us to get into, where the hell is the money suppose to come from?
Do you recall that the Iraq regime change was going to pay for itself? Four trillion or so later, that ain't working out so well. Do you somehow see military conflicts as a jobs program to get everybody working again? That's Orwellian, 1984 was not a how too manual. BTW did you know that was HRC's favorite book?
Do you want to print the money [devalue the dollars in existence] and let our great, great, great grandchildren still be paying the interest on it to the banks?
Tax and spend, a neolib tactic, or borrow [from central banks] and print the money to just pay the interest, a neocon tactic. This country is failing from spending on wars we can't and shouldn't afford. You can't have it both ways. Somebody, sometime has got to give a damn about this country's future economically, before all that is left is the mega rich and the ultra poor.
How do you want to pay for this aid? We can't afford any more friends.
Do you want Russia to take that territory? They will likely be successful as they have support from the local population if nobody aids Ukraine.
of the C-17 that follows Air Force One
wherever it goes. It's loaded with equipment
like helos, hazmat vehicles and armored
vehicles for the president. It also carries the
SS detail that guards POTUS. I could have
seen him in uniform when he was at our
local airport with Bush, but my wife and her
sister went instead for a tour of the plane.
This is the reason AF1 costs so much to fly,
this huge expensive plane tags along on
every trip. My son says the military wastes
money like there is a bottomless pit of it,
he tried not to think about it.
Quote: EvenBobFor awhile in 2004 my son was the pilot
of the C-17 that follows Air Force One
wherever it goes. It's loaded with equipment
like helos, hazmat vehicles and armored
vehicles for the president. It also carries the
SS detail that guards POTUS. I could have
seen him in uniform when he was at our
local airport with Bush, but my wife and her
sister went instead for a tour of the plane.
This is the reason AF1 costs so much to fly,
this huge expensive plane tags along on
every trip. My son says the military wastes
money like there is a bottomless pit of it,
he tried not to think about it.
They do. Often to a sickening level. (It's probably one of the few points I can agree with petroglyphs on). And it is doubtless a result of lobbying by certain defense contractors. The military is often forced by congress to buy hundreds of thousands of vehicles (literally) that will never be driven once. That's why the military left so much stuff In Iraq that ISIS now has is because it's cheaper just to leave it to be destroyed than ship everything back when they already have way too much stuff.
But if he was on that assignment I am sure your son had a virtually unlimited personal budget for all the fancy gear they could want.
Quote: EvenBobWhat does that have to do with me
seeing one in person? Believe it or
not, seeing something on TV isn't
like you actually being there.
Well Bob, this thread is about torture so I guess we both strayed a little. Have you ever seen anyone tortured?
Quote: 1BBWell Bob, this thread is about torture so I guess we both strayed a little. Have you ever seen anyone tortured?
By the way watching 24 doesn't count :-)
Quote: GandlerQuote: petroglyphQuote: GandlerQuote: petroglyphI'm not sure what you are saying? Are you saying they [congress] didn't pass legislation for lethal aid or that they have plausible deniability or nothing of the sort in the way of giving lethal aid?
Do you think we have not sent advisors as well as covert opps which are armed to Ukraine as well as munitions?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/11337518
From this article:<The Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014, which passed the Senate and House unanimously, authorizes -- but doesn’t require -- providing lethal assistance to Ukraine’s military as well as sweeping sanctions on Russia’s energy sector. The measure mandates sanctions against Rosoboronexport, the state agency that promotes Russia’s defense exports and arms trade>
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/226833-senate-passes-russian-sanctions-bill
<S. 2828, the Ukraine Freedom Support Act, directs the president to sanction members of the Russian Federation and businesses controlled by the Russian government. >
I see no problem with Arming Ukraine. They are being attacked by seperist militants trying to break out of the country.
Ukraine is an ally, so it should be our duty to help them.
Ukraine is an ally? Of who and since when? If you want to aid them so much go clean up Chernobyl.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster
That is smack dab in Russian territorial influence and has nothing to do with the US. We have 47 million of our citizens on food stamps who presumably can't feed themselves and you are ready to finance another conflict. In all these disputes that you want us to get into, where the hell is the money suppose to come from?
Do you recall that the Iraq regime change was going to pay for itself? Four trillion or so later, that ain't working out so well. Do you somehow see military conflicts as a jobs program to get everybody working again? That's Orwellian, 1984 was not a how too manual. BTW did you know that was HRC's favorite book?
Do you want to print the money [devalue the dollars in existence] and let our great, great, great grandchildren still be paying the interest on it to the banks?
Tax and spend, a neolib tactic, or borrow [from central banks] and print the money to just pay the interest, a neocon tactic. This country is failing from spending on wars we can't and shouldn't afford. You can't have it both ways. Somebody, sometime has got to give a damn about this country's future economically, before all that is left is the mega rich and the ultra poor.
How do you want to pay for this aid? We can't afford any more friends.
Do you want Russia to take that territory? They will likely be successful as they have support from the local population if nobody aids Ukraine.
The Crimea [the jewel] voted and joined Russia already, done deal. If the local population wants to join they're historic land with their common language and culture, what has that got to do with me/us? Nada
Russia isn't a threat to America, only hegemony. The Russians and Chinese since this bs started are now trading in local currency's and the petrodollar is shut out. The Bric nations are forming their own common bank and currency. China/Russia recently inked a 20 year 400 billion contract for NG/oil deal, bypassing the WRC U.S dollar.
Russia and China are both buying up the world gold supply, China already [14] admitted 1400 tons, this year alone. Russia and India signing deal on new nuke plants as well as Iran.
I don't think it is conspiracy to predict a one world government, its biblical in fact. I don't agree that so many innocents have to sacrifice their lives for it. I think just telling the truth might work? I don't see how that would cost more lives.
There just isn't as much money in peace to be extracted from the labor of the Morlock's, by the ruling class.
Have you watched this? Education through humor, a classic: Totally worth 2 1/2 minutes of your life....http://youtu.be/LbnzhTmiyec
Quote: 1BBJust watch the news. There are dozens and dozens of stories of military parents surprising their kids at their school, the mall or wherever else they can think of. They are usually in uniform. It's a thing now.
No longer sure what the claim being made. Military sometimes leave base in utility uniforms (except maybe the marines who like to enforce stricter standards) and drive home. Sometimes they stop at stores or other errands.
But base commanders sometimes designate specific requirements.
The idea that was given here, is that you see a military person in the mall in a fatigue or utility style uniform is a fake soldier. That's just going to be wrong eventually.
I'll put money on it.
Quote: terapinedBy the way watching 24 doesn't count :-)
24 is real. Jack Bauer is real.
Quote: EvenBob24 is real. Jack Bauer is real.
OK, it's starting to make more sense now.
You think 24 is real and also Fox news is fair and balanced.
For a second there you had me going.
Quote: petroglyph
If you want to aid them so much go clean up Chernobyl.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster
Not sure how that is our problem. They are an industrialized country they have the ability to handle clean ups themselves. But their military is certainly no match for Russia without help
Quote:That is smack dab in Russian territorial influence and has nothing to do with the US. We have 47 million of our citizens on food stamps who presumably can't feed themselves and you are ready to finance another conflict. In all these disputes that you want us to get into, where the hell is the money suppose to come from?
Sending arms is not a huge investment. It is insignificant economically compared to many other things America does.
Quote:Do you recall that the Iraq regime change was going to pay for itself? Four trillion or so later, that ain't working out so well. Do you somehow see military conflicts as a jobs program to get everybody working again?
I don't recall that claim?
I don't think humanitarian aid should be stipulated to pay for itself, removing a horrible dictator is payment enough. The moral compensation is enough.
But no, I don't see it as a jobs program, I think I said earlier (perhaps in a different thread) I agree it needs to be cut. My ideal plan for be to have a mostly reserve force to be activated when necessary, we have far too many people who are active duty.
Quote:Do you want to print the money [devalue the dollars in existence] and let our great, great, great grandchildren still be paying the interest on it to the banks?
Tax and spend, a neolib tactic, or borrow [from central banks] and print the money to just pay the interest, a neocon tactic. This country is failing from spending on wars we can't and shouldn't afford. You can't have it both ways. Somebody, sometime has got to give a damn about this country's future economically, before all that is left is the mega rich and the ultra poor.
That is not a NeoCon tactic. A NeoCon tactic would be to balance the budget if they are true to their philopshy. Which is why I said earlier like many I don't think you understand Neoconservatism.
Quote:I don't think it is conspiracy to predict a one world government, its biblical in fact. I don't agree that so many innocents have to sacrifice their lives for it. I think just telling the truth might work? I don't see how that would cost more lives.
One World Government?
I am not even sure how we got into this territory... But yes I think its a crazy conspiracy theory.
And no I don't think the U.N. is part of some NWO conspiracy, even if I disagree with many of their decisions.
Quote: rxwineNo longer sure what the claim being made. Military sometimes leave base in utility uniforms (except maybe the marines who like to enforce stricter standards) and drive home. Sometimes they stop at stores or other errands.
But base commanders sometimes designate specific requirements.
The idea that was given here, is that you see a military person in the mall in a fatigue or utility style uniform is a fake soldier. That's just going to be wrong eventually.
I'll put money on it.
I've never seen a fake soldier that I know of. I suppose one could slip by.
I see lots of sailors in uniform here in Connecticut. They are from the New London sub base. (The base is actually in Groton but everyone says New London.) The Coast Guard Academy is also here and I see them in uniform as well.
Quote: 1BBI've never seen a fake soldier that I know of. I suppose one could slip by.
I see lots of sailors in uniform here in Connecticut. They are from the New London sub base. (The base is actually in Groton but everyone says New London.) The Coast Guard Academy is also here and I see them in uniform as well.
Every branch is different and has different approved wear for their uniforms.
But I live right between 2 major CG bases (AC base and Cape May base which is also their bootcamp location) and I have never seen any CG person in uniform person ever my whole life offpost (with the exception of the local recruiter and local Veteran Day Marches/Ceremonies).
But the CG Academy is a different, they are Cadets there until they graduate. I don't know the rules for their academy, but I would imagine that they are forced to wear their uniforms (dress uniforms) around so they can't engage in unseemly behavior.
In my AIT I had to (or was supposed to) wear Dress Uniform offpost so that people knew I was in initial training (so I could be reported for drinking and eating unauthorized food and such). But training is different than when you are actually in. Also, its probably their dress uniforms you see them in? In Basic Training and AIT (in the Army) you would never be offpost in ACUs. But since you are not allowed to wear civilian clothes while in training they have you wear dress uniforms around when you are allowed to go offpost.
Especially in Vegas, that's an AP bet, what with Nellis folks all over the place in fatigues (pronounced fat-EE-goos).Quote: rxwineThe idea that was given here, is that you see a military person in the mall in a fatigue or utility style uniform is a fake soldier. That's just going to be wrong eventually. I'll put money on it.
When and where have Americans been engaged in combat?Quote: petroglyphI'm not sure what you are saying? Are you saying they [congress] didn't pass legislation for lethal aid or that they have plausible deniability or nothing of the sort in the way of giving lethal aid? Do you think we have not sent advisors as well as covert opps which are armed to Ukraine as well as munitions?
The act never uses the phrases "lethal aid" or "legal assistance" or whatever.Quote: petroglyphhttp://www.democraticunderground.com/11337518 From this article: The Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014, which passed the Senate and House unanimously, authorizes -- but doesn’t require -- providing lethal assistance to Ukraine’s military as well as sweeping sanctions on Russia’s energy sector.
Again not "lethal aid, " as the world understands the conventional and clear use of the term.Quote: petroglyph[From] http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/226833-senate-passes-russian-sanctions-bill<S. 2828, the Ukraine Freedom Support Act, directs the president to sanction members of the Russian Federation and businesses controlled by the Russian government.
That makes us even, I don't think you understand it either.Quote: GandlerQuote:Which is why I said earlier like many I don't think you understand Neoconservatism.
I don't think it's a conspiracy either, I think it is just business.Quote:One World Government?
I am not even sure how we got into this territory... But yes I think its a crazy conspiracy theory.
And no I don't think the U.N. is part of some NWO conspiracy, even if I disagree with many of their decisions.
http://youtu.be/Rc7i0wCFf8g
http://youtu.be/IYH75mTrQDA
http://youtu.be/NzUkhKaNylM
The POTUS's are well vetted long before elections. It is just business. There is no magic, or great conspiracy. What power wants power gets, everything else is just a distraction. Or as they said in Rome, "bread and circuses". The business model of the Roman empire is alive and well.
Quote: petroglyphThat makes us even, I don't think you understand it either.
You can think that, but I can assure you that I do. But you are misrepresenting the basic definition of it, so its fair to say that you don't.
Quote:I don't think it's a conspiracy either, I think it is just business.
The POTUS's are well vetted long before elections. It is just business. There is no magic, or great conspiracy. What power wants power gets, everything else is just a distraction. Or as they said in Rome, "bread and circuses". The business model of the Roman empire is alive and well.
Alright, I am not going to argue about this since it is way off topic. I can't disprove this anymore than I can disprove Obama and Bush are reptilian invaders....
Quote: GandlerQuote: petroglyph
IMHO, they [neocons] seem to be the war party, and it is heating up in Ukraine, this from today:[[Wall Street would dump a few hundred trillion in derivatives on the laps of US taxpayers once again (it did), quietly and unanimously both houses passed The Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014, which authorizes "providing lethal assistance to Ukraine’s military"]] We are now admitting to giving lethal assistance to Ukraine, Putin will do the same for Kiev and this isn't good for anyone.[Except bankers and the mic] The neocons are waste deep in promoting this. This, just like Syria is none of our business and to me it's not worth American lives.
If the congress that voted for this were on the front line, the vote would be extremely different. Bring back conscription, for everybody. They vote like this because they know they will never have "skin in the game", and a revolving door policy which makes them millions of dollars in gratuities after there terms are over. To me they are criminals.
That is pretty accurate summary (as far as foreign policy) though I am less pessimistic than you. The general principle of Neocons (true NeoCons) is grounded in Classical Liberalism, freedom of the individual, free thought. However, it says Liberal values cannot protect themselves and need to be protected with force if need be.
For example No true NeoCon would be against gay marriage. Nor would they let religion influence the law. Nor would they restrict free speech.
Douglas Murray is the best (public figure) I can name off of the top of my head who is the definition of actual Neo-conservatism, because he follows all of the principles socially and militarily. Very Socially liberal, very strong militarily, very capitalistic economically.
-I actually found out about him from his debates against religion. But I later found out a book he wrote some years ago "Neoconservatism: Why We Need It". Which is where I found out he is actually one of the few people who can be labelled a true NeoCon, and pretty much all of his debates remain constant to his views.
Unfortunately I can't name an American Politician I can say the same of.
How do you get from here to thinking I don't understand Neoconservatism?
You still won't tell me who or how all this foreign conflicts will be payed for, I am still waiting.
You say neocon started off [or you] being liberal, how does a liberal want foreign conflicts?
By whom?Quote: petroglyphThe POTUS's are well vetted long before elections.
"We" do not "cover their losses." The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation does that. And the F.D.I.C. is financed by the insurance premiums that the banks pay.Quote: TankoThe change shifts more derivatives units losses to the taxpayer when these investments fail. When they win their bets, they keep the money. When they lose, we have to cover their losses.
By those that finance their campaigns. They certainly aren't vetted by the voters.Quote: SanchoPanzaBy whom?
Did you think anything in D.C. happens by accident?
Above you also answered 3 of my question with another question, so I didn't feel like getting to involved.
There is no evidence whatsoever of that.Quote: petroglyphBy those that finance their campaigns. They certainly aren't vetted by the voters.
Quote: SanchoPanza"We" do not "cover their losses." The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation does that. And the F.D.I.C. is financed by the insurance premiums that the banks pay.
The FDIC has less than 5% of assets to cover losses. The cromnibus bill slides another 300 trillion over to the fdic side of the ledgers. This is ridiculous, when they gamble and win they keep the wins, when they lose their derivative trades we cover the loses.
Glass Steagall should never have been repealed. Separating investment banks from savings banks worked since the great depression. Allowing tbtf banks to gamble with the entire financial system of the world is insane.
We never needed to cover the losses of AIG caused by Cassano.
Quote: petroglyphThe FDIC has less than 5% of assets to cover losses. The cromnibus bill slides another 300 trillion
Seriously? Trillion? It's a 1 trillion bill.
Trillions'Quote: EvenBobSeriously? Trillion? It's a 1 trillion bill.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-12-12/presenting-303-trillion-derivatives-us-taxpayers-are-now-hook
It's not a problem until it is. Look at Greece, or Cyprus. This is what happens when Wall Street isn't regulated. It's now estimated that there is 1 quadrillion of derivative exposure out there world wide. It takes a very small mistake for them to cascade.
Look what is going on in Japan with their QE.
http://www.bis.org/publ/qtrpdf/r_qt1412.pdf The BIS says global banks on hook for 691 trillion of derivative exposure, predominantly US banks
With a lurid and unfettered imagination, anything is possible. The Bank of International Settlements reports this as the global status at the end of June of 2014: "The cross-border claims of BIS reporting banks rose by $401 billion to $30.0 trillion." What are couple of zeros among friends?Quote: EvenBobSeriously? Trillion? It's a 1 trillion bill.
As for the blogger who tosses around so many trillions that he's now into quadrillions, he should stick to the adjacent discussion of those truly vaporous "chemtrails."
