The Watering Hole

What the fuck is wrong with our government?

We haven't finished up war with Iraq and Afghanistan and have threatened Iran, and now North Korea. What next? who the fuck do we think we are? Ya think maybe we should mind our own business and try to help our own people for a while? Damn. Fucking Obama's worse than Bush. Lol!!


http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/26/korea-north-combat-idUSL3N0CI14H20130326?feedType=RSS&feedName=industrialsSector&rpc=43

When have we said anything different to these countries?  We made a big BOOM BOOM.  We let it get out and gave it to our buddies.  It's old tech and it gets you a seat at the big boy table.  How do you stop another country from doing science?  How do you give tech to your buddies and expect tech won't be given/developed by those with resources and friends of their own?  With BOOM BOOM?



I'm not getting anywhere near that last sentence you threw down, I wouldn't know...

"threw down".  ;D ;D

Exactly, we haven't said anything different.


I would think that if a "Rogue Nation" was to use big BOOM BOOM directly, it would be a death sentence...becoming the Hyundai of noox would present quite a problem tho...

No one can win an election on the idea of "no war."  Look at Ron Paul.
And... lest I remind you AGAIN... you, and more than a majority of the country, voted for Bush AFTER he started both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.

charger — Mar 27, 2013No one can win an election on the idea of "no war."  Look at Ron Paul.
And... lest I remind you AGAIN... you, and more than a majority of the country, voted for Bush AFTER he started both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.

Let me explain, since you've jumped to your own conclusions, as usual lately.

This isn't a bash Obama observation. Bush started it, Obama's continuing it. Regardless of who the President is or was, we are either in wars or threatening military action way to damn much. Thats the point.

The reason I voted for Bush the second time is in part, because we were in the middle of war. I damn sure wouldn't have voted for Kerry under any circumstance. I don't think changing leaders in the middle of war is a good idea. I guess it was a war. Whatever you call it.

I think we need to keep out of other countries damn business and worry about our own folks for a while. Our economy. Our country. And especially, what our corrupt government is doing.

charger — Mar 27, 2013No one can win an election on the idea of "no war."  Look at Ron Paul.
And... lest I remind you AGAIN... you, and more than a majority of the country, voted for Bush AFTER he started both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.

This is the new pub move, at least fer the moment, they have bought Libertarianism...not the ideas completely (not that they were too far off from their own) but they seem to be buying the party itself.  heh heh

Hook, you're not making a whole lot of sense.  You're saying Obama should end the war, but you voted for Bush "because we were in the middle of a war."  I'm fucking confused.  

I didn't support either war, Afghanistan because, well, those who don't learn history are doomed to repeat it... no one has ever really won a war in Afghanistan, and Westerners and Russians have been fighting there since about 1870.  And I didn't support the war in Iraq.  I thought it was a crock of horseshit.  And guess what... Obama was one of the few not to support that one either.  But here we are, at war.  You can't just pull out without it looking like we lost.  But ultimately, it's hard to say that we are winning.  So we're kind of fucked.  He's kind of fucked.  History will judge George Bush more unkindly for the wars he got us into then for the financial crisis, of that I am sure.  Because even in the best case, no one ever really comes out of war happy.

It is kinda funny.  We aren't out fast enough to call it "cut and run" and yet up until he parroted Obama in the last debate, Mitt, putting forth the party line, wasn't into leaving.  So we, for the moment, see a shift to Libertarian isolationism coming from people who voted the NeoConz in.  The old lines aren't working too well right now...

charger — Mar 27, 2013Hook, you're not making a whole lot of sense.  You're saying Obama should end the war, but you voted for Bush "because we were in the middle of a war."  I'm fucking confused.  

I didn't support either war, Afghanistan because, well, those who don't learn history are doomed to repeat it... no one has ever really won a war in Afghanistan, and Westerners and Russians have been fighting there since about 1870.  And I didn't support the war in Iraq.  I thought it was a crock of horseshit.  And guess what... Obama was one of the few not to support that one either.  But here we are, at war.  You can't just pull out without it looking like we lost.  But ultimately, it's hard to say that we are winning.  So we're kind of fucked.  He's kind of fucked.  History will judge George Bush more unkindly for the wars he got us into then for the financial crisis, of that I am sure.  Because even in the best case, no one ever really comes out of war happy.

Thats out of line. If your gonna quote me, quote it correctly. The first part of that was, "IS IN PART". Thats kinda important if your gonna quote people that you do it correctly and accurately. And your not confused. Thats very easy to understand. You act like just because I voted for Bush, that I also voted to go to war with Iraq. Obama didn't have a vote on the invasion of Iraq. He vocally was against it, but had he been able to vote for or against, are you sure his feelings would have been the same? I mean, he's throwing threats around to Iran, North Korea, etc. I think he could have been easily persuaded, don't you? Knowing what we know now?

Hookbender — Mar 28, 2013[quote author=charger link=1364339287/0#7 date=1364424424]Hook, you're not making a whole lot of sense.  You're saying Obama should end the war, but you voted for Bush "because we were in the middle of a war."  I'm fucking confused.  

I didn't support either war, Afghanistan because, well, those who don't learn history are doomed to repeat it... no one has ever really won a war in Afghanistan, and Westerners and Russians have been fighting there since about 1870.  And I didn't support the war in Iraq.  I thought it was a crock of horseshit.  And guess what... Obama was one of the few not to support that one either.  But here we are, at war.  You can't just pull out without it looking like we lost.  But ultimately, it's hard to say that we are winning.  So we're kind of fucked.  He's kind of fucked.  History will judge George Bush more unkindly for the wars he got us into then for the financial crisis, of that I am sure.  Because even in the best case, no one ever really comes out of war happy.

Thats out of line. If your gonna quote me, quote it correctly. The first part of that was, "IS IN PART". Thats kinda important if your gonna quote people that you do it correctly and accurately. And your not confused. Thats very easy to understand. You act like just because I voted for Bush, that I also voted to go to war with Iraq. Obama didn't have a vote on the invasion of Iraq. He vocally was against it, but had he been able to vote for or against, are you sure his feelings would have been the same? I mean, he's throwing threats around to Iran, North Korea, etc. I think he could have been easily persuaded, don't you? Knowing what we know now?

And I quote:

I don't think changing leaders in the middle of war is a good idea.

This is part two of the reason we are always at war. If a president accomplishes nothing else, getting us into a war is usually a safe bet to keep himself in office.  

I have to wonder if all these sudden anti-war voices would be so anti-war if the president was someone they liked.  You have to admit it's a little strange how seemingly every conservative is suddenly anti-war... hell, even you were pro-war when the guy you liked started it.  Add this to the long list of things that conservatives hate because Obama supports it.

Obama's best move would be to start adopting conservative ideas.  For example, he could become anti-abortion, and watch the conservatives all switch to pro-abortion stances.

charger — Mar 29, 2013[quote author=Hookbender link=1364339287/0#9 date=1364506202][quote author=charger link=1364339287/0#7 date=1364424424]Hook, you're not making a whole lot of sense.  You're saying Obama should end the war, but you voted for Bush "because we were in the middle of a war."  I'm fucking confused.  

I didn't support either war, Afghanistan because, well, those who don't learn history are doomed to repeat it... no one has ever really won a war in Afghanistan, and Westerners and Russians have been fighting there since about 1870.  And I didn't support the war in Iraq.  I thought it was a crock of horseshit.  And guess what... Obama was one of the few not to support that one either.  But here we are, at war.  You can't just pull out without it looking like we lost.  But ultimately, it's hard to say that we are winning.  So we're kind of fucked.  He's kind of fucked.  History will judge George Bush more unkindly for the wars he got us into then for the financial crisis, of that I am sure.  Because even in the best case, no one ever really comes out of war happy.

Thats out of line. If your gonna quote me, quote it correctly. The first part of that was, "IS IN PART". Thats kinda important if your gonna quote people that you do it correctly and accurately. And your not confused. Thats very easy to understand. You act like just because I voted for Bush, that I also voted to go to war with Iraq. Obama didn't have a vote on the invasion of Iraq. He vocally was against it, but had he been able to vote for or against, are you sure his feelings would have been the same? I mean, he's throwing threats around to Iran, North Korea, etc. I think he could have been easily persuaded, don't you? Knowing what we know now?

And I quote:

I don't think changing leaders in the middle of war is a good idea.

This is part two of the reason we are always at war. If a president accomplishes nothing else, getting us into a war is usually a safe bet to keep himself in office.  

I have to wonder if all these sudden anti-war voices would be so anti-war if the president was someone they liked.  You have to admit it's a little strange how seemingly every conservative is suddenly anti-war... hell, even you were pro-war when the guy you liked started it.  Add this to the long list of things that conservatives hate because Obama supports it.

Obama's best move would be to start adopting conservative ideas.  For example, he could become anti-abortion, and watch the conservatives all switch to pro-abortion stances.


I see your points.

I was told that Saddam had WMD's, like everyone, and how dangerous Saddam was and could be. With WMD's. What can I say? However, going to war, or to get Saddam, didn't have to include taking over the country and all this shit for years and years.

We're out of Iraq.

After what, 9 years? I don't think anyone imagined a 9 or 10 year take over of Iraq,  part of the equation.

But now we see how our government operates and how much money and american lives are at risk even being at war with little ole Iraq....I think the entire country has a much different opinion of war.

Sure, they do right now.  But give us a few years, or another terrorist attack, or another pile of falsified evidence... would you be surprised if people were behind the next war. too? I won't.  People always back the war when it starts, and they back the politicians who start them.  When a war is crappy and drags on for ten years, people get tired of it.

I agree. But if our government says we need to get rid of a Saddam next time, we know they can do that without taking over a entire country and being involved in a war with a bunch of savages who know only war as a way of life. What I mean by this is for example, the way we got Binny. All this other war shit was just a huge waste of money and lives, and time.

Hookbender — Mar 31, 2013I agree. But if our government says we need to get rid of a Saddam next time, we know they can do that without taking over a entire country and being involved in a war with a bunch of savages who know only war as a way of life.

Strange thing to say... How so?  

Are the savages the Iraqi's in this scenario?  We supported them in their war against Iran.  Are the savages the Taliban?  We supported them as well as well as their predecessors who fought the Soviets.  We changed out the people who were in control of the resources of these nations.  

Hookbender — Mar 31, 2013What I mean by this is for example, the way we got Binny. All this other war shit was just a huge waste of money and lives, and time.

What was the way we got binny?  

A huge wast of time, money and lives for some and a boon for others.

I don't get anything your trying to imply.

I was trying to understand what you were saying.  What were you saying?

The North Korean people - the real losers in anything that's currently happening and about to happen...  Here's one of those many "Korea at night" pics.  They don't even get electricity, but they have the bomb and looking to provoke the world.  Wonderful...  ::)

I just don't understand why it's the U.S. that has to get involved in all this shit. We always are right up front in everything.

I don't know how serious North K. threats are. However, they have threatened to bomb us or whatever. What a world of shit. Scary times right now with N.K. and Iran.