USA normalizes relations with Cuba

Page 3 of 7  
Oren wrote:

Whatever as long as they aren't in DC.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
news:5f04ceef-ecaa-44c5-85bf-On Thursday, December 18, 2014 11:05:46 AM UTC-5, philo wrote:

friends

"Fuck em"
Precisely. The Saudis funded and executed the 9/11 attack but they were Bush's BFF's so he went after Iraq which had nothing to do with 9/11. He even flew the Saudis all out of the US on 9/12 when all other air travel was banned right after the attack.
<Jimmy Carter told the Shah of Iran essentially to F*** off, because of "human rights". Seems the Shah had the crazy islamic nut jobs locked up or exiled. How did that work out?>
About as well as our deposing Saddam who had the nut jobs of Iraq locked up tight. Much of ISIS is being run by Saddam's former military officers. The Shah was doomed to fail with or without Carter. Not so Saddam. Cheney and his cabal alleged that Saddam had WMDs that we needed to eliminate. WMDs that no one could find in ten years of looking. Bush should have looked in North Korea. He would have found WMD's there. He didn't because the Iraq war was all about Bush's hard-on for Saddam and had little to do with *really* eliminating WMDs in the hands of nut jobs. That was just the cover story for the feeble-minded. Philo seems to understand that.
--
Bobby G.




Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Friday, December 19, 2014 3:06:56 AM UTC-5, Robert Green wrote:

As usualy, you're full of anti-American lies. There was no Bush authorized flight for the Saudis, while the airspace was closed. There was no flight at all. The 911 Commission investigated it and showed it was a myth. The Saudis in question left once the airspace was open again. This is pure garbage from the nutty 911 deniers.
And I'm sure we;d all love to see your proof that the Saudi govt executed the 911 attack. Are you as sure about that as you are about the above lie?

Well, there you go. Which is why destabilizing Saudi Arabia is a dumb idea.

The Shah might have gone eventually anyway, but Jimmy sure helped give him a big push. "Human rights....." :Human rights....", what a moron.
Cheney and

Based on CIA intelligence. British, Israeli intelligence believed he had them too. And we know for sure he had them in the past, that he had used them. Just days before the war began, with 300,000 coalition forces on Iraq's border, Hans Blix, in his final report to the UN, said that Iraq was still not fully cooperating with the UN weapons inspectors and that they could not account for Iraqs WMDs.
It's nice being a Monday morning quarterback. Of course if it had turned out Iraq had WMDs and later used them, you'd be here harping about what an idiot Bush was. You'd be saying how everyone knew he still had WMDs. The CIA knew it, British intel, Israeli intel. You'd cite the many speeches by Bill, Hillary Clinton, Reid, Kerry, Edwards, saying Iraq had WMDs and what a threat they were. You'd have been calling for Bush's impeachment because he didn't act.
WMDs

He didn't have to look. We knew and the rest of the world knows that they have had a nuclear weapons program for a long time, at least back to the days of the Clinton administration. I recall him sending Jimmy Carter over there, to play footsie with them, giving them aid if they would just pretend to be nice. Kind of like what Obama and Kerry are doing right now with Iran.
He didn't because the Iraq

I see, so you're advocating a US bombing and invasion of North Korea?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/19/2014 01:45 AM, Robert Green wrote:

Thank you!
No president has ever had the guts to take on North Korea.
No president has had the guts to tell our HUGE enemy Saudi Arabia where to go.
North Korea at least does not pretend to be our friend and they certainly did not sent people over here to blow things up like the Saudi's did.
At any rate, out of all the problems in the world, that of Cuba is at the bottom of the list.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, December 20, 2014 9:29:10 AM UTC-5, philo  wrote:

e

He

l was

p

d up

The

and

Ds

d in

raq

over

OK, it's your turn. What exactly would you do right now to "take on" North Korea?


They aren't our enemy. Just because you don't like them, doesn't make them our enemy. Would you prefer they became like Libya, Syria, Iraq? Good grief. We need more stable countries in the ME, not more chaos.


Which of course is a lie. The Saudi Govt didn't send anyone here on 911.

So why is Obama suddenly kissing their ass? Answer: He's desperate for anything to take attention off the recent disaster in the Congressional elections and all his policy failures.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/20/2014 08:42 AM, trader_4 wrote:

Build a Disney Land there of course.
sheesh that was a simple one

Of course they are our enemy.

There is no government in Saudi Arabia so I guess you are correct when you say their government didn't send anyone here.

Obama is doing very little about Cuba at all... but again...out of all the troubles in the world Cuba is at the bottom of the list, we have more important matters elsewhere

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, December 20, 2014 11:16:01 AM UTC-5, philo  wrote:

In other words, despite all your bloviating of how others have not "taken on" NK, you have no clue what to actually do yourself.

e

e

Which of course is either ignorance or another lie:
http://www.saudiembassy.net/about/country-information/government/
"Government
Saudi Arabia is a monarchy based on Islam. The government is headed by the King, who is also the commander in chief of the military.
The King appoints a Crown Prince to help him with his duties. The Crown Pri nce is second in line to the throne.
The King governs with the help of the Council of Ministers, also called the Cabinet. There are 22 government ministries that are part of the Cabinet. Each ministry specializes in a different part of the government, such as fo reign affairs, education and finance.
The King is also advised by a legislative body called the Consultative Coun cil (Majlis Al-Shura). The Council proposes new laws and amends existing on es. It consists of 150 members who are appointed by the King for four-year terms that can be renewed.
The country is divided into 13 provinces, with a governor and deputy govern or in each one. Each province has its own council that advises the governor and deals with the development of the province. "

onal

re

Not according to the lamestream media. They say the trade embargo is all but over, tourism, cuban cigars, massive trade are all coming soon.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/20/2014 11:12 AM, trader_4 wrote:

Ok, all kidding aside.
If any country is a real and serious threat to the US, then we simply need to blow them the hell up.
If they are not a big enough threat to us that we need to wipe them off the face of the earth...then we can just leave them the fuck alone.

X

Yep, like I said...no government and indeed our enemy.

Who the hell cares about Cuba, it's a non-problem
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, December 20, 2014 5:17:52 PM UTC-5, philo  wrote:


Which obviously again does not answer the very basic question I raised:
"What exactly would you do right now to "take on" North Korea? " You used the term "take on", said that no US president has had the guts to take on NK. So, again, specifically, right now, what would you do? No more bloviating and trying to weasel away.
Aside from that, it's a bizarre foreign policy, call it the "binary foreign policy".
Also how does this binary policy relate to Saudi Arabia? You keep saying to tell them to "F off". That isn't leaving them alone, nor is it wiping them out. Right now, we are leaving them alone. Make up your mind please.
Since you dragged any country that is a threat to us into this, add Iran to the list. Specifics please, what would you do with Iran, right now? Leave them alone or wipe them out? Your choice.

OK, now you're a liar.

where

ll

You and Obama do apparently. I guess he didn't follow your binary foreign policy idea there either, he's neither leaving it alone, nor wiping it out.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/21/2014 07:43 AM, trader_4 wrote:

Korea is a tough one and I do not pretend to have an answer. It should have been finished off in 1953 but instead a bandage was placed over a festering wound.
My original answer of building a Disney Land there may be the best thing to do. It would not be very civilized of us to blow them off the map.

To me, Saudi Arabia and Iran are both our enemies.
I just give a little more credit to Iran because they are not smiling to our face.
What the US needs to do is abandon /all/ oil imports from the mid-East.
There is enough right here in the US to supply our needs if we supplement our power requirements with solar.
100 square miles of panels in a place like Arizona is all it would take.
What the US needed to have done in both Iraq and Afghanistan is to have totally decimated the countries like we did to Germany and Japan then never leave.
Heck I was stationed on Germany 25 years after WW-II ended.
Had we treated Afghanistan and Iraq the way we handled Germany and Japan, we would not be seeing the shit that we see today.
OK, you don't think decimating the two countries is a good idea?
If not, then we need to stay the fuck out.
Applying a bandage to a festering wound is not going to help the victim but it can infect the care giver
Xere is no government in Saudi Arabia so I guess you are correct when

No I am not a liar. I do not consider a dictatorship a government...and that's exactly what a monarchy is.
If Saudi Arabia is such a great place, why don't you and your wife move there, I'm sure she'd love it.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sunday, December 21, 2014 9:03:49 AM UTC-5, philo  wrote:


It's not very much of an answer. Who exactly is going to build a "Disney L and"? Certainly not Disney. There is very little foreign investment in NK, excep t for China. It's not just the US that has issues and is pissed off at them. Pl us there are currently UN sanctions in place, that would prohibit US investmen t there. So, if you ever want to get to that point, then you'd have to A - restore normal diplomatic relations B - end the sanctions C - Make nice to Kim Jung Un who just this week inflicted $100mil in terrorism against Sony, threatened the USA with another 911, etc
You'd do that, while they are actively building nuclear weapons, thumbing their nose at the UN, and directly threatening the USA as well as SK, Japan, sinking SK ships, firing on them, etc?

r


Which isn't consistent with your stated policy of leaving them alone or wiping them off the map. And what we import or don't import from there isn't going to hurt them. Oil is fungible, there is a world market and it will be sold anyway. I agree there are economic reasons and national security reasons why the USA would be better off importing less oil. But to think we can then ignore the middle east, let anyone take over the oil there, is naive. How about ISIS takes over the oil?

Sure, solar has been a big success so far..... It's the highest cost electricity there is, by far. The only reason it's gotten anywhere is because the govt is heavily subsidizing it, to hide the true cost. Plus, we aren't burning oil to generate electricity, with rare exceptions, anyway.

This analysis says you're off by a factor of 100, which sounds about right. Ain't no way you're going to provide the power for the USA with something only 100 square miles. I'd be happy to see your math/reference.
http://www.energytrendsinsider.com/2008/02/25/running-the-u-s-on-solar-powe r/


We only decimated Germany and Japan because they had formidable military forces that were still fighting and would not surrender. Iraq/Afghanistan, we decimated their military, they surrendered. So, you'd go on to needless ly kill innocent civilians, women and children that had nothing to do with Saddam or the Taliban? My God.
Regarding never leaving, we did pretty much leave both Germany and Japan. We set up democracies, gave them enormous aid. Yeah, we have some residual troops there, but we're not involved in governing the country. Also leaving troops anywhere is clearly contrary to your binary foreign policy of leaving them alone or wiping them out.

So, following 911 you would have stayed out of Afghanistan? Or you would have bombed all the civilian, women and children, when they had no military that was capable of threatening the USA? The latter would have been a war crime, rightly condemned by the whole world.


What you consider, doesn't matter. Look up the definition.


Which of course is irrelevant. Whether it's a great place, whether one wants to live there, has nothing to do with telling them to F** off, destabilizing another friendly country in the mideast, etc.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/21/2014 08:34 AM, trader_4 wrote:

X
Like I said, I don't have the answer to North Korea and since 1953 no one else has either. I am quite sure the US has enough missiles programmed to get there asap should they actually try anything...and other than containing them there is not much more we can do.

I fully realize the idea of us going in there and just plain blowing up the entire mid-East is an insane idea and I was speaking figuratively if I implied I really meant to do that...but no matter what, we need to get our oil interests /out/ of the mid-East.
If the US were in no way dependent on them for oil it would cloud our thinking less.
As far as ISIS goes. since no one else is going to do it, the good old US will have to...and of course get criticized by everyone else on Earth for doing so

The article you linked to confirmed my figures so I don't see why your are arguing .
Of course when I said "going solar" that does not mean we need to go 100% solar. There is plenty of oil right here and in Canada. I /think/ we get more oil from Canada than we get from the mid-East anyway

After 911 I would have done sufficient research to find out /exactly/ where the threat came from and completely wiped them out.
Since the terrorists apparently came from Afghanistan then that would have been the place to go. Although the US did put some effort into going after terrorists there, the majority of the effort was put into Iraq.
A considerably bigger problem than Iraq (Iraq was not a threat to the US) is the issue of Saudi Arabia which you say is our good friend. The Saudis were where the terrorists came from and the US in one way or another needed to (and still needs to ) address that issue.
Bottom line:
Had Bush gone to the source of the problem we'd not be in the mess we are in today,
Of course we'd just be in some kind of other mess...that's the way the world is.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Iraq was shown to have tried to kill Daddy Bush after he was out of office. At the time, I noted that the run up seemed to be a Princess Bride Moment: " I am George W. Bush. You tried to kill my father. Prepare to die."
--
?Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.?
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
'Stormin Mormon[_10_ Wrote: > ;3323346']On 12/18/2014 1:32 PM, philo wrote:-

I'm not a liar, but when my wife asked me if the new dress she wanted to buy made her look fat, I said "No". I'm not a liar, but when my neighbor's kid pressed me for an answer, I said "Yes, Jamie, there is a Santa Claus."
Stormin: some things arem't stictly black or white, but various shades of grey.
I photocopied my income tax return at work, and now the receptionist is telling everyone that I'm a thief.
There's a difference between a smoker, some kid who gets an adult to buy him cigarettes so he can supposedly impress his friends, someone who will have an occasional cigarette when offered one and someone who never smokes under any circumstances.
"Not a smoker" means someone who isn't hooked and doesn't normally smoke. It doesn't mean someone who never smokes under any circumstance. So, to say "I'm not a smoker, but I had a cigarette at last year's company Christmas Party" is not a contradiction.
I used to watch that bunk all the time on Sunday morning TV where some TV evangelist would say "If you ever sinned, you are by definition a "sinner"", and I thought "What bunk". If I pounded out something that didn't make sense on a piano, does that make me a "musician"?
--
nestork


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/19/2014 11:37 AM, nestork wrote:

There is an old joke I can't remember well enough to quote. It goes some thing about "I give to the poor, alms and work for the church. I help little old ladies across the street. But.... just f-k ONE GOAT!!!!!
Some things only require one.
- . Christopher A. Young Learn about Jesus www.lds.org .
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/19/2014 10:37 AM, nestork wrote:

<troll comments snipped unread>

Yep.
A smart move when dealing with your wife or neighbor's kid.

Last time I had a cigar was 20 years ago.
Who knows , maybe I'll have another at my funeral?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Oren wrote:

Which will be peeling by the time Shrillary is sworn in.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

He

was

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

    And Bin Laden's father was Bush senior's partner in ... oil.     They made a fortune out of 9/11     All very strange.     []'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, December 20, 2014 8:51:56 AM UTC-5, Shadow wrote:


Nothing strange just more 911 deniers loony claims, with little basis in fact. Then guys like you take it to the next level. All you have in the case of the Bush oil company was that many decades ago, a private investor who put some money into the Bush oil company, was also doing business with the Bin Laden family. The person who made the investme nt says that it was his own money, had nothing to do with the Bin Ladens. The investment was a whopping $50K. Does that sound like Bin Laden kind of money to you? Or more likely it was what the person has said, that it was just his own money? THAT is all you have. And only a lying loon would turn that into "Bin Laden's father was Bush's senior partner". Good grief, how you fabricate and lie.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.