Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Hey, you know now that Iraq's basically over, and Afghanistan has a hard date for winding down, it looks like after more than a decade at war, we might finally be able to relax and enjoy a "peace dividend" unless, oh son of a b--   (foxnews.com) divider line 317
    More: Sad, Afghanistan, Iraq, Latin American, United States, Gil Kerlikowske, border protection, Mexican Army, arms exports  
•       •       •

34990 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Feb 2013 at 12:40 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



317 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-02-04 11:43:40 AM  
You really thought the military industrial complex was going to sit on its hands, subby?
 
2013-02-04 12:27:07 PM  
I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty. The REAL problems stem from my fellow Americans excession consumption of illegal drugs.

/Legalizing pot would be a step in the right direction, IMHO
 
2013-02-04 12:42:16 PM  
We just HAVE to blow the money shooting at brown people.
 
2013-02-04 12:43:05 PM  
Nice job obummer !!!
 
2013-02-04 12:43:43 PM  
Admittedly... it would seem fun to run down a drug boat in an Apache...  or an A-10.  Just mess with them for a bit with the cannons before you lock on and blow them out of the water.
 
2013-02-04 12:43:51 PM  
Pax Americana, biatches.
 
2013-02-04 12:44:54 PM  

nmemkha: We just HAVE to blow the money shooting at brown people.


In the War on Drugs, everything is black or white.
 
2013-02-04 12:45:27 PM  
www.wearysloth.com

I have no recollection, Senator
 
2013-02-04 12:46:02 PM  

Cythraul: military industrial complex


This term always seems so crude to me.  Sometimes these interests do not cooperate.
 
2013-02-04 12:46:19 PM  
Budgets: use it or lose it.
 
2013-02-04 12:47:03 PM  

Cythraul: You really thought the military industrial complex was going to sit on its hands, subby?


I'd rather have them trashing another country than building more jails and filling them with people who commit victimless "crimes".


Sorry South America, but it's you or us. Nothing personal.



i.imgur.com
 
2013-02-04 12:47:09 PM  
Why is Obama driving up the price of weed?
 
2013-02-04 12:47:21 PM  
war will never be over until the great & terrible day of the Lord!
 
2013-02-04 12:48:04 PM  
Yea, cause the war on drugs is going sooo well...
 
2013-02-04 12:48:26 PM  

nmemkha: We just HAVE to blow the money shooting at brown people.


Would you prefer we shoot at really white people? I hear Germany gets uppity every few decades or so. Idiot
 
2013-02-04 12:49:45 PM  
Oh yeah thanks America,your unrelenting focus on prohibition has made the world a better place. For heartless cops and the most ruthless inhuman gangsters.
 
2013-02-04 12:50:35 PM  
Grist for the grinder.
 
2013-02-04 12:50:56 PM  

nmemkha: We just HAVE to blow the money shooting at brown people.


There are plenty of brown people in Africa.  That's why we're going to 35 or more countries over there.



i.qkme.me
 
2013-02-04 12:51:36 PM  

AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty. The REAL problems stem from my fellow Americans excession consumption of illegal drugs.

/Legalizing pot would be a step in the right direction, IMHO


I'm sorry sir... Did I really just hear a US Military Vet take an alternative position to that ordered to the nation the Federal Government? 

<favorites>
<passes out>
 
2013-02-04 12:51:54 PM  

The Glorified Jailer: Why is Obama driving up the price of weed?


I was under the impression that the good stuff was grown in the US and you only got "ditch weed" from Mexico/ Latin America.
 
2013-02-04 12:54:18 PM  
"
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence - economic, political, even spiritual - is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.

"
 
2013-02-04 12:54:26 PM  
www.atypicallyrelevant.com
 
2013-02-04 12:54:40 PM  

Torqueknot: The Glorified Jailer: Why is Obama driving up the price of weed?

I was under the impression that the good stuff was grown in the US and you only got "ditch weed" from Mexico/ Latin America.


You are correct, however if K-Mart and Wal-Mart is taken out of the picture Target drives it's prices up due to increased demand.  Savy?
 
2013-02-04 12:55:15 PM  

SpectroBoy: Cythraul: You really thought the military industrial complex was going to sit on its hands, subby?

I'd rather have them trashing another country than building more jails and filling them with people who commit victimless "crimes".
Sorry South America, but it's you or us. Nothing personal.

[i.imgur.com image 850x605]


"Central" America would be more accurate. Chile and Argentina (South America) don't seem to have as much of a drug trade as Central America (Mexico, etc) and North America (The US & Canada).
 
2013-02-04 12:56:08 PM  
War is profitable for the one percent.

End of discussion.
 
2013-02-04 12:56:17 PM  
My last cruise on active duty was patrolling the Mexican west coast. What a joke. We tracked a  "mother ship" for days yet when we messaged for permission to board them, in the time it took to get a response the "mother ship" suddenly decided to move in to Mexican territorial waters where we could not now board them without the consent of the Mexican government. So sure enough, we hang around (finally showing ourselves since it was obvious that they now knew we were there) and watch the Mexican Navy gunboat conduct a search and report finding nothing.

Well, maybe a stray wad of cash, right?
 
2013-02-04 12:56:37 PM  
One thing should be clear with drugs: if you make them illegal, you are basically guaranteeing large and ongoing profits for organized crime, so that should always be taken into account when deciding which to ban, meaning that only things that are seriously dangerous should be banned, which things like alcohol, mj, cocaine and so on should be regulated, taxed, and public awareness campaigns to mitigate the harms, etc.
 
2013-02-04 12:56:40 PM  

Pair-o-Dice: Yea, cause the war on drugs is going sooo well...


Since 2000 we've spent over $600 a second on the war on drugs for no appreciable positive outcome.

/true story
 
2013-02-04 12:57:29 PM  
While I'm all for legalization of some drugs, commitment of military assets to dealing with drugs isn't that bad.  Even with pot legal, we'll still have issues with things like heroin which I assume won't be legalized any time soon.  In additional to that, some cartels present border security problems.  Others have gotten in local politics and are destabilizing regimes in their home country (or started as a rebel movement that sells drugs to fund operations).

Just look at Mexico, where mayors who stand up to corruption and cartels die in a hail of gunfire.  I'm not exactly bothered by the thought of the Zetas coming into contact with a USMC platoon and finding out what it feels like to be at a firepower disadvantage.

Honestly 20 billion or so does not seem that excessive.  If the cost balloons out of control, then we need to think about scaling back funding, but it doesn't seem to be at that point.  If anything I'd rather see more attempts to build up Latin American forces along the lines of how we helped train and build the Egyptian Army.  The end result in Egypt was a professional military that refused orders to crush the protests and now is helping to check their new President and his power grabs.  Spend the time and money to build various armies down there into something like that seems to have value.
 
2013-02-04 12:57:40 PM  
Don't want so much money and blood over drugs?  Stop sending the drug cartels your bucks.  Question the nearly world-wide legal prohibitions all you want, but as long as they're in place a cocaine habit, as well as one for a lot of other narcotics, is funding the cartels.

I have no problem with DIY folks, but pot and shrooms aren't ratcheting up the kill count like the industry surrounding cocaine, meth, and heroin either.
 
2013-02-04 12:58:21 PM  

Cythraul: You really thought the military industrial complex was going to sit on its hands, subby?


Hey, I'd rather them take the War on Drugs (tm) off of our shore and keep poor pot-smokers out of prison just coz they have an ounce or two.

Overall, though, our priorities are horribly misplaced.
 
2013-02-04 12:59:07 PM  
zarberg

Pair-o-Dice: Yea, cause the war on drugs is going sooo well...

Since 2000 we've spent over $600 a second on the war on drugs for no appreciable positive outcome.


It is because we need to spend more.
 
2013-02-04 01:00:15 PM  
Send in the Drones!
 
2013-02-04 01:00:48 PM  
Obama 2016.
 
2013-02-04 01:00:53 PM  

AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty.


I'll second that.

/retired uscg.
 
2013-02-04 01:00:56 PM  
How about spending that money at home, treating and preventing drug addiction?

Nevermind, playing world cop and blowing stuff up is so much better for our ego.
 
2013-02-04 01:01:44 PM  

TwowheelinTim: AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty.

I'll second that.

/retired uscg.


Two in one day, I'm going to farking die!
 
2013-02-04 01:02:16 PM  

Cache: War is profitable for the one percent.

End of discussion.


It also helps keep the rabble in line.
 
2013-02-04 01:03:14 PM  

drayno76: TwowheelinTim: AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty.

I'll second that.

/retired uscg.

Two in one day, I'm going to farking die!


What, you have me on ignore?
 
2013-02-04 01:03:20 PM  
100+ years ago Alcohol, cocaine and Pot were legal and everyone was doing ok. We stomped on it becasue of a few idiots and here we are today. You take something away and it makes it special and a have to have item. Enough people see its not a good idea to over do and you will not have the problem. those that have the problem need to be taken care of medically not with the courts.

Im a Conservative and I can see all this fighting  is BS. Grandstanding on an issue that has no freaking end .There is always someone willing to take the place of the last guy that fell. There is and always will be a market for this stuff.
 
2013-02-04 01:03:53 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: My last cruise on active duty was patrolling the Mexican west coast.


Were you in the CG or USN?
 
2013-02-04 01:04:32 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: My last cruise on active duty was patrolling the Mexican west coast. What a joke. We tracked a  "mother ship" for days yet when we messaged for permission to board them, in the time it took to get a response the "mother ship" suddenly decided to move in to Mexican territorial waters where we could not now board them without the consent of the Mexican government. So sure enough, we hang around (finally showing ourselves since it was obvious that they now knew we were there) and watch the Mexican Navy gunboat conduct a search and report finding nothing.

Well, maybe a stray wad of cash, right?


Sounds like we need to start importing Somali pirates to the Mexican Coast.
 
2013-02-04 01:04:34 PM  
Sigh, FTA:  Last year $830 million, almost $9 out of every $10 of U.S. law enforcement and military aid spent in the region, went toward countering narcotics, up 30 percent in the past decade.

"Countering narcotics" pays pretty well.
 
2013-02-04 01:05:22 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: My last cruise on active duty was patrolling the Mexican west coast. What a joke. We tracked a  "mother ship" for days yet when we messaged for permission to board them, in the time it took to get a response the "mother ship" suddenly decided to move in to Mexican territorial waters where we could not now board them without the consent of the Mexican government. So sure enough, we hang around (finally showing ourselves since it was obvious that they now knew we were there) and watch the Mexican Navy gunboat conduct a search and report finding nothing.

Well, maybe a stray wad of cash, right?


No doubt.  I really hate it when I'm out of my jurisdiction and I see someone who might be doing something that is illegal within my own jurisdiction.  And then when I ask them if I can come take a look to see if they are doing something that isn't illegal where we are, but is illegal in my jurisdiction, they immediately move to a jurisdiction where I'm not allowed to follow and harass them.  I mean, seriously, it's like they think they have rights or that I have limitations on my power or something.  They're clearly crazy.  Or terrorists.  Or crazy terrorists.
 
2013-02-04 01:05:27 PM  
This kind of makes sense to me. I know it seems like make-work for the putative "Military-Industrial Complex," but killing criminals while undermining their business via legalization seems like a good idea. Just because marijuana and cocaine are legal isn't going to make the small, standing armies of various trafficking organizations suddenly start clocking 9-5 in an office or retail outlet anytime soon. These guys deal drugs because the illegality of said drugs gives them revenue, rather than doing it because they want to provide drugs to the needy masses. They're in it for the money, and would just find some other black market opportunity.
 
2013-02-04 01:06:44 PM  
# of times word used at Hagel confirmation hearing

War: 160
Peace: 2
 
2013-02-04 01:07:08 PM  
On duty as we speak

www.imfdb.org
 
2013-02-04 01:07:21 PM  
These idiots should all be forced to read Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad.

lugubrious drollery
 
2013-02-04 01:07:25 PM  
ALL the die-hard libs who blindly support Obama are just as foolish as all the die-hard conservatives who blindly supported GW Bush.
 
2013-02-04 01:07:38 PM  

david_gaithersburg: Just what the fark did you libs think the government was going to do with all of the extra tax money you've been chomping at the bit to give them.  You voted for this shiat, own it, or wake up and join your local Tea Party.


Nicely done. This could have been 10/10, but the "join your local Tea Party"  was a little excessive; it kinda set you back a few points. I'll give you 6/10.

Still, you should get some bites (besides mine of course).
 
2013-02-04 01:09:35 PM  
The designer drugs are also a result of the drug war. Would bath salts even have been discovered if it weren't so profitable? The damage done by some of the new drugs is worse than what they replace. Meth seems to be destroying peoples lives faster than cocaine with worse health effects.
 
2013-02-04 01:11:06 PM  

Cythraul: You really thought the military industrial complex was going to sit on its hands, subby?


www.sheppardsoftware.com

I warned you.
 
2013-02-04 01:11:43 PM  
No brown person left unshot.
 
2013-02-04 01:11:51 PM  
Well, we all know who is ultimately responsible for this - people who continue to buy marijuana, thus creating a market for it, and thus giving rise to drug cartels, and all of their associated evils. Stop supporting the drug cartels.
 
2013-02-04 01:13:47 PM  
Let's allow drug money a path into the US military.  What could possibly go wrong?
 
2013-02-04 01:14:13 PM  
Maybe if there wasn't such a market for it......who am I kidding, as long as man exist there will be a market for drugs.
 
2013-02-04 01:14:19 PM  

TwowheelinTim: Old_Chief_Scott: My last cruise on active duty was patrolling the Mexican west coast.

Were you in the CG or USN?


USN. Twenty years worth.


Litig8r:
No doubt.  I really hate it when I'm out of my jurisdiction and I see someone who might be doing something that is illegal within my own jurisdiction.  And then when I ask them if I can come take a look to see if they are doing something that isn't illegal where we are, but is illegal in my jurisdiction, they immediately move to a jurisdiction where I'm not allowed to follow and harass them.  I mean, seriously, it's like they think they have rights or that I have limitations on my power or something.  They're clearly crazy.  Or terrorists.  Or crazy terrorists.

My point, which you seem to have missed, is that the mother ship was obviously tipped off by someone in government service somewhere in our communication chain.
 
2013-02-04 01:15:09 PM  

JohnCarter: On duty as we speak


Came for Ding Chavez/John Clarke. (and to rail about the M/I Complex, too, I guess)

Leaving satisfied
 
2013-02-04 01:16:07 PM  

ha-ha-guy: While I'm all for legalization of some drugs, commitment of military assets to dealing with drugs isn't that bad.  Even with pot legal, we'll still have issues with things like heroin which I assume won't be legalized any time soon.


If we were sensible, we'd decriminalize it.

 In additional to that, some cartels present border security problems.

Create a rational guest worker program, and strictly enforce the laws against hiring illegals. Then you get rid of the two or three million people sneaking across the border to get a job, and the drug smugglers will stand out.

 Others have gotten in local politics and are destabilizing regimes in their home country (or started as a rebel movement that sells drugs to fund operations).



It is the interdiction and illegality that raises the price of drugs.  Legalize them, and the cartels would be fighting each other in an attempt to control the supply and thus the price.  Today, the cartels lose very little on interdictions (the production and transport cost is small and the profit margins high). Let them get through and the price will drop, and you cut the financing out from under them.

Just look at Mexico, where mayors who stand up to corruption and cartels die in a hail of gunfire.  I'm not exactly bothered by the thought of the Zetas coming into contact with a USMC platoon and finding out what it feels like to be at a firepower disadvantage.

I am not willing to lose a single American soldier or Marine's life just to stop people from getting high. You join the military to defend this country, not play Customs agent.

Honestly 20 billion or so does not seem that excessive.  If the cost balloons out of control, then we need to think about scaling back funding, but it doesn't seem to be at that point.  If anything I'd rather see more attempts to build up Latin American forces along the lines of how we helped train and build the Egyptian Army.  The end result in Egypt was a professional military that refused orders to crush the protests and now is helping to check their new President and his power grabs.  Spend the time and money to build various armies down there into something like that seems to have value.


Yeah, because strong militaries have been so good for Latin America in the past.
 
2013-02-04 01:16:24 PM  

AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty. The REAL problems stem from my fellow Americans excession consumption of illegal drugs.

/Legalizing pot would be a step in the right direction, IMHO



Oh, it would be more than a step in the right direction. It would pretty much be checkmate.

The vast, overwhelming majority of illicit drug us in America is marijuana. Other drug use doesn't come anywhere CLOSE to the percentage of drug use which pot makes up. Despite the lopsided attention the use of the hardest drugs gets, the hardest stuff (crack, coke, heroin) is almost a rounding error.

And the problems which the marijuana trade has would absolutely be allieviated by legalizing the pot trade. We could grow it right here on America's own soil, and the smuggling and crime associated would simply no longer be needed. Our prisons, which are just choked with marijuana "criminals" would suddenly have vacancy again, our prison overcrowding problems would be eliminated overnight.

And then maybe we wouldn't have to be embarrassed anymore about how lovely places like China and Iran arrest and incarcerate fewer of their own citizens then we do. China even has us beat not just per capita but in real numbers!!! It's disgusting.
 
2013-02-04 01:18:00 PM  

zarberg: Pair-o-Dice: Yea, cause the war on drugs is going sooo well...

Since 2000 we've spent over $600 a second on the war on drugs for no appreciable positive outcome.

/true story


That's not true, the prices have come way down.
 
2013-02-04 01:18:05 PM  

GORDON: Obama 2016.


Nah, if they don't change sockpuppets every 4 to 8 years the dumbasses might get a clue.
 
2013-02-04 01:18:08 PM  

ethics-gradient: Oh yeah thanks America,your unrelenting focus on prohibition has made the world a better place. For heartless cops and the most ruthless inhuman gangsters.


Don't forget the owners of private prisons!  They're spiffy.
 
2013-02-04 01:18:15 PM  
Fred Thompson, former senator and cast member of Law and Order:

"...with just a fraction of the money spent on the 'war on drugs', we could burn every poppy field on the planet.  But we won't, and you wanna know why?  Because there's got to be a 'war on something' for folks in Washington to get elected."
 
2013-02-04 01:18:19 PM  
david_gaithersburg:
.
The goal of the Tea Party is to reduce spending, and reduce government.    At least someone in this country has the balls to stand up to the establishment.  But you keep on supporting the Republicrat party.


6/10.  Needs more "sheeple".
 
2013-02-04 01:19:11 PM  

ha-ha-guy: While I'm all for legalization of some drugs, commitment of military assets to dealing with drugs isn't that bad.  Even with pot legal, we'll still have issues with things like heroin which I assume won't be legalized any time soon.  In additional to that, some cartels present border security problems.  Others have gotten in local politics and are destabilizing regimes in their home country (or started as a rebel movement that sells drugs to fund operations).

Just look at Mexico, where mayors who stand up to corruption and cartels die in a hail of gunfire.  I'm not exactly bothered by the thought of the Zetas coming into contact with a USMC platoon and finding out what it feels like to be at a firepower disadvantage.

Honestly 20 billion or so does not seem that excessive.  If the cost balloons out of control, then we need to think about scaling back funding, but it doesn't seem to be at that point.  If anything I'd rather see more attempts to build up Latin American forces along the lines of how we helped train and build the Egyptian Army.  The end result in Egypt was a professional military that refused orders to crush the protests and now is helping to check their new President and his power grabs.  Spend the time and money to build various armies down there into something like that seems to have value.


ha-ha-guy: While I'm all for legalization of some drugs, commitment of military assets to dealing with drugs isn't that bad.  Even with pot legal, we'll still have issues with things like heroin which I assume won't be legalized any time soon.  In additional to that, some cartels present border security problems.  Others have gotten in local politics and are destabilizing regimes in their home country (or started as a rebel movement that sells drugs to fund operations).

Just look at Mexico, where mayors who stand up to corruption and cartels die in a hail of gunfire.  I'm not exactly bothered by the thought of the Zetas coming into contact with a USMC platoon and finding out what it feels like to be at a firepower disadvantage.

Honestly 20 billion or so does not seem that excessive.  If the cost balloons out of control, then we need to think about scaling back funding, but it doesn't seem to be at that point.  If anything I'd rather see more attempts to build up Latin American forces along the lines of how we helped train and build the Egyptian Army.  The end result in Egypt was a professional military that refused orders to crush the protests and now is helping to check their new President and his power grabs.  Spend the time and money to build various armies down there into something like that seems to have value.


it's about 60% more expensive than the federal school lunch program, that feeds 30 million kids everyday.
it's double what exxon booked as profit last quarter.
it's more than 1% of total federal income tax receipts for last year.
it's a massive, massive amount of money for a program that causes more problems than it solves.
and why do you feel you are particularly well placed to decide what consenting adults can and can't do with their bodies in the privacy of their homes?
authoritarians, everywhere....
 
2013-02-04 01:19:29 PM  

Smeggy Smurf: nmemkha: We just HAVE to blow the money shooting at brown people.

There are plenty of brown people in Africa.  That's why we're going to 35 or more countries over there.


Citation needed
 
2013-02-04 01:22:48 PM  
"Billions upon billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars have been spent over the years to combat the drug trade in Latin America and the Caribbean," he said. "In spite of our efforts, the positive results are few and far between."

www.csmonitor.com

"Yeah...wellll..."
 
2013-02-04 01:25:18 PM  
Great, more tax money going out of our pockets to increase the profit margins for clowns who pay no taxes on those profits.  Price Support Subsidy agents (all that law enforcement/military represent).

I'd like to know just how many Americans have been saved from themselves, over the past 40yrs, by such futzing around with the `free market'?  How much did it cost to `save' each of those individuals?  Could have given them all the drugs they wanted AND paid for their health insurance and, I'm betting, still came out ahead (without the corruption or the death of innocents).
 
2013-02-04 01:26:08 PM  

Madbassist1: "
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence - economic, political, even spiritual - is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.
"


Yep, we're farked.
 
2013-02-04 01:26:32 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: My point, which you seem to have missed, is that the mother ship was obviously tipped off by someone in government service somewhere in our communication chain.


No, I got your point.  You messaged stateside command, your command messaged state, state messaged Mexico (presumably because the ship was flagged Mexican), Mexican state messaged Armada de Mexico, and somewhere between the state department contacting its counterpart in Mexico, someone in the Mexican government or navy contacted the ship and told it to get the hell out of international waters before it was boarded by an American warship.

And why wouldn't they?  I'll bet we don't much care for U.S. flagged ships being boarded in international waters by warships of other countries, either.  And if I was in the U.S. department of state and received a message from the department of state of another country about the impending boarding of a U.S. flagged ship I'd probably tell them to move into U.S. waters so that they're boarded and searched by our own authorities, too.

Countries are in the business of sovereignty -- why would any rational country defer law enforcement to the military of another country?  Especially in international waters.
 
2013-02-04 01:27:10 PM  

drayno76: TwowheelinTim: AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty.

I'll second that.

/retired uscg.

Two in one day, I'm going to farking die!


Prepare to fall over. US Army Ranger. I hated Panama and Honduras/Guatemala in the summer... yuck.
 
2013-02-04 01:28:38 PM  
Meanwhile US forces guard poppy fields in the middle east, which fund CIA and military black projects.

The thing is, if you use tax dollars to fund things you can't really hide it as well from taxpayers and congress. But if you use drug funds you can do whatever the hell you want with it and no one asks where the money went.

What the 'war on drugs' has always been about, is eliminating the competition.
 
2013-02-04 01:29:24 PM  

Netrngr: nmemkha: We just HAVE to blow the money shooting at brown people.

Would you prefer we shoot at really white people? I hear Germany gets uppity every few decades or so. Idiot


Lol.  You mad.
 
2013-02-04 01:31:33 PM  

MisterRonbo: I am not willing to lose a single American soldier or Marine's life just to stop people from getting high. You join the military to defend this country, not play Customs agent.


I like how you state "getting high", as if pot is the only product the cartels ever sell.  I'd say the Chinese experience with opium (when the Euros forced the import of it upon them) is a pretty good example of why a lot of drugs will never be legal.  America had its own issues with morphine abuse, which is just refined opium.  Heroin, of course a morphine replacement in the medical field, is also unlikely to ever be legalized for recreational use.  As such there are always going to be a certain level of drugs that remain controlled and people seek to obtain illegally.  So the cartels will always have a product to sell and they'll be down at the border shooting at US Customs Agents, pretending to be the Mexican military to move around in convoys, building submarines, and kinds of other violent and dumb shiat to move their product around.  As such dispatching elements of the US military to supplement the abilities of the Customs agents and secure our borders is a valid use of the military.

If the Zetas are shooting across the border, I'd rather have the military there to shoot back instead of sitting around in Fort Hood and going "Well we only signed up to fight enemies that have a flag...".

Treatment of the drug problem solely by domestic policy is not going to remove 100% of the product catalog of the cartels or their incentive to get goods into America.

/plus in the case of things like the nacro submarines it is stupid and redundant spending to buy the Customs Agents ASW assets when the Navy already has a whole bunch of P-3 Orions sitting around on the flight line
 
2013-02-04 01:31:50 PM  
we might finally be able to relax and enjoy a "peace dividend" unless

America decides we need another warmongering Republican in the White House in 2016.

Otherwise we are headed there.  And I know it makes you realpolitik types hopping mad.
 
2013-02-04 01:34:08 PM  
I'm not joking here, I've written this prior to now - the only solution is for these corrupt governments to hire an outfit like Executive Outcomes.  Ask the fine folks in Sierra Leone about their work there.  Solid numbers escape me now but it took about six weeks to end a civil conflict that had gone on for at least a year if not longer. Never mind what happened when they with drew (think "Saigon").
E/O is gone but parts live on in other groups

Unless of course the CIA needs the drug money to fund some other issue.
OR
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gg-jvHynP9Y    go hang with Ike.
 
2013-02-04 01:35:37 PM  

whidbey: America decides we need another warmongering Republican in the White House in 2016.


Because CIA black ops and drone wars which kill civilians aren't going on. We're not supporting Israel's apartheid against Palestine. We're not backing French imperialism in Africa. And the reason for our interventions in other people's rebellions are noble. The Drug War has ended. Private prison companies aren't making buku money. Our security apparatus isn't going out of its way to repress political dissidents.
Not saying any of that is anything new or just new ways of doing old things, but don't pretend Democrats and the American state apparatus in general isn't in the business of imperialism.
The Democrats are smarter and better at it is all.
 
2013-02-04 01:36:25 PM  

david_gaithersburg: TwowheelinTim: david_gaithersburg: Just what the fark did you libs think the government was going to do with all of the extra tax money you've been chomping at the bit to give them.  You voted for this shiat, own it, or wake up and join your local Tea Party.

Nicely done. This could have been 10/10, but the "join your local Tea Party"  was a little excessive; it kinda set you back a few points. I'll give you 6/10.

Still, you should get some bites (besides mine of course).

.
The goal of the Tea Party is to reduce spending, and reduce government.    At least someone in this country has the balls to stand up to the establishment.  But you keep on supporting the Republicrat party.


You've obviously mistaken me for somebody who voted for either of the two corporate owned bozos in the last presidential election.
 
2013-02-04 01:36:25 PM  

Netrngr: Prepare to fall over. US Army Ranger. I hated Panama and Honduras/Guatemala in the summer... yuck.


My brother got stuck down there during his time.  I was luckier and ended up sitting in Korea and staring across the DMZ, with the occasional trip to SE Asia for military exercises.  I'd have to say Thailand has worse jungles than Latin America, but the citizenry is about a million times nicer.

/the times they sent me during the wet season, urgh
 
2013-02-04 01:37:13 PM  
Is there anything that evil Bush and his cronies won't do???
 
2013-02-04 01:37:59 PM  

whidbey: we might finally be able to relax and enjoy a "peace dividend" unless

America decides we need another warmongering Republican in the White House in 2016.

Otherwise we are headed there.  And I know it makes you realpolitik types hopping mad.


You're really pretending there's a difference in a War on Drugs thread? Really?
 
2013-02-04 01:38:55 PM  
i830.photobucket.com
"War on Drugs? It's not a war. Wars end."

/just wrapped up watching S4 last night
//if by "as good as Breaking Bad" people mean "As spirit-crushing as Breaking Bad" then yes
 
2013-02-04 01:39:09 PM  

zarberg: Pair-o-Dice: Yea, cause the war on drugs is going sooo well...

Since 2000 we've spent over $600 a second on the war on drugs for no appreciable positive outcome.

/true story


"No appreciable positive outcome" to you, but to the Congress members who keep the pork rolling back to their districts for DoD/DEA/DoJ contracts see a huge positive outcome for them.
 
2013-02-04 01:40:05 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: TwowheelinTim: Old_Chief_Scott: My last cruise on active duty was patrolling the Mexican west coast.

Were you in the CG or USN?

USN. Twenty years worth.


Thanks for your service Chief. You have my gratitude.
 
2013-02-04 01:41:35 PM  
blog.hillbent.com
 
2013-02-04 01:42:40 PM  
So far my side, drug users, is winning.

Go drugs!

But seriously, if old white millionaires want to sell me pot, I am all for it. Because even black people admit that black people are the worst drug dealers.
 
2013-02-04 01:43:07 PM  

ethics-gradient: Oh yeah thanks America,your unrelenting focus on prohibition has made the world a better place. For heartless cops and the most ruthless inhuman gangsters.


Your welcome.  Thanks for getting your asses kicked out of every country you attempted to colonize across the globe.  AND thanks for jumping on the slave trade bandwagon after the Dutch kicked it off; which put a nasty smear on our countries history and ultimately lead to the Civil War.  But please continue talking shiat about us while ignoring all the things y'all farked up in the name of King/Queen and country.  Yeah yeah, there were American slave traders too, but we didn't start trading them before y'all started selling them.
 
2013-02-04 01:44:38 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-02-04 01:44:52 PM  

m2313: Not saying any of that is anything new or just new ways of doing old things, but don't pretend Democrats and the American state apparatus in general isn't in the business of imperialism.
The Democrats are smarter and better at it is all.


I don't see it that way at all.   The right-wing in this country are the warmongers.  They controlled the government for 8 straight years, and people still keep electing them.

The Democratic Party has been wasting time, public money and energy basically cleaning up their foreign and domestic policy f*ckups.   You obviously want them to pull the plug on everything the Republicans did, and they can't.  Which is how the right-wing still controls this country.

We have a chance to keep them out of our government in 2016 by not re-electing Republicans to the House and refusing to entertain whatever Neo-Reaganite the GOP is undoubtedly attempting to run in 2016.

The whole "both sides are bad"  argument is bullshiat when it's clear the Democratic Party is interested in social progress, and cutting military expenditures.
 
2013-02-04 01:46:19 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: y point, which you seem to have missed, is that the mother ship was obviously tipped off by someone in government service somewhere in our communication chain.



You sure that your communications were not intercepted?
 
2013-02-04 01:46:23 PM  

YixilTesiphon: whidbey: we might finally be able to relax and enjoy a "peace dividend" unless

America decides we need another warmongering Republican in the White House in 2016.

Otherwise we are headed there.  And I know it makes you realpolitik types hopping mad.

You're really pretending there's a difference in a War on Drugs thread? Really?


Is that what this is?   I thought it was a Peace Dividend thread.

At any rate, I'm not clicking on that Fox News bullshiat.
 
2013-02-04 01:47:21 PM  

over_and_done: Madbassist1: "
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence - economic, political, even spiritual - is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.
"

Yep, we're farked.


the war on druggies developed independently of choices made by Boeing, EADS, etc.
the whole military industrial fallacy is a nice way for people to avoid taking responsibility for their actions and omissions and the actions and omissions of their elected leaders. the pull of money and jobs may result in even extreme waste in the procurement process at times, but it sure as f*ck doesn't create the idiots that populate this thread and cheer on the drug war, assassinate jfk, or dictate our posture as a hyper aggressive predator nation.
 
2013-02-04 01:48:15 PM  

The First Four Katy Perry Albums: [i.imgur.com image 512x662]


You're blaming the a government prohibition of a demanded product on capitalism?

whidbey: The whole "both sides are bad"  argument is bullshiat when it's clear the Democratic Party is interested in social progress, and cutting military expenditures.


Oh my, you're dumb.
 
2013-02-04 01:48:34 PM  

Rapmaster2000: Let's allow drug money a path into the US military.  What could possibly go wrong?


www.examiner.com
 
2013-02-04 01:48:51 PM  

Litig8r: Old_Chief_Scott: My point, which you seem to have missed, is that the mother ship was obviously tipped off by someone in government service somewhere in our communication chain.

No, I got your point.  You messaged stateside command, your command messaged state, state messaged Mexico (presumably because the ship was flagged Mexican), Mexican state messaged Armada de Mexico, and somewhere between the state department contacting its counterpart in Mexico, someone in the Mexican government or navy contacted the ship and told it to get the hell out of international waters before it was boarded by an American warship.

And why wouldn't they?  I'll bet we don't much care for U.S. flagged ships being boarded in international waters by warships of other countries, either.  And if I was in the U.S. department of state and received a message from the department of state of another country about the impending boarding of a U.S. flagged ship I'd probably tell them to move into U.S. waters so that they're boarded and searched by our own authorities, too.

Countries are in the business of sovereignty -- why would any rational country defer law enforcement to the military of another country?  Especially in international waters.


The vessel was Panamanian flagged. It had nothing to do with sovereignty and everything to do with corruption.

TwowheelinTim: Old_Chief_Scott: TwowheelinTim: Old_Chief_Scott: My last cruise on active duty was patrolling the Mexican west coast.

Were you in the CG or USN?

USN. Twenty years worth.

Thanks for your service Chief. You have my gratitude.


*checks profile*

Same to you, Chief.
 
2013-02-04 01:49:39 PM  

ha-ha-guy: I like how you state "getting high", as if pot is the only product the cartels ever sell. I'd say the Chinese experience with opium (when the Euros forced the import of it upon them) is a pretty good example of why a lot of drugs will never be legal. America had its own issues with morphine abuse, which is just refined opium. Heroin, of course a morphine replacement in the medical field, is also unlikely to ever be legalized for recreational use. As such there are always going to be a certain level of drugs that remain controlled and people seek to obtain illegally. So the cartels will always have a product to sell and they'll be down at the border shooting at US Customs Agents, pretending to be the Mexican military to move around in convoys, building submarines, and kinds of other violent and dumb shiat to move their product around. As such dispatching elements of the US military to supplement the abilities of the Customs agents and secure our borders is a valid use of the military.

 Your nuanced and intelligent post has no place in FARK, sir.


/hoped you got to enjoy the "nice people" of Thailand if you know what I mean
/didn't mean the ladyboys
 
2013-02-04 01:51:27 PM  

YixilTesiphon: The First Four Katy Perry Albums: [i.imgur.com image 512x662]

You're blaming the a government prohibition of a demanded product on capitalism?

whidbey: The whole "both sides are bad"  argument is bullshiat when it's clear the Democratic Party is interested in social progress, and cutting military expenditures.

Oh my, you're dumb.


My you don't really have anything to say except a predictable personal attack in lieu of an actual argument.

How surprising.
 
2013-02-04 01:52:06 PM  

Cythraul: You really thought the military industrial complex was going to sit on its hands, subby?


There was no peace in the 1990s (Haiti, Somalia, Balkans etc,etc) just an underfunded over deployed military.   To be fair Bush the I started te  Peace Dividend  crap , Clinton just picked it up and ran with it.

  Between 1960 and 1991, the United States Army conducted 10 "operational events." From 1991 through 1999, the Army conducted 26 operational events --- 2 1/2 times that number in 1/3 the time span.  It was wore for  the Navy and Marine Corps

  To pay for operational commitments the military found itself having to transfer funds from maintenance, training and procurment.

Things got so bad there were many problems like the AIr Force found itself running out of cruise missiles (production had been shut down) Morale was bad and the leadership was even worse.  The Army Chief of Staff thought he would improve morale by making everyone  wear new hats -a stupid beret. (That same military genius is now running the VA) While the AIr Force's equally stupid solution was leather flight jackets for pilots and Navy looking Uniforms for officers.  Of course these meansures were cheaper than real fixes.

You want to improve troops morale? Make sure they are well equipped and trained (cost money)  make sure their barracks  and housing  are not falling apart (again cost money).  These areas got short changed to finance operational deployments. For example the supposedly ony 18 month deployment to Bosnia did not even get put into the budget until 3 years after it started.

Other problems

By 1999, the Navy was short  22,000 personnel in a 324-ship fleet

 The armed services suffered a severe ammunition shortfall going into the Kosovo engagement. According to the Service Chiefs, the FY99 ammunition shortfall for the Marine Corps is $193 million. For the Army in FY00, it was $3.5 billion.

A-10 pilots flying over Kosovo were forced to spend their own money to buy inferior, off-the-shelf GPS receivers at local stores and attach them with Velcro to their planes to use in conjunction with their outdated survival radios should their planes crash.

In 1999, more than half of the B1-Bs at Ellsworth AFB were not mission capable because they lack critical parts.


And tha tis just a very few items off a very long list.
 
2013-02-04 01:52:23 PM  

mwfark: ALL the die-hard libs who blindly support Obama are just as foolish as all the die-hard conservatives who blindly supported GW Bush.


Thank God I'm a moderate.  I support reason and sanity.  Too bad neither of those ideals are represented in politics.
 
2013-02-04 01:53:30 PM  

hasty ambush: In 1999, more than half of the B1-Bs at Ellsworth AFB were not mission capable because they lack critical parts.


And tha tis just a very few items off a very long list.


1999 was years ago.  Don't you have any of your anti-Democrat talking points up to date?
 
2013-02-04 01:54:52 PM  
I'm so glad we won in Iraq, and the situation isn't rapidly decaying into a three-way ethnic slaughterfest.

oh wait
 
2013-02-04 01:57:51 PM  

FTDA: mwfark: ALL the die-hard libs who blindly support Obama are just as foolish as all the die-hard conservatives who blindly supported GW Bush.

Thank God I'm a moderate.  I support reason and sanity.  Too bad neither of those ideals are represented in politics.


Because Obama and Bush's policies are/were exactly the same.

Maybe you should stay home next election.
 
2013-02-04 01:59:20 PM  

ISO15693: Well, we all know who is ultimately responsible for this - people who continue to buy marijuana, thus creating a market for it, and thus giving rise to drug cartels, and all of their associated evils. Stop supporting the drug cartels.


Don't be stupid. Who still smokes that crappy dirt weed?
 
2013-02-04 02:00:56 PM  
Government ought to do to weed what it did to cigarettes.  Legalize, regulate, smear, make weed-positive media illegal, regulate, smear, rinse wash repeat...

Today, the one guy in the elevator who smells like smoke has to endure the ride in shame most of the time.

Collective and ubiquitous social stigma probably would help a lot with said war on drugs, as opposed to whack a mole.
 
2013-02-04 02:03:20 PM  
Why don't we just stick with some agent orange and napalm. That seems more economical.
 
2013-02-04 02:04:09 PM  

whidbey: FTDA: mwfark: ALL the die-hard libs who blindly support Obama are just as foolish as all the die-hard conservatives who blindly supported GW Bush.

Thank God I'm a moderate.  I support reason and sanity.  Too bad neither of those ideals are represented in politics.

Because Obama and Bush's policies are/were exactly the same.

Maybe you should stay home next election.


Really?  I state that I'm neither left or right wing and would like to see people with some integrity and sense be elected to political office and your answer is that I shouldn't vote or have an opinion about our country?  Who pissed in your cornflakes today?
 
2013-02-04 02:04:48 PM  

pxlboy: ISO15693: Well, we all know who is ultimately responsible for this - people who continue to buy marijuana, thus creating a market for it, and thus giving rise to drug cartels, and all of their associated evils. Stop supporting the drug cartels.

Don't be stupid. Who still smokes that crappy dirt weed?


I guess he thinks dispensaries are the new drug lords.
 
2013-02-04 02:05:00 PM  
Buy American!
 
2013-02-04 02:05:38 PM  
This is obviously Bush's fault
 
2013-02-04 02:05:38 PM  

Stranded On The Planet Dumbass: Buy American!


When it comes to weed we mostly are.
 
2013-02-04 02:06:01 PM  
No offense brown people but this bus needs to keep rollin'.

sincerely,
The Military Industrial Complex
 
2013-02-04 02:06:25 PM  

FTDA: whidbey: FTDA: mwfark: ALL the die-hard libs who blindly support Obama are just as foolish as all the die-hard conservatives who blindly supported GW Bush.

Thank God I'm a moderate.  I support reason and sanity.  Too bad neither of those ideals are represented in politics.

Because Obama and Bush's policies are/were exactly the same.

Maybe you should stay home next election.

Really?  I state that I'm neither left or right wing and would like to see people with some integrity and sense be elected to political office and your answer is that I shouldn't vote or have an opinion about our country?  Who pissed in your cornflakes today?


I really get sick of hearing the "both sides are bad" myth perpetrated.

Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.
 
2013-02-04 02:07:55 PM  
I remember there was supposed to be a peace divident around 1988-89 and the CEO of the Military Industrial Complex where I worked scuffed at the ideal of a peace dividend. He said they will come up with something, wait and see. That would be the war on drugs, and the cycle continues.
 
2013-02-04 02:09:33 PM  

hasty ambush: Cythraul: You really thought the military industrial complex was going to sit on its hands, subby?

There was no peace in the 1990s (Haiti, Somalia, Balkans etc,etc) just an underfunded over deployed military.   To be fair Bush the I started te  Peace Dividend  crap , Clinton just picked it up and ran with it.

  Between 1960 and 1991, the United States Army conducted 10 "operational events." From 1991 through 1999, the Army conducted 26 operational events --- 2 1/2 times that number in 1/3 the time span.  It was wore for  the Navy and Marine Corps

  To pay for operational commitments the military found itself having to transfer funds from maintenance, training and procurment.

Things got so bad there were many problems like the AIr Force found itself running out of cruise missiles (production had been shut down) Morale was bad and the leadership was even worse.  The Army Chief of Staff thought he would improve morale by making everyone  wear new hats -a stupid beret. (That same military genius is now running the VA) While the AIr Force's equally stupid solution was leather flight jackets for pilots and Navy looking Uniforms for officers.  Of course these meansures were cheaper than real fixes.

You want to improve troops morale? Make sure they are well equipped and trained (cost money)  make sure their barracks  and housing  are not falling apart (again cost money).  These areas got short changed to finance operational deployments. For example the supposedly ony 18 month deployment to Bosnia did not even get put into the budget until 3 years after it started.

Other problems

By 1999, the Navy was short  22,000 personnel in a 324-ship fleet

 The armed services suffered a severe ammunition shortfall going into the Kosovo engagement. According to the Service Chiefs, the FY99 ammunition shortfall for the Marine Corps is $193 million. For the Army in FY00, it was $3.5 billion.

A-10 pilots flying over Kosovo were forced to spend their own money to buy inferior, off-t ...



these are the fights I can remember us being involved in.

barely remember grenada, something in the philipines iirc, troops in lebanon, invasion of panama, attack on lybia #1, attack on lybia #2, serbia/kosovo, gulf war, iraq, somalia, afganistan, pakistan, yemen.
in about 29 years 13 times we have attacked countries, once every 2.3 years since I can remember.
out of those 12 perhaps 3 could be said to really involve significant u.s. interests. only one was true national defense.

the problem isn't not enough cruise missiles, it is picking too many fights.
 
2013-02-04 02:13:57 PM  

drayno76: TwowheelinTim: AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty.

I'll second that.

/retired uscg.

Two in one day, I'm going to farking die!


  You must not have been around many actual military members in your life.  They do not have a single monolithic worldview regarding drug policy or any other topic, pretty much like every other group.  I knew lots of cool, laid back, navy guys when I lived in Jacksonville.  I would guess a majority probably lean republican, but not all by any means.
 
2013-02-04 02:15:38 PM  

whidbey: FTDA: whidbey: FTDA: mwfark: ALL the die-hard libs who blindly support Obama are just as foolish as all the die-hard conservatives who blindly supported GW Bush.

Thank God I'm a moderate.  I support reason and sanity.  Too bad neither of those ideals are represented in politics.

Because Obama and Bush's policies are/were exactly the same.

Maybe you should stay home next election.

Really?  I state that I'm neither left or right wing and would like to see people with some integrity and sense be elected to political office and your answer is that I shouldn't vote or have an opinion about our country?  Who pissed in your cornflakes today?

I really get sick of hearing the "both sides are bad" myth perpetrated.

Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.


What gives you the impression that only Democrats can be identified with the left and only Republicans can be identified with the right?  I didn't mention either party until now.  Perhaps you should pull that stick out of your ass, go get laid and relax a little.  Then again, being vitriolic is probably your thing so keep it up if it makes you happy.
 
2013-02-04 02:15:40 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: drayno76: TwowheelinTim: AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty.

I'll second that.

/retired uscg.

Two in one day, I'm going to farking die!

What, you have me on ignore?


No I don't ignore people, mark them red so I know not to read it if I'm in a pissy mood, but not ignore.  I just wasn't to sure where you stood other than your last mission was pointless. So if you're against the War on drugs, you get a favorite. :)
 
2013-02-04 02:16:44 PM  

Random Anonymous Blackmail: zarberg

Pair-o-Dice: Yea, cause the war on drugs is going sooo well...

Since 2000 we've spent over $600 a second on the war on drugs for no appreciable positive outcome.

It is because we need to spend more.


It's like spending on public education. It's always lack of funding that's the problem. Any other reasons for the lack of success must be ignored.
 
2013-02-04 02:17:05 PM  

Deep Contact: I remember there was supposed to be a peace divident around 1988-89 and the CEO of the Military Industrial Complex where I worked scuffed at the ideal of a peace dividend. He said they will come up with something, wait and see. That would be the war on drugs, and the cycle continues.


we never stopped fighting regular wars. if anything we increased the pace of foreign intervention.
I worry when I realize people like you consider yourselves to be urbane and sophisticated and that you vote.
it's not the secret cabal that is the cause of all your problems, you provincial rubes. it's you and the people you keep electing.
 
2013-02-04 02:18:32 PM  

FTDA: Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.

What gives you the impression that only Democrats can be identified with the left and only Republicans can be identified with the right? I didn't mention either party until now. Perhaps you should pull that stick out of your ass, go get laid and relax a little. Then again, being vitriolic is probably your thing so keep it up if it makes you happy.


The Dems are about as left as we're going to get for the time being, until people step up and create a political party that is politically left of where they are. We should be throwing all of our support to them now, at least until another party gets created.

However, if you are entertaining the notion that the Republican Party isn't anything other than a far-right threat to our society, then you're really looking at the situation with an unfairly centrist perspective.
 
2013-02-04 02:19:51 PM  

FTDA: Perhaps you should pull that stick out of your ass, go get laid and relax a little. Then again, being vitriolic is probably your thing so keep it up if it makes you happy.


Oh I see. You're only interested in personal attacks, not discussion.

Never mind.  Enjoy your skewed political perspective.
 
2013-02-04 02:19:51 PM  

RanDomino: three-way ethnic slaughterfest.


im so hard right now
 
2013-02-04 02:20:42 PM  
Prime example of the results of the war is a main story on CNN right now. Fake weed hospitalizes a girl in Texas.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/04/health/synthetic-marijuana-irpt/index. ht ml?hpt=hp_c1
 
2013-02-04 02:21:28 PM  
Momma gotta get paid.
 
2013-02-04 02:22:41 PM  

whidbey: Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.



So many that you couldn't even name one of them
 
2013-02-04 02:24:37 PM  

WeenerGord: whidbey: Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.


So many that you couldn't even name one of them


Living under a rock the past few years, or just really that stubborn?
 
2013-02-04 02:24:38 PM  

xria: One thing should be clear with drugs: if you make them illegal, you are basically guaranteeing large and ongoing profits for organized crime, so that should always be taken into account when deciding which to ban, meaning that only things that are seriously dangerous should be banned, which things like alcohol, mj, cocaine and so on should be regulated, taxed, and public awareness campaigns to mitigate the harms, etc.


You lost me there. Cocaine, while not as bad as meth or heroin, is too highly addictive to make it available to the masses.
 
2013-02-04 02:25:06 PM  
"I wake up every morning thinking how am going to get plain old Americans back to workin' them good jobs.  Shovel Ready Wars are keepin' the middle class workin'.
 Heck, I said I was going create 5 million "Green Collar" jobs and I will. Just not not at Solyndra, Turns out my Green Collar jobs refers to army fatiques.
I have one thing to say to George Bush. You didn't start this war. I did."


www.mygovcost.org
 
2013-02-04 02:26:45 PM  

whidbey: WeenerGord: whidbey: Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.

So many that you couldn't even name one of them

Living under a rock the past few years, or just really that stubborn?



Still cant even name one of them, resorts to strawman attacks instead.
 
2013-02-04 02:26:55 PM  

drayno76: AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty. The REAL problems stem from my fellow Americans excession consumption of illegal drugs.

/Legalizing pot would be a step in the right direction, IMHO

I'm sorry sir... Did I really just hear a US Military Vet take an alternative position to that ordered to the nation the Federal Government? 

<favorites>
<passes out>


Military folks are required to answer Yes or No to the question: Would you fire on a U.S. citizen, given the order? What they don't say is which ones.
 
2013-02-04 02:27:54 PM  

WeenerGord: whidbey: WeenerGord: whidbey: Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.

So many that you couldn't even name one of them

Living under a rock the past few years, or just really that stubborn?


Still cant even name one of them, resorts to strawman attacks instead.


You really can't be that dense.  It's like someone asking to prove that water exists.
 
2013-02-04 02:29:22 PM  

Thrakkorzog: Prime example of the results of the war is a main story on CNN right now. Fake weed hospitalizes a girl in Texas.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/04/health/synthetic-marijuana-irpt/index. ht ml?hpt=hp_c1


was just thinking that. front f*cking page.
another example that people cannot be trusted with personal autonomy and the militarization of the american police force and the violent regulation of american morals must continue!
this bathtub gin death is your fault CNN.
 
2013-02-04 02:30:00 PM  

whidbey: WeenerGord: whidbey: WeenerGord: whidbey: Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.

So many that you couldn't even name one of them

Living under a rock the past few years, or just really that stubborn?

Still cant even name one of them, resorts to strawman attacks instead.

You really can't be that dense.  It's like someone asking to prove that water exists.



3 chances, still cant name even one, another strawman. Yup, looks like the one thats full of shiat is YOU
 
2013-02-04 02:31:25 PM  

Sir Not Sure The Unscannable: Military folks are required to answer Yes or No to the question: Would you fire on a U.S. citizen, given the order? What they don't say is which ones.



Hey, cops do it all the time!

/For Great Justice!
 
2013-02-04 02:31:53 PM  

Sir Not Sure The Unscannable: Military folks are required to answer Yes or No to the question: Would you fire on a U.S. citizen, given the order? What they don't say is which ones.


Really?

Huh...

Never got asked that.
 
2013-02-04 02:33:58 PM  

whidbey: WeenerGord: whidbey: WeenerGord: whidbey: Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.

So many that you couldn't even name one of them

Living under a rock the past few years, or just really that stubborn?


Still cant even name one of them, resorts to strawman attacks instead.

You really can't be that dense.  It's like someone asking to prove that water exists.


Careful WeenerGord, he'll get upset at your requests for citations and pointing out his strawman strategy and finish up by insinuating that YOU'RE the one that doesn't want to have a rational discussion.  I suggested what he might do to become more reasonable but the evidence is mounting that instead of a stick, it's a cactus that's lodged in his 4th point of contact.
 
2013-02-04 02:34:22 PM  
Stupid warmongering BUsh... er.. Obama? Ok then, its all for world peace.
 
2013-02-04 02:34:56 PM  
There will always be war.
Bring back the USSR.  We never shot directly at each other, just each stood in our corner building bigger and bigger penises nuclear weapons and never actually using them.

REPORT FROM IRON MOUNTAIN: ON THE POSSIBILITY AND DESIRABILITY OF PEACE
 
2013-02-04 02:36:07 PM  

WeenerGord: whidbey: WeenerGord: whidbey: WeenerGord: whidbey: Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.

So many that you couldn't even name one of them

Living under a rock the past few years, or just really that stubborn?

Still cant even name one of them, resorts to strawman attacks instead.

You really can't be that dense.  It's like someone asking to prove that water exists.


3 chances, still cant name even one, another strawman. Yup, looks like the one thats full of shiat is YOU


It's really an easy Google,  WeenerGord.And these are only 21 of the top 50.


1. Passed Health Care Reform: After five presidents over a century failed to create universal health insurance, signed the Affordable Care Act (2010). It will cover 32 million uninsured Americans beginning in 2014 and mandates a suite of experimental measures to cut health care cost growth, the number one cause of America's long-term fiscal problems.
2. Passed the Stimulus: Signed $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009 to spur economic growth amid greatest recession since the Great Depression. Weeks after stimulus went into effect, unemployment claims began to subside. Twelve months later, the private sector began producing more jobs than it was losing, and it has continued to do so for twenty-three straight months, creating a total of nearly 3.7 million new private-sector jobs.
3. Passed Wall Street Reform: Signed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (2010) to re-regulate the financial sector after its practices caused the Great Recession. The new law tightens capital requirements on large banks and other financial institutions, requires derivatives to be sold on clearinghouses and exchanges, mandates that large banks provide "living wills" to avoid chaotic bankruptcies, limits their ability to trade with customers' money for their own profit, and creates the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (now headed by Richard Cordray) to crack down on abusive lending products and companies.
4. Ended the War in Iraq: Ordered all U.S. military forces out of the country. Last troops left on December 18, 2011.
5. Began Drawdown of War in Afghanistan: From a peak of 101,000 troops in June 2011, U.S. forces are now down to 91,000, with 23,000 slated to leave by the end of summer 2012. According to Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, the combat mission there will be over by next year.
6. Eliminated Osama bin laden: In 2011, ordered special forces raid of secret compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, in which the terrorist leader was killed and a trove of al-Qaeda documents was discovered.
7. Turned Around U.S. Auto Industry: In 2009, injected $62 billion in federal money (on top of $13.4 billion in loans from the Bush administration) into ailing GM and Chrysler in return for equity stakes and agreements for massive restructuring. Since bottoming out in 2009, the auto industry has added more than 100,000 jobs. In 2011, the Big Three automakers all gained market share for the first time in two decades. The government expects to lose $16 billion of its investment, less if the price of the GM stock it still owns increases.
8. Recapitalized Banks: In the midst of financial crisis, approved controversial Treasury Department plan to lure private capital into the country's largest banks via "stress tests" of their balance sheets and a public-private fund to buy their "toxic" assets. Got banks back on their feet at essentially zero cost to the government.
9. Repealed "Don't Ask, Don't Tell": Ended 1990s-era restriction and formalized new policy allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military for the first time.
10. Toppled Moammar Gaddafi: In March 2011, joined a coalition of European and Arab governments in military action, including air power and naval blockade, against Gaddafi regime to defend Libyan civilians and support rebel troops. Gaddafi's forty-two-year rule ended when the dictator was overthrown and killed by rebels on October 20, 2011. No American lives were lost.
11. Told Mubarak to Go: On February 1, 2011, publicly called on Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to accept reform or step down, thus weakening the dictator's position and putting America on the right side of the Arab Spring. Mubarak ended thirty-year rule when overthrown on February 11.
12. Reversed Bush Torture Policies: Two days after taking office, nullified Bush-era rulings that had allowed detainees in U.S. custody to undergo certain "enhanced" interrogation techniques considered inhumane under the Geneva Conventions. Also released the secret Bush legal rulings supporting the use of these techniques.
13. Improved America's Image Abroad: With new policies, diplomacy, and rhetoric, reversed a sharp decline in world opinion toward the U.S. (and the corresponding loss of "soft power") during the Bush years. From 2008 to 2011, favorable opinion toward the United States rose in ten of fifteen countries surveyed by the Pew Global Attitudes Project, with an average increase of 26 percent.
14. Kicked Banks Out of Federal Student Loan Program, Expanded Pell Grant Spending: As part of the 2010 health care reform bill, signed measure ending the wasteful decades-old practice of subsidizing banks to provide college loans. Starting July 2010 all students began getting their federal student loans directly from the federal government. Treasury will save $67 billion over ten years, $36 billion of which will go to expanding Pell Grants to lower-income students.
15. Created Race to the Top: With funds from stimulus, started $4.35 billion program of competitive grants to encourage and reward states for education reform.
16. Boosted Fuel Efficiency Standards: Released new fuel efficiency standards in 2011 that will nearly double the fuel economy for cars and trucks by 2025.
17. Coordinated International Response to Financial Crisis: To keep world economy out of recession in 2009 and 2010, helped secure from G-20 nations more than $500 billion for the IMF to provide lines of credit and other support to emerging market countries, which kept them liquid and avoided crises with their currencies.
18. Passed Mini Stimuli: To help families hurt by the recession and spur the economy as stimulus spending declined, signed series of measures (July 22, 2010; December 17, 2010; December 23, 2011) to extend unemployment insurance and cut payroll taxes.
19. Began Asia "Pivot": In 2011, reoriented American military and diplomatic priorities and focus from the Middle East and Europe to the Asian-Pacific region. Executed multipronged strategy of positively engaging China while reasserting U.S. leadership in the region by increasing American military presence and crafting new commercial, diplomatic, and military alliances with neighboring countries made uncomfortable by recent Chinese behavior.
20. Increased Support for Veterans: With so many soldiers coming home from Iraq and Iran with serious physical and mental health problems, yet facing long waits for services, increased 2010 Department of Veterans Affairs budget by 16 percent and 2011 budget by 10 percent. Also signed new GI bill offering $78 billion in tuition assistance over a decade, and provided multiple tax credits to encourage businesses to hire veterans.
21. Tightened Sanctions on Iran: In effort to deter Iran's nuclear program, signed Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act (2010) to punish firms and individuals who aid Iran's petroleum sector. In late 2011 and early 2012, coordinated with other major Western powers to impose sanctions aimed at Iran's banks and with Japan, South Korea, and China to shift their oil purchases away from Iran.
 
2013-02-04 02:36:42 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-02-04 02:37:28 PM  

FTDA: Careful WeenerGord, he'll get upset at your requests for citations and pointing out his strawman strategy and finish up by insinuating that YOU'RE the one that doesn't want to have a rational discussion. I suggested what he might do to become more reasonable but the evidence is mounting that instead of a stick, it's a cactus that's lodged in his 4th point of contact.


You two should have coffee sometime and discuss the upcoming "small 'l':"  libertarian revolution.
 
2013-02-04 02:38:48 PM  

whidbey: 10. Toppled Moammar Gaddafi


I'm disappointed to see you celebrating our hyper aggressive foreign policy and waging of wars of choice on countries that have nothing to do with us.
 
2013-02-04 02:41:22 PM  

AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty. The REAL problems stem from my fellow Americans excession consumption of illegal drugs.

/Legalizing pot would be a step in the right direction, IMHO


Sorry about that, it's gotten much easier to shop local in the last decade though.
 
2013-02-04 02:42:51 PM  

whidbey: WeenerGord: whidbey: WeenerGord: whidbey: WeenerGord: whidbey: Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.

So many that you couldn't even name one of them

Living under a rock the past few years, or just really that stubborn?

Still cant even name one of them, resorts to strawman attacks instead.

You really can't be that dense.  It's like someone asking to prove that water exists.


3 chances, still cant name even one, another strawman. Yup, looks like the one thats full of shiat is YOU

It's really an easy Google,  WeenerGord.And these are only 21 of the top 50.


1. Passed Health Care Reform: After five presidents over a century failed to create universal health insurance, signed the Affordable Care Act (2010). It will cover 32 million uninsured Americans beginning in 2014 and mandates a suite of experimental measures to cut health care cost growth, the number one cause of America's long-term fiscal problems.
2. Passed the Stimulus: Signed $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009 to spur economic growth amid greatest recession since the Great Depression. Weeks after stimulus went into effect, unemployment claims began to subside. Twelve months later, the private sector began producing more jobs than it was losing, and it has continued to do so for twenty-three straight months, creating a total of nearly 3.7 million new private-sector jobs.
3. Passed Wall Street Reform: Signed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (2010) to re-regulate the financial sector after its practices caused the Great Recession. The new law tightens capital requirements on large banks and other financial institutions, requires derivatives to be sold on clearinghouses and exchanges, mandates that large banks provide "living wills" to avoid chaotic bankruptcies, limits their ability to trade with customers' money for their ...


Nice cut and paste but
Wait.
Off the top of my head, I would say they all look like bullshiat. I'm against the Republicans too. We have to expect more from government. Until we get more we have to be adversaries of them, not make excuses for them.
 
2013-02-04 02:45:56 PM  

Vectron: Nice cut and paste but
Wait.
Off the top of my head, I would say they all look like bullshiat. I'm against the Republicans too. We have to expect more from government. Until we get more we have to be adversaries of them, not make excuses for them.


You're welcome to expound on how any of those accomplishments are "bullshiat."

Here's one more:

The economy has regained all the jobs it lost during the first two years of the Obama administration and is now starting to regain the jobs lost in the last year of the Bush administration
 
2013-02-04 02:46:58 PM  
We've always been at war with Eastasia .....
 
2013-02-04 02:47:12 PM  

whidbey: FTDA: Careful WeenerGord, he'll get upset at your requests for citations and pointing out his strawman strategy and finish up by insinuating that YOU'RE the one that doesn't want to have a rational discussion. I suggested what he might do to become more reasonable but the evidence is mounting that instead of a stick, it's a cactus that's lodged in his 4th point of contact.

You two should have coffee sometime and discuss the upcoming "small 'l':"  libertarian revolution.


Coffee?  Nah, but if he knows a good microbrewery I wouldn't say no.
 
2013-02-04 02:48:01 PM  
Cartels? I thought my drug money was funding middle eastern terrorism. Can the KKK start slinging dope? I want to support the local economy.
 
2013-02-04 02:49:35 PM  

Vectron: We have to expect more from government. Until we get more we have to be adversaries of them, not make excuses for them.


The real adversary is big business and corporatism.

Government is a reflection of the people. In this case, people with more money because they get the most out of it.  Thanks to our own apathy.

And it doesn't help that decisions like Citizens United are considered landmarks of free speech.
 
2013-02-04 02:54:56 PM  

RanDomino: I'm so glad we won in Iraq, and the situation isn't rapidly decaying into a three-way ethnic slaughterfest.

oh wait


Fartbongo is outsourcing the killing of brown people
 
2013-02-04 02:55:40 PM  

Netrngr: nmemkha: We just HAVE to blow the money shooting at brown people.

Would you prefer we shoot at really white people? I hear Germany gets uppity every few decades or so. Idiot


what about the Irish?
 
2013-02-04 02:56:10 PM  
We found the "Giant Sucking Sound"

www.prlog.org
 
2013-02-04 02:56:22 PM  

whidbey: Vectron: Nice cut and paste but
Wait.
Off the top of my head, I would say they all look like bullshiat. I'm against the Republicans too. We have to expect more from government. Until we get more we have to be adversaries of them, not make excuses for them.

You're welcome to expound on how any of those accomplishments are "bullshiat."

Here's one more:

The economy has regained all the jobs it lost during the first two years of the Obama administration and is now starting to regain the jobs lost in the last year of the Bush administration


Job creation is still below population growth; a lower proportion of people have jobs each month.
 
2013-02-04 02:57:20 PM  

Mark Ratner: xria: One thing should be clear with drugs: if you make them illegal, you are basically guaranteeing large and ongoing profits for organized crime, so that should always be taken into account when deciding which to ban, meaning that only things that are seriously dangerous should be banned, which things like alcohol, mj, cocaine and so on should be regulated, taxed, and public awareness campaigns to mitigate the harms, etc.

You lost me there. Cocaine, while not as bad as meth or heroin, is too highly addictive to make it available to the masses.


New formula Coke Soma
 
2013-02-04 02:57:52 PM  

SuperNinjaToad: Netrngr: nmemkha: We just HAVE to blow the money shooting at brown people.

Would you prefer we shoot at really white people? I hear Germany gets uppity every few decades or so. Idiot

what about the Irish?


Naw...you can't get those people out of bed. They're either passed out drunk or making more Irish.
 
2013-02-04 02:57:53 PM  

whidbey: Vectron: We have to expect more from government. Until we get more we have to be adversaries of them, not make excuses for them.

The real adversary is big business and corporatism.

Government is a reflection of the people. In this case, people with more money because they get the most out of it.  Thanks to our own apathy.

And it doesn't help that decisions like Citizens United are considered landmarks of free speech.


the real enemy is a hyper aggressive foreign policy led by an unchecked executive branch, regulations that are often designed to insulate corporations from competition, not protect consumers, and the adoption of neoliberalism and regulation of morality through violent police action by both political parties.
117 u.s. military interventions in the past century:

CUBA1912TroopsU.S. interests protected in civil war.PANAMA1912TroopsMarines land during heated election.HONDURAS1912TroopsMarines protect U.S. economic interests.NICARAGUA1912-33Troops, bombing10-year occupation, fought guerillasMEXICO1913NavalAmericans evacuated during revolution.DOMINICAN REPUBLIC1914NavalFight with rebels over Santo Domingo.COLORADO1914TroopsBreaking of miners' strike by Army.MEXICO1914-18Naval, troopsSeries of interventions against nationalists.HAITI1914-34Troops, bombing19-year occupation after revolts.TEXAS1915TroopsFederal soldiers crush "Plan of San Diego" Mexican-American rebellionDOMINICAN REPUBLIC1916-24Troops8-year Marine occupation.CUBA1917-33TroopsMilitary occupation, economic protectorate.WORLD WAR I1917-18Naval, troopsShips sunk, fought Germany for 1 1/2 years.RUSSIA1918-22Naval, troopsFive landings to fight BolsheviksPANAMA1918-20Troops"Police duty" during unrest after elections.HONDURAS1919TroopsMarines land during election campaign.YUGOSLAVIA1919Troops/Marinesintervene for Italy against Serbs in Dalmatia.GUATEMALA1920Troops2-week intervention against unionists.WEST VIRGINIA1920-21Troops, bombingArmy intervenes against mineworkers.TURKEY1922TroopsFought nationalists in Smyrna.CHINA1922-27Naval, troopsDeployment during nationalist revolt.MEXICO1923BombingAirpower defends Calles from rebellionHONDURAS1924-25TroopsLanded twice during election strife.PANAMA1925TroopsMarines suppress general strike.CHINA1927-34TroopsMarines stationed throughout the country.EL SALVADOR1932NavalWarships send during Marti revolt.WASHINGTON DC1932TroopsArmy stops WWI vet bonus protest.WORLD WAR II1941-45Naval, troops, bombing, nuclearHawaii bombed, fought Japan, Italy and Germay for 3 years; first nuclear war.DETROIT1943TroopsArmy put down Black rebellion.IRAN1946Nuclear threatSoviet troops told to leave north.YUGOSLAVIA1946Nuclear threat, navalResponse to shoot-down of US plane.URUGUAY1947Nuclear threatBombers deployed as show of strength.GREECE1947-49Command operationU.S. directs extreme-right in civil war.GERMANY1948Nuclear ThreatAtomic-capable bombers guard Berlin Airlift.CHINA1948-49Troops/Marinesevacuate Americans before Communist victory.PHILIPPINES1948-54Command operationCIA directs war against Huk Rebellion.PUERTO RICO1950Command operationIndependence rebellion crushed in Ponce.KOREA1951-53 (-?)Troops, naval, bombing , nuclear threatsU.S./So. Korea fights China/No. Korea to stalemate; A-bomb threat in 1950, and against China in 1953. Still have bases.IRAN1953Command OperationCIA overthrows democracy, installs Shah.VIETNAM1954Nuclear threatFrench offered bombs to use against seige.GUATEMALA1954Command operation, bombing, nuclear threatCIA directs exile invasion after new gov't nationalized U.S. company lands; bombers based in Nicaragua.EGYPT1956Nuclear threat, troopsSoviets told to keep out of Suez crisis; Marines evacuate foreigners.LEBANONl958Troops, navalArmy & Marine occupation against rebels.IRAQ1958Nuclear threatIraq warned against invading Kuwait.CHINAl958Nuclear threatChina told not to move on Taiwan isles.PANAMA1958TroopsFlag protests erupt into confrontation.VIETNAMl960-75Troops, naval, bombing, nuclear threatsFought South Vietnam revolt & North Vietnam; one million killed in longest U.S. war; atomic bomb threats in l968 and l969.CUBAl961Command operationCIA-directed exile invasion fails.GERMANYl961Nuclear threatAlert during Berlin Wall crisis.LAOS1962Command operationMilitary buildup during guerrilla war. CUBA l962 Nuclear threat, navalBlockade during missile crisis; near-war with Soviet Union. IRAQ1963Command operationCIA organizes coup that killed president, brings Ba'ath Party to power, and Saddam Hussein back from exile to be head of the secret service.PANAMAl964TroopsPanamanians shot for urging canal's return.INDONESIAl965Command operationMillion killed in CIA-assisted army coup.DOMINICAN REPUBLIC1965-66Troops, bombingArmy & Marines land during election campaign.GUATEMALAl966-67Command operationGreen Berets intervene against rebels.DETROITl967TroopsArmy battles African Americans, 43 killed.UNITED STATESl968TroopsAfter King is shot; over 21,000 soldiers in cities.CAMBODIAl969-75Bombing, troops, navalUp to 2 million killed in decade of bombing, starvation, and political chaos.OMANl970Command operationU.S. directs Iranian marine invasion.LAOSl971-73Command operation, bombingU.S. directs South Vietnamese invasion; "carpet-bombs" countryside.SOUTH DAKOTAl973Command operationArmy directs Wounded Knee siege of Lakotas.MIDEAST1973Nuclear threatWorld-wide alert during Mideast War.CHILE1973Command operationCIA-backed coup ousts elected marxist president.CAMBODIAl975Troops, bombingGassing of captured ship Mayagüez, 28 troops die when copter shot down.ANGOLAl976-92Command operationCIA assists South African-backed rebels.IRANl980Troops, nuclear threat, aborted bombingRaid to rescue Embassy hostages; 8 troops die in copter-plane crash. Soviets warned not to get involved in revolution.LIBYAl981Naval jetsTwo Libyan jets shot down in maneuvers.EL SALVADORl981-92Command operation, troopsAdvisors, overflights aid anti-rebel war, soldiers briefly involved in hostage clash.NICARAGUAl981-90Command operation, navalCIA directs exile (Contra) invasions, plants harbor mines against revolution.LEBANONl982-84Naval, bombing, troopsMarines expel PLO and back Phalangists, Navy bombs and shells Muslim positions. 241 Marines killed when Shi'a rebel bombs barracks.GRENADAl983-84Troops, bombingInvasion four years after revolution.HONDURASl983-89TroopsManeuvers help build bases near borders.IRANl984JetsTwo Iranian jets shot down over Persian Gulf.LIBYAl986Bombing, navalAir strikes to topple Qaddafi gov't.BOLIVIA1986TroopsArmy assists raids on cocaine region.IRANl987-88Naval, bombingUS intervenes on side of Iraq in war, defending reflagged tankers and shooting down civilian jet.LIBYA1989Naval jetsTwo Libyan jets shot down.VIRGIN ISLANDS1989TroopsSt. Croix Black unrest after storm.PHILIPPINES1989JetsAir cover provided for government against coup.PANAMA1989 (-?)Troops, bombingNationalist government ousted by 27,000 soldiers, leaders arrested, 2000+ killed.LIBERIA1990TroopsForeigners evacuated during civil war.SAUDI ARABIA1990-91Troops, jetsIraq countered after invading Kuwait. 540,000 troops also stationed in Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Israel.IRAQ1990-91Bombing, troops, navalBlockade of Iraqi and Jordanian ports, air strikes; 200,000+ killed in invasion of Iraq and Kuwait; large-scale destruction of Iraqi military.KUWAIT1991Naval, bombing, troopsKuwait royal family returned to throne. IRAQ1991-2003Bombing, navalNo-fly zone over Kurdish north, shiate south; constant air strikes and naval-enforced economic sanctionsLOS ANGELES1992TroopsArmy, Marines deployed against anti-police uprising.SOMALIA1992-94Troops, naval, bombingU.S.-led United Nations occupation during civil war; raids against one Mogadishu faction.YUGOSLAVIA1992-94NavalNATO blockade of Serbia and Montenegro.BOSNIA1993-?Jets, bombingNo-fly zone patrolled in civil war; downed jets, bombed Serbs.HAITI1994
 
2013-02-04 02:58:51 PM  

manimal2878: drayno76: TwowheelinTim: AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty.

I'll second that.

/retired uscg.

Two in one day, I'm going to farking die!

  You must not have been around many actual military members in your life.  They do not have a single monolithic worldview regarding drug policy or any other topic, pretty much like every other group.  I knew lots of cool, laid back, navy guys when I lived in Jacksonville.  I would guess a majority probably lean republican, but not all by any means.


Actually, I'm the son of Vietnam Vet and spent a major portion of my childhood on military bases.  In the battle of the parentage my former flower child Professor Mother won over my psychotically unbalanced abusive father. It's worth saying both my grandfather and my father were hardline 'War on drugs' during the Ray-gun error.  Both dead now, thankfully. My college fraternity also consisted of about 20 service members, all hardline pro war on drugs.

What I've seen on Fark from Military personnel concerning most issues is...

"We take order, no think for ourselves, no comprehend consequences of actions or morality, because we're loyal and our colors are flawless."

Seeing military personnel openly disagreeing with the War on drugs is absolutely amazing!
Now if we can also convince those who are still in service and not just the 15 retired ones on fark, then maybe they'll tell their bosses to take a flying Fark. They should be allowed to acknowledge that they signed up to defend the country not attack anyone the corporate lobbyists can make money off of.

I know for a fact my father assisted in the export of opium out of both Vietnam and Cambodia while gathering intel against the Viet Cong and I also know he admits he has no concerns about the fact that much of it ultimately landed in the streets of the us because he was 'under orders.'  I've read rumors and blogs that the same happened in Afganistan, the 'Obama's War' documentary had footage showing US Military 'turning a blind eye' to drug smugglers.

It frighteningly apparent that we actually have no direct moral compass and we are willing to do whatever is necessary as a nation to make a lot of money for very few people.  I don't know if this is the governmental version of 'We're sorry' for Fast and Furious, or if they just really want to piss off central America but that will be the end result.

The international war on drugs needs to end, the national war on drugs needs to come to a grinding halt.  Legalize cannabis, psilocybin, LSD, MDMA and hell even coke, properly regulate them and make the public aware on how NOT to OD.  They're trying to do that right now with farking acetaminophen because people are ODing on it.  When the military stands up against the every growing tyranny that is our government I'll be really glad to watch political lines dissolve in favor of a common enemy.  Our farked up government and the corporations who pull it's strings.
 
2013-02-04 02:59:03 PM  

YixilTesiphon: whidbey: Vectron: Nice cut and paste but
Wait.
Off the top of my head, I would say they all look like bullshiat. I'm against the Republicans too. We have to expect more from government. Until we get more we have to be adversaries of them, not make excuses for them.

You're welcome to expound on how any of those accomplishments are "bullshiat."

Here's one more:

The economy has regained all the jobs it lost during the first two years of the Obama administration and is now starting to regain the jobs lost in the last year of the Bush administration

Job creation is still below population growth; a lower proportion of people have jobs each month.


The linked article is still good news.   Methinks you're looking for failure a bit too much.

Still waiting to hear how my other list of accomplishments is "bullshiat."

How about we just cut to the chase:  It isn't.   They are real accomplishments no Republican would have ever signed into law.
 
2013-02-04 02:59:34 PM  
 
2013-02-04 03:03:49 PM  

whidbey: m2313: Not saying any of that is anything new or just new ways of doing old things, but don't pretend Democrats and the American state apparatus in general isn't in the business of imperialism.
The Democrats are smarter and better at it is all.

I don't see it that way at all.   The right-wing in this country are the warmongers.  They controlled the government for 8 straight years, and people still keep electing them.

The Democratic Party has been wasting time, public money and energy basically cleaning up their foreign and domestic policy f*ckups.   You obviously want them to pull the plug on everything the Republicans did, and they can't.  Which is how the right-wing still controls this country.

We have a chance to keep them out of our government in 2016 by not re-electing Republicans to the House and refusing to entertain whatever Neo-Reaganite the GOP is undoubtedly attempting to run in 2016.

The whole "both sides are bad"  argument is bullshiat when it's clear the Democratic Party is interested in social progress, and cutting military expenditures.


2014. 20 f*cking 14. The next election is 21 months away. Crap like this is why Republicans clean up in the midterms.
 
2013-02-04 03:05:26 PM  

relcec: the war on druggies developed independently of choices made by Boeing, EADS, etc.
the whole military industrial fallacy is a nice way for people to avoid taking responsibility for their actions and omissions and the actions and omissions of their elected leaders. the pull of money and jobs may result in even extreme waste in the procurement process at times, but it sure as f*ck doesn't create the idiots that populate this thread and cheer on the drug war, assassinate jfk, or dictate our posture as a hyper aggressive predator nation.


Way to demonstrate a tenuous grasp of the situation.
 
2013-02-04 03:06:16 PM  

whidbey: FTDA: whidbey: FTDA: mwfark: ALL the die-hard libs who blindly support Obama are just as foolish as all the die-hard conservatives who blindly supported GW Bush.

Thank God I'm a moderate.  I support reason and sanity.  Too bad neither of those ideals are represented in politics.

Because Obama and Bush's policies are/were exactly the same.

Maybe you should stay home next election.

Really?  I state that I'm neither left or right wing and would like to see people with some integrity and sense be elected to political office and your answer is that I shouldn't vote or have an opinion about our country?  Who pissed in your cornflakes today?

I really get sick of hearing the "both sides are bad" myth perpetrated.

Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.


Maybe you should just stop being such a stupid.
 
2013-02-04 03:06:41 PM  
Sure, the corrupt governments of Mexico, Central America and South America can always use the cash. I mean, just because they're taking bribes from the cartels doesn't mean they can't take money from us, too.  It would be rude not to.
 
2013-02-04 03:06:50 PM  
WTF else are we supposed to do with all these munitions we manufactured to fight the evil communists if they are too pussy to come over here and a fight like Real MenTM
 
2013-02-04 03:07:04 PM  

dryknife: Rapmaster2000: Let's allow drug money a path into the US military.  What could possibly go wrong?

[www.examiner.com image 255x306]


Except that Oliver North was selling SAM parts to the Iranians at far more than they were worth on the Black Market and then flipping the profits to support Nicaraguan rebels who only in the wet dreams of Liberals were selling drugs.  He was also doing it under orders that did not come from the Defense Department.

Now that we've cleared that up...

I supported our involvement in Afghanistan for obvious reasons, well obvious unless you think a bunch of assclowns should be able to get away with murder.  I also understood the rationale for going into Iraq and while we should have prepared better for occupying the place long term up front and mistakes were made along the way as a result, overall I supported the war there.  I support our troops--not just with words that I don't mean--but through actions, after all I was one of them once.  Our people deserve the best equipment, good pay, excellent facilities, and we need a military large enough to make sure that our soldiers and sailors have enough time with their families so that they aren't burned out by their service.

But if you are going to tell me we're going to piss away billions more moving military assets into Latin America to fight the "War on Drugs" I'm going to say HELL NO.

How about instead this administration do something about demand in this country first?  Or is that too big a project for you, Barry?  Hmm?  Oh right, you're too busy out making speeches about bullshiat, because clearly the images of you firing your $3,500 shotgun weren't enough to convince people that the 2nd amendment protects skeet and duck shooting.  Never mind.
 
2013-02-04 03:07:10 PM  

whidbey: It's really an easy Google,  WeenerGord.And these are only 21 of the top 50.


2. Passed the Stimulus:


I would rather he hadn't done that. You say "The real adversary is big business and corporatism." How do you reconcile that?


7. Turned Around U.S. Auto Industry
Yeah. He really worked hard getting out those new car designs and working at the factories.

There is another few that reference wars and dictators. He could have brought the troops home January 21, 2009. In 5 years we will see nothing has been gained

19. Began Asia "Pivot":  oh boy. more goodies for the military industrial complex.

21. Tightened Sanctions on Iran: more goodies for the AIPAC and Hollywood donors.

15. Created Race to the Top:  No Child Left Behind 2.

12. Reversed Bush Torture Policies:  BULLshiat
 
2013-02-04 03:08:24 PM  

verbaltoxin: The whole "both sides are bad" argument is bullshiat when it's clear the Democratic Party is interested in social progress, and cutting military expenditures.

2014. 20 f*cking 14. The next election is 21 months away. Crap like this is why Republicans clean up in the midterms.


What is?  Be specific.
 
2013-02-04 03:08:27 PM  

whidbey: The linked article is still good news.


Not unless you're an ignoramus. Of course the raw number of jobs will, the vast majority of the time, increase as population increases; all of those extra people need goods and services.

We're only recovering, in terms of jobs, if we're adding more jobs than population growth requires.

/we have more jobs than Brazil does, so clearly we're doing great!
//derp
 
2013-02-04 03:11:28 PM  

Vectron: 2. Passed the Stimulus:

I would rather he hadn't done that. You say "The real adversary is big business and corporatism." How do you reconcile that?


We didn't have a choice.  Bush ran this country into the ground and allowed Wall Street to go apeshiat.

Vectron: 7. Turned Around U.S. Auto Industry
Yeah. He really worked hard getting out those new car designs and working at the factories.

There is another few that reference wars and dictators. He could have brought the troops home January 21, 2009. In 5 years we will see nothing has been gained


You're not being realistic if you really think Obama could have just pulled the plug.  We broke it, we bought it.

19. Began Asia "Pivot": oh boy. more goodies for the military industrial complex.

21. Tightened Sanctions on Iran: more goodies for the AIPAC and Hollywood donors.

15. Created Race to the Top: No Child Left Behind 2.

12. Reversed Bush Torture Policies: BULLshiat


So you're a cynic who doesn't know actual accomplishments when you see them.  How surprising.
 
2013-02-04 03:12:02 PM  

Vectron: 19. Began Asia "Pivot":  oh boy. more goodies for the military industrial complex.


Yeah.....no cutting the Navy budget if you want to rule the Pacific. That's a big ocean. And Guam, be ever so careful with Guam. It might tip over and capsize if we keep cramming marines there.
 
2013-02-04 03:12:14 PM  

YixilTesiphon: whidbey: The linked article is still good news.

Not unless you're an ignoramus.


Personal attacks forfeit whatever argument you're making.
 
2013-02-04 03:12:32 PM  

Smelly Pirate Hooker: Sure, the corrupt governments of Mexico, Central America and South America can always use the cash. I mean, just because they're taking bribes from the cartels doesn't mean they can't take money from us, too.  It would be rude not to.


Guyana, French Guyana, Colombia, Belize, Bolivia, Guatemala, Peru, Panama, Nicarauga, Argentina, Suriname, Uruguay, Paraguay, Venezuela, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Honduras, and Ecuador. Not all these countries have cartels, and not all are banana republics either. Some are downright boring.
 
2013-02-04 03:12:58 PM  

GORDON: Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.

Maybe you should just stop being such a stupid.


Maybe you should learn how to formulate actual arguments.
 
2013-02-04 03:13:52 PM  

whidbey: GORDON: Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.

Maybe you should just stop being such a stupid.

Maybe you should learn how to formulate actual arguments.


Shiat, your both morans.

/I can play this game too.
 
2013-02-04 03:14:15 PM  

whidbey: We didn't have a choice.  Bush ran this country into the ground and allowed Wall Street to go apeshiat.


And the Democrats' brilliant solution is to bail them out?

whidbey: YixilTesiphon: whidbey: The linked article is still good news.

Not unless you're an ignoramus.

Personal attacks forfeit whatever argument you're making.


It's not really a personal attack. You have to be truly ignorant to believe that jobs increasing at a slower rate than population is "good news". It's part of the parties' glib dishonesty with the American public that annoys me so much.
 
2013-02-04 03:15:38 PM  

SuperNinjaToad: Netrngr: nmemkha: We just HAVE to blow the money shooting at brown people.

Would you prefer we shoot at really white people? I hear Germany gets uppity every few decades or so. Idiot

what about the Irish?



Don't mess with the Irish, they'll bomb your ass
 
2013-02-04 03:16:06 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: Sir Not Sure The Unscannable: Military folks are required to answer Yes or No to the question: Would you fire on a U.S. citizen, given the order? What they don't say is which ones.

Really?

Huh...

Never got asked that.


Because they don't ask it.
 
2013-02-04 03:19:00 PM  

whidbey: So you're a cynic who doesn't know actual accomplishments when you see them.  How surprising.


When it comes to Washington, I'm a glass half full kinda guy.
 
2013-02-04 03:19:39 PM  

YixilTesiphon: whidbey: We didn't have a choice.  Bush ran this country into the ground and allowed Wall Street to go apeshiat.

And the Democrats' brilliant solution is to bail them out?


It wasn't a "brilliant solution."  It was really the only choice we had.

whidbey: YixilTesiphon: whidbey: The linked article is still good news.

Not unless you're an ignoramus.

Personal attacks forfeit whatever argument you're making.

It's not really a personal attack. You have to be truly ignorant to believe that jobs increasing at a slower rate than population is "good news". It's part of the parties' glib dishonesty with the American public that annoys me so much.


Actually, you're the one being dishonest here. I gave you statistics, you moved the goal posts.

This economy has improved considerably under Obama.  Stop being so obtuse as to keep pretending otherwise.
 
2013-02-04 03:21:35 PM  
If this "war" is waged anywhere near the previous "war" was, I expect nothing of substance to be accomplished. I don't understand how identifying supply lines and manufacturing/distributing facilities & personnel would be all that difficult. If we really wanted to stop it, couldn't we just absolutely obliterate the whole darn network? The other method of course is waging an economic warfare where the products rapidly decline in either demand. Legalize most drugs or drive the cost up to traffic to where it is no longer that profitable. However, no matter how you go about it you are attacking an entity that is bound to get desperate and backed into a corner. I haven't really read much or researched the matter, I just don't understand how this is exactly difficult to map and destroy the drug trafficking network.
 
2013-02-04 03:22:02 PM  

Vectron: whidbey: So you're a cynic who doesn't know actual accomplishments when you see them.  How surprising.

When it comes to Washington, I'm a glass half full kinda guy.


Half-empty it sounds like to me.

"Half-full" would be admitting that we have good people in office for once and they're trying to change things.   Yeah, the political process is overwhelmingly right-leaning, and it's a swim upstream.

Still there have been notable accomplishments, and it's the best we have.   We dodged a bullet with Romney.    It's extremely dishonest to say that a Romney Presidency would have been exactly the same as what Obama has accomplished.
 
2013-02-04 03:22:54 PM  

drayno76: whidbey: GORDON: Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.

Maybe you should just stop being such a stupid.

Maybe you should learn how to formulate actual arguments.

Shiat, your both morans.

/I can play this game too.


Did you actually have something to add to this discussion?
 
2013-02-04 03:22:58 PM  

drayno76: manimal2878: drayno76: TwowheelinTim: AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty.

I'll second that.

/retired uscg.

Two in one day, I'm going to farking die!

  You must not have been around many actual military members in your life.  They do not have a single monolithic worldview regarding drug policy or any other topic, pretty much like every other group.  I knew lots of cool, laid back, navy guys when I lived in Jacksonville.  I would guess a majority probably lean republican, but not all by any means.

Actually, I'm the son of Vietnam Vet and spent a major portion of my childhood on military bases.  In the battle of the parentage my former flower child Professor Mother won over my psychotically unbalanced abusive father. It's worth saying both my grandfather and my father were hardline 'War on drugs' during the Ray-gun error.  Both dead now, thankfully. My college fraternity also consisted of about 20 service members, all hardline pro war on drugs.

What I've seen on Fark from Military personnel concerning most issues is...

"We take order, no think for ourselves, no comprehend consequences of actions or morality, because we're loyal and our colors are flawless."

Seeing military personnel openly disagreeing with the War on drugs is absolutely amazing!
Now if we can also convince those who are still in service and not just the 15 retired ones on fark, then maybe they'll tell their bosses to take a flying Fark. They should be allowed to acknowledge that they signed up to defend the country not attack anyone the corporate lobbyists can make money off of.

I know for a fact my father assisted in the export of opium out of both Vietnam and Cambodia while gathering intel against the Viet Cong and I also know he admits he has no concerns about the fact that much of it ultimately landed in the streets of the us because he was 'under orders.'  I've read rumors and blogs that the same happened in Afganistan, the 'Obama's War' docu ...


I'm going with "you don't know too many active duty servicemembers". We don't blindly follow orders. In fact, we are permitted to not follow direct orders that are clearly illegal. Sure, there are some hard-line pro-(insert your war of choice here), but no more so than in the general population.
Military members want peace more than anyone...we don't like dying for stupid reasons.
 
2013-02-04 03:23:02 PM  

Red Shirt Blues: Vectron: 19. Began Asia "Pivot":  oh boy. more goodies for the military industrial complex.

Yeah.....no cutting the Navy budget if you want to rule the Pacific. That's a big ocean. And Guam, be ever so careful with Guam. It might tip over and capsize if we keep cramming marines there.


fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-02-04 03:23:40 PM  

whidbey: Actually, you're the one being dishonest here. I gave you statistics, you moved the goal posts.

This economy has improved considerably under Obama.  Stop being so obtuse as to keep pretending otherwise.


I'm not moving the goalposts, I'm saying that by the goal of jobs, the bolded statement is false.

whidbey: Yeah, the political process is overwhelmingly right-leaning, and it's a swim upstream.


The tsar is kind, but the boyars are cruel.
 
2013-02-04 03:24:48 PM  

whidbey: Vectron: whidbey: So you're a cynic who doesn't know actual accomplishments when you see them.  How surprising.

When it comes to Washington, I'm a glass half full kinda guy.

Half-empty it sounds like to me.

"Half-full" would be admitting that we have good people in office for once and they're trying to change things.   Yeah, the political process is overwhelmingly right-leaning, and it's a swim upstream.

Still there have been notable accomplishments, and it's the best we have.   We dodged a bullet with Romney.    It's extremely dishonest to say that a Romney Presidency would have been exactly the same as what Obama has accomplished.



You're a true believer or getting paid. Nothing more to add.
 
2013-02-04 03:25:58 PM  

whidbey: YixilTesiphon: whidbey: We didn't have a choice.  Bush ran this country into the ground and allowed Wall Street to go apeshiat.

And the Democrats' brilliant solution is to bail them out?

It wasn't a "brilliant solution."  It was really the only choice we had.

whidbey: YixilTesiphon: whidbey: The linked article is still good news.

Not unless you're an ignoramus.

Personal attacks forfeit whatever argument you're making.

It's not really a personal attack. You have to be truly ignorant to believe that jobs increasing at a slower rate than population is "good news". It's part of the parties' glib dishonesty with the American public that annoys me so much.

Actually, you're the one being dishonest here. I gave you statistics, you moved the goal posts.

This economy has improved considerably under Obama.  Stop being so obtuse as to keep pretending otherwise.


because a president alone has so much to do with the improvement or failure of an economy, by himself.
 
2013-02-04 03:28:16 PM  

Kit Fister: This economy has improved considerably under Obama. Stop being so obtuse as to keep pretending otherwise.

because a president alone has so much to do with the improvement or failure of an economy, by himself.


I'd be first to admit that many in here are obsessed with the power of the President--power he really doesn't have.

But we are talking about accomplishments for the elected Administration and Congress.
 
2013-02-04 03:28:40 PM  
We need to turn our prisons into "Drug Tourism Resorts."  People can stay as long as they like and get free drugs, and free psychological counseling.

Makes as much sense as what we have now.

   (X-cessive Dreamer is my Wu Tang name)
 
2013-02-04 03:29:12 PM  

Vectron: whidbey: Vectron: whidbey: So you're a cynic who doesn't know actual accomplishments when you see them.  How surprising.

When it comes to Washington, I'm a glass half full kinda guy.

Half-empty it sounds like to me.

"Half-full" would be admitting that we have good people in office for once and they're trying to change things.   Yeah, the political process is overwhelmingly right-leaning, and it's a swim upstream.

Still there have been notable accomplishments, and it's the best we have.   We dodged a bullet with Romney.    It's extremely dishonest to say that a Romney Presidency would have been exactly the same as what Obama has accomplished.


You're a true believer or getting paid. Nothing more to add.


Yeah well that really isn't an argument, nor does it lessen any of the points I have made here.
 
2013-02-04 03:30:15 PM  

YixilTesiphon: whidbey: Actually, you're the one being dishonest here. I gave you statistics, you moved the goal posts.

This economy has improved considerably under Obama.  Stop being so obtuse as to keep pretending otherwise.

I'm not moving the goalposts, I'm saying that by the goal of jobs, the bolded statement is false.

whidbey: Yeah, the political process is overwhelmingly right-leaning, and it's a swim upstream.

The tsar is kind, but the boyars are cruel.


See above.

Both of you have proven to be a total waste in terms of providing counter-arguments to my points.

But this Fark, after all.  It's all about wasting time, isn't it?
 
2013-02-04 03:31:05 PM  

Vectron: There is another few that reference wars and dictators. He could have brought the troops home January 21, 2009. In 5 years we will see nothing has been gained


How? Was he supposed to just call 100,000 taxis and have them pick everyone up in Kabul?
 
2013-02-04 03:33:16 PM  

Joe Blowme: Stupid warmongering BUsh... er.. Obama? Ok then, its all for world peace.


Just wait, its going to get worse.
This administration has gotten into the habit of running wars without congressional approval and in any theater it feels like.When a Republican gets in and does more of the same, the bawwwing of the left will be hushed by nearly a decade of precedent.

/Following the pattern, him and his party will add their own overreaching laws to the mix.
/Sooner or later one of these political machines will find its easier to sweep aside the opposition rather than pretend to argue with it.
 
2013-02-04 03:35:12 PM  

way south: Just wait, its going to get worse.
This administration has gotten into the habit of running wars without congressional approval and in any theater it feels like.When a Republican gets in and does more of the same, the bawwwing of the left will be hushed by nearly a decade of precedent.


Yes because cleaning up the failed foreign policy of one of the worst Presidential administrations in history constitutes getting "into the habit of running wars without congressional approval."
 
2013-02-04 03:35:57 PM  
China and the US have a deal. China buys up our debt so we can fight the pointless wars and then they go in and buy up all the resources.
 
2013-02-04 03:36:45 PM  
I'm the libbiest lib that ever libbed and i say GOOD. The cartels need to be wiped off the planet. They bring nothing but pain,suffering,misery and death.  The only thing worse than a person that kills for a belief is a person that kills for money. Guess which kind of people run the cartels.

This should've been done a long time ago.
 
2013-02-04 03:39:59 PM  

PlasticMoby: I'm the libbiest lib that ever libbed and i say GOOD. The cartels need to be wiped off the planet. They bring nothing but pain,suffering,misery and death.  The only thing worse than a person that kills for a belief is a person that kills for money. Guess which kind of people run the cartels.

This should've been done a long time ago.


But really, do you think this will happen or it will be mostly political red tape holding back any progress, with the media condemning the US military for being blood hungry and the US being a bully? What it takes is to go there and destroy. What is likely to happen instead is that STs are sent in for anything meaningful, but there won't be any large operations. Cartels adapt and take a hit but same ol' same ol'. After about a year or so of this, the public decries it a failed operation and waste of resources. Gee you think? Boxing with your hands tied behind your back is pretty difficult.
 
2013-02-04 03:42:22 PM  

whidbey: way south: Just wait, its going to get worse.
This administration has gotten into the habit of running wars without congressional approval and in any theater it feels like.When a Republican gets in and does more of the same, the bawwwing of the left will be hushed by nearly a decade of precedent.

Yes because cleaning up the failed foreign policy of one of the worst Presidential administrations in history constitutes getting "into the habit of running wars without congressional approval."


Are you saying O isn't in the habit of running wars without congressional approval? Or is this just more apologia?

whidbey: See above.

Both of you have proven to be a total waste in terms of providing counter-arguments to my points.

But this Fark, after all.  It's all about wasting time, isn't it?


This does not constitute a counter-argument.

True believers are creepy.
 
2013-02-04 03:43:01 PM  

PlasticMoby: I'm the libbiest lib that ever libbed and i say GOOD. The cartels need to be wiped off the planet. They bring nothing but pain,suffering,misery and death.  The only thing worse than a person that kills for a belief is a person that kills for money. Guess which kind of people run the cartels.

This should've been done a long time ago.


They absolutely need to be wiped out. So do a bunch of US gangs. We need to have fewer gun murders in the US. That's why we should push for blanket legalization. It's direct economic warfare, and it will work. Any problems created can be solved at a fraction of the cost of the war on drugs.
 
2013-02-04 03:45:14 PM  

TopoGigo: PlasticMoby: I'm the libbiest lib that ever libbed and i say GOOD. The cartels need to be wiped off the planet. They bring nothing but pain,suffering,misery and death.  The only thing worse than a person that kills for a belief is a person that kills for money. Guess which kind of people run the cartels.

This should've been done a long time ago.

They absolutely need to be wiped out. So do a bunch of US gangs. We need to have fewer gun murders in the US. That's why we should push for blanket legalization. It's direct economic warfare, and it will work. Any problems created can be solved at a fraction of the cost of the war on drugs.


That solution does not involve increasing power to the federal government, so it is unacceptable to the Democrats and Republicans.
 
2013-02-04 03:46:24 PM  

Nurglitch: This kind of makes sense to me. I know it seems like make-work for the putative "Military-Industrial Complex," but killing criminals while undermining their business via legalization seems like a good idea. Just because marijuana and cocaine are legal isn't going to make the small, standing armies of various trafficking organizations suddenly start clocking 9-5 in an office or retail outlet anytime soon. These guys deal drugs because the illegality of said drugs gives them revenue, rather than doing it because they want to provide drugs to the needy masses. They're in it for the money, and would just find some other black market opportunity.


Can you name one that they aren't already involved in?

Hint:   They're already involved in human trafficking and even stealing oil from Pemex.
 
2013-02-04 03:46:28 PM  

YixilTesiphon: Yes because cleaning up the failed foreign policy of one of the worst Presidential administrations in history constitutes getting "into the habit of running wars without congressional approval."

Are you saying O isn't in the habit of running wars without congressional approval? Or is this just more apologia?


What "wars" are those?  Be specific.

 

YixilTesiphon: whidbey: See above.

Both of you have proven to be a total waste in terms of providing counter-arguments to my points.

But this Fark, after all. It's all about wasting time, isn't it?

This does not constitute a counter-argument.

True believers are creepy.


Still waiting for you to come up with real arguments and to stop with the personal attacks.
 
2013-02-04 03:50:46 PM  

GORDON: whidbey:

Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.

Maybe you should just stop being such a stupid.


Wow, seriously? That is a lame attempt at a putdown, even for a second grader.
 
2013-02-04 03:51:29 PM  

the money is in the banana stand: If this "war" is waged anywhere near the previous "war" was, I expect nothing of substance to be accomplished. I don't understand how identifying supply lines and manufacturing/distributing facilities & personnel would be all that difficult. If we really wanted to stop it, couldn't we just absolutely obliterate the whole darn network? The other method of course is waging an economic warfare where the products rapidly decline in either demand. Legalize most drugs or drive the cost up to traffic to where it is no longer that profitable. However, no matter how you go about it you are attacking an entity that is bound to get desperate and backed into a corner. I haven't really read much or researched the matter, I just don't understand how this is exactly difficult to map and destroy the drug trafficking network.


NAFTA.
 
2013-02-04 03:51:48 PM  
www.globalresearch.ca
 
2013-02-04 03:52:19 PM  

whidbey: YixilTesiphon: Yes because cleaning up the failed foreign policy of one of the worst Presidential administrations in history constitutes getting "into the habit of running wars without congressional approval."

Are you saying O isn't in the habit of running wars without congressional approval? Or is this just more apologia?

What "wars" are those?  Be specific.

  YixilTesiphon: whidbey: See above.

Both of you have proven to be a total waste in terms of providing counter-arguments to my points.

But this Fark, after all. It's all about wasting time, isn't it?

This does not constitute a counter-argument.

True believers are creepy.

Still waiting for you to come up with real arguments and to stop with the personal attacks.


My real argument is that job increases which do not keep up with population growth does not constitute recovery. You call this "moving the goalposts".
 
2013-02-04 03:52:43 PM  

david_gaithersburg: Just what the fark did you libs think the government was going to do with all of the extra tax money you've been chomping at the bit to give them.  You voted for this shiat, own it, or wake up and join your local Tea Party.


Weren't the Republicans chomping at the bit to start a war with Iran while abolishing taxes for rich people and jacking taxes up for the middle-class, lower-class, and poor? Aren't the Republicans the party that goes insane whenever someone suggests cutting the defense budget? Why are you telling us to quit supporting "warmongers" and come support warmongers?
 
2013-02-04 03:53:36 PM  

drayno76: manimal2878: drayno76: TwowheelinTim: AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty.

I'll second that.

/retired uscg.

Two in one day, I'm going to farking die!

  You must not have been around many actual military members in your life.  They do not have a single monolithic worldview regarding drug policy or any other topic, pretty much like every other group.  I knew lots of cool, laid back, navy guys when I lived in Jacksonville.  I would guess a majority probably lean republican, but not all by any means.

Actually, I'm the son of Vietnam Vet and spent a major portion of my childhood on military bases.  In the battle of the parentage my former flower child Professor Mother won over my psychotically unbalanced abusive father. It's worth saying both my grandfather and my father were hardline 'War on drugs' during the Ray-gun error.  Both dead now, thankfully. My college fraternity also consisted of about 20 service members, all hardline pro war on drugs.

What I've seen on Fark from Military personnel concerning most issues is...

"We take order, no think for ourselves, no comprehend consequences of actions or morality, because we're loyal and our colors are flawless."

Seeing military personnel openly disagreeing with the War on drugs is absolutely amazing!
Now if we can also convince those who are still in service and not just the 15 retired ones on fark, then maybe they'll tell their bosses to take a flying Fark. They should be allowed to acknowledge that they signed up to defend the country not attack anyone the corporate lobbyists can make money off of.

I know for a fact my father assisted in the export of opium out of both Vietnam and Cambodia while gathering intel against the Viet Cong and I also know he admits he has no concerns about the fact that much of it ultimately landed in the streets of the us because he was 'under orders.'  I've read rumors and blogs that the same happened in Afganistan, the 'Obama's War' documentary had footage showing US Military 'turning a blind eye' to drug smugglers.

It frighteningly apparent that we actually have no direct moral compass and we are willing to do whatever is necessary as a nation to make a lot of money for very few people.  I don't know if this is the governmental version of 'We're sorry' for Fast and Furious, or if they just really want to piss off central America but that will be the end result.

The international war on drugs needs to end, the national war on drugs needs to come to a grinding halt.  Legalize cannabis, psilocybin, LSD, MDMA and hell even coke, properly regulate them and make the public aware on how NOT to OD.  They're trying to do that right now with farking acetaminophen because people are ODing on it.  When the military stands up against the every growing tyranny that is our government I'll be really glad to watch political lines dissolve in favor of a common enemy.  Our farked up government and the corporations who pull it's strings.


A veteran doesn't have to be retired.

/vet
//I feel safer
 
2013-02-04 03:53:38 PM  
Whidbey - you really believe the Stimulus worked?  I'm not being snarky, I just thought the Left gave up defending that.  No one, not even Obama mentioned it during his re-election campaign. I think you're the first person I've seen in a while that actually defended it.

As for the rest of your list - I agree with about one-third, disagree with another third (on ideological/philosophical grounds), and disagree with your facts on another third.  FWIW (which is not very much).
 
2013-02-04 03:56:49 PM  

ha-ha-guy: MisterRonbo: I am not willing to lose a single American soldier or Marine's life just to stop people from getting high. You join the military to defend this country, not play Customs agent.

I like how you state "getting high", as if pot is the only product the cartels ever sell.  I'd say the Chinese experience with opium (when the Euros forced the import of it upon them) is a pretty good example of why a lot of drugs will never be legal.


I'm under the impression that most opium comes from Afghanistan, but I could be wrong. In any event, I'd think the market for heroin is tiny compared to marijuana and cocaine.  Those, and particularly the latter, are what fund the cartels. Legalize those, and the cartels lose over 90% of their revenue.

Bigger picture, drug addiction will only be dealt with effectively when you let evolution run its course. Those genetically predisposed will get weeded out of the gene pool, and hopefully the other contributory causes (poverty, abuse) will decline.

We deal with the problems of alcoholism, we can handle some junkies. Let them shuffle through homeless shelters and soup kitchen lines until they die. Buh-bye.
 
2013-02-04 03:57:05 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: Sir Not Sure The Unscannable: Military folks are required to answer Yes or No to the question: Would you fire on a U.S. citizen, given the order? What they don't say is which ones.

Really?

Huh...

Never got asked that.


Perhaps he just meant the Marines?
 
2013-02-04 03:57:34 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: david_gaithersburg: Just what the fark did you libs think the government was going to do with all of the extra tax money you've been chomping at the bit to give them.  You voted for this shiat, own it, or wake up and join your local Tea Party.

Weren't the Republicans chomping at the bit to start a war with Iran while abolishing taxes for rich people and jacking taxes up for the middle-class, lower-class, and poor? Aren't the Republicans the party that goes insane whenever someone suggests cutting the defense budget? Why are you telling us to quit supporting "warmongers" and come support warmongers?


I'm a Republican who thinks the rich should pay more (but yeah, I do the poor and lower-class should pay a little more - half the households not paying any federal income taxes is stupid both financially and philosophically).  I also think the defense budget is just ridiculous.  I realize that defense is one of the few American trade surplus industries, but Holy Shiat, we're Number One in the world and spend more than 2-18 combined.
 
2013-02-04 03:57:44 PM  

Sir Not Sure The Unscannable: Old_Chief_Scott: Sir Not Sure The Unscannable: Military folks are required to answer Yes or No to the question: Would you fire on a U.S. citizen, given the order? What they don't say is which ones.

Really?

Huh...

Never got asked that.

Perhaps he just meant the Marines?


Also, only since Clinton.
 
2013-02-04 03:57:50 PM  

FLMountainMan: Whidbey - you really believe the Stimulus worked? I'm not being snarky, I just thought the Left gave up defending that. No one, not even Obama mentioned it during his re-election campaign. I think you're the first person I've seen in a while that actually defended it.


Not at all.   While it was disappointing that much of it turned out to be just tax cuts,  there were many progressive and forward-thinking proposals in the Stimulus that were passed into law.  Right off the top of my head I'm thinking of incentives for alternative energy programs,  and charging stations for electric cars down the freeways on the West coast.

I admit it wasn't enough of a Stimulus, but the idea to invest in our country?  A Republican would never consider that a priority.
 
2013-02-04 03:58:45 PM  

FLMountainMan: Whidbey - you really believe the Stimulus worked?


Of course the stimulus "worked" Putting money into the economy is always going to have a positive short term effect.

Government stimulus is sort of like having your nuts removed because they're cancerous. It's not exactly an ideal situation, but it's better than the alternative of farkin dying.
 
2013-02-04 03:59:27 PM  

FLMountainMan: Whidbey - you really believe the Stimulus worked?  I'm not being snarky, I just thought the Left gave up defending that.  No one, not even Obama mentioned it during his re-election campaign. I think you're the first person I've seen in a while that actually defended it.

As for the rest of your list - I agree with about one-third, disagree with another third (on ideological/philosophical grounds), and disagree with your facts on another third.  FWIW (which is not very much).


It was the first thing I Googled. I used to have a much more extensive list in my profile, but I got rid of it because I didn't think I'd have to lecture anyone on the obvious accomplishment of this administration ever again.
 
2013-02-04 03:59:27 PM  

bigheadface: we are permitted to not follow direct orders that are clearly illegal.


There's the rub.... Clearly "illegal."

When you're overseas, who's law?  Local law, US Law, International Law?

So the personnel in various wars who followed orders exporting drugs out of SE Asia and more recently the middle east, are they or are they not criminals? Such as my dad? Honorable discharge, two purple hears (ya I know dime a dozen) and several other accolades I don't understand what exactly they mean.  Since he chose to follow orders which were violations of US law, who is to prosecute?
MP's and military justice.  I hate to echo anything my Dad said but he called them 'two to three times more corrupt than civilian cops' which I always felt was a pot-kettle-politically incorrect color type of statement.  I do troll, but in this case, I'm not doing so.

Also, clearly illegal, which is clearly vague without an extended definition.  Setting aside legalities, how about ethics and morals.  AFAIK refusing to follow a direct order based on moral grounds is not acceptable, please correct me if I'm wrong.

To blindly rely on the law, which many times is either immoral or amoral, is to suspend personal judgement.  From what I understand laws were meant to be inflexible while 'justice' was historically given some breathing room for opinion, situation, and possible justification of said illegal act. With Zero Tolerance (another drug war gem that's evolved into every aspect of our lives) and mandatory minimums, justice has gone from blind to deaf dumb and mute.   Using law as the sole basis, and only justifiable one, for a human being to refuse to carry out a mission involving violence and killing is asinine. I'm not saying you sir, but the rules in which you are required to operate are asanine.

Had the generations been reversed I likely would have been killed by my own commanding officer or platoon for not being willing to fire bomb whole villages of Vietnamese people with little to no real intel on who they were actually bombing.  Too many stories for Vietnam Vets of 'oops this village was all women an infants and these grain bins actually have grains in them. Oh well HQ was wrong again.'

I can not attest to any repairs that may or may not have occurred since Vietnam, but I don't have faith that smart bombs are as smart as they claim. I'm pretty sure they're still relying on humans and administrative intelligence which is just as human open to interpretation and coercion as anything else. Anyone find those WMD's that 'intel' said were in Iraq?  I'm pretty sure little has changed since Vietnam.

If you can't walk out and say, 'Fark you and the flag you rode in on' based completely on personal morals and still retain the honor of your position, then free thought is in fact discouraged in our military.

As someone who's lost mobility to one of the many monsters the military created in the 60's, it's very difficult for me to see anything but programmed killing machines coming out of a military that forces one to suspend personal morals for the job.

I've quit multiple 'jobs' based on morals, no I wasn't defending the country or attacking another, but I refuse to give my moral judgement to any other human. One job I decided to stop facilitating a wife beater with his favorite, and the most despicable drug, booze. I was fired because I had no standing to refuse service to him; I'm ok with that I made a moral choice above that of the law my company didn't like that, fark them.  After my termination I turned him in and got to watch him get sentenced to 15 years, farking him over and depriving my former company of his addiction money. When my employer informed a potential interviewer that I was 'insubordinate' I had a lovely time taking them to court and donating my proceeds to their least favorite charity. You should have the same ability in the military.

If you don't have the stomach to kill children, load heroin into a dead soldier's caskets in exchange for a bad tip on Al Quaida head op #234, or fire bomb hundreds of innocents to get one person you should have the legal ability and right to walk away from your employer without damage or recourse as opposed to taking a dishonorable discharge and never finding employment again.
 
2013-02-04 04:00:04 PM  

Nurglitch: This kind of makes sense to me. I know it seems like make-work for the putative "Military-Industrial Complex," but killing criminals while undermining their business via legalization seems like a good idea. Just because marijuana and cocaine are legal isn't going to make the small, standing armies of various trafficking organizations suddenly start clocking 9-5 in an office or retail outlet anytime soon. These guys deal drugs because the illegality of said drugs gives them revenue, rather than doing it because they want to provide drugs to the needy masses. They're in it for the money, and would just find some other black market opportunity.


they could make a fortune in the states selling all of those hi-cap they have.
 
2013-02-04 04:00:45 PM  

whidbey: drayno76: whidbey: GORDON: Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.

Maybe you should just stop being such a stupid.

Maybe you should learn how to formulate actual arguments.

Shiat, your both morans.

/I can play this game too.

Did you actually have something to add to this discussion?


Between you two, no I'm still on topic and haven't devolved into name calling.. I just wanted to play in your sandbox.
 
2013-02-04 04:01:42 PM  

verbaltoxin: Smelly Pirate Hooker: Sure, the corrupt governments of Mexico, Central America and South America can always use the cash. I mean, just because they're taking bribes from the cartels doesn't mean they can't take money from us, too.  It would be rude not to.

Guyana, French Guyana, Colombia, Belize, Bolivia, Guatemala, Peru, Panama, Nicarauga, Argentina, Suriname, Uruguay, Paraguay, Venezuela, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Honduras, and Ecuador. Not all these countries have cartels, and not all are banana republics either. Some are downright boring.


I believe his comments were addressed to the corrupt countries of those continents.  Of course, it's still not entirely accurate.  Argentina, for example, is corrupt as shiat, but doesn't have cartels.
 
2013-02-04 04:02:56 PM  

WeenerGord: whidbey: WeenerGord: whidbey: WeenerGord: whidbey: Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.

So many that you couldn't even name one of them

Living under a rock the past few years, or just really that stubborn?

Still cant even name one of them, resorts to strawman attacks instead.

You really can't be that dense.  It's like someone asking to prove that water exists.


3 chances, still cant name even one, another strawman. Yup, looks like the one thats full of shiat is YOU


Is it really that difficult for you to fire up Google and actually do some research, or are you being a stubborn twit for the sake of it?
 
2013-02-04 04:03:35 PM  

Eddie Adams from Torrance: FLMountainMan: Whidbey - you really believe the Stimulus worked?

Of course the stimulus "worked" Putting money into the economy is always going to have a positive short term effect.

Government stimulus is sort of like having your nuts removed because they're cancerous. It's not exactly an ideal situation, but it's better than the alternative of farkin dying.


I think a more apt description would be that your borrowing from your neighbor so you can buy your children's approval with toys you bought from that the same neighbor.
 
2013-02-04 04:04:11 PM  
*you're* goddamnitsomuch.
 
2013-02-04 04:05:06 PM  

whidbey: FLMountainMan: Whidbey - you really believe the Stimulus worked?  I'm not being snarky, I just thought the Left gave up defending that.  No one, not even Obama mentioned it during his re-election campaign. I think you're the first person I've seen in a while that actually defended it.

As for the rest of your list - I agree with about one-third, disagree with another third (on ideological/philosophical grounds), and disagree with your facts on another third.  FWIW (which is not very much).

It was the first thing I Googled. I used to have a much more extensive list in my profile, but I got rid of it because I didn't think I'd have to lecture anyone on the obvious accomplishment of this administration ever again.


Sounds like you have a really diverse social circle.
 
2013-02-04 04:05:12 PM  

drayno76: whidbey: drayno76: whidbey: GORDON: Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.

Maybe you should just stop being such a stupid.

Maybe you should learn how to formulate actual arguments.

Shiat, your both morans.

/I can play this game too.

Did you actually have something to add to this discussion?

Between you two, no I'm still on topic and haven't devolved into name calling.. I just wanted to play in your sandbox.


I haven't called anyone names in here, and I object to you lumping me in the same category as my opponents.
 
2013-02-04 04:05:37 PM  

whidbey: pxlboy: ISO15693: Well, we all know who is ultimately responsible for this - people who continue to buy marijuana, thus creating a market for it, and thus giving rise to drug cartels, and all of their associated evils. Stop supporting the drug cartels.

Don't be stupid. Who still smokes that crappy dirt weed?

I guess he thinks dispensaries are the new drug lords.



Yes, those viagra cartels along the mexican border kill thousands every year. What was I thinking.
 
2013-02-04 04:06:38 PM  

FLMountainMan: whidbey: FLMountainMan: Whidbey - you really believe the Stimulus worked?  I'm not being snarky, I just thought the Left gave up defending that.  No one, not even Obama mentioned it during his re-election campaign. I think you're the first person I've seen in a while that actually defended it.

As for the rest of your list - I agree with about one-third, disagree with another third (on ideological/philosophical grounds), and disagree with your facts on another third.  FWIW (which is not very much).

It was the first thing I Googled. I used to have a much more extensive list in my profile, but I got rid of it because I didn't think I'd have to lecture anyone on the obvious accomplishment of this administration ever again.

Sounds like you have a really diverse social circle.


I was referring to discussions I've had here, not IRL.

Most people I know aren't that obtuse regarding the past 4 years.  They also by and large realize that we dodged a bullet with Romney.
 
2013-02-04 04:07:52 PM  

whidbey: drayno76: whidbey: drayno76: whidbey: GORDON: Maybe you should Google the accomplishments the Obama administration has produced in the past 4 years and compare it to the utter failure of the past 8 years before that.

Maybe you should just stop being such a stupid.

Maybe you should learn how to formulate actual arguments.

Shiat, your both morans.

/I can play this game too.

Did you actually have something to add to this discussion?

Between you two, no I'm still on topic and haven't devolved into name calling.. I just wanted to play in your sandbox.

I haven't called anyone names in here, and I object to you lumping me in the same category as my opponents.


objection noted, I'm too lazy to review your whole conversation so I'll take your word for it, so I apologize... He's a Moran.

but I don't think both sides are broken, I think the whole system is broken and neither party has a chance in hell of truly fixing it.
 
2013-02-04 04:10:36 PM  
FTFA: In the most expensive initiative in Latin America since the Cold War, the U.S. has militarized the battle against the traffickers, spending more than $20 billion in the past decade.

Aaaaaand that's $20 billion that we can't spend on treating addicts.  But of course that doesn't go to such welfare queens as Northrup Grumman.
 
2013-02-04 04:11:06 PM  
The war is not meant to be won, it is meant to be continuous. Hierarchical society is only possible on the basis of poverty and ignorance. This new version is the past and no different past can ever have existed. In principle the war effort is always planned to keep society on the brink of starvation. The war is waged by the ruling group against its own subjects and its object is not the victory over either Eurasia or East Asia, but to keep the very structure of society intact.

Substitute hunger for fear and eur/eastasia with the boogie man of the week.
 
2013-02-04 04:11:10 PM  
Even as a liberal, I would say that many members of the cartel are scum and absolutely deserve to die. However, I also think that legalizing would be a massive financial blow to the cartels. So I say, "Why not both?" Legalize it, but also ban its import from other countries. Continue to hunt down the real criminals, while cutting off a large source of their funding.
 
2013-02-04 04:11:36 PM  

hdhale: How about instead this administration do something about demand in this country first? Or is that too big a project for you, Barry? Hmm? Oh right, you're too busy out making speeches about bullshiat, because clearly the images of you firing your $3,500 shotgun weren't enough to convince people that the 2nd amendment protects skeet and duck shooting. Never mind.


Perhaps you can point out when and where Obama said that hes coming for all the guns all the where. This is something that people keep screaming about constantly and yet I've seen not a lick of proof. I'm also confused as to the obsession people have with equating the picture to "protecting skeet shooting". Sounds like random gibbering in lieu of any intelligent conversation.
 
2013-02-04 04:12:19 PM  

drayno76: objection noted, I'm too lazy to review your whole conversation so I'll take your word for it, so I apologize... He's a Moran.

but I don't think both sides are broken, I think the whole system is broken and neither party has a chance in hell of truly fixing it.


Again, you're ignoring what has been accomplished in the past 4 years.   And the Democratic party is on track for raising taxes on the rich,  passing regulation to make business play fair, and reducing the kind of military aggressiveness seen in the Bush years and working to make this country more respected by the civilized world.

Why do you oppose this kind of policy? .

Why
 
2013-02-04 04:15:06 PM  
ethics-gradient: Oh yeah thanks America,your unrelenting focus on prohibition has made the world a better place. For heartless cops and the most ruthless inhuman gangsters.

Iaazathot: Don't forget the owners of private prisons!  They're spiffy.

Oh that's true, I shall remember them in my prayers tonight. *Rot in hell, rot in hell.*

FTDA:Your welcome.  Thanks for getting your asses kicked out of every country you attempted to colonize across the globe.  AND thanks for jumping on the slave trade bandwagon after the Dutch kicked it off; which put a nasty smear on our countries history and ultimately lead to the Civil War.  But please continue talking shiat about us while ignoring all the things y'all farked up in the name of King/Queen and country.  Yeah yeah, there were American slave traders too, but we didn't start trading them before y'all started selling them.

I'm not denying the great things that the USA has contributeed to the world just saying that the American legacy of prohibition has been shiate, especially as you guys should have learnt from the alcohol one of the early 20thC.
Yeah the British Empire made many truly shiate decisions but a lot of the colonies were withdrawn from (prematurely often I'd argue) because UK had shifted more towards socialism. As well as that Britain couldn't afford to run an empire after being bankrupted by getting into two enormous wars with Germany one century.
Slavery was abolished in the British Empire well before the American Civil War and was scarcely a British invention, it was the norm all through history up until abolition. (I think only Denmark abolished it before the UK though, fair play to the Danes.)
 
2013-02-04 04:16:05 PM  

whidbey: passing regulation to make business play fair


Just a few more, then everything will be great!

whidbey: reducing the kind of military aggressiveness seen in the Bush years


This part's just a lie.

Tiber727: Legalize it, but also ban its import from other countries


The current ban on that is working so well.
 
2013-02-04 04:18:39 PM  

AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty. The REAL problems stem from my fellow Americans excession consumption of illegal drugs.

/Legalizing pot would be a step in the right direction, IMHO


The real problem is that they're illegal. If they're not illegal, then there's no black market. There's no black market, then enforcement is FDA, not Army.

/ excession? Just a typo.  No wirries.
 
2013-02-04 04:19:49 PM  

FLMountainMan: Keizer_Ghidorah: david_gaithersburg: Just what the fark did you libs think the government was going to do with all of the extra tax money you've been chomping at the bit to give them.  You voted for this shiat, own it, or wake up and join your local Tea Party.

Weren't the Republicans chomping at the bit to start a war with Iran while abolishing taxes for rich people and jacking taxes up for the middle-class, lower-class, and poor? Aren't the Republicans the party that goes insane whenever someone suggests cutting the defense budget? Why are you telling us to quit supporting "warmongers" and come support warmongers?

I'm a Republican who thinks the rich should pay more (but yeah, I do the poor and lower-class should pay a little more - half the households not paying any federal income taxes is stupid both financially and philosophically).  I also think the defense budget is just ridiculous.  I realize that defense is one of the few American trade surplus industries, but Holy Shiat, we're Number One in the world and spend more than 2-18 combined.


Half of them? Citation? That sounds a bit twee to me. Actually it's twice as much as the next 5 countries combined, and it is absolutely ridiculous. The biggest problem is that America thinks it needs to be the policeman of the world and turn every country into America Jr. It started with the Cold War and our obsessive panic of communism, and man did it fark us over with the things we did during those decades. Sadly I don't see it ending anytime soon. Yes, I think we should help out wherever and whenever we can, but we need to focus on ourselves first, especially when we're still suffering from the effects of the second-worst recession in American history and there's so many homeless and poor and hungry in our own borders, along with the continuing fights for equality in this so-called land where everyone is created equal.
 
2013-02-04 04:20:49 PM  

The Glorified Jailer: Why is Obama driving up the price of weed?


Dude, we have legal American weed now. Well, 4% of us do anyway.
You don't want the Mexicans coming in and taking jobs away from Hard Working American Farmerstm Do you?
 
2013-02-04 04:21:20 PM  

ethics-gradient: ethics-gradient: Oh yeah thanks America,your unrelenting focus on prohibition has made the world a better place. For heartless cops and the most ruthless inhuman gangsters.

Iaazathot: Don't forget the owners of private prisons!  They're spiffy.

Oh that's true, I shall remember them in my prayers tonight. *Rot in hell, rot in hell.*

FTDA:Your welcome.  Thanks for getting your asses kicked out of every country you attempted to colonize across the globe.  AND thanks for jumping on the slave trade bandwagon after the Dutch kicked it off; which put a nasty smear on our countries history and ultimately lead to the Civil War.  But please continue talking shiat about us while ignoring all the things y'all farked up in the name of King/Queen and country.  Yeah yeah, there were American slave traders too, but we didn't start trading them before y'all started selling them.

I'm not denying the great things that the USA has contributeed to the world just saying that the American legacy of prohibition has been shiate, especially as you guys should have learnt from the alcohol one of the early 20thC.
Yeah the British Empire made many truly shiate decisions but a lot of the colonies were withdrawn from (prematurely often I'd argue) because UK had shifted more towards socialism. As well as that Britain couldn't afford to run an empire after being bankrupted by getting into two enormous wars with Germany one century.
Slavery was abolished in the British Empire well before the American Civil War and was scarcely a British invention, it was the norm all through history up until abolition. (I think only Denmark abolished it before the UK though, fair play to the Danes.)


Dang it, I like Great Britain.  I was trying to troll you, but no, you had to be all rational and diplomatic in your response.  Yeah there are a lot of things America should have learned by now, hasn't, and probably never will.  Good on you for not  biting on the lure I cast in your direction.
 
2013-02-04 04:21:41 PM  

YixilTesiphon: whidbey: passing regulation to make business play fair

Just a few more, then everything will be great!


Is there a point to this statement?

whidbey: reducing the kind of military aggressiveness seen in the Bush years

This part's just a lie.


You're welcome to list any and all military activities this country has engaged in the past 4 years that have any sort of comparison to Iraq or Afghanistan and also show how the Obama administration abused its power in ordering unjustified military action in order to employ nationbuilding.

You can't.  Because it isn't even the same thing.
 
2013-02-04 04:23:41 PM  

ha-ha-guy: While I'm all for legalization of some drugs, commitment of military assets to dealing with drugs isn't that bad.  Even with pot legal, we'll still have issues with things like heroin which I assume won't be legalized any time soon.  In additional to that, some cartels present border security problems.  Others have gotten in local politics and are destabilizing regimes in their home country (or started as a rebel movement that sells drugs to fund operations).

Just look at Mexico, where mayors who stand up to corruption and cartels die in a hail of gunfire.  I'm not exactly bothered by the thought of the Zetas coming into contact with a USMC platoon and finding out what it feels like to be at a firepower disadvantage.

Honestly 20 billion or so does not seem that excessive.  If the cost balloons out of control, then we need to think about scaling back funding, but it doesn't seem to be at that point.  If anything I'd rather see more attempts to build up Latin American forces along the lines of how we helped train and build the Egyptian Army.  The end result in Egypt was a professional military that refused orders to crush the protests and now is helping to check their new President and his power grabs.  Spend the time and money to build various armies down there into something like that seems to have value.


Umm, you're not supposed to be reasonable here.
 
2013-02-04 04:25:30 PM  
FTFA: A Pew Research study found that 61 percent of respondents believe the Mexican and United States' governments were equally to blame for explosion in violence the last few years.

Well, there you go! An opinion poll has clearly squared the blame on the governments!

Get rid of those governments, problem solved!!
 
2013-02-04 04:26:01 PM  

Sir Not Sure The Unscannable: Sir Not Sure The Unscannable: Old_Chief_Scott: Sir Not Sure The Unscannable: Military folks are required to answer Yes or No to the question: Would you fire on a U.S. citizen, given the order? What they don't say is which ones.

Really?

Huh...

Never got asked that.

Perhaps he just meant the Marines?

Also, only since Clinton.


*sniff*

*sniff*

Smells like bullshiat in here.
 
2013-02-04 04:33:21 PM  

whidbey: drayno76: objection noted, I'm too lazy to review your whole conversation so I'll take your word for it, so I apologize... He's a Moran.

but I don't think both sides are broken, I think the whole system is broken and neither party has a chance in hell of truly fixing it.

Again, you're ignoring what has been accomplished in the past 4 years.   And the Democratic party is on track for raising taxes on the rich,  passing regulation to make business play fair, and reducing the kind of military aggressiveness seen in the Bush years and working to make this country more respected by the civilized world.

Why do you oppose this kind of policy? .

Why


Three words "quality of service."

If we are to assess our federal government based on it's previous performance spanning over the course of the last 100 years, we've perpetually spiraled downwards.
Education in this nation ranks us near bottom on the international scale.  Social Security is about bankrupt and despite my anual SS report reads like I could have a beautiful retirement,
I know in 30 years it will not be.  The Federal law enforcement is disgustingly corrupt starting at it's inception with Hoover blackmailing his way into absolute control and international intelligence is pretty much owned by the Bush family, we know what kind of quality to expect out of them.  The lobbyists are still on the hill controlling congressional votes and whatever Obama does can (and likely will) be undone before the end of the next presidential term.

His grand contribution to stemming the drug war (our actual topic) has been a memo that had no weight, and then his appointee deputized the IRS into a law enforcement agency to go after state legalized dispensaries and now his administration is declaring war on all of central America.  I can honestly say that any accomplishments he may or may not have had were compromised down to nothing, such as campaign promise 1, closing Guantanamo bay.

Closing became de-funding, became reducing, became lets start filling it again. Since he let Joe-boy off the leash to go after Guns like he's wanted to since the primaries, he's pissed any chance away at retaining a democratic anything.  Any chance of legalized marijuana at all much less a suspension of the drug war was spent on another pointless AWB ban that will drive prices of guns to the point where the reps will be so happy, only the wealthy will have them. 

Sorry I don't loath your winning dog, I just have no respect for him or his handlers, which is up from my negative respect for Bush or his handlers.  His memo's and notices and crap carry no weight and most of the things you copy and pasted carry little personal weight to me.

I don't want the lowest bidder providing my health care or anyone else for that matter. I've worked for the lowest bidder, great way to hold a job, shiatty way to do quality work. Regulation of the industry, fine, get the money hogs out of insurance and healthcare, put them in prison right next to the bankers no one is going after for fraud and embezzlement.  Take over and contract it out to Big Pharma's lowest bidder, which will likely be owned by some combination of the Bush - Cheney - Haliburten people conglomerate and we'll get out exactly what we've put in ... Shiat.

Just like our education, roads, law enforcement, legislature, and judicial system.  ROI is crap for the people, but great for the top of the money chain.

Not biting, you may commence trying to convince him, but he's just as diluded to think anything short of revolution will fix things. 8 years means nothing in 236 year old country.
 
2013-02-04 04:33:26 PM  

Tiber727: Even as a liberal, I would say that many members of the cartel are scum and absolutely deserve to die. However, I also think that legalizing would be a massive financial blow to the cartels. So I say, "Why not both?" Legalize it, but also ban its import from other countries. Continue to hunt down the real criminals, while cutting off a large source of their funding.


Sure. This.
 
2013-02-04 04:37:00 PM  

Smelly Pirate Hooker: Tiber727: Even as a liberal, I would say that many members of the cartel are scum and absolutely deserve to die. However, I also think that legalizing would be a massive financial blow to the cartels. So I say, "Why not both?" Legalize it, but also ban its import from other countries. Continue to hunt down the real criminals, while cutting off a large source of their funding.

Sure. This.


Works for me.
 
2013-02-04 04:38:42 PM  

drayno76: Closing became de-funding, became reducing, became lets start filling it again. Since he let Joe-boy off the leash to go after Guns like he's wanted to since the primaries, he's pissed any chance away at retaining a democratic anything. Any chance of legalized marijuana at all much less a suspension of the drug war was spent on another pointless AWB ban that will drive prices of guns to the point where the reps will be so happy, only the wealthy will have them.


um wat?


I don't want the lowest bidder providing my health care or anyone else for that matter. I've worked for the lowest bidder, great way to hold a job, shiatty way to do quality work. Regulation of the industry, fine, get the money hogs out of insurance and healthcare, put them in prison right next to the bankers no one is going after for fraud and embezzlement.  Take over and contract it out to Big Pharma's lowest bidder, which will likely be owned by some combination of the Bush - Cheney - Haliburten people conglomerate and we'll get out exactly what we've put in ... Shiat.

Dude, your tinfoil hat is slipping.
 
2013-02-04 04:40:28 PM  

Pair-o-Dice: Yea, cause the war on drugs is going sooo well...


Give it 2 more weeks, I think we'll get it done.
 
2013-02-04 04:40:41 PM  
 
2013-02-04 04:42:51 PM  

factoryconnection: Don't want so much money and blood over drugs?  Stop sending the drug cartels your bucks.  Question the nearly world-wide legal prohibitions all you want, but as long as they're in place a cocaine habit, as well as one for a lot of other narcotics, is funding the cartels.

I have no problem with DIY folks, but pot and shrooms aren't ratcheting up the kill count like the industry surrounding cocaine, meth, and heroin either.


Um, yeah, about that.  Pot is something like a 2 billion dollar a year industry or something like  that.
 
2013-02-04 04:43:37 PM  

Ow! That was my feelings!: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Marijuana, and Firearms


That's amazing. I can't believe I'm reading what I'm reading in that article.
 
2013-02-04 04:47:28 PM  

whidbey: drayno76: Closing became de-funding, became reducing, became lets start filling it again. Since he let Joe-boy off the leash to go after Guns like he's wanted to since the primaries, he's pissed any chance away at retaining a democratic anything. Any chance of legalized marijuana at all much less a suspension of the drug war was spent on another pointless AWB ban that will drive prices of guns to the point where the reps will be so happy, only the wealthy will have them.

um wat?


I don't want the lowest bidder providing my health care or anyone else for that matter. I've worked for the lowest bidder, great way to hold a job, shiatty way to do quality work. Regulation of the industry, fine, get the money hogs out of insurance and healthcare, put them in prison right next to the bankers no one is going after for fraud and embezzlement.  Take over and contract it out to Big Pharma's lowest bidder, which will likely be owned by some combination of the Bush - Cheney - Haliburten people conglomerate and we'll get out exactly what we've put in ... Shiat.

Dude, your tinfoil hat is slipping.


Did I miss a corporate regulation cap that regulates CEO's cashing in their stock, folding the company, bashing employees on their financial head and stealing their retirement plans leaving their few honest employees to starve? I worked for one of those companies, it farking sucked.  My CEO was also a lobbyist, I got to sit on the hill and listen to him sell our civil rights for a nickle on his stock divined. It's not a tin foil hat, it's a shell that I grew living the game.

Things may not be owned by the same names this week, but as long as there are share holders, CEO's and people who do next to nothing for tons of money, then nothing has changed and anyone who patronizes those services is the one who gets the short end of the stick.  We will be farked, the federal government will not recognize the medical properties of cannabis nor allow for research into it; and we'll trust them with our health care?

Dependance upon a government we cannot control is not freedom. It's serfdom.
 
2013-02-04 04:48:23 PM  

USCLaw2010: [www.wearysloth.com image 320x240]

I have no recollection, Senator


okay, I have been racking my brain for a bit... is that from clear and present danger?
 
2013-02-04 04:48:49 PM  
www.reactiongifs.com
 
2013-02-04 04:50:37 PM  

the money is in the banana stand: If this "war" is waged anywhere near the previous "war" was, I expect nothing of substance to be accomplished. I don't understand how identifying supply lines and manufacturing/distributing facilities & personnel would be all that difficult. If we really wanted to stop it, couldn't we just absolutely obliterate the whole darn network? The other method of course is waging an economic warfare where the products rapidly decline in either demand. Legalize most drugs or drive the cost up to traffic to where it is no longer that profitable. However, no matter how you go about it you are attacking an entity that is bound to get desperate and backed into a corner. I haven't really read much or researched the matter, I just don't understand how this is exactly difficult to map and destroy the drug trafficking network.


You're kidding, right?

Are you familiar with whack-a-mole?  Can you tell which spot the next mole will pop up out of?

When we killed Pablo Escobar, did cocaine disappear from our streets?

Even if you can identify the sources and their trade routes (which is not as easy as you seem to think) they will just be replaced by other sources and trade routes.
 
2013-02-04 04:53:51 PM  

drayno76: Dude, your tinfoil hat is slipping.

Did I miss a corporate regulation cap that regulates CEO's cashing in their stock, folding the company, bashing employees on their financial head and stealing their retirement plans leaving their few honest employees to starve? I worked for one of those companies, it farking sucked. My CEO was also a lobbyist, I got to sit on the hill and listen to him sell our civil rights for a nickle on his stock divined. It's not a tin foil hat, it's a shell that I grew living the game.

Things may not be owned by the same names this week, but as long as there are share holders, CEO's and people who do next to nothing for tons of money, then nothing has changed and anyone who patronizes those services is the one who gets the short end of the stick. We will be farked, the federal government will not recognize the medical properties of cannabis nor allow for research into it; and we'll trust them with our health care?

Dependance upon a government we cannot control is not freedom. It's serfdom.


Pretty sure that electing people to office who pledge to raise taxes on the wealthy and corporate power constitutes a measure of "control."

Also, activism in the private sector works for the same goal, and so does advocacy and lobbying.

Calls to overturn Citizens United and eliminate corporate personhood are also attempts to put control into public hands.

Three examples which make your concerns a bit over-inflated to say the least.
 
2013-02-04 05:03:25 PM  
whidbey: Pretty sure that electing people to office who pledge to raise taxes on the wealthy and corporate power constitutes an illusion measure of "control."

FTFY
 
2013-02-04 05:04:57 PM  

drayno76: TwowheelinTim: AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty.

I'll second that.

/retired uscg.

Two in one day, I'm going to farking die!



You can add me to that count.

//Army, LTC
 
2013-02-04 05:06:47 PM  

TopoGigo: whidbey: Pretty sure that electing people to office who pledge to raise taxes on the wealthy and corporate power constitutes an illusion measure of "control."

FTFY


So making the rich and corporations pay their fair share for what they glean constitutes a folly in your worldview.

Of course, you're going to back this up with actual evidence so I don't just dismiss your opinion as unfounded cynicism.
 
2013-02-04 05:07:34 PM  

whidbey: Dependance upon a government we cannot control is not freedom. It's serfdom.

Pretty sure that electing people to office who pledge to raise taxes on the wealthy and corporate power constitutes a measure of "control."

Also, activism in the private sector works for the same goal, and so does advocacy and lobbying.

Calls to overturn Citizens United and eliminate corporate personhood are also attempts to put control into public hands.

Three examples which make your concerns a bit over-inflated to say the least.


All those things have as much chance of standing long term as the AWB Joe-boy is pushing.  Obama pissed his whole second term away just announcing that. Clinton has publicly
warned Democrats that their careers will be over if they support the ban, hindsight is a real PITA sometimes.  Obama will be as usless second term as Clinton was, for the same reason
too.  If the Reps have to fight the AWB, then after mid-terms he will accomplish nothing he set out to do. Even if he hadn't made that fatal political fumble, anything he does has as much chance of a long term standing as anything Carter or Clinton did. 

I wish people would put party BS away and focus on the fact that in some way they are all controlled by money people.

"Pretty sure that electing people to office who pledge to raise taxes on the wealthy and corporate power constitutes a measure of "control."

See 2000 Election, I'm pretty sure they're all rigged at this point.  Between voter fraud, states compromising the electoral system, and gerrymandering I can honestly say
I have no idea who the majority of the US would have elected.  I can SEE who the majority of party spending was in an election, last two times it was Obama. I won't say
he was elected anymore than Bush was elected.  The electoral college needs to go and popular vote need to be the only vote. 

Our vote = nothing: I still do it, but it's pointless.

"Also, activism in the private sector works for the same goal, and so does advocacy and lobbying."

Activists rarely have the financial backing to lobby with the strength of corporations. The odd times they win is when the other side puts their money
into another cause.

"Calls to overturn Citizens United and eliminate corporate personhood are also attempts to put control into public hands. "

Calls that have remained un-answered.

Trash this crappy system and start over, remove 'state power' and divert it to the people.  Take most federal power and divert it to the people.  We can do the job on our own better than they have. I hate paying to treat symptoms of a disease because it's too bothersome to cure the disease.
 
2013-02-04 05:12:44 PM  
nmemkha


We just HAVE to blow the money shooting at brown people.
You are aware who the president (who heads the law enforcement branch ) is, right?


bu bu bu but booooosh.
 
2013-02-04 05:15:52 PM  

drayno76: Joe-boy


Yup. Nothing biased about your worldview.

I wish people would put party BS away and focus on the fact that in some way they are all controlled by money people.

This whole country is controlled by "money people."  Pretending that is a reason not to support progressive policy is more than a bit unrealistic.

Our vote = nothing: I still do it, but it's pointless.

Which is bullshiat, and frankly with that kind of attitude you should just stay home next time.

Activists rarely have the financial backing to lobby with the strength of corporations. The odd times they win is when the other side puts their money into another cause.

Which is a bare, unfounded assertion.  Now you're going to make the claim that activism hasn't in fact been responsible for nearly every social reform in this country in the past 100 years alone.   How on earth did they accomplish such things going up against modern-day Goliaths?  How did they manage to force Congress to pass the Civil Rights Act? Or  shut down coal plants?

"Calls to overturn Citizens United and eliminate corporate personhood are also attempts to put control into public hands. "

Calls that have remained un-answered.

I wouldn't be too sure about that.  It's going to be a huge deal within the next year.

Trash this crappy system and start over, remove 'state power' and divert it to the people.  Take most federal power and divert it to the people.  We can do the job on our own better than they have. I hate paying to treat symptoms of a disease because it's too bothersome to cure the disease.

We are not a democracy, we are a republic.  You want anarchy.
 
2013-02-04 05:16:56 PM  
Oh yeah sure, throw money at the problem hoping it will go away. Look I know America's got the Big Stick(tm) and all, but let's not fool ourselves... You know and I know this is just a silly game of ring around the rosie and if the American military wants to stop high demand drugs like heroin and cocaine(Yummy!) from entering U.S. soil it's not gonna work, and I'd rather see my taxpayer dollar used elsewhere. Keep farking that chicken guys.
 
2013-02-04 05:17:03 PM  

whidbey: TopoGigo: whidbey: Pretty sure that electing people to office who pledge to raise taxes on the wealthy and corporate power constitutes an illusion measure of "control."

FTFY

So making the rich and corporations pay their fair share for what they glean constitutes a folly in your worldview.

Of course, you're going to back this up with actual evidence so I don't just dismiss your opinion as unfounded cynicism.


No, believing that they actually would make the rich and the corporations pay their fair share is the folly here.

Of course, anyone who uses the words "unfounded" and "cynicism" in the same sentence when talking about politicians has not been paying attention.
 
2013-02-04 05:19:00 PM  
There's a weary predictability about it.

Arm the Mujahideen -> create Al Qaeda.
Support Hussein -> create, well, Hussein.
Import cocaine to fund Oliver North's project -> strengthen FARC.

Are you guys fighting any enemies you didn't create yourselves?
 
2013-02-04 05:21:00 PM  

whidbey: drayno76: Joe-boy

Yup. Nothing biased about your worldview.

I wish people would put party BS away and focus on the fact that in some way they are all controlled by money people.

This whole country is controlled by "money people."  Pretending that is a reason not to support progressive policy is more than a bit unrealistic.

Our vote = nothing: I still do it, but it's pointless.

Which is bullshiat, and frankly with that kind of attitude you should just stay home next time.

Activists rarely have the financial backing to lobby with the strength of corporations. The odd times they win is when the other side puts their money into another cause.

Which is a bare, unfounded assertion.  Now you're going to make the claim that activism hasn't in fact been responsible for nearly every social reform in this country in the past 100 years alone.   How on earth did they accomplish such things going up against modern-day Goliaths?  How did they manage to force Congress to pass the Civil Rights Act? Or  shut down coal plants?

"Calls to overturn Citizens United and eliminate corporate personhood are also attempts to put control into public hands. "

Calls that have remained un-answered.

I wouldn't be too sure about that.  It's going to be a huge deal within the next year.

Trash this crappy system and start over, remove 'state power' and divert it to the people.  Take most federal power and divert it to the people.  We can do the job on our own better than they have. I hate paying to treat symptoms of a disease because it's too bothersome to cure the disease.

We are not a democracy, we are a republic.  You want anarchy.


For a time, yes I do, we need to learn to be self sufficient again.
 
2013-02-04 05:25:19 PM  

Happy Hours: the money is in the banana stand: If this "war" is waged anywhere near the previous "war" was, I expect nothing of substance to be accomplished. I don't understand how identifying supply lines and manufacturing/distributing facilities & personnel would be all that difficult. If we really wanted to stop it, couldn't we just absolutely obliterate the whole darn network? The other method of course is waging an economic warfare where the products rapidly decline in either demand. Legalize most drugs or drive the cost up to traffic to where it is no longer that profitable. However, no matter how you go about it you are attacking an entity that is bound to get desperate and backed into a corner. I haven't really read much or researched the matter, I just don't understand how this is exactly difficult to map and destroy the drug trafficking network.

You're kidding, right?

Are you familiar with whack-a-mole?  Can you tell which spot the next mole will pop up out of?

When we killed Pablo Escobar, did cocaine disappear from our streets?

Even if you can identify the sources and their trade routes (which is not as easy as you seem to think) they will just be replaced by other sources and trade routes.


I am thinking that the people calling the shots within the organization are known. If they are known, why aren't they killed? You kill enough of the brain trust, and the organization isn't so organized and becomes fragmented. What you are saying is if Walmart and Target went out of business, they could easily be replaced. What would happen more likely is instead of 2 companies, you now have 200 companies that operate on a more local level without the resources and capabilities of the other 2. It seems to me fighting 200 people with sticks would be easier than fighting 2 people with tanks.

I am thinking these people are not eliminated for political reasons, aka we cannot go into a country and start decimating targets in a country we are not at war with.
 
2013-02-04 05:34:05 PM  

drayno76: We are not a democracy, we are a republic. You want anarchy.

For a time, yes I do, we need to learn to be self sufficient again.


Because all of us struggling to make ends meet,  raising families and striving to  become productive members of our communities are prime examples of us not knowing how to be "self-sufficient."

Right.  Do you even have a clue as to how dangerous you sound?
 
2013-02-04 05:34:32 PM  

Thrakkorzog: Prime example of the results of the war is a main story on CNN right now. Fake weed hospitalizes a girl in Texas.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/04/health/synthetic-marijuana-irpt/index. ht ml?hpt=hp_c1


From that article: 'She was literally just a shell'

love it
 
2013-02-04 05:39:37 PM  
The Best Way to End Gun Violence? End the War On Drugs

But we don't really want to reduce gun violence, do we?
 
2013-02-04 05:42:59 PM  

AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty. The REAL problems stem from my fellow Americans excession consumption of illegal drugs.

/Legalizing pot would be a step in the right direction, IMHO


Actually, the REAL farking problem is believing criminalization HAS "worked", and will CONTINUE to "work".

Dependency is a MEDICAL issue, not a criminal issue.

I don't give a fark WHAT "drugs" somebody uses in the privacy of their own home, because as long as they aren't posing a threat to anybody else, it's none of my g'damn business.

The drug war has FAILED to do anything but criminalize non-violent citizens who may, or may not, need MEDICAL assistance to kick a dependency problem.

Funding the "drug war" needs to farking stop, NOW.
 
2013-02-04 05:51:57 PM  

Hagenhatesyouall: AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty. The REAL problems stem from my fellow Americans excession consumption of illegal drugs.

/Legalizing pot would be a step in the right direction, IMHO

Actually, the REAL farking problem is believing criminalization HAS "worked", and will CONTINUE to "work".

Dependency is a MEDICAL issue, not a criminal issue.

I don't give a fark WHAT "drugs" somebody uses in the privacy of their own home, because as long as they aren't posing a threat to anybody else, it's none of my g'damn business.

The drug war has FAILED to do anything but criminalize non-violent citizens who may, or may not, need MEDICAL assistance to kick a dependency problem.

Funding the "drug war" needs to farking stop, NOW.


What do you think about Heroin, Cocaine, Meth, Bath Salts, Acid, and substances that unlike Marijuana are highly addictive and are detrimental to society as a whole? While I agree with the assessment of prohibition, what happens when these substances are now legal? Legal to use, and legal to buy/sell? What happens when you take an industry like that and legitimatize it? How would violence cease to exist?
 
2013-02-04 05:59:20 PM  
Sure fire way to lose credibility in a thread: by saying "brown people".

Just thought I'd throw that in there.
 
2013-02-04 06:00:18 PM  
The first three people that need to be cloned are Smedley Butler, Ike, and George Washington.
 
2013-02-04 06:15:23 PM  

Smeggy Smurf: nmemkha: We just HAVE to blow the money shooting at brown people.

There are plenty of brown people in Africa.  That's why we're going to 35 or more countries over there.

[i.qkme.me image 500x412]


I hear night ops are a biatch, though...
 
2013-02-04 06:18:04 PM  

Charlie Chingas: Smeggy Smurf: nmemkha: We just HAVE to blow the money shooting at brown people.

There are plenty of brown people in Africa.  That's why we're going to 35 or more countries over there.

[i.qkme.me image 500x412]

I hear night ops are a biatch, though...


Until you crack a joke and get them to laugh.
 
2013-02-04 06:19:02 PM  
i.qkme.me
 
2013-02-04 06:28:46 PM  

whidbey: drayno76: We are not a democracy, we are a republic. You want anarchy.

For a time, yes I do, we need to learn to be self sufficient again.

Because all of us struggling to make ends meet,  raising families and striving to  become productive members of our communities are prime examples of us not knowing how to be "self-sufficient."

Right.  Do you even have a clue as to how dangerous you sound?


Yes and I have little problem letting natural laws take over. I grew up on a farm, I didn't know what a grocery store was until I was 10,  I grow my own food and the only dependance I have my mortgage; which given the property is farm more expensive than it's tangible value because of inflation driven by those who prey on us.  We're struggling because we let them turn us into serfs.

Dangerous, meh, only for the psychologically, emotionally, and intellectually weak.  Survival instincts got us out of the caves and into homes.  Sacrificing our freedom in favor of corporate and government control will be our down fall, unless we as a species regain our ability to fend for ourselves and not depend on every jack-ass who tells us we shouldn't have to.

You know how dangerous the existing policies and the road they are following is?  I'd rather 2 - 3 decades for mandatory self reliance to teach our species how to live again.
Sorry all you dependants will be without your corporately poisoned food, yes I've been to a corporate farm, and yes the are poisoning us.  My families cattle had an average
of 1 illness in the herd every 2 years over a 15 year period.  This farm I visited in Kansas dumps 200,000 doses of antibiotics into their steer per MONTH, this is the farm that
drove my grandfathers farm out of business. Their steer were near death, ours were near perfection.  This is what we put in our bodies, and our dependency on the federal
food system is just a small part of the problem.  Not federal you say?  What are farm subsidies?  They were hailed as the savior to the farmer, yet it drove my families entire community
out of business. Instead of 200 farmers caring for themselves and their families they became 200 employees struggling every one purchased out by the corporate farms who with corporate loopholes. They purchased every piece of well cared for farm land in our area and turned it to dust because the local farmers didn't have enough ''heads' or 'acrage' to complete against federally funded companies. It started in 1930 and had fully incorporated my home in Missouri by the mid 80s.

The result is a nation that feeds itself at McDonald's almost exclusively.  The teaching of home-economics has become the teaching of familial consumerism, they new call it consumer sciences instead of HOME-ECONOMICS.  We used to handle the economics of our own homes, now we manage our consumers budget, this was harkened in during public schools. Instead of working for ourselves by either owning our own business which helps the local economy, we now work for others who have no vested interest in our area beyond how much money they can squeeze out of it.

You claim 'struggling' families will suffer because they're forced to be independant.  Oh well.  Lifes a biatch, I've learned that over and over again.  To be forced to hang our health, nutrition, safety and security 100% on what is probably one of the most corrupt and redundant governments in history, is simply repeating the mistakes of Rome and Egypt all over again. Their focus on globalization and consolidation of power in a singular place lead to the ultimate downfall of their infrastructure.

You call me dangerous? We're at the apex of every historic government that fell with total loss of technology and social development.  We just keep driving in the same direction they did and hope for different results.

I might be dangerous, but you sir are blind to what's going on and stuck in your myopic little bubble of consumerism and dependance.

I don't cry when the weak kitten in the litter dies, I have more disdain for the simpletons we have become than I do for cats who's value died at the same time as the private farm. You can let Ms. Susy at the local high school teach your child to shop and drop off their laundery.  I'll be teaching my daughter how to sew crops, sew clothes, and cook for herself before I'll teach her the 'economic' value of becoming a valued employee to another persons or corporate entities greed.

I for one would rather survive on my own skills than die serving a master and begging him to give me enough food for the winter. We didn't abolish slavery, we just expanded it to cover everyone and coated with an icing of lies to make us think we're free.

Again, I don't care what Obama has done, it's not enough and he continues to feed the machine that put us where we are today.

Feel free to be a slave, that's your right. I'll live dangerous and free.
 
2013-02-04 06:30:04 PM  
"Defense Department estimates about 850 metric tons of cocaine departed South America last year toward the U.S., down 20 percent in just a year. The most recent U.S. survey found cocaine use fell significantly, from 2.4 million people in 2006 to 1.4 million in 2011."

Really? 1.3 pounds per person per year? Richard Pryor WAS right.
 
2013-02-04 06:33:38 PM  
FTDA:
Dang it, I like Great Britain.  I was trying to troll you, but no, you had to be all rational and diplomatic in your response.  Yeah there are a lot of things America should have learned by now, hasn't, and probably never will.  Good on you for not  biting on the lure I cast in your direction.Oh right, thank you. There's a lot of stuff America has got right too tbh and if it weren't for my old marijuana conviction I'd seriousely consider moving to a country based on ideals I deeply respect. Ah well unrequited love.
 
2013-02-04 06:37:11 PM  

ha-ha-guy: MisterRonbo: I am not willing to lose a single American soldier or Marine's life just to stop people from getting high. You join the military to defend this country, not play Customs agent.

I like how you state "getting high", as if pot is the only product the cartels ever sell.  I'd say the Chinese experience with opium (when the Euros forced the import of it upon them) is a pretty good example of why a lot of drugs will never be legal.  America had its own issues with morphine abuse, which is just refined opium.  Heroin, of course a morphine replacement in the medical field, is also unlikely to ever be legalized for recreational use.  As such there are always going to be a certain level of drugs that remain controlled and people seek to obtain illegally.  So the cartels will always have a product to sell and they'll be down at the border shooting at US Customs Agents, pretending to be the Mexican military to move around in convoys, building submarines, and kinds of other violent and dumb shiat to move their product around.  As such dispatching elements of the US military to supplement the abilities of the Customs agents and secure our borders is a valid use of the military.

If the Zetas are shooting across the border, I'd rather have the military there to shoot back instead of sitting around in Fort Hood and going "Well we only signed up to fight enemies that have a flag...".

Treatment of the drug problem solely by domestic policy is not going to remove 100% of the product catalog of the cartels or their incentive to get goods into America.

/plus in the case of things like the nacro submarines it is stupid and redundant spending to buy the Customs Agents ASW assets when the Navy already has a whole bunch of P-3 Orions sitting around on the flight line


So here is a question:  How will these cartels replace the massive amount of money they make off what you consider the lesser drugs if they were legalized?

You suggest that they would make their money off heroin, yet that is not possible.  The market potential for heroin is tapped out.  People don't just seek out drugs because they are illegal, they seek out drugs to get high, and we have pretty much reached an equilibrium with respect to heroin use.

"They will charge more for Heroin to make up the difference, and the addicts will pay it because they are addicted."

No, they ALREADY charge as much as they can for Heroin because the addicts will pay because they are addicted.  Do you think they might be charging less than the market will bear now?  Nope.  Those markets are tapped out.  You can't go to a heroin addict, people who will go without food to afford the drug, and say "Gee, we know you are already paying every single cent you take in to us, but we need you to pay us 1000% more because we need to offset our loss of the weed market."

Basically what I'm saying, is that your entire premise that the cartels will makeup the huge loss by shifting to another illicit product is false because the other product is already illicit and the market is already saturated.  Ironically, given the basis of your post, they only way you could see a real uptick in 'hard' drugs would be to cut back on the domestic policy you seem to think won't work.
 
2013-02-04 06:41:44 PM  

the money is in the banana stand: What do you think about Heroin, Cocaine, Meth, Bath Salts, Acid, and substances that unlike Marijuana are highly addictive and are detrimental to society as a whole? While I agree with the assessment of prohibition, what happens when these substances are now legal? Legal to use, and legal to buy/sell? What happens when you take an industry like that and legitimatize it? How would violence cease to exist?


Decriminalize use and possession, prosecute people who attempt to sell.  You would be amazed what happens to crime rates when people aren't afraid to speak to the police for fear of being prosecuted themselves.  Ever wonder why Pimps get away with being pimps?  It's because the prostitutes can't go to the police, seek help from counselors, or even complain about labor practices without being threatened with fines and jailtime ontop of whatever the pimp can do.
 
2013-02-04 06:45:08 PM  

whidbey: FLMountainMan: whidbey: FLMountainMan: Whidbey - you really believe the Stimulus worked?  I'm not being snarky, I just thought the Left gave up defending that.  No one, not even Obama mentioned it during his re-election campaign. I think you're the first person I've seen in a while that actually defended it.

As for the rest of your list - I agree with about one-third, disagree with another third (on ideological/philosophical grounds), and disagree with your facts on another third.  FWIW (which is not very much).

It was the first thing I Googled. I used to have a much more extensive list in my profile, but I got rid of it because I didn't think I'd have to lecture anyone on the obvious accomplishment of this administration ever again.

Sounds like you have a really diverse social circle.

I was referring to discussions I've had here, not IRL.

Most people I know aren't that obtuse regarding the past 4 years.  They also by and large realize that we dodged a bullet with Romney.


Oh, I am sure all reasonable people agree with you.

whidbey: drayno76: We are not a democracy, we are a republic. You want anarchy.

For a time, yes I do, we need to learn to be self sufficient again.

Because all of us struggling to make ends meet,  raising families and striving to  become productive members of our communities are prime examples of us not knowing how to be "self-sufficient."

Right.  Do you even have a clue as to how dangerous you sound?


Do you even  have a clue as to how hysterical you sound?  You do liberalism a disservice when you try to label notions like self-sufficiency, accountability, and personal responsibility as dangerous right-wing ideals.  It's playing right into the Limbaugh handbook.  Those ideals should be embraced by both parties, and actually are by most people worth listening to.
 
2013-02-04 06:45:55 PM  

the money is in the banana stand: What do you think about Heroin, Cocaine, Meth, Bath Salts, Acid, and substances that unlike Marijuana are highly addictive and are detrimental to society as a whole? While I agree with the assessment of prohibition, what happens when these substances are now legal? Legal to use, and legal to buy/sell? What happens when you take an industry like that and legitimatize it? How would violence cease to exist?


First off, meth and bath salts would largely disappear. When people can get their hands on cheap, clean coke and amphetamines, there is no reason to settle for garbage. Notice how we don't blind ourselves with bathtub gin anymore. In fact, you can point to meth, bath salts, and krokodil as direct evidence of the failure of drug policy. High school kids occasionally got high on trucker speed when I was young, but now that it's gone, they're using meth.

As far as the other things go? Coke isn't that big of a deal for most people. Neither is acid. Heroin is pretty addictive, but the only reason addiction ruins most peoples' lives is the crap they have to go through to get their drug. A tiny fraction of DEA money could go to addiction treatment, and anyone who wants it could get it.

All the violence is due to prohibition. People make fortunes running distribution ops, and they kill to stay on top. People kill to get money for their artificially expensive drugs. People kill snitches and thieves, because it's lawless in the drug world. How much senseless violence can you attribute to alcohol? Caffeine? Tobacco? Prozac?
 
2013-02-04 06:46:52 PM  

FLMountainMan: whidbey: FLMountainMan: whidbey: FLMountainMan: Whidbey - you really believe the Stimulus worked?  I'm not being snarky, I just thought the Left gave up defending that.  No one, not even Obama mentioned it during his re-election campaign. I think you're the first person I've seen in a while that actually defended it.

As for the rest of your list - I agree with about one-third, disagree with another third (on ideological/philosophical grounds), and disagree with your facts on another third.  FWIW (which is not very much).

It was the first thing I Googled. I used to have a much more extensive list in my profile, but I got rid of it because I didn't think I'd have to lecture anyone on the obvious accomplishment of this administration ever again.

Sounds like you have a really diverse social circle.

I was referring to discussions I've had here, not IRL.

Most people I know aren't that obtuse regarding the past 4 years.  They also by and large realize that we dodged a bullet with Romney.

Oh, I am sure all reasonable people agree with you.

whidbey: drayno76: We are not a democracy, we are a republic. You want anarchy.

For a time, yes I do, we need to learn to be self sufficient again.

Because all of us struggling to make ends meet,  raising families and striving to  become productive members of our communities are prime examples of us not knowing how to be "self-sufficient."

Right.  Do you even have a clue as to how dangerous you sound?

Do you even  have a clue as to how hysterical you sound?  You do liberalism a disservice when you try to label notions like self-sufficiency, accountability, and personal responsibility as dangerous right-wing ideals.  It's playing right into the Limbaugh handbook.  Those ideals should be embraced by both parties, and actually are by most people worth listening to.


Mnt Man, I like you... I'm in Trampa, home of the slutty snowbird. Where do you hail from?
 
2013-02-04 06:53:36 PM  

drayno76: Dangerous, meh, only for the psychologically, emotionally, and intellectually weak. Survival instincts got us out of the caves and into homes. Sacrificing our freedom in favor of corporate and government control will be our down fall, unless we as a species regain our ability to fend for ourselves and not depend on every jack-ass who tells us we shouldn't have to.


Because people who decide to escape the rat race and start their own businesses are "psychologically, emotionally, and intellectually weak."  Because modern society is akin to "living in a cave."

Because your attitude isn't reminiscent of the French Revolution.

I might be dangerous, but you sir are blind to what's going on and stuck in your myopic little bubble of consumerism and dependance.

How smug of you.  And you're dangerous only because you don't know what you're doing.

The only successful change is going to have to come from within the system.   Through channels the people need to start using.  Otherwise, you're talking destruction.
 
2013-02-04 06:58:23 PM  

TopoGigo: whidbey: TopoGigo: whidbey: Pretty sure that electing people to office who pledge to raise taxes on the wealthy and corporate power constitutes an illusion measure of "control."

FTFY

So making the rich and corporations pay their fair share for what they glean constitutes a folly in your worldview.

Of course, you're going to back this up with actual evidence so I don't just dismiss your opinion as unfounded cynicism.

No, believing that they actually would make the rich and the corporations pay their fair share is the folly here.

Of course, anyone who uses the words "unfounded" and "cynicism" in the same sentence when talking about politicians has not been paying attention.


Your opinion is not fact, nor is your cynicism or paranoia.
 
2013-02-04 07:10:18 PM  

whidbey: way south: Just wait, its going to get worse.
This administration has gotten into the habit of running wars without congressional approval and in any theater it feels like.When a Republican gets in and does more of the same, the bawwwing of the left will be hushed by nearly a decade of precedent.

Yes because cleaning up the failed foreign policy of one of the worst Presidential administrations in history constitutes getting "into the habit of running wars without congressional approval."





You've given another breathless defense that can be surmised with "it's not wrong when my favorite political party does it".

Unfortunately, Obamas administration kept raising the bar for quasi legal actions well beyond the mess that Bush created. Both with his actions on undeclared battle fields and with his endorsement of the ndaa and the patriot act.
Doing something differently to break away from the previous admins way of doing things doesn't justify the fact that you've done it wrong.
 
2013-02-04 07:12:24 PM  

whidbey: TopoGigo: whidbey: TopoGigo: whidbey: Pretty sure that electing people to office who pledge to raise taxes on the wealthy and corporate power constitutes an illusion measure of "control."

FTFY

So making the rich and corporations pay their fair share for what they glean constitutes a folly in your worldview.

Of course, you're going to back this up with actual evidence so I don't just dismiss your opinion as unfounded cynicism.

No, believing that they actually would make the rich and the corporations pay their fair share is the folly here.

Of course, anyone who uses the words "unfounded" and "cynicism" in the same sentence when talking about politicians has not been paying attention.

Your opinion is not fact, nor is your cynicism or paranoia.


I'm plenty cynical, but not paranoid. In all the years we've elected Democrats, when have they meaningfully acted against corporate interests? Sure, they didn't blow them quite as hard as the Republicans, but that's not exactly a soaring endorsement. Who did Obama appoint in his cabinet? Hell, who did he pick as his VP? Old bank-sucking Joe. How many of the thieves from the financial sector have been prosecuted? How many regulations have been restored? Honestly, what can you name that shows Democrats have done anything real to take back what has been stolen from us, or prevent it from happening again? There was a credit bill, but it was so full of holes that nothing really helped much. You can say Republican obstructionism all you like, but the executive branch has power to do some of these things, too, and didn't.
 
2013-02-04 07:27:11 PM  
Stopped reading at "fleeing go-fast boat."

If the article was written by someone in the military I'd be ok with it--but clearly it isn't--at least doesn't seem to be...
 
2013-02-04 07:31:24 PM  

whidbey: drayno76: Dangerous, meh, only for the psychologically, emotionally, and intellectually weak. Survival instincts got us out of the caves and into homes. Sacrificing our freedom in favor of corporate and government control will be our down fall, unless we as a species regain our ability to fend for ourselves and not depend on every jack-ass who tells us we shouldn't have to.

Because people who decide to escape the rat race and start their own businesses are "psychologically, emotionally, and intellectually weak."  Because modern society is akin to "living in a cave."

Because your attitude isn't reminiscent of the French Revolution.

I might be dangerous, but you sir are blind to what's going on and stuck in your myopic little bubble of consumerism and dependance.

How smug of you.  And you're dangerous only because you don't know what you're doing.

The only successful change is going to have to come from within the system.   Through channels the people need to start using.  Otherwise, you're talking destruction.


I do believe that dismantling the whole of the US government would probably constitute destruction of the government.  Aparently a lifetime of begging the government for everything they'll squeeze down to you has made you incapable of understanding that if we hadn't let them get this far, none of this would be necessary. None of it.

Tell ya what, I know how Obama fans love to compramise as much as their leader.... Tell ya what, drop the war on drugs, completely, none of the low end drugs are as dangerous as booze and anyone willing to snort a brick has the right to have their heart explode.

My end is, you can have your fantasy control, your leader, your teet to milk and teach your children to hang from, but...

remove all forms of modern economy.  No credit, no cash, 0 legal tender.  If you can't make it worth something else, you better make something else.

I wonder how much food people will be willing to give to politicians who tell them they have to give upwards of 45% of it to them for less than 10% in return.
Oh that's been done and it's called Lenin/Marxist communism. Change fiat money to food you've got a Commi government. I see no value in the US dollar
as it has exactly none.  The products it purchases are damaged and designed to control us from top to bottom.  If you can't see that 100% of your food
comes from 1 company and that 85%+ and climbing of your goods come from foreign countries,  and all of your money is nothing more than government
paper to purchase inferiority, well I'm sorry but that's all it is. It's providing nothing but climbing debt, increased poverty, and destruction of the human spirit.

I think that economic dependance on China for both goods and money is far more dangerous than removing approx. 600 sociopaths from political office.
I think that legislatively forced chemical dependance on opiates for pain relief (prohibition on cannabis) is far more dangerous than telling the feds where they can stick it.
I think that the fact our children are now no longer allowed to use imagination in schools is a travisty (STEM-Thank you Oblama)
I think the fact that our children are now required to learn theological lies is a travisty.
I think the fact that our children can't cook, sing, read, or write is an absolute horror, at least they can play football and know that someone somewhere is smarter than we are and he's a grumpy jerk who had his kid killed. Glad my tax dollars are paying for that shiat.
I think the fact that many urban children find tax-free criminal enterprise more available to them than proper education is abysmal and Obama gives us STEM and Every Child left behind the sequel.

Please tell me how our current policies are going to fix ANY of this. Please tell me how removing literature from Schools is smart?  Please tell me how being dependent on restaurants and microwave dinners is healthy for our country? Please tell me how a corporate farm, chemically fed dying steer are better for us than privately produced grain fed cattle? Please tell me how paramilitarily trained police and excessive incarceration used to combat substance addiction is helpful to our nation?

Man up, take some responsibility and admit you can do something for yourself and your community other than paying your tithe to the king.

Call me names, something I already apologized for.... but given the start of this conversation I'm more in agreement with your original nemesis.
 
2013-02-04 07:38:47 PM  

orbister: There's a weary predictability about it.

Arm the Mujahideen -> create Al Qaeda.
Support Hussein -> create, well, Hussein.
Import cocaine to fund Oliver North's project -> strengthen FARC.

Are you guys fighting any enemies you didn't create yourselves?


Probably not.
 
2013-02-04 07:47:23 PM  

way south: whidbey: way south: Just wait, its going to get worse.
This administration has gotten into the habit of running wars without congressional approval and in any theater it feels like.When a Republican gets in and does more of the same, the bawwwing of the left will be hushed by nearly a decade of precedent.

Yes because cleaning up the failed foreign policy of one of the worst Presidential administrations in history constitutes getting "into the habit of running wars without congressional approval."

You've given another breathless defense that can be surmised with "it's not wrong when my favorite political party does it".


Cute.   Because both sides are bad/do the same thing.  Yeah we know you think that.

Unfortunately, Obamas administration kept raising the bar for quasi legal actions well beyond the mess that Bush created. Both with his actions on undeclared battle fields and with his endorsement of the ndaa and the patriot act.
Doing something differently to break away from the previous admins way of doing things doesn't justify the fact that you've done it wrong.


Done it wrong?  I don't think so.  Bush gave us little choice.  His farkups only compounded worse farkups.   By the time Bush left office, we did in fact have real enemies we were fighting.
 
2013-02-04 07:52:29 PM  

TopoGigo: whidbey: TopoGigo: whidbey: TopoGigo: whidbey: Pretty sure that electing people to office who pledge to raise taxes on the wealthy and corporate power constitutes an illusion measure of "control."

FTFY

So making the rich and corporations pay their fair share for what they glean constitutes a folly in your worldview.

Of course, you're going to back this up with actual evidence so I don't just dismiss your opinion as unfounded cynicism.

No, believing that they actually would make the rich and the corporations pay their fair share is the folly here.

Of course, anyone who uses the words "unfounded" and "cynicism" in the same sentence when talking about politicians has not been paying attention.

Your opinion is not fact, nor is your cynicism or paranoia.

I'm plenty cynical, but not paranoid. In all the years we've elected Democrats, when have they meaningfully acted against corporate interests? Sure, they didn't blow them quite as hard as the Republicans, but that's not exactly a soaring endorsement. Who did Obama appoint in his cabinet? Hell, who did he pick as his VP? Old bank-sucking Joe. How many of the thieves from the financial sector have been prosecuted? How many regulations have been restored? Honestly, what can you name that shows Democrats have done anything real to take back what has been stolen from us, or prevent it from happening again? There was a credit bill, but it was so full of holes that nothing really helped much. You can say Republican obstructionism all you like, but the executive branch has power to do some of these things, too, and didn't.


Granted,  big business has an ungodly hold on this country.  I don't disagree with you.

But when the Democratic Party says their goal is to regulate business and tax the richest people in this country,  we should be throwing our support into making that goal a reality.

The Republicans don't want to regulate business at all.  And where's your 3rd party solution?

What other group or entity are you going to work with to make this goal a reality?
 
2013-02-04 07:55:53 PM  

AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty. The REAL problems stem from my fellow Americans excession consumption of illegal drugs.

/Legalizing pot would be a step in the right direction, IMHO


Repeal all drug laws. Then the "problem" of illegal drugs will go away.
 
2013-02-04 07:57:00 PM  
We are on the road to marijuana legalization in this country.

I think it makes sense the Fed wants to divert resources to prevent Mexican cartels from supplying the US with illegal drugs.

When marijuana is legalized, it will be great to keep the revenue inside the US, not still being funneled to Mexican drug lords.
 
2013-02-04 07:59:58 PM  

SurelyShirley: How about spending that money at home, treating and preventing drug addiction?

Nevermind, playing world cop and blowing stuff up is so much better for our ego.


How about ending the War on (some) Drugs and letting the taxpayer keep more of his money?
 
2013-02-04 08:00:45 PM  

DrPainMD: Repeal all drug laws. Then the "problem" of illegal drugs will go away.


Worked for Portugal.
 
2013-02-04 08:01:24 PM  

drayno76: I do believe that dismantling the whole of the US government would probably constitute destruction of the government. Aparently a lifetime of begging the government for everything they'll squeeze down to you has made you incapable of understanding that if we hadn't let them get this far, none of this would be necessary. None of it.


Yes, anyone who doesn't march lockstep into your utopian revolution fantasy has clearly spent his entire life "begging the government for everything."

Nice bit of self-righteous unintentional humor there. Oh wait, you were serious.

I wonder how much food people will be willing to give to politicians who tell them they have to give upwards of 45% of it to them for less than 10% in return.
Oh that's been done and it's called Lenin/Marxist communism.


OK, so now capitalism is actually Communism.  Who knew?

I think that economic dependance on China for both goods and money is far more dangerous than removing approx. 600 sociopaths from political office.
I think that legislatively forced chemical dependance on opiates for pain relief (prohibition on cannabis) is far more dangerous than telling the feds where they can stick it.
I think that the fact our children are now no longer allowed to use imagination in schools is a travisty (STEM-Thank you Oblama)
I think the fact that our children are now required to learn theological lies is a travisty.
I think the fact that our children can't cook, sing, read, or write is an absolute horror, at least they can play football and know that someone somewhere is smarter than we are and he's a grumpy jerk who had his kid killed. Glad my tax dollars are paying for that shiat.
I think the fact that many urban children find tax-free criminal enterprise more available to them than proper education is abysmal and Obama gives us STEM and Every Child left behind the sequel.


God I hope to Fark you're just trolling and don't really believe any of this shiat.  I think that growing up on a farm did you a lot more harm than good.  You don't even appear to know how people in the real world actually function.

Please tell me how our current policies are going to fix ANY of this. Please tell me how removing literature from Schools is smart?  Please tell me how being dependent on restaurants and microwave dinners is healthy for our country? Please tell me how a corporate farm, chemically fed dying steer are better for us than privately produced grain fed cattle? Please tell me how paramilitarily trained police and excessive incarceration used to combat substance addiction is helpful to our nation?

 Fix "what," exactly?  Your skewed fatalistic perception of the world?  I don't they are going to fix any of that.
 
2013-02-04 08:05:56 PM  

ristst: Fred Thompson, former senator and cast member of Law and Order:

"...with just a fraction of the money spent on the 'war on drugs', we could burn every poppy field on the planet.  But we won't, and you wanna know why?  Because there's got to be a 'war on something' for folks in Washington to get elected."


The Taliban cut Afghanistan's poppy production by >90% and look what it got them. You DON'T interfere with the CIA's income stream.
 
2013-02-04 08:14:28 PM  

drayno76: bigheadface: we are permitted to not follow direct orders that are clearly illegal.

There's the rub.... Clearly "illegal."

When you're overseas, who's law?  Local law, US Law, International Law?


All of the above. We go through hours and hours and HOURS of training on this very idea. Military members must follow the local laws, international laws, and US laws. Local laws could be flexible depending on the situation (war time vs "peace" time), but US law and International law is not flexible.

So the personnel in various wars who followed orders exporting drugs out of SE Asia and more recently the middle east, are they or are they not criminals?

I don't know your dad, and I have no beef with anything he did or did not do in any military action, but yes, exporting drugs out of SE Asia, if done knowingly, would make them criminals.

Such as my dad? Honorable discharge, two purple hears (ya I know dime a dozen) and several other accolades I don't understand what exactly they mean.  Since he chose to follow orders which were violations of US law, who is to prosecute?

If he chose to follow orders knowingly violating US law, he is prosecutable. I'm not saying we should go on some witch hunt for anyone who did that shiat, I'm just answering your questions here.

MP's and military justice.  I hate to echo anything my Dad said but he called them 'two to three times more corrupt than civilian cops' which I always felt was a pot-kettle-politically incorrect color type of statement.  I do troll, but in this case, I'm not doing so.

Also, clearly illegal, which is clearly vague without an extended definition.  Setting aside legalities, how about ethics and morals.


Air Force NCOs are taught that you should not obey orders that are "illegal, immoral, or unethical". I don't know about the other services, but that's what I've ALWAYS been taught. And yes, one can suddenly turn conscientious objector and be removed from the service. I'm not sure about the ramifications, but I would imagine that it would be a general discharge, but one would (should) lose all benefits such as the GI Bill.

AFAIK refusing to follow a direct order based on moral grounds is not acceptable, please correct me if I'm wrong.

You are mistaken.

To blindly rely on the law, which many times is either immoral or amoral, is to suspend personal judgement.  From what I understand laws were meant to be inflexible while 'justice' was historically given some breathing room for opinion, situation, and possible justification of said illegal act. With Zero Tolerance (another drug war gem that's evolved into every aspect of our lives) and mandatory minimums, justice has gone from blind to deaf dumb and mute.   Using law as the sole basis, and only justifiable one, for a human being to refuse to carry out a mission involving violence and killing is asinine. I'm not saying you sir, but the rules in which you are required to operate are asanine.

And absolutely necessary. In the heat of battle, you must be willing to kill. If you aren't, you put your own life, as well as the lives of those depending on you at risk.

Had the generations been reversed I likely would have been killed by my own commanding officer or platoon for not being willing to fire bomb whole villages of Vietnamese people with little t ...

You likely would have followed suit just like everyone else did.

I'm not going to judge anyone from a previous generation by today's moral standards. It is highly probable that something you take as absolutely normal today will be regarded by future generations as barbaric. We have no way of knowing what tomorrow's morals will be, so we can't judge the past by today's.

I hope I have responded to everything you asked without sounding like an asshole.
 
2013-02-04 08:17:42 PM  

hasty ambush: Cythraul: You really thought the military industrial complex was going to sit on its hands, subby?

There was no peace in the 1990s (Haiti, Somalia, Balkans etc,etc) just an underfunded over deployed military.   To be fair Bush the I started te  Peace Dividend  crap , Clinton just picked it up and ran with it.

  Between 1960 and 1991, the United States Army conducted 10 "operational events." From 1991 through 1999, the Army conducted 26 operational events --- 2 1/2 times that number in 1/3 the time span.  It was wore for  the Navy and Marine Corps

  To pay for operational commitments the military found itself having to transfer funds from maintenance, training and procurment.

Things got so bad there were many problems like the AIr Force found itself running out of cruise missiles (production had been shut down) Morale was bad and the leadership was even worse.  The Army Chief of Staff thought he would improve morale by making everyone  wear new hats -a stupid beret. (That same military genius is now running the VA) While the AIr Force's equally stupid solution was leather flight jackets for pilots and Navy looking Uniforms for officers.  Of course these meansures were cheaper than real fixes.

You want to improve troops morale? Make sure they are well equipped and trained (cost money)  make sure their barracks  and housing  are not falling apart (again cost money).  These areas got short changed to finance operational deployments. For example the supposedly ony 18 month deployment to Bosnia did not even get put into the budget until 3 years after it started.

Other problems

By 1999, the Navy was short  22,000 personnel in a 324-ship fleet

 The armed services suffered a severe ammunition shortfall going into the Kosovo engagement. According to the Service Chiefs, the FY99 ammunition shortfall for the Marine Corps is $193 million. For the Army in FY00, it was $3.5 billion.

A-10 pilots flying over Kosovo were forced to spend their own money to buy inferior, off-t ...


The problem wasn't, and isn't, underfunding; it's over-extension. Close all overseas bases, half the bases in this country, and mothball most of the fleet. The "shortages" will evaporate overnight.
 
2013-02-04 08:25:53 PM  

Cache: War is profitable for the one percent.

End of discussion.


Annnnnnd I think we're done here
 
2013-02-04 08:47:10 PM  
I find it interesting that the thread started about the "war on drugs" and how now, towards the end, I am wondering what drayno76 is smoking...
 
2013-02-04 09:38:58 PM  

bigheadface: drayno76: bigheadface: we are permitted to not follow direct orders that are clearly illegal.

There's the rub.... Clearly "illegal."

When you're overseas, who's law?  Local law, US Law, International Law?

All of the above. We go through hours and hours and HOURS of training on this very idea. Military members must follow the local laws, international laws, and US laws. Local laws could be flexible depending on the situation (war time vs "peace" time), but US law and International law is not flexible.

So the personnel in various wars who followed orders exporting drugs out of SE Asia and more recently the middle east, are they or are they not criminals?

I don't know your dad, and I have no beef with anything he did or did not do in any military action, but yes, exporting drugs out of SE Asia, if done knowingly, would make them criminals.

Such as my dad? Honorable discharge, two purple hears (ya I know dime a dozen) and several other accolades I don't understand what exactly they mean.  Since he chose to follow orders which were violations of US law, who is to prosecute?

If he chose to follow orders knowingly violating US law, he is prosecutable. I'm not saying we should go on some witch hunt for anyone who did that shiat, I'm just answering your questions here.

MP's and military justice.  I hate to echo anything my Dad said but he called them 'two to three times more corrupt than civilian cops' which I always felt was a pot-kettle-politically incorrect color type of statement.  I do troll, but in this case, I'm not doing so.

Also, clearly illegal, which is clearly vague without an extended definition.  Setting aside legalities, how about ethics and morals.

Air Force NCOs are taught that you should not obey orders that are "illegal, immoral, or unethical". I don't know about the other services, but that's what I've ALWAYS been taught. And yes, one can suddenly turn conscientious objector and be removed from the service. I'm not sure about the ramifications, ...


Honestly I think those are the most heartfelt, honest answers I've ever read from a serviceman.  I've got no experience with anyone Air Force, Army, Marines, and Coast Guard yes, but never an airmen.

What I've been told from people I've known in other services and after your far more logical description I believe that they themselves were just high on their return and/or selves, was that they were to follow orders, regardless from all superior orders without question up to and including the Commander in Chief without question or consideration of any personal or political beliefs. That is what I was told, not necessarily what they were told, many of these guys signed up in 1999 - 2000 hoping to go to Iraq.  Their vehemence and bigotry towards anyone not US was why many of them are former associations.

I have little to say in response other than I agree if one does not fill out their obligations they should not receive full compensation.  As a former manager I know that, at least my employers viewed General Discharge to be a lesser version of dishonorable discharge and they would not be hired. That is something that is an issue between employer perception and actual military performance.  I however agree that one should suspend any completion package if they leave mid-stream.

I agree a 50 year old witch hunt is pointless, I was just asking for clarification because what I've been told and what has historically happened is in utter contradiction. If what you've conveyed is true of all branches then I've been poorly educated on what happens in military and war time and what our government truly tells our people to do. 

That said, I knowingly avoided any form of military knowing that I could not under an circumstances assume that information I'd ever received would be completely researched enough to validate the taking of a human life, combatant or otherwise. Directly threaten me, I will do what is necessary for defense. However I cannot trust the government with my moral conscience or put myself in a position where I'm forced to disagree with a superior who can suspend that need for personal verification of facts. Which is why I'm a musician and academic and not a warrior.

I appreciate your honesty and your tolerance.  I cannot say I've gained any degree of respect for what your superiors have ordered you to do nor can I ever forgive them for the violent hell they returned in my father. I can honestly say I feel better knowing that at least a few people out there wearing a uniform are thinking for themselves and not blindly following orders.
 
2013-02-04 09:41:30 PM  
There is never going to be a peace dividend. The US military budget will continue to climb, and any money that could have been spent on butter will find a new reason to be spent on guns. The Soviet Union is a memory. The US won that. But we still need to spend the lion's share on defense. Why? It used to be that the US military industrial complex needed to be kept afloat so that US jobs were maintained. But now, US manufacturing is dead. Dead.

So now, the reasoning is that US executives of manufacturing companies can maintain their lifestyles. And Whidbey, while I agree with you that President Obama has accomplished all you mentioned and more, there is so much more he could have accomplished if he: A) weren't beholden to those very same people who benefit from always being at war, and B) didn't have his hands tied by a party that has decided that HE, the very President elected by the will of the people of the United States is the United States worst enemy.

WeenerGord, as for you, I've had you favorited as an intelligent person for a long time, so I have a question for you; what the fark? You can't see anything good that President Obama has done? Really? This is beneath you. You know better.  As for the rest of the people beleaguering Whidbey, I don't know them other than relcec (who is on the seventh step of my seven step road to ignoration (is that a word? I don't really care. It is now.)).

I am so tired of the US always being at war. There is no justification for it, and it hurts my country.
 
2013-02-04 10:08:59 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: I find it interesting that the thread started about the "war on drugs" and how now, towards the end, I am wondering what drayno76 is smoking...


At the moment nothing untaxed. I appreciate high quality cannabis and high quality pipe tobacco when the mood calls for it.  I just come from a very independent, very stubborn cut of American culture.  Most of my ilk have been bred out by the corporate suburban life model that any part of middle America that the highways missed didn't get. Instead they withered and died as their land was bought out by corporate farms and the businesses closed because Wal-Mart opened up 20 miles down the road. I had enough experience in the classic 1940s - 1950's way of life living with my Grandparents while my dad was in the hospital for what would probably now be considered PTSD, but back then it had several different diagnoses.

I came here because I think cannabis should be legalized and the government should get the hell out of being an international police force.  I stayed because you and BigHeadFace fascinated me.  The other guy who derailed our conversation, well he so far left he's practically fallen right. I'll freely admit I'm an anarchist.  Yesterday when the cop aggressively ordered me to put my legally smoked cigarette out at the scene of an accident at a convenience store that injured my daughter, deserved to have her skull bashed in; any qualified emergency responder knows you do not aggressively approach a parent with an injured infant. I saw no reason for them to be there as there were no criminal charges being filed.  If the company wanted their insurance adjuster out there fine, but a cop is not an insurance agent nor legal defense agency for a corporation. In my opinion they got in the way of the delivery of medical attention to my baby. 

So what am I smoking. I'm smoking the dissatisfaction of being ordered by my 'free' country that the only intoxicant I'm allowed is a poison which deteriorates the liver. I'm smoking the dissatisfaction that I live in a country where law enforcement approach everyone as if they are looking for a crime to find. I'm dissatisfied with a former president who sent you and thousands of other Americans on a mission to obliterate a country based on a lie in order to improve his stock holdings. Any positive actions that came out of that war for the Iraqi people are irrelevant to the fact that the Americans were lied to and our forces were sent to dominate a country in order for select corporations to gain a foothold on economic opportunities that would not have been available had we not invaded.  The fact that more men went to Iraq than Afghanistan where our true attacker was is deplorable. 

The current and former treatment of military personnel who return to the country with psychological problems due to combat is sickening.  There are so many things wrong with this nation that I don't see any one political party, any one president, or anything other than total reconstruction solving the problems.  More education money is spent on upper administration than students and our international educational status is a testament to that. There are more things that I can list that are massive failings of the government.  The solution every election is 'we'll cut this and spend more on this' and the end result is more money spent at the top and nothing changes at the service level. 

Republicans should LOVE me, I'm anti-big government, anti-government control, anti-taxation and pro-2a.
Democrats should LOVE me, I'm pro choice, anti-prohibition, anti-prayer in public schools, and anti-big-corp.

The sad truth is that the above issues are all minor in comparison to the massive failing has done the American people. 
We imprison instead of educate, we establish ever expanding laws to curb effects of previous laws. We fail on so many levels
that we desperately need an infrastructure overhaul.  If it causes Anarchy, I grew up prepared for that one day due to my Grandfathers
experiences during the Great Depression, he taught me to expect it. However, more laws covering up old broken laws is simply putting
a band-aid on a broken arm, it's not going to do anything.
 
2013-02-04 10:13:01 PM  
I wish there was an edit key for grammar and I didn't have this throbbing head-ache. Well kids it's been fun. Good night..
 
2013-02-05 12:53:29 AM  

Old_Chief_Scott: I am wondering what drayno76 is smoking...


I'm guessing a heaping bowl of Pol Pot from the smell of it.
 
2013-02-05 02:05:21 AM  

the money is in the banana stand: Hagenhatesyouall: AirForceVet: I hated doing drug interdiction work personally while on active duty. The REAL problems stem from my fellow Americans excession consumption of illegal drugs.

/Legalizing pot would be a step in the right direction, IMHO

Actually, the REAL farking problem is believing criminalization HAS "worked", and will CONTINUE to "work".

Dependency is a MEDICAL issue, not a criminal issue.

I don't give a fark WHAT "drugs" somebody uses in the privacy of their own home, because as long as they aren't posing a threat to anybody else, it's none of my g'damn business.

The drug war has FAILED to do anything but criminalize non-violent citizens who may, or may not, need MEDICAL assistance to kick a dependency problem.

Funding the "drug war" needs to farking stop, NOW.

What do you think about Heroin, Cocaine, Meth, Bath Salts, Acid, and substances that unlike Marijuana are highly addictive and are detrimental to society as a whole? While I agree with the assessment of prohibition, what happens when these substances are now legal? Legal to use, and legal to buy/sell? What happens when you take an industry like that and legitimatize it? How would violence cease to exist?


I think we should examine the approach Portugal and the Netherlands have taken, and find a compromise that works for our society.

Using an approach similar to the approach we use for alcohol and prescription medication for ALL drugs would be preferable to the criminalization approach we have used for almost 80 years.
 
2013-02-05 09:14:03 AM  

ethics-gradient: FTDA:
Dang it, I like Great Britain.  I was trying to troll you, but no, you had to be all rational and diplomatic in your response.  Yeah there are a lot of things America should have learned by now, hasn't, and probably never will.  Good on you for not  biting on the lure I cast in your direction.Oh right, thank you. There's a lot of stuff America has got right too tbh and if it weren't for my old marijuana conviction I'd seriousely consider moving to a country based on ideals I deeply respect. Ah well unrequited love.


It is legal in Colorado and Washington State.  I lived in Washington for several years and it is a very beautiful place to live, or visit.  If you're not restricted from traveling, the Puget Sound area of Washington is nice.
 
2013-02-05 09:41:01 AM  

drayno76: Actually, I'm the son of Vietnam Vet and spent a major portion of my childhood on military bases. In the battle of the parentage my former flower child Professor Mother won over my psychotically unbalanced abusive father. I


Sounds like you let your father bias your view of all military people.
 
2013-02-05 12:56:01 PM  

manimal2878: drayno76: Actually, I'm the son of Vietnam Vet and spent a major portion of my childhood on military bases. In the battle of the parentage my former flower child Professor Mother won over my psychotically unbalanced abusive father. I

Sounds like you let your father bias your view of all military people.


That, or he/she/it is just a big pussy.
 
2013-02-05 01:37:39 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: Sir Not Sure The Unscannable: Military folks are required to answer Yes or No to the question: Would you fire on a U.S. citizen, given the order? What they don't say is which ones.

Really?

Huh...

Never got asked that.


I did ten years in the Army. No one ever asked me that question.
 
2013-02-05 02:23:40 PM  

RugNug: Old_Chief_Scott: Sir Not Sure The Unscannable: Military folks are required to answer Yes or No to the question: Would you fire on a U.S. citizen, given the order? What they don't say is which ones.

Really?

Huh...

Never got asked that.

I did ten years in the Army. No one ever asked me that question.


I was never asked whether I would fire on U.S. citizens if ordered, however, I WAS asked how I felt about the Posse Comitatus Act.

Figure it out...
 
2013-02-07 03:04:36 PM  

Hagenhatesyouall: RugNug: Old_Chief_Scott: Sir Not Sure The Unscannable: Military folks are required to answer Yes or No to the question: Would you fire on a U.S. citizen, given the order? What they don't say is which ones.

Really?

Huh...

Never got asked that.

I did ten years in the Army. No one ever asked me that question.

I was never asked whether I would fire on U.S. citizens if ordered, however, I WAS asked how I felt about the Posse Comitatus Act.

Figure it out...


The only question I was asked was "are you now, or have you ever been in the communist party"
 
Displayed 317 of 317 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report