What's new
By:

Terror Attack in France, 84 Dead, 50 injured (so far)

Are you seriously trying to move a thread about a terrorist incident that claimed the lives of nearly 100 people in that direction?
 
I'm not certain which is worse between the "just kill'm and that'll fix it" mentality and the "we can't really fix it so let's do nothing about all the killing."
 
Dr. Jones said:
I'm not certain which is worse between the "just kill'm and that'll fix it" mentality and the "we can't really fix it so let's do nothing about all the killing."
Click to expand...
I understand why you're saying that, but America used to act so much more confidently. I know which approach I prefer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfKGUF9uDxU
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
I understand why you're saying that, but America used to act so much more confidently. I know which approach I prefer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfKGUF9uDxU
Click to expand...


I'm sure Obama blaming Benghazi on "not remembering" would've gone over real well with your kind. Maybe democrats should waste millions and spend years investigating Iranian contra? Where's the emails errr transcripts for that?

Raygun's foreign policy, like his economic policy, and not all too different from the GOP, was a lot of hot air zero substance.

You need to read some history. From the Middle East to Central America. Get informed! But I know you won't.
 
The Thriller said:
I'm sure Obama blaming Benghazi on "not remembering" would've gone over real well with your kind. Maybe democrats should waste millions and spend years investigating Iranian contra? Where's the emails errr transcripts for that?

Raygun's foreign policy, like his economic policy, and not all too different from the GOP, was a lot of hot air zero substance.

You need to read some history. From the Middle East to Central America. Get informed! But I know you won't.
Click to expand...
Hot air and zero substance foreign policy took down the Berlin Wall? I'll take it!

People with a liberal bias are looking for (and positively respond to) a different sort of leadership than people with a conservative bias. Shocker.
 
Siro said:
Please stop responding to Boris.
Click to expand...

Dr. Jones said:
I'm not certain which is worse between the "just kill'm and that'll fix it" mentality and the "we can't really fix it so let's do nothing about all the killing."
Click to expand...

That is cause you do not understand war from a educated war general like I do. I have a philosophy in life that you make people responsible for there actions an you force them to do what you tell them to. It is just like with children. You want them to grow up an become good, respectable, hard working contributors to society or you want them to be complainy spoilt liberal brats?

War is the same. Destroy them, take away all there toys, put them in timeout an tell them exactly how they need to act!

We have become to soft an tolerant of bad behaviour. The liberals tell us we need to pacify. How well has that worked sense WWII?
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
Hot air and zero substance foreign policy took down the Berlin Wall? I'll take it!

People with a liberal bias are looking for (and positively respond to) a different sort of leadership than people with a conservative bias. Shocker.
Click to expand...

Hmmm no.

Soviet Russia was heading towards disaster long before Reagan was even inaugurated.
 
The skyrocketing price of oil in the mid to late 70s helped to prolong the lagging and outdated Soviet economy until the bubble burst and the price dropped like a rock in the 1980s.

Furthermore, worker productivity, technology, and quality of life had been dragging for decades. Reagan's own cabinet were surprised to see how bad off the Soviets were in Terms of health care and life expectancy. What good are nukes when your own county is rotting from the inside?

Lastly, the decade long Soviet-Afghan War took a tremendous toll. It's regarded by most historians as the most powerful factor at diminishing Soviet morale and draining resources away from the economy.

So yay. Reagan made a few speeches and increased defense funding.

But the vast majority of historians agree that the Soviet Union wouldn't have continued for more than a decade longer anyway.

Reagan merely pushed the diseased, and dying old man off a cliff.

The backwards Soviet government, the decades of stagnation, the lower oil prices, and the afghan war is what aged the man, infected him, and led him to the cliff.
 
Obama at a press conference vs Reagan in an Oval Office announcement

apples vs oranges
 
Dr. Jones said:
I'm not certain which is worse between the "just kill'm and that'll fix it" mentality and the "we can't really fix it so let's do nothing about all the killing."
Click to expand...

It's kind of the same with guns - between the "we need more guns and that'll fix it" mentality and "we can't do anything so let's do nothing" isn't it?!
 
moevillini said:
It's kind of the same with guns - between the "we need more guns and that'll fix it" mentality and "we can't do anything so let's do nothing" isn't it?!
Click to expand...

I haven't heard the "we need more guns" argument.
I get what you're saying though and, sure, I guess it is.
 
Dr. Jones said:
I haven't heard the "we need more guns" argument.
I get what you're saying though and, sure, I guess it is.
Click to expand...

I think she's referring, broadly, to arguments that increase the presence of guns (like arming teachers) and good guys with guns stop bad guys with guns.
 
Dr. Jones said:
I haven't heard the "we need more guns" argument.
I get what you're saying though and, sure, I guess it is.
Click to expand...
I have heard people say that if more good guys (whatever that means) had guns then we would be safer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top