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.

(Talking Points Memo)   Bobby Jindal: 'Obama's a moron for not waging war against Russia'   (talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 160
    More: Unlikely, Bobby Jindal, President Obama, Russia, Sen. John McCain, intelligence  
•       •       •

1961 clicks; posted to Politics » on 10 Mar 2014 at 1:27 PM (32 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-10 02:07:42 PM  

hiker9999: meat0918: Obama's affection for the movie the Princess Bride is widely known.

Plus, we're already involved in one land war in Asia, why on god's green Earth would we get involved in another?

I think we should hold off on invading Russia....until wintertime.  Wintertime invasions of Russia always end well, right?


Do you really believe that A: if we went to war it would be fought on the ground not with drones and planes and B: Russia would stand a chance even if we did?
 
2014-03-10 02:08:18 PM  
DJ Kittypie here, bringin' electronica to soothe your pissed cats and rustled jimmys, featuring...the infamous TFH.
 
2014-03-10 02:09:12 PM  
It is disturbing seeing  GOP leaders say shiat that i have said while trolling and thought  "wow.. i really pushed it too far this time. it's obvious!"
 
2014-03-10 02:09:37 PM  
While the president of Russia is using military force to invade neighboring countries, our president is reducing the size of our military

I know, right? Why can't we have a bold decisive leader like Putin? What good is having the largest military in the world if we can't use it to invade our neighbors? Why won't Obama annex Toronto???
 
2014-03-10 02:09:54 PM  

SpectroBoy: Up until now I though maybe Jindal was partially sane.

Just another GOP partisan hack I guess.



This incident ...

wonkroom.thinkprogress.org

...demonstrated all anyone needs to know about the man's capability for sane, rational judgment.
 
2014-03-10 02:12:14 PM  
I'm having trouble imagining a scenario where a war between the US and Russia is winnable by either side without one side or the other resorting to nuclear weapons.
 
2014-03-10 02:12:35 PM  
for f*ck sake.
 
2014-03-10 02:12:51 PM  
content.internetvideoarchive.com

wwwdelivery.superstock.com
 
2014-03-10 02:13:34 PM  

rynthetyn: I'm having trouble imagining a scenario where a war between the US and Russia is winnable by either side without one side or the other resorting to nuclear weapons.


You haven't seen War Games, have you?
 
2014-03-10 02:14:00 PM  
...In an editorial for National Review...

LOL
 
2014-03-10 02:16:49 PM  
Actually I could see Jindal as a VP choice.

He could be the next Dan Quayle.
 
2014-03-10 02:17:43 PM  

nmrsnr: rynthetyn: I'm having trouble imagining a scenario where a war between the US and Russia is winnable by either side without one side or the other resorting to nuclear weapons.

You haven't seen War Games, have you?


Not a great idea. I bet Putin is really good at Tic-Tac-Toe.
 
2014-03-10 02:19:34 PM  

ecmoRandomNumbers: I bet Putin is really good at Tic-Tac-Toe.


Of course he is...you mark an X in the center square, and his O from the square on the right just invades yours.
 
2014-03-10 02:19:52 PM  

ScaryBottles: SpectroBoy: Up until now I though maybe Jindal was partially sane.

[i.imgur.com image 500x203]


Which US senator is that again? He was in the first movie too, but was a governor at the time, i believe.
 
2014-03-10 02:20:56 PM  

whidbey: Actually I could see Jindal as a VP choice.

He could be the next Dan Quayle.


Cruz/Jindal 2016!
 
2014-03-10 02:24:43 PM  

Smoking GNU: ScaryBottles: SpectroBoy: Up until now I though maybe Jindal was partially sane.

[i.imgur.com image 500x203]

Which US senator is that again? He was in the first movie too, but was a governor at the time, i believe.


Patrick Leahy
 
2014-03-10 02:25:52 PM  

rynthetyn: I'm having trouble imagining a scenario where a war between the US and Russia is winnable by either side without one side or the other resorting to nuclear weapons.


This isn't a war plan! Its just some sort of horrible spasm!
 
2014-03-10 02:26:21 PM  

Ned Stark: meat0918: Obama's affection for the movie the Princess Bride is widely known.

Plus, we're already involved in one land war in Asia, why on god's green Earth would we get involved in another?

The Ukraine is in Europe.


For some reason, I thought the Ural's cut through Ukraine.

You can see how much I've been paying attention to the geopolitical dick waving going on.
 
2014-03-10 02:26:52 PM  
This is absurd. All the GOP talking faces complain that the president is being weak and indecisive. But not a single one of them offers anything remotely specific about what they would have him do. Even a halfwit who is barely paying attention can see the flaw there.
 
2014-03-10 02:29:43 PM  

meat0918: Ned Stark: meat0918: Obama's affection for the movie the Princess Bride is widely known.

Plus, we're already involved in one land war in Asia, why on god's green Earth would we get involved in another?

The Ukraine is in Europe.

For some reason, I thought the Ural's cut through Ukraine.

You can see how much I've been paying attention to the geopolitical dick waving going on.


No, even before the Soviets moved all those countries west after ww2 they didn't quite.
 
2014-03-10 02:32:10 PM  

stamped human bacon: lilbjorn: offmymeds: Apparently Bobby wants to see the world revert back to the days of the Cold War.

It's good for the 1%, which is the only constituency the GOP gives a shiat about.

I would have thought the days of the Cold War were actually much better for the middle class.  Hmm.


The days of the Cold War were better for a good portion of the middle class, but the Cold War itself has nothing to do with that.  War overwhelmingly benefits the rich at the expense of the taxpayers.

http://www.fas.org/man/smedley.htm
 
2014-03-10 02:34:41 PM  

Ned Stark: meat0918: Ned Stark: meat0918: Obama's affection for the movie the Princess Bride is widely known.

Plus, we're already involved in one land war in Asia, why on god's green Earth would we get involved in another?

The Ukraine is in Europe.

For some reason, I thought the Ural's cut through Ukraine.

You can see how much I've been paying attention to the geopolitical dick waving going on.

No, even before the Soviets moved all those countries west after ww2 they didn't quite.


Honest to goodness, I had Ukraine's location confused with Turkmenistan.

My geography teacher would be crushed.
 
2014-03-10 02:42:29 PM  

Kittypie070: Stuff it up your ass, Piyush.


Which is the actual sound produced when stuffing things up one's ass.
 
2014-03-10 02:43:43 PM  

rynthetyn: I'm having trouble imagining a scenario where a war between the US and Russia is winnable by either side without one side or the other resorting to nuclear weapons.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditu re s

I think the U.S. will be just fine. We spend literally almost seven times as much as they do. There are literally dozens of inroads to attack Russia from and they have to defend a vastly larger territory to defend with far fewer resources. They have more people to keep fed and safe. Technologically we're decades ahead of them and much better equipped. Thats all before we factor in our greatest trade partner who just happens to live right next door and have numerically the largest army in the world and little compunction about sending them into a meat grinder. If you think China will risk its fragile economic gains by allowing us to engage in a costly and destructive military conflict that we could potentially lose (as unlikely as that may be) you don't know much about economics.

If Russia launches thats a whole ballgame. Do think China will sit still for your little pin up's temper tantrum when it opens the door to the U.S. letting our shiat fly all over Asia? I'm not sure if you're aware of this but they have both air and wind in Asia so China has a vested interest in preventing us from nuking the shiat out of Russia. No cubby if China catches even a hint of the N word Putin will take a nasty fall down the stairs, after he accidentally ingested 1000% of a lethal dose of rat poison just before he shot himself in the face six or seven times while cleaning his rifle.

/sorry everyone but I'm sick of monday morning quarterbacks dousing their drawers over a war that isn't going to happen.
 
2014-03-10 02:44:10 PM  
He added, "I think the administration has correctly sent word to Moscow, this is not acceptable."

Huh?
 
2014-03-10 02:46:15 PM  

someonelse: This is absurd. All the GOP talking faces complain that the president is being weak and indecisive. But not a single one of them offers anything remotely specific about what they would have him do. Even a halfwit who is barely paying attention can see the flaw there.


That's the plan.  If you're Obama, you can't defend against their nothingness.
 
2014-03-10 02:47:35 PM  

ScaryBottles: rynthetyn: I'm having trouble imagining a scenario where a war between the US and Russia is winnable by either side without one side or the other resorting to nuclear weapons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditu re s

I think the U.S. will be just fine. We spend literally almost seven times as much as they do. There are literally dozens of inroads to attack Russia from and they have to defend a vastly larger territory to defend with far fewer resources. They have more people to keep fed and safe. Technologically we're decades ahead of them and much better equipped. Thats all before we factor in our greatest trade partner who just happens to live right next door and have numerically the largest army in the world and little compunction about sending them into a meat grinder. If you think China will risk its fragile economic gains by allowing us to engage in a costly and destructive military conflict that we could potentially lose (as unlikely as that may be) you don't know much about economics.

If Russia launches thats a whole ballgame. Do think China will sit still for your little pin up's temper tantrum when it opens the door to the U.S. letting our shiat fly all over Asia? I'm not sure if you're aware of this but they have both air and wind in Asia so China has a vested interest in preventing us from nuking the shiat out of Russia. No cubby if China catches even a hint of the N word Putin will take a nasty fall down the stairs, after he accidentally ingested 1000% of a lethal dose of rat poison just before he shot himself in the face six or seven times while cleaning his rifle.

/sorry everyone but I'm sick of monday morning quarterbacks dousing their drawers over a war that isn't going to happen.


//Proofreading
 
2014-03-10 02:52:22 PM  

rynthetyn: I'm having trouble imagining a scenario where a war between the US and Russia is winnable by either side without one side or the other resorting to nuclear weapons.


You've clearly never read Red Storm Rising.
 
2014-03-10 02:53:11 PM  
img.fark.net
 
2014-03-10 03:02:39 PM  

Cagey B: President Jindal would have put on his finest luchador garb and grabbed the first plane to Moscow. Upon his arrival, he would have personally driven Putin from the Crimea with his signature Creationist Cockpunch and Volcanic Indian Burn moves.


Nah, he would've asked a Catholic priest to perform an exorcism on Putin.
 
2014-03-10 03:02:40 PM  
Dear GOP,

Russia is NOT a 2nd rate middle east dictator with 3rd rate military tech.  It is a nuclear armed nation with the ability to send 100's to the US in less than 30 minutes.  If it comes to war, the US as you know it will be over, along with Russia and pretty much the entire planet.  Go away and let the grown-ups try to work this out before the gop tries to kill us all.
 
2014-03-10 03:07:09 PM  

dr_blasto: whidbey: Actually I could see Jindal as a VP choice.

He could be the next Dan Quayle.

Cruz/Jindal 2016!


There you go. Book(mark) it.
 
2014-03-10 03:07:58 PM  

jntaylor63: Dear GOP,

Russia is NOT a 2nd rate middle east dictator with 3rd rate military tech.  It is a nuclear armed nation with the ability to send 100's to the US in less than 30 minutes.  If it comes to war, the US as you know it will be over, along with Russia and pretty much the entire planet.  Go away and let the grown-ups try to work this out before the gop tries to kill us all.


www.blogcdn.com
 
2014-03-10 03:10:43 PM  

Arkanaut: I guess this would technically be a land war in Europe, but this is still a bad idea.


Nuts.  Everyone knows you can invade Russia any time and it will be over by Christmas.
 
2014-03-10 03:21:08 PM  
If the White House receives a 3:00 AM call for a commander-in-chief to give the OK to waste $220 million dollars with the construction of sand berms, by GOD do I want a President Bobby Jindal to be the one to accept that call.
 
2014-03-10 03:24:06 PM  

Arkanaut: I guess this would technically be a land war in Europe, but this is still a bad idea.


You are aware that adage comes from the book The Princess Bride yes? Its not cribbed from like The Art of War or The Book of the Five Rings or something. It comes from a fantasy/comedy novel and was said by a person who learned the hard way a few pages later he wasn't as smart as he thought he was. So can we give it a rest already.
 
2014-03-10 03:24:39 PM  

Raoul Eaton: Arkanaut: I guess this would technically be a land war in Europe, but this is still a bad idea.

Nuts.  Everyone knows you can invade Russia any time and it will be over by Christmas.


You know who else ... nevermind.
 
2014-03-10 03:29:57 PM  

Arkanaut: Raoul Eaton: Arkanaut: I guess this would technically be a land war in Europe, but this is still a bad idea.

Nuts.  Everyone knows you can invade Russia any time and it will be over by Christmas.

You know who else ... nevermind.



Napoleon?  I just know you were about to say "Napoleon."  Right?
 
2014-03-10 03:31:08 PM  

ScaryBottles: Arkanaut: I guess this would technically be a land war in Europe, but this is still a bad idea.

You are aware that adage comes from the book The Princess Bride yes? Its not cribbed from like The Art of War or The Book of the Five Rings or something. It comes from a fantasy/comedy novel and was said by a person who learned the hard way a few pages later he wasn't as smart as he thought he was. So can we give it a rest already.


It was supposedly said by Douglas MacArthur. After the Korean War, he urged the United States to avoid land wars in Asia.

Of course, he also found out later that he wasn't as smart as he thought he was.
 
2014-03-10 03:31:38 PM  
ScaryBottles: Arkanaut: I guess this would technically be a land war in Europe, but this is still a bad idea.
You are aware that adage comes from the book The Princess Bride yes? Its not cribbed from like The Art of War or The Book of the Five Rings or something. It comes from a fantasy/comedy novel and was said by a person who learned the hard way a few pages later he wasn't as smart as he thought he was. So can we give it a rest already.


I still think William Goldman meant it as a RISK reference.
 
2014-03-10 03:32:14 PM  
Jesus, do these people get migraines or something if we don't go to war every 2 1/2 years, or what? Maybe he's start bleeding profusely through his eyeballs? I don't know, but I'm starting to think that it would be worth it to lock him in a room with nothing but Doom and Gloom FauxNews 24/7 with their 'Nothing But Ukraine' special, and see how long until his head explodes... Then maybe we go ahead and draw a line in the sand... With his body.

www.esplatter.com
 
2014-03-10 03:32:17 PM  

gas giant: Kittypie070: Stuff it up your ass, Piyush.

Which is the actual sound produced when stuffing things up one's ass.


So what if he ever pulls his head out of his ass? What sound would that make...?
 
2014-03-10 03:33:39 PM  
ScaryBottles: ScaryBottles: rynthetyn: I'm having trouble imagining a scenario where a war between the US and Russia is winnable by either side without one side or the other resorting to nuclear weapons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditu re s

I think the U.S. will be just fine. We spend literally almost seven times as much as they do. There are literally dozens of inroads to attack Russia from and they have to defend a vastly larger territory to defend with far fewer resources. They have more people to keep fed and safe.  .

.
Oh Dear God.  There are actually people who believe this?

No, they don't have anybody who they need to keep fed and safe.  During WWII, they lost 30 million people to starvation.  They simply don't care about that.

And territory?  Who gives a rat's ass about that?  This isn't Risk.

You can send lots of bombers and drones to kill all the civilians you want. It won't even slow them down.  It'll be Afghanistan except 10 times as big, 100 times the army, and winters that make Afghanistan look like Disneyland.  The more you bomb them, the more stubborn they'll become.  They'll resort to nukes almost immediately, and if those fail they'll switch to terrorism.  With suitcase nukes.

The only people who would risk all out war with Russia are are authoritarians hoping that this will turn the U.S. into Nazi Germany and idiots who think that using bombs on Russia will somehow prevent New York and Kansas City from being turned into piles of glowing rubble.

The only way to win a war against Russia is to make it so destructive that the will do anything to have it stop.  The Germans tried that and they failed.   We could kill ten million people and it would just make them more obstinate.

Read a book or two on WWII, and see if it helps you understand what it would take to conquer Russia.
 
2014-03-10 03:35:20 PM  

ScaryBottles: Arkanaut: I guess this would technically be a land war in Europe, but this is still a bad idea.

You are aware that adage comes from the book The Princess Bride yes? Its not cribbed from like The Art of War or The Book of the Five Rings or something. It comes from a fantasy/comedy novel and was said by a person who learned the hard way a few pages later he wasn't as smart as he thought he was. So can we give it a rest already.


So... war in Asia good?
 
2014-03-10 03:36:33 PM  

whidbey: Get back to us when you know what volcanoes are and what they do, Bobby.

And we would not want a failure in you in office with access to air strikes.


How the fark did I miss THAT one? Seriously, I would bet that even Sarah Palin can understand why we would 'monitor' volcanoes.
 
2014-03-10 03:41:23 PM  

MrBallou: ScaryBottles: Arkanaut: I guess this would technically be a land war in Europe, but this is still a bad idea.

You are aware that adage comes from the book The Princess Bride yes? Its not cribbed from like The Art of War or The Book of the Five Rings or something. It comes from a fantasy/comedy novel and was said by a person who learned the hard way a few pages later he wasn't as smart as he thought he was. So can we give it a rest already.

It was supposedly said by Douglas MacArthur. After the Korean War, he urged the United States to avoid land wars in Asia.

Of course, he also found out later that he wasn't as smart as he thought he was.

Wikiquote has that listed as unsourced and considering you are the first I've ever heard attribute it to McArthur (bear in mind I'm not implying you're a derp) I'm taking the whole thing with a grain of salt. There are tons of people who attribute the whole idea we only use 10% of our brain to Einstein or claim that Charles Darwin repudiated all his theories on his deathbed.
www.fbcomics.com
 
2014-03-10 03:43:27 PM  

Arkanaut: ScaryBottles: Arkanaut: I guess this would technically be a land war in Europe, but this is still a bad idea.

You are aware that adage comes from the book The Princess Bride yes? Its not cribbed from like The Art of War or The Book of the Five Rings or something. It comes from a fantasy/comedy novel and was said by a person who learned the hard way a few pages later he wasn't as smart as he thought he was. So can we give it a rest already.

So... war in Asia good?


No but nice try sweetie.... Land war in Asia no more of a clusterfark than anywhere else.
 
2014-03-10 03:46:49 PM  

ScaryBottles: claim that Charles Darwin repudiated all his theories on his deathbed


My all-time favorite deathbed story is the one where Voltaire, asked by a priest to renounce Satan, replied "Now is not the time for making new enemies".
 
2014-03-10 03:47:33 PM  

The Jami Turman Fan Club: ScaryBottles: ScaryBottles: rynthetyn: I'm having trouble imagining a scenario where a war between the US and Russia is winnable by either side without one side or the other resorting to nuclear weapons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditu re s

I think the U.S. will be just fine. We spend literally almost seven times as much as they do. There are literally dozens of inroads to attack Russia from and they have to defend a vastly larger territory to defend with far fewer resources. They have more people to keep fed and safe.  .

.Oh Dear God.  There are actually people who believe this?

No, they don't have anybody who they need to keep fed and safe.  During WWII, they lost 30 million people to starvation.  They simply don't care about that.

And territory?  Who gives a rat's ass about that?  This isn't Risk.

You can send lots of bombers and drones to kill all the civilians you want. It won't even slow them down.  It'll be Afghanistan except 10 times as big, 100 times the army, and winters that make Afghanistan look like Disneyland.  The more you bomb them, the more stubborn they'll become.  They'll resort to nukes almost immediately, and if those fail they'll switch to terrorism.  With suitcase nukes.

The only people who would risk all out war with Russia are are authoritarians hoping that this will turn the U.S. into Nazi Germany and idiots who think that using bombs on Russia will somehow prevent New York and Kansas City from being turned into piles of glowing rubble.

The only way to win a war against Russia is to make it so destructive that the will do anything to have it stop.  The Germans tried that and they failed.   We could kill ten million people and it would just make them more obstinate.

Read a book or two on WWII, and see if it helps you understand what it would take to conquer Russia.


Do you not see how this situation might be different than WWII? If not then I'm not the one who needs to crack a book super patriot. Also I guess you missed the part where I said this war is never going to happen.
 
2014-03-10 03:48:02 PM  

Kittypie070: gas giant: Kittypie070: Stuff it up your ass, Piyush.

Which is the actual sound produced when stuffing things up one's ass.

So what if he ever pulls his head out of his ass? What sound would that make...?


Bobby
 
Displayed 50 of 160 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report