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.

(CNN)   CIA to supply small arms to Syrian rebels. Because this worked so well in Afghanistan. And Beirut. And Nicaragua. And El Salvador. And   (cnn.com) divider line 219
    More: Asinine, Secretary of State John Kerry, CIA, beer pongs, russian foreign ministry, Sergey Lavrov, national capitals, anti-tank weapons, boots on the ground  
•       •       •

1620 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Jun 2013 at 7:31 PM (43 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-14 10:04:04 PM
Remember when a lot of people scoffed that the Nobel Prize for Peace given to Obama, well before he had done anything at all?  It was hilarious.

Well, I guess that's over.  Peace through superior firepower.  Obama is doing the right thing, and it's good that the Nobel Prize is accidentally vindicated.  You don't end a war without winning it.
 
2013-06-14 10:04:21 PM

Deep Contact: Under the terms of the National Defense Authorization Act that he personally signed into law, President Barack Obama should immediately be arrested and indefinitely detained for providing support to Al-Qaeda terrorists in Syria.


LOL
 
2013-06-14 10:05:16 PM

Arcanum: Remember when a lot of people scoffed that the Nobel Prize for Peace given to Obama, well before he had done anything at all?  It was hilarious.

Well, I guess that's over.  Peace through superior firepower.  Obama is doing the right thing, and it's good that the Nobel Prize is accidentally vindicated.  You don't end a war without winning it.


IIRC the nobel peace prize to Obama was basically a huge FU to Bush, not about Obama's actions.
 
2013-06-14 10:05:23 PM
How's that Peace Prize tasting right now?
 
2013-06-14 10:07:20 PM

BitwiseShift: Every hundred years we should dust off the Sykes-Picot Agreement and ask if it's really working.

Possibly a Kurdish state, a Shia state, a Sunni state, a Turkish officially non-religious state, a Jewish state could all be drawn this time and the oil companies given a mandate. Left out the pipeline states.  And the Alabama of the middle east.

Seems there's always conflict when the big boys leave town: Hapsburgs and Yugoslavia, Ottomans and Middle East, Russia and Eastern Europe. If only there were a way to perpetuate brual mega empires.


Why?  Most of the citizens of most of these countries do not actually want to live in an religious dictatorship.  The people crying for a sunni or shiate or whatever government are oppressors of normal folks.

The hard truth is that the only way to fix all this is to export democracy.  Actually, exporting Christianity would probably do a lot of good, but that's unrealistic.

Obama is on the right track.  Let the people have democracies and suddenly the politicians are clamoring to offer better services and debate about issues that impact the daily lives of the citizens.
 
2013-06-14 10:08:21 PM

Almost Everybody Poops: Arcanum: Remember when a lot of people scoffed that the Nobel Prize for Peace given to Obama, well before he had done anything at all?  It was hilarious.

Well, I guess that's over.  Peace through superior firepower.  Obama is doing the right thing, and it's good that the Nobel Prize is accidentally vindicated.  You don't end a war without winning it.

IIRC the nobel peace prize to Obama was basically a huge FU to Bush, not about Obama's actions.


True.  I guess Bush had the last laugh.  His policies have been vindicated by a nobel peace prize winner!  Obama has made it pretty damn hard to blame Bush for anything, given things are the same with or without him.
 
2013-06-14 10:08:51 PM

Arcanum: Obama has kept Gitmo open


It's not "Obama" keeping Gitmo open. Please stop that.

Arcanum: and uses drones far, far more than the Bush folks


aside from the American citizen/enemy combatant debate, I'm puzzled as to why just "drone use" is considered in of itself a bad thing
 
2013-06-14 10:09:45 PM
imageshack.com

The Syrian rebels don't seem to think they can defeat the Syrian military with small arms, which is odd, since Teabaggers seem convinced they can defeat the American military with small arms.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/syrian-rebels-say-th ey -need-heavy-weaponry-not-small-arms-from-us/2013/06/14/775615fe-d4e2-1 1e2-8cbe-1bcbee06f8f8_story.html

Syria's rebels on Friday criticized the U.S. decision to offer small-scale military assistance as late and inadequate, saying they will need heavy weapons to counter the growing challenge posed by a reinvigorated Syrian army that is already receiving foreign help.
 
2013-06-14 10:10:08 PM

The Bestest: Arcanum: Obama has kept Gitmo open

It's not "Obama" keeping Gitmo open. Please stop that.

Arcanum: and uses drones far, far more than the Bush folks

aside from the American citizen/enemy combatant debate, I'm puzzled as to why just "drone use" is considered in of itself a bad thing


Because: Terminator
 
2013-06-14 10:10:34 PM

Arcanum: I can respect people who take a pacifist or isolationist worldview.  I disagree with it, but it's a valid point of view that should be argued to the American people to keep things in check.

It must suck for anyone who bought Obama's condemnations of The Bush Doctrine, supported him, and then voted for Obama.

Personally, I supported the Iraq war and do not regret it.  The Afghanistan mess lasted too long, and I think we were there too long.

I am delighted that Obama is going to encourage warfare in Syria as the people there fight eachother, hopefully destroying more of eachother.  I am curious if Obama picked now to do this after he's been having a tough time with scandals, but hey, I'll take what I can get.

It's a little weird that Obama is actually a more gungho Hawk than Dick Cheney, but it's the truth.  Obama has kept Gitmo open, expanded extraordinary rendition, and uses drones far, far more than the Bush folks.

I disagree with most of Obama's policies, but this is the silver lining.  I do think Obama should have been a little more upfront about his views.  I would have considered voting for him.


fotokartinki.my1.ru

Nice of you to drop by.
 
2013-06-14 10:13:32 PM

The Bestest: Arcanum: Obama has kept Gitmo open

It's not "Obama" keeping Gitmo open. Please stop that.


Yeah, of course it's Obama keeping Gitmo as a prison.  LOL at some people out there.  He's commander in chief and could easily move all these people wherever he wanted, or just give them a trial, or release them today.  Now Gitmo as a military base, you're right, in that less relevant sense Obama can't unilaterally close it anymore.

But Obama promised to close it pretty damn quick, and had years of majorities in congress and broke that promise.

Not that I'm complaining.  I support Obama keeping Gitmo open, and I support Obama's expansion of the Bush doctrine.  Drones make it much easier to kill terrorists in countries we are not technically at war with, and I support that too.  Obama is on the ball when it comes to killing bad guys.  I mean that sincerely.  Had I known I could vote to reelect the Bush foreign policy, I would have been happy to do so.
 
2013-06-14 10:16:19 PM

Vectron: Nice of you to drop by.


I chuckled.. though really a lot of his views seem to match my own.. imperial.

I do disagree with the Iraq War, though I understand it (motivations and intentions). The execution (run-up and occupation) was horrible and if THAT had been better, it would probably have been looked upon a lot more favorably historically.
 
2013-06-14 10:19:24 PM

Arcanum: He's commander in chief and could easily move all these people wherever he wanted, or just give them a trial, or release them today.


Not without severe political fallout.. c'mon, you know that.

Arcanum: and had years of majorities in congress


..again, stop that. Argue from a position of strength and use facts.
 
2013-06-14 10:23:47 PM

CheatCommando: Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs
And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots
But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots
Of disappointed shells that dropped behind.
GAS! Gas! Quick, boys!-- An ecstasy of fumbling,
Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time;
But someone still was yelling out and stumbling
And floundering like a man in fire or lime.--
Dim, through the misty panes and thick green light
As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.
In all my dreams, before my helpless sight,
He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.
If in some smothering dreams you too could pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin;
If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,--
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori

-Wilfred Owen


Thank you for posting that. Very powerful.
 
2013-06-14 10:26:14 PM

dookdookdook: [imageshack.com image 54x11]

The Syrian rebels don't seem to think they can defeat the Syrian military with small arms, which is odd, since Teabaggers seem convinced they can defeat the American military with small arms.


You might misunderstand the views of Tea Partiers.  There's apparently lot of fear of these guys, as we can see from the IRS's freaking out whenever they see anything coming close.

The second amendment goes back to the 1689 English Declaration of rights.  "That the Subjects, which are Protestants, may have Arms for their Defence suitable to their Conditions, and as allowed by Law " was intended as a deterrence against government going too far.  Same, the second amendment is simply a deterrent.  What a miserable pain in the ass it would be to fight against the militia (civilian men of military age).  They have millions of guns.  I'm sure this is not just a deterrent to American abuses, but also a deterrent to foreign tyrants, such as during WWII.

Does the Tea Party talk about fighting the US Military?  I've never heard of that, but I'm sure there are a few kooks.  If anything, so much of the civilian volunteer military is likely to join the militia if anything like a civil war were to happen, though.

But the important thing to remember is that this is a theoretical deterrent, not a plan for an actual event.  It's like concealed carry on campus.  Few are saying they expect to whip out their gun and mow down a bad guy.  they are saying that the presence of an equalizer like a gun deters undesirable things.

Perhaps you disagree, which is fine with me.  I can see both sides of the argument because i understand both sides.  Much like President Obama, who understands the best arguments for condemning the Bush doctrine, and also the greater wisdom in following Bush's lead.
 
2013-06-14 10:26:49 PM

Nick Nostril: The pointy heads need to invent disposable weapons, weapons with a "use by" date that go bad like cheese after a certain time period.

/ or, it could be gin and tonics typing for me


The funny thing is that, since I really suck at politics but am good at science I was just thinking about that. But all I could come up with were biological ideas... which would be biological weapons.. which would be a serious atrocity.
 
2013-06-14 10:29:32 PM
They've mysteriously been getting lots of american made anti-tank weapons to combat assad tanks from the very start.
 
2013-06-14 10:29:32 PM

Mambo Bananapatch: CheatCommando: Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs
And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots
But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots
Of disappointed shells that dropped behind.
GAS! Gas! Quick, boys!-- An ecstasy of fumbling,
Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time;
But someone still was yelling out and stumbling
And floundering like a man in fire or lime.--
Dim, through the misty panes and thick green light
As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.
In all my dreams, before my helpless sight,
He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.
If in some smothering dreams you too could pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin;
If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,--
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori

-Wilfred Owen

Thank you for posting that. Very powerful.


It does tend to make the 101st Fighting Keyboardists pause
 
2013-06-14 10:39:17 PM

The Bestest: machoprogrammer: You really think this is a good idea?

Here's the thing.. do I think its a good idea tactically? Hell no. Do I think it's a political necessity (globally.. taking action in Syria probably has more negatives than positives in domestic politics). Unfortunately yes.


I'm afraid you have me profoundly confused. How is this a political necessity? You mean it's a global necessity, but a "more negatives than positives" domestically?

How can this be a necessity either way? I have to say, I'm completely in the dark as to whether there are any good guys in this war. Assad seems to be quite the dirtbag, on the other hand, the Christians in Syria (10% of the population) support him, even though he's not exactly their best pal. The alternative in their eyes seems to be an Islamic state that will oppress them even more. Christians are fark's doormat, but I'm guessing that to Islamic states the entire West (and probably Japan) are Christians, or even worse, Jews.

Call me narrow minded, but I've come to feel the world is better off with non-religious dictators than with Islamofacist states, with Islamo-facist being more or less redundant, when you get right down to it. Of course, some Islamic states are much better than others.

Anyway, I don't see how the US comes out on top here. We have a shiatload to lose, and not a damn thing to gain as far as I can tell.

I've got sons who are 12 and 13. I'm actually worried that they're wind up being cannon fodder in this idiot war, or the next pointless war in the middle east the US waltzes into.
 
2013-06-14 10:50:52 PM

enemy of the state: The Bestest: machoprogrammer: You really think this is a good idea?

Here's the thing.. do I think its a good idea tactically? Hell no. Do I think it's a political necessity (globally.. taking action in Syria probably has more negatives than positives in domestic politics). Unfortunately yes.

I'm afraid you have me profoundly confused. How is this a political necessity? You mean it's a global necessity, but a "more negatives than positives" domestically?

How can this be a necessity either way? I have to say, I'm completely in the dark as to whether there are any good guys in this war. Assad seems to be quite the dirtbag, on the other hand, the Christians in Syria (10% of the population) support him, even though he's not exactly their best pal. The alternative in their eyes seems to be an Islamic state that will oppress them even more. Christians are fark's doormat, but I'm guessing that to Islamic states the entire West (and probably Japan) are Christians, or even worse, Jews.

Call me narrow minded, but I've come to feel the world is better off with non-religious dictators than with Islamofacist states, with Islamo-facist being more or less redundant, when you get right down to it. Of course, some Islamic states are much better than others.

Anyway, I don't see how the US comes out on top here. We have a shiatload to lose, and not a damn thing to gain as far as I can tell.

I've got sons who are 12 and 13. I'm actually worried that they're wind up being cannon fodder in this idiot war, or the next pointless war in the middle east the US waltzes into.


It's not about "good guys and bad guys"; quite frankly both 'sides' in this conflict (at least within Syria itself) are "bad guys". You have a government that has lost legitimacy and has shown disdain for the well-being of its own citizens and international convention on one side and rebels that have shown almost equal disdain (though they can claim it's out of desperation) and backed by/comprised of a theocratic movement.

The issue is global political capital and gamesmanship, and it's not that we necessarily have much to gain through action as it is we have more to lose through inaction. It may sound callous, since both the cost of and pieces in this game are "human capital", but it's all a big multiplayer game between the US, Russia and China, and their respective allies and proxies. It may not be "right", and it certainly isn't pretty, but it's the ugly way the world works.
 
2013-06-14 10:51:30 PM

Arcanum: Almost Everybody Poops: Arcanum: Remember when a lot of people scoffed that the Nobel Prize for Peace given to Obama, well before he had done anything at all?  It was hilarious.

Well, I guess that's over.  Peace through superior firepower.  Obama is doing the right thing, and it's good that the Nobel Prize is accidentally vindicated.  You don't end a war without winning it.

IIRC the nobel peace prize to Obama was basically a huge FU to Bush, not about Obama's actions.

True.  I guess Bush had the last laugh.  His policies have been vindicated by a nobel peace prize winner!  Obama has made it pretty damn hard to blame Bush for anything, given things are the same with or without him.


You're right, 'cause Obama started two wars that lasted a decade.
 
2013-06-14 10:55:10 PM
We have no money to send hot meals to our troops overseas, but we will arm terrorists to take out other bad guys.  How messed up is that?
 
2013-06-14 10:56:13 PM

R.A.Danny: How many wars are we trying to get in at the same time?


You know we're done with Iraq and Libya, right? We're only in one "war" at the moment, and we'll be done with that for all intents and purposes by the end of next year.

Also, too, you ignoramuses quit wetting your panties about Americans dying in Syria. That ain't gonna happen. The most that happens is the Syrian government and Hezbollah lose more troops, and maybe the Syrian Alawite government is overthrown by the ethnic Sunni majority. That doesn't = Taliban in the Levant. As long as we keep supporting non-Takfiri Sunnis, they'll sort the fanatics out once Assad's gone.

/If you don't know what Takfir means, get the fark out of this thread.
 
2013-06-14 10:56:14 PM
Don't forget the torture chambers and extermination camps.
 
2013-06-14 11:01:57 PM

webthing01: US troops on Syria border as Obama arms rebelsThree hundred US Marines have been deployed to northern Jordan to pave the way for the West to arm Syrian rebels.http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/middleeast/article379 1863.ece


Says the Murdoch-owned newspaper that claimed AIDS wasn't caused by HIV. I'll believe it when a respectable publication confirms it.
 
2013-06-14 11:02:57 PM

Hick: We have no money to send hot meals to our troops overseas, but we will arm terrorists to take out other bad guys.  How messed up is that?


You know how I know you've never eaten in a chow hall down range?
 
2013-06-14 11:05:58 PM

Arcanum: Does the Tea Party talk about fighting the US Military?  I've never heard of that, but I'm sure there are a few kookspotential presidential nominees


cloudfront.mediamatters.org
 
2013-06-14 11:08:08 PM

Giltric: ChuDogg: Giltric: ChuDogg: This is great news, I was just here thinking in my suburban home how these guys might not have enough access to American made weaponry. Thankfully our government understands.

[www.thesundaytimes.co.uk image 580x386]

Looks like they have access to Belgian weaponry as well.

Praise John Moses Browning

This dude has a friggin Steyr Aug.

[s1.reutersmedia.net image 435x300]

Also...Sturmgewehr 44s


[farm9.staticflickr.com image 640x427]


That HAS to be the .22 semi-auto repro, doesn't it? Are there any of those still kicking around? And where can I get one?
 
2013-06-14 11:08:32 PM
Well, according to HuffPo, the situation is clarifying:
The Muslim Brotherhood had been "vague" on Syria, said Khalil al-Anani, an expert on Islamist movements at Washington's Middle East Institute: "But now they have decided to join the kind of sectarian war against Hezbollah, Syria and Iran."
 
2013-06-14 11:09:35 PM

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: We have no business getting involved in a civil war.


Good thing the French didn't make that call in 1777.
 
2013-06-14 11:15:21 PM

mbillips: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: We have no business getting involved in a civil war.

Good thing the French didn't make that call in 1777.


You do realize we were France's Afghanistan, right? That it was much cheaper to fight the English here, using us as fodder, than it was to fight them directly?

The comparison breaks down, of course, when you realize that, unlike the French, we didn't give a rat's rancid rectum about the Afghans - they were just a tool by which we were able to bankrupt the Soviets. We didn't exactly help them out after their war, while the French did give us a bit of support.

We don't give a rat's rancid rectum about Syria, or Islamist terrorist, for that matter - we just want Assad out of office to ensure more churn in the Middle East. So, sure, we'll happily send training, money, and weapons to Syrian rebels - so what if some of them are the same Islamist terrorists against which we claimed justification in bombing the hell out of Afghanistan, Iraq, parts of Pakistan, and so on.

Again, we don't care about terrorism - it's a pretext, something we use to further our aims. We're happy to assist terrorists if it means getting what we want. It's not like this is the first time we've done so.
 
2013-06-14 11:15:55 PM

mbillips: Hick: We have no money to send hot meals to our troops overseas, but we will arm terrorists to take out other bad guys.  How messed up is that?

You know how I know you've never eaten in a chow hall down range?


He has been reading to many fwd fwd fwd emails and too many right wing blogs.
 
2013-06-14 11:20:36 PM

FormlessOne: mbillips: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: We have no business getting involved in a civil war.

Good thing the French didn't make that call in 1777.

You do realize we were France's Afghanistan, right? That it was much cheaper to fight the English here, using us as fodder, than it was to fight them directly?

The comparison breaks down, of course, when you realize that, unlike the French, we didn't give a rat's rancid rectum about the Afghans - they were just a tool by which we were able to bankrupt the Soviets. We didn't exactly help them out after their war, while the French did give us a bit of support.

We don't give a rat's rancid rectum about Syria, or Islamist terrorist, for that matter - we just want Assad out of office to ensure more churn in the Middle East. So, sure, we'll happily send training, money, and weapons to Syrian rebels - so what if some of them are the same Islamist terrorists against which we claimed justification in bombing the hell out of Afghanistan, Iraq, parts of Pakistan, and so on.

Again, we don't care about terrorism - it's a pretext, something we use to further our aims. We're happy to assist terrorists if it means getting what we want. It's not like this is the first time we've done so.


A cynic is a skeptic who doesn't bother to do research. Name ONE national interest we have in getting rid of Assad, other than for humanitarian reasons.
 
2013-06-14 11:21:41 PM

ongbok: mbillips: Hick: We have no money to send hot meals to our troops overseas, but we will arm terrorists to take out other bad guys.  How messed up is that?

You know how I know you've never eaten in a chow hall down range?

He has been reading to many fwd fwd fwd emails and too many right wing blogs.


You mean like this right wing blog?

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/31/18592339-the-drawdown- di et-marines-steamed-by-loss-of-hot-meal-at-afghanistan-base?lite
 
2013-06-14 11:27:37 PM

OgreMagi: ongbok: mbillips: Hick: We have no money to send hot meals to our troops overseas, but we will arm terrorists to take out other bad guys.  How messed up is that?

You know how I know you've never eaten in a chow hall down range?

He has been reading to many fwd fwd fwd emails and too many right wing blogs.

You mean like this right wing blog?

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/31/18592339-the-drawdown- di et-marines-steamed-by-loss-of-hot-meal-at-afghanistan-base?lite


The moves, though unpopular with many Marines on the ground and their families back home, are emblematic of the massive drawdown of American troops in Afghanistan and the dismantling of U.S. military facilities. More than 30,000 U.S. service members will leave Afghanistan in coming months as the U.S. prepares to hand responsibility for security to Afghan forces in 2014.

So they are replacing meals, but it's not because of money, it because of troop reductions because of the planned pullout. I'm guessing his right wing blogs told him it was because of money.
 
2013-06-14 11:35:47 PM

mbillips: FormlessOne: mbillips: Abe Vigoda's Ghost: We have no business getting involved in a civil war.

Good thing the French didn't make that call in 1777.

You do realize we were France's Afghanistan, right? That it was much cheaper to fight the English here, using us as fodder, than it was to fight them directly?

The comparison breaks down, of course, when you realize that, unlike the French, we didn't give a rat's rancid rectum about the Afghans - they were just a tool by which we were able to bankrupt the Soviets. We didn't exactly help them out after their war, while the French did give us a bit of support.

We don't give a rat's rancid rectum about Syria, or Islamist terrorist, for that matter - we just want Assad out of office to ensure more churn in the Middle East. So, sure, we'll happily send training, money, and weapons to Syrian rebels - so what if some of them are the same Islamist terrorists against which we claimed justification in bombing the hell out of Afghanistan, Iraq, parts of Pakistan, and so on.

Again, we don't care about terrorism - it's a pretext, something we use to further our aims. We're happy to assist terrorists if it means getting what we want. It's not like this is the first time we've done so.

A cynic is a skeptic who doesn't bother to do research. Name ONE national interest we have in getting rid of Assad, other than for humanitarian reasons.


A more US/Israel friendly government

/fat chance whatever we do, IMHO
 
2013-06-14 11:36:16 PM

ongbok: OgreMagi: ongbok: mbillips: Hick: We have no money to send hot meals to our troops overseas, but we will arm terrorists to take out other bad guys.  How messed up is that?

You know how I know you've never eaten in a chow hall down range?

He has been reading to many fwd fwd fwd emails and too many right wing blogs.

You mean like this right wing blog?

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/31/18592339-the-drawdown- di et-marines-steamed-by-loss-of-hot-meal-at-afghanistan-base?lite

The moves, though unpopular with many Marines on the ground and their families back home, are emblematic of the massive drawdown of American troops in Afghanistan and the dismantling of U.S. military facilities. More than 30,000 U.S. service members will leave Afghanistan in coming months as the U.S. prepares to hand responsibility for security to Afghan forces in 2014.

So they are replacing meals, but it's not because of money, it because of troop reductions because of the planned pullout. I'm guessing his right wing blogs told him it was because of money.


I don't give a shiat what reason they are reducing hot meal service.  You don't do that to troops who are required to be away from home a year at a time.  There is no damn good reason for this.
 
2013-06-14 11:39:01 PM
CIA to supply small arms to Syrian rebels. Because this worked so well in Afghanistan. And Beirut. And Nicaragua. And El Salvador. And Soviet Union
 
2013-06-14 11:42:49 PM

LewDux: CIA to supply small arms to Syrian rebels. Because this worked so well in Afghanistan. And Beirut. And Nicaragua. And El Salvador. And Soviet Union


Minor addition: CIA to supply small arms to Syrian Sunni rebels.
 
2013-06-14 11:45:42 PM

OgreMagi: ongbok: OgreMagi: ongbok: mbillips: Hick: We have no money to send hot meals to our troops overseas, but we will arm terrorists to take out other bad guys.  How messed up is that?

You know how I know you've never eaten in a chow hall down range?

He has been reading to many fwd fwd fwd emails and too many right wing blogs.

You mean like this right wing blog?

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/31/18592339-the-drawdown- di et-marines-steamed-by-loss-of-hot-meal-at-afghanistan-base?lite

The moves, though unpopular with many Marines on the ground and their families back home, are emblematic of the massive drawdown of American troops in Afghanistan and the dismantling of U.S. military facilities. More than 30,000 U.S. service members will leave Afghanistan in coming months as the U.S. prepares to hand responsibility for security to Afghan forces in 2014.

So they are replacing meals, but it's not because of money, it because of troop reductions because of the planned pullout. I'm guessing his right wing blogs told him it was because of money.

I don't give a shiat what reason they are reducing hot meal service.  You don't do that to troops who are required to be away from home a year at a time.  There is no damn good reason for this.


It is something that is done in the draw down to any war. Non essential troops go first. But now for some reason it is an outrage. Get a clue
 
PKY
2013-06-14 11:49:23 PM
Iraq, Libya, Bosnia, Caucasus and now Syria. Can't believe the US is doing the same mistake again. Taking out the secular leader who is holding the religious extremists in check. But like in all the other cases it's all about continuing to destroy the Russian sphere of influence. The cold war isn't over even if the Soviet union has turned 180 degrees politically into a conservative's paradise.
 
2013-06-14 11:55:08 PM

ongbok: OgreMagi: ongbok: OgreMagi: ongbok: mbillips: Hick: We have no money to send hot meals to our troops overseas, but we will arm terrorists to take out other bad guys.  How messed up is that?

You know how I know you've never eaten in a chow hall down range?

He has been reading to many fwd fwd fwd emails and too many right wing blogs.

You mean like this right wing blog?

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/31/18592339-the-drawdown- di et-marines-steamed-by-loss-of-hot-meal-at-afghanistan-base?lite

The moves, though unpopular with many Marines on the ground and their families back home, are emblematic of the massive drawdown of American troops in Afghanistan and the dismantling of U.S. military facilities. More than 30,000 U.S. service members will leave Afghanistan in coming months as the U.S. prepares to hand responsibility for security to Afghan forces in 2014.

So they are replacing meals, but it's not because of money, it because of troop reductions because of the planned pullout. I'm guessing his right wing blogs told him it was because of money.

I don't give a shiat what reason they are reducing hot meal service.  You don't do that to troops who are required to be away from home a year at a time.  There is no damn good reason for this.

It is something that is done in the draw down to any war. Non essential troops go first. But now for some reason it is an outrage. Get a clue


If the pullout was being done quickly, I'm sure our troops wouldn't mind going a week or two missing some hot meals knowing they go home shortly, but the troops being affected are NOT happy because they know they aren't going home.
 
2013-06-15 12:05:40 AM
You know there's no relation between us and our government, right?

None whatsoever. I take that back. You and I are lashed to the wheel to pay the vig for what 'they' do ...

How(uh) .. does(uh) .. that(uh) .. feel(uh) .. citizen(uh) .. it feels like you need to use more lube ...
 
2013-06-15 12:19:04 AM
This all makes sense now. Obama has bought all the ammo and will now start confiscating all the guns and ship them  overseas so he can help his Muslim brothers.
Thanks a lot Obama!!
 
2013-06-15 12:44:23 AM

SmithHiller: This all makes sense now. Obama has bought all the ammo and will now start confiscating all the guns and ship them  overseas so he can help his Muslim brothers.
Thanks a lot Obama!!


The House did vote to delay the Department of Homeland Security from buying ammunition. It is always nice when one of the political parties votes to support conspiracy theories.
 
2013-06-15 01:32:36 AM

J. Frank Parnell: They've mysteriously been getting lots of american made anti-tank weapons to combat assad tanks from the very start.


Yes - mysterious, isn't it?
 
2013-06-15 02:02:26 AM
Go ahead guys. Leave the lot in Europe's back-yard. It won't do any harm.
 
2013-06-15 02:03:14 AM
The important thing for fark is to stand by whatever stupid decision he settles on.
 
2013-06-15 02:40:26 AM
So Rambo 6 in Syria then?
 
2013-06-15 02:58:02 AM
Well, this oughta make the Olympics interesting....
 
Displayed 50 of 219 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report