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.

(Yahoo)   President Obama told President Putin on a call that sending troops to Ukraine flouted international law, ruined his Sunday, and he'll remove any Facebook likes he gave Putin, the very next time he's on Facebook ...... unless a staffer does it sooner   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 144
    More: Obvious, President Vladimir Putin, President Obama, Ukraine, Facebook, EU Foreign Policy, international laws, Ukraine flouted, Samantha Power  
•       •       •

2590 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Mar 2014 at 3:19 AM (25 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-02 06:38:34 AM
super_grass:
Russia is not the USSR, and they have fallen a lot since then. They're not nearly as unstable as you think, which we can see with the various US bases established next to it after the USSR collapsed.
We don't have to treat Russia as an equal now, and having a military deterrent prevents a bigger diplomatic crisis from emerging out of Ukraine in the first place.


Fool.
 
2014-03-02 06:40:26 AM

Wake Up Sheeple: super_grass:
Russia is not the USSR, and they have fallen a lot since then. They're not nearly as unstable as you think, which we can see with the various US bases established next to it after the USSR collapsed.
We don't have to treat Russia as an equal now, and having a military deterrent prevents a bigger diplomatic crisis from emerging out of Ukraine in the first place.

Fool.


Looks like your argument just went the way of Russian military strength.
 
2014-03-02 06:48:28 AM

Bloody William: Gentoolive: Does Putin not realize he's dealing with a community organizer here?!

/fool better recognize

Describe to me the course of action you believe we should take.


Bring all of our soldiers home, protect our own borders and mind our own business?
 
2014-03-02 06:52:53 AM

Gentoolive: Bloody William: Gentoolive: Does Putin not realize he's dealing with a community organizer here?!

/fool better recognize

Describe to me the course of action you believe we should take.

Bring all of our soldiers home, protect our own borders and mind our own business?


That would be "isolationism", do you know who else is an isolationist? That's right, RAND PAUL.
 
2014-03-02 06:55:37 AM

Gentoolive: Bloody William: Gentoolive: Does Putin not realize he's dealing with a community organizer here?!

/fool better recognize

Describe to me the course of action you believe we should take.

Bring all of our soldiers home, protect our own borders and mind our own business?


Are you serious? How the hell are we gonna justify the billions of military spending we want if all we do is protect the country?
 
2014-03-02 07:09:34 AM

phrawgh: TheWhoppah: Since when did the USA worry about flouting international law?  What, is that only OK when we do it?


"It is the last territorial claim that I have to make in Europe." - Vladimir Putin



Nice...
 
2014-03-02 07:12:29 AM

super_grass: Gentoolive: Bloody William: Gentoolive: Does Putin not realize he's dealing with a community organizer here?!

/fool better recognize

Describe to me the course of action you believe we should take.

Bring all of our soldiers home, protect our own borders and mind our own business?

That would be "isolationism", do you know who else is an isolationist? That's right, RAND PAUL.


Love the guy
 
2014-03-02 07:13:50 AM

super_grass: Wake Up Sheeple: super_grass: Wake Up Sheeple: super_grass: Wake Up Sheeple: Wake Up Sheeple: super_grass: gsiofa: Bush didn't involve the U.S. in the Russo-Georgian war in 2008, and a diplomatic effort from France/EU led to a ceasefire. Why should Obama lead the U.S. into war now?

We can manage to cut off Russia on its one military port in the Caspian sea.

Are you serious? Are you advocating for military intervention against Russia?

Answer this question, super_grass. I'm not quoting your right-wing vitriol you spewed later in the thread.

Calm down, bro. You're the one being all angry and passive aggressive.

You can achieve these goals without firing a shot, like how we kept the Spratly islands or Taiwan away from China without a single nuke launched.

And I consider myself one of the libbiest lib who ever libbed, so check yourself.

Or how we successfully kept Korea as one nation, or how we kept South Vietnam from being overrun?

China still considers Taiwan part of its territory, and we've stepped back. If China wants it, we're going to retreat rather than lob nukes and lose carrier groups, and China damn well knows it.

You can also call yourself "the libbiest lib" but you're advocating positions that are contrary. You need to look into a mirror. Talk about not being self-aware.

That's just weak, I mean, your position makes Chamberlain look like Genghis Khan.

America doesn't outspend the next ten military budgets combined for nothing. I'd be pissed if the military didn't use that force to contain local powers in check after all the money dumped into it. I don't want a shooting war, but if the US can be opportunistic in keeping the Kremlin in check then I'm all for it.

And China is not going to take Taiwan or the Spratlys any time soon, Taiwan and Japan has enough US military aid to put up a decent fight themselves if push comes to blow.

You ARE advocating WW3. And for unimportant territories that will be fine regardless. You're insane.

The US intervened in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Somalia, etc, and WWIII has yet to start, and that's WITH shots fired, which nobody is advocating now.

WWIII is only going to happen if leaders were like you and recoiled at their own shadows, which thank god they're not. Park some battleships in nearby, speak softly, and carry a big stick.


??? Battleships? You are an idiot.
 
2014-03-02 07:18:10 AM
All right Drew, this is the crap we put up with. The trolls that you say are bad for business. Yet, nothing. It's nice that someone sponsored me, but I'll continue to block your ads and pay you nothing for your site until you start policing this more and keeping to your word.
 
2014-03-02 07:24:29 AM

Wake Up Sheeple: All right Drew, this is the crap we put up with. The trolls that you say are bad for business. Yet, nothing. It's nice that someone sponsored me, but I'll continue to block your ads and pay you nothing for your site until you start policing this more and keeping to your word.


You're under the assumption this is a "real" news site or something?
 
2014-03-02 07:26:36 AM

Mike_1962: super_grass: Wake Up Sheeple: super_grass: Wake Up Sheeple: super_grass: Wake Up Sheeple: Wake Up Sheeple: super_grass: gsiofa: Bush didn't involve the U.S. in the Russo-Georgian war in 2008, and a diplomatic effort from France/EU led to a ceasefire. Why should Obama lead the U.S. into war now?

We can manage to cut off Russia on its one military port in the Caspian sea.

Are you serious? Are you advocating for military intervention against Russia?

Answer this question, super_grass. I'm not quoting your right-wing vitriol you spewed later in the thread.

Calm down, bro. You're the one being all angry and passive aggressive.

You can achieve these goals without firing a shot, like how we kept the Spratly islands or Taiwan away from China without a single nuke launched.

And I consider myself one of the libbiest lib who ever libbed, so check yourself.

Or how we successfully kept Korea as one nation, or how we kept South Vietnam from being overrun?

China still considers Taiwan part of its territory, and we've stepped back. If China wants it, we're going to retreat rather than lob nukes and lose carrier groups, and China damn well knows it.

You can also call yourself "the libbiest lib" but you're advocating positions that are contrary. You need to look into a mirror. Talk about not being self-aware.

That's just weak, I mean, your position makes Chamberlain look like Genghis Khan.

America doesn't outspend the next ten military budgets combined for nothing. I'd be pissed if the military didn't use that force to contain local powers in check after all the money dumped into it. I don't want a shooting war, but if the US can be opportunistic in keeping the Kremlin in check then I'm all for it.

And China is not going to take Taiwan or the Spratlys any time soon, Taiwan and Japan has enough US military aid to put up a decent fight themselves if push comes to blow.

You ARE advocating WW3. And for unimportant territories that will be fine regardless. You're insane.

The ...


T'was a Teddy Roosevelt reference, sparky.
 
2014-03-02 07:32:18 AM

Wake Up Sheeple: All right Drew, this is the crap we put up with. The trolls that you say are bad for business. Yet, nothing. It's nice that someone sponsored me, but I'll continue to block your ads and pay you nothing for your site until you start policing this more and keeping to your word.


Waaaah! Someone is disagreeing with me in a debate! drew, ban him!!

/even if you are correct in a debate, such whining is pathetic
 
2014-03-02 07:39:43 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: Wake Up Sheeple: All right Drew, this is the crap we put up with. The trolls that you say are bad for business. Yet, nothing. It's nice that someone sponsored me, but I'll continue to block your ads and pay you nothing for your site until you start policing this more and keeping to your word.

Waaaah! Someone is disagreeing with me in a debate! drew, ban him!!

/even if you are correct in a debate, such whining is pathetic


Actually, I'm just saying this is the last straw. Drew has actually come out against the trolls, and now I want him to start policing more. Otherwise he's a hypocrite. If he's not going to police it, then he should just say so, and let Fark be another Breitbart site, as this is fast becoming.

People are entitled to their opinions, but this is open trolling. I'm expressing my opinion, and voting with my wallet. I've lurked here for over a decade, and if it has to go back to that, I'm perfectly happy to do so. Interacting was an experiment. Unfortunately, talking about the problem openly is the only way left that I know how to get action on the problem since I've gone through all other channels.

The trolls, the alts, hell, this has happened even worse in TFD and there's no policing, no discipline.

Bottom line: Trolls make Drew money. More clicks, more posts = more ad views.
 
2014-03-02 07:39:46 AM

Wake Up Sheeple: All right Drew, this is the crap we put up with. The trolls that you say are bad for business. Yet, nothing. It's nice that someone sponsored me, but I'll continue to block your ads and pay you nothing for your site until you start policing this more and keeping to your word.


i290.photobucket.com

Maybe Reddit or Tumblr is more your speed.
 
2014-03-02 07:40:09 AM

DamnYankees: This is just the weirdest talking point. Can anyone give a single actual military option they want Obama to employ?


I have yet to see anyone who is suggesting Obama take military action but that doesn't seem to be stopping people from screaming "CHICKENHAWKS WANT WW3!"
 
2014-03-02 07:42:21 AM

Tokin42: DamnYankees: This is just the weirdest talking point. Can anyone give a single actual military option they want Obama to employ?

I have yet to see anyone who is suggesting Obama take military action but that doesn't seem to be stopping people from screaming "CHICKENHAWKS WANT WW3!"


You sir, need to read the thread. Maybe scroll up just a few posts.
 
2014-03-02 07:43:54 AM

Wake Up Sheeple: Debeo Summa Credo: Wake Up Sheeple: All right Drew, this is the crap we put up with. The trolls that you say are bad for business. Yet, nothing. It's nice that someone sponsored me, but I'll continue to block your ads and pay you nothing for your site until you start policing this more and keeping to your word.

Waaaah! Someone is disagreeing with me in a debate! drew, ban him!!

/even if you are correct in a debate, such whining is pathetic

Actually, I'm just saying this is the last straw. Drew has actually come out against the trolls, and now I want him to start policing more. Otherwise he's a hypocrite. If he's not going to police it, then he should just say so, and let Fark be another Breitbart site, as this is fast becoming.

People are entitled to their opinions, but this is open trolling. I'm expressing my opinion, and voting with my wallet. I've lurked here for over a decade, and if it has to go back to that, I'm perfectly happy to do so. Interacting was an experiment. Unfortunately, talking about the problem openly is the only way left that I know how to get action on the problem since I've gone through all other channels.

The trolls, the alts, hell, this has happened even worse in TFD and there's no policing, no discipline.

Bottom line: Trolls make Drew money. More clicks, more posts = more ad views.


At first glance it doesn't sound like he is trolling to me. Not saying he's right, or you are, but you just differ in your views.

The definition of "troll" around here seems to have expanded to "anyone expressing a view to the right of me."
 
2014-03-02 07:48:56 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: Wake Up Sheeple: Debeo Summa Credo: Wake Up Sheeple: All right Drew, this is the crap we put up with. The trolls that you say are bad for business. Yet, nothing. It's nice that someone sponsored me, but I'll continue to block your ads and pay you nothing for your site until you start policing this more and keeping to your word.

Waaaah! Someone is disagreeing with me in a debate! drew, ban him!!

/even if you are correct in a debate, such whining is pathetic

Actually, I'm just saying this is the last straw. Drew has actually come out against the trolls, and now I want him to start policing more. Otherwise he's a hypocrite. If he's not going to police it, then he should just say so, and let Fark be another Breitbart site, as this is fast becoming.

People are entitled to their opinions, but this is open trolling. I'm expressing my opinion, and voting with my wallet. I've lurked here for over a decade, and if it has to go back to that, I'm perfectly happy to do so. Interacting was an experiment. Unfortunately, talking about the problem openly is the only way left that I know how to get action on the problem since I've gone through all other channels.

The trolls, the alts, hell, this has happened even worse in TFD and there's no policing, no discipline.

Bottom line: Trolls make Drew money. More clicks, more posts = more ad views.

At first glance it doesn't sound like he is trolling to me. Not saying he's right, or you are, but you just differ in your views.

The definition of "troll" around here seems to have expanded to "anyone expressing a view to the right of me."


No... the Gish Gallop is troll-behavior. Constantly pretending a point wasn't debunked earlier in the thread, constantly moving the goalposts, bringing up off-topic points, the circular logic, telling people to go to Reddit, etc.. that's not trolling? Huh.. It sure looks like someone who keeps wants a negative response. Classic trolling.

Anyway, see you later.
 
2014-03-02 07:52:01 AM

Wake Up Sheeple: Bottom line: Trolls make Drew money. More clicks, more posts = more ad views.


This guy gets it. Trolling is specifically named in the posting rules but the mods never, ever enforce that part.
 
2014-03-02 07:53:01 AM

Wake Up Sheeple: Tokin42: DamnYankees: This is just the weirdest talking point. Can anyone give a single actual military option they want Obama to employ?

I have yet to see anyone who is suggesting Obama take military action but that doesn't seem to be stopping people from screaming "CHICKENHAWKS WANT WW3!"

You sir, need to read the thread. Maybe scroll up just a few posts.


Right.  I know when I'm looking for detailed political/military analysis and "talking points" I run to read anonymous blog commentators.
 
2014-03-02 08:39:58 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfEBupAeo4  All Wars are Bankers wars
"War is a Racket" by Smedley Butler
That is all you need to know.
 
2014-03-02 08:46:16 AM
We need to give Putin a way out of this mess without getting egg on his face. We can't allow him to escalate things in Crimea which is in direct violation of the '94 treaty. We don't want to see cold war era tensions either. Let's hope this resolves with no more bloodshed, because the alternative could be bad for the whole world.
 
2014-03-02 09:00:48 AM
Can't think of a single damned reason we should get involved. If the Ukraine wants to call in it's NATO chip, let the french or Poles go over there and fark with Putin.
 
2014-03-02 09:07:50 AM
Heh.  Can't believe the number of hardline nutbags in this thread who think Saint Reagan would have handled it any differently.  Well, let me correct myself.  He would have made a stirring speech full of bluff and bluster on TV, but the actual phone call behind closed doors would have gone exactly the same, maybe even softer.  It's been 60 years of this.  Other than that little moment with missiles in Cuba the US and Russia haven't so much as said an arch word directly to each other at the top.  Diplomat vs diplomat, sure.  Head to head in open session at the UN, occasionally a bit heated.  But head of state talking to head of state?  There's no need.  The fact that the President, no you don't get to dismiss him by just saying 'Obama', The Mother farking President called said everything that needed to be said.  The actual words exchanged didn't matter one single bit.
 
2014-03-02 09:15:15 AM
Wow... you armchair generals are just farking hilarious. You really want to risk American lives and WWIII for the farking Ukraine? Just pretend they are brown people and STFU.
 
2014-03-02 09:32:03 AM
WHITE HOUSE CALLS RUSSIAN OCCUPATION OF WEST WING "UNACCEPTABLE"

President Draws Red Line in the Carpeting After Russian Soldiers Confiscate, Eat His Special Pro-biotic Yogurt

********

REUTERS, Mar. 2, 2014 -- With tensions escalating throughout the White House, the President today spent two hours on the phone with Russian president Vladimir Putin, seeking a peaceful resolution to Russia's occupation of The West Wing, now entering its 168th day.

(Story continues next page)
 
2014-03-02 09:33:21 AM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: Can't think of a single damned reason we should get involved. If the Ukraine wants to call in it's NATO chip, let the french or Poles go over there and fark with Putin.


The '94 treaty was signed by Ukraine, Russia, Britain, and the US. There is no NATO chip Ukraine can call in.
 
2014-03-02 10:58:14 AM
img.fark.net
 
2014-03-02 11:15:40 AM
Remember when this meant something?

img.fark.net
 
2014-03-02 11:16:48 AM

MarkEC: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Can't think of a single damned reason we should get involved. If the Ukraine wants to call in it's NATO chip, let the french or Poles go over there and fark with Putin.

The '94 treaty was signed by Ukraine, Russia, Britain, and the US. There is no NATO chip Ukraine can call in.


Oh well. If Pooty Poot wants to wipe his ass on a treaty, who are we to intervene?  You think we're gonna start a world war over the Ukraine? Not likely.
 
2014-03-02 12:31:54 PM
"Obama could order a show of military support for US allies in eastern Europe through NATO, but wants to avoid a Cold War-style chess match with Moscow."

JFK is rolling in his grave
 
2014-03-02 12:54:30 PM
Obama will let Putin do whatever he wants to do in the area.
Must be part of Obama being 'more flexible' once he was in his second term.

And for those of you trying to say Reagan wouldn't have done anything different, at least Reagan wouldn't have skipped a WH national security council meeting like Obama did.
Obama can't even be bothered to attend a meeting about the issue.
 
2014-03-02 01:09:06 PM

zepher: Obama will let Putin do whatever he wants to do in the area.
Must be part of Obama being 'more flexible' once he was in his second term.


You guys had your chance to vote him out. You couldn't do it.
 
2014-03-02 01:29:39 PM

Wake Up Sheeple: Debeo Summa Credo: Wake Up Sheeple: All right Drew, this is the crap we put up with. The trolls that you say are bad for business. Yet, nothing. It's nice that someone sponsored me, but I'll continue to block your ads and pay you nothing for your site until you start policing this more and keeping to your word.

Waaaah! Someone is disagreeing with me in a debate! drew, ban him!!

/even if you are correct in a debate, such whining is pathetic

Actually, I'm just saying this is the last straw. Drew has actually come out against the trolls, and now I want him to start policing more. Otherwise he's a hypocrite. If he's not going to police it, then he should just say so, and let Fark be another Breitbart site, as this is fast becoming.

People are entitled to their opinions, but this is open trolling. I'm expressing my opinion, and voting with my wallet. I've lurked here for over a decade, and if it has to go back to that, I'm perfectly happy to do so. Interacting was an experiment. Unfortunately, talking about the problem openly is the only way left that I know how to get action on the problem since I've gone through all other channels.

The trolls, the alts, hell, this has happened even worse in TFD and there's no policing, no discipline.

Bottom line: Trolls make Drew money. More clicks, more posts = more ad views.


Actually, from a Farker who's been here for longer than you've been sexually active, it has gotten way more liberal than it used to be and the republican trolls have been cut in half if not decimated.

You are not being trolled so pull you big boy pants up and deal.
 
2014-03-02 01:38:04 PM

zepher: Obama will let Putin do whatever he wants to do in the area.
Must be part of Obama being 'more flexible' once he was in his second term.

And for those of you trying to say Reagan wouldn't have done anything different, at least Reagan wouldn't have skipped a WH national security council meeting like Obama did.
Obama can't even be bothered to attend a meeting about the issue.



You're 12 right?
 
2014-03-02 02:08:34 PM

Wake Up Sheeple: way south: Wake Up Sheeple: way south: So the reset thing still on or what?


gsiofa: Bush didn't involve the U.S. in the Russo-Georgian war in 2008, and a diplomatic effort from France/EU led to a ceasefire. Why should Obama lead the U.S. into war now?


Because, if you make it a habit, your opponent starts to confuse your lengthy diplomacy efforts for simply running away.
He sooner resorts to driving over every border with tanks. This creates bigger diplomatic kerfuffles and the risk of more violence.

/and lets be honest, how much is any promise of security from the west worth if everyone who signs on either dies in a revolt or gets invaded?
/Not saying that nukes are the only answer, but a little saber rattling wouldn't hurt.
/Altho too much could be confused with parkinsons.

For the same reason the USSR backed off and pulled their nukes (and military) from Cuba, the USA needs to not plant itself on another of Russia's borders.

And directly attacking Russia's military? Let's try talking first. Even without nukes, I don't want carrier groups to start sinking in random parts of the world.

If you're afraid that they'll use anti ship weapons they've never tested successfully (much less threatened to use against you) to the point that you can't even pretend you're willing to use force, they'll just keep pushing.

Anti ship weapons, such as carriers, jets, submarines, and missiles? You think Russia is some podunk 3rd World military, slinging arrows and rocks? Holy heck you're naive.


Our "no" doesn't have any meaning behind it.

/Openly allow one encroachment after another
/but suddenly you're miffed when they build an invasion fleet and plant some missiles off of Florida.
/Of course the Kremlin will get confused when you're sending mixed signals all the time.

Telling someone to not do something that is not good, and trying to be diplomatic first, then slowly escalating, is not a good tactic? No one in the world was going to mind if we blew the USSR into a giant smoking super-crater for sneakily putting nukes 90 miles off our coast. Build a consensus, and a coalition. Then start rattling that saber.


Russian military is a joke. Most of their tanks etc were left outside to rust. After their humiliation in their first invasion of Chechnya they held war games to test actual capability and declared to the world afterwards that any hostile action toward them would be met with nuclear retaliation because their conventional forces were useless in larger scale conflicts.

With what we've seen in the Olympics do you think that they magically upgraded their military? Last time I went to buy a field jacket at a military surplus store in Indiana they had sold them all to the Russian army which apparently couldn't source decent cold weather jackets in Russia for less than scouring our small aftermarket outlets for the twenty or so they individually stock and pay for international shipment.

They have one option if the Ukrainian military fights back and that is to go nuclear. The question is if we think Putin will follow through with that. Do the Ukrainians believe Russia would?

What makes me mad is that Russia is being rewarded for previous genocide. That several decades ago people were relocated and their children who grew up citizens of another country are being forced to join Russia in a last-ditch effort to keep Russia relevant.

Of course most of this is our fault. If we'd sent Russia a bunch of civics teachers and spent heavily on open communications and media infrastructure there after the collapse of the Soviet Union, there were a couple of years where this could have been forestalled. But we were content to suck each others' dicks on self-congratulations for having won the Cold War. I saw this in high school. They were asking us for help in building Democratic institutions and we told them they were on their own. Now the world is reaping what we failed to sow because we couldn't be gracious in our "victory." They allowed us to rewire their controls for their nuclear weapons, for heavens sake. But we couldn't bring ourselves to help them in nonmilitary areas even when asked.

Instead we ended up with our own version of the Kremlin (meaning a unified internal federal law enforcement and investigation service and foreign spy service, something we used to be dead set against because it inevitably meant despotism) and a Russia dominated by the old order of autocrats.

So we are back to realpolitik with an adversary whose only feasible military response even in small engagements is nuclear war, which they know we will not risk.

The only way to win that game is not to play but we don't have a choice in that matter.

The military might of Russia rests largely in the one option we will not force them to use.
 
2014-03-02 02:37:44 PM

way south: If you're afraid that they'll use anti ship weapons they've never tested successfully (much less threatened to use against you) to the point that you can't even pretend you're willing to use force, they'll just keep pushing.
Our "no" doesn't have any meaning behind it.


You believe that anything short of threatening all out war is "meaningless"?
See, this is why Eisenhower warned against the military industrial complex.
When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
 
2014-03-02 02:49:08 PM

GDubDub: There is a treaty. It is LAW that we intervene. LAW.


No.  The treaty states:

"The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine ... to respect the Independence and Sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine. "

These are the specific responsibilities that the signatories have:

* Respect Ukrainian independence and sovereignty within its existing borders.
* Refrain from the threat or use of force against Ukraine.
* Refrain from using economic pressure on Ukraine in order to influence its politics.
* Seek United Nations Security Council action if nuclear weapons are used against Ukraine.
* Refrain from the use of nuclear arms against Ukraine.
* Consult with one another if questions arise regarding these commitments.



So NO, it is not at all clear that we have any legal obligation to intervene militarily against Russia.
 
2014-03-02 02:56:56 PM

BolloxReader: They were asking us for help in building Democratic institutions and we told them they were on their own. Now the world is reaping what we failed to sow because we couldn't be gracious in our "victory." They allowed us to rewire their controls for their nuclear weapons, for heavens sake. But we couldn't bring ourselves to help them in nonmilitary areas even when asked.


Why oh why couldn't we learn from the one time we got it right with the Marshall Plan?
The ability to gloat is worth absolutely nothing, especially compared to the difference between having stable and prosperous nation with which to trade goods, and angry, resentful, desperate ones who have a chip on their shoulder and nothing to trade but bombs.
 
2014-03-02 03:08:23 PM

Gawdzila: BolloxReader: They were asking us for help in building Democratic institutions and we told them they were on their own. Now the world is reaping what we failed to sow because we couldn't be gracious in our "victory." They allowed us to rewire their controls for their nuclear weapons, for heavens sake. But we couldn't bring ourselves to help them in nonmilitary areas even when asked.

Why oh why couldn't we learn from the one time we got it right with the Marshall Plan?
The ability to gloat is worth absolutely nothing, especially compared to the difference between having stable and prosperous nation with which to trade goods, and angry, resentful, desperate ones who have a chip on their shoulder and nothing to trade but bombs.


Tscha. Yeah. You know what?

Um ... about that, too.
 
Ral
2014-03-02 03:23:57 PM
There's no such thing as international law.
 
2014-03-02 03:34:42 PM

jmr61: zepher


You're slobbering Barry's cock every night, right?
 
2014-03-02 08:45:38 PM

Wake Up Sheeple: Debeo Summa Credo: Wake Up Sheeple: Debeo Summa Credo: Wake Up Sheeple: All right Drew, this is the crap we put up with. The trolls that you say are bad for business. Yet, nothing. It's nice that someone sponsored me, but I'll continue to block your ads and pay you nothing for your site until you start policing this more and keeping to your word.

Waaaah! Someone is disagreeing with me in a debate! drew, ban him!!

/even if you are correct in a debate, such whining is pathetic

Actually, I'm just saying this is the last straw. Drew has actually come out against the trolls, and now I want him to start policing more. Otherwise he's a hypocrite. If he's not going to police it, then he should just say so, and let Fark be another Breitbart site, as this is fast becoming.

People are entitled to their opinions, but this is open trolling. I'm expressing my opinion, and voting with my wallet. I've lurked here for over a decade, and if it has to go back to that, I'm perfectly happy to do so. Interacting was an experiment. Unfortunately, talking about the problem openly is the only way left that I know how to get action on the problem since I've gone through all other channels.

The trolls, the alts, hell, this has happened even worse in TFD and there's no policing, no discipline.

Bottom line: Trolls make Drew money. More clicks, more posts = more ad views.

At first glance it doesn't sound like he is trolling to me. Not saying he's right, or you are, but you just differ in your views.

The definition of "troll" around here seems to have expanded to "anyone expressing a view to the right of me."

No... the Gish Gallop is troll-behavior. Constantly pretending a point wasn't debunked earlier in the thread, constantly moving the goalposts, bringing up off-topic points, the circular logic, telling people to go to Reddit, etc.. that's not trolling? Huh.. It sure looks like someone who keeps wants a negative response. Classic trolling.

Anyway, see you later.


Crybaby.
 
2014-03-03 06:44:19 AM

zepher: ouldn't have done anything different, at least Reagan wouldn't have skipped a WH national security council meeting like Obama did.
Obama can't even be bothered to attend a meeting about the is


Yeah Reagan would have gone, he just wouldn't have remembered it.
/staff and aides no witch meetings are important I doubt you do.
 
Displayed 44 of 144 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report