Scotty, BS. The government of Poland has changed and is also part of the EU. They don’t care for the ham-fisted “my way or the high way” diplomacy of 43. Get out of Po Dunk Union or where ever and see a little of the world.
@ HQ: I never quite understood it, myself; but I will tell you what I think. Bush Jr. was selling the shield as a protection from any missiles launched by Iran, but that made no sense. If Iran did get nukes (I’m still not convinced it wants to) and wanted to hit anything it would be Israel, not Poland, the Czech Republic, Germany or the like. If you put it a missile defense system against rogue states in the Middle East, it should be in Turkey, the Balkans, or the Caucasus.
If anything, imo the system was more of a measure against Russia, instead. The Russians were pissed, as the US was effectively trying to negate their missile potential. Now, you may think that’s a good thing (though I doubt many Americans would be happy if the Russians put on a battery of S-400s in Cuba, Canada, and Mexico), but there was an old doctrine from the Cold war called MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction. Basically, it went ” If you bomb me, I bomb you, we’re both screwed, so let’s not do it.” More paranoid Russians maybe thought the US could, if it came to that, attack them without repercussions.
IMO the Russians were just sensitive against anyone hedging them in, geopolitically, just like the whole situation with the NATO expansion in Ukraine and the Caucasus. The EU was kinda edgy about the entire thing. I don’t think anyone seriously believed the shield was needed, much less against Iran. Technically it could work in case of a conflict with Russia, and maybe get them to be a little less aggressive, but I think it was more likely to backfire and just PO Moscow. Mind you, when Russia is PO’d enough it takes it out in other ways - such as stopping natural gas deliveries during the winter, which happened just last year.
wolski2, You think ! Gee an awful lot happens out there and one can learn alot. More than most history books in po-dunk union texas, or where ever, teach.
In actuality: “Well, we can theoretically put up a privacy screen so that nobody can see Mr. Eastern Europe naked, but we’ve never actually figured out how to hang it up. Give us a few billion more and we might figure out how to attach the rings to the curtain.”
The system was designed to protect the entire western hemisphere, and Western and formerly Socialist Europe. The positioning of the radars in Czech republic and missiles in Poland was dictated by possible trajectories of the missiles from Iran and/or North Korea, or anywhere in the East. Many in those countries feared that they would become the targets in an attempt to destroy the systems, which is why the majority of population of those countries opposed the placement of the systems.
Russia vehemently opposed the systems for a variety of reasons, though certainly not because they didn’t expect it to be effective. The main issue was geopolitical - they regard Eastern Europe as theirs - given to them by Yalta Agreement.
The assertion that the system is being ‘replaced’ with a more modern one, designed for shorter range missiles, is a blatant lie!!! The short range missile defense systems have existed and been continually developing for decades, and have been deployed in various theaters, including Desert Storm I, and etc. Indeed, when North Koreans were testing the last batch of rockets, a mobile defense shield has been deployed near Hawaii.
New intelligence? Is this the same ‘intelligence’ community that told us with absolute certainty about the Iraq’s WMD’s; missed the fall of European Communism; was surprised by North Korean progress on their nuclear weaponry?
If 0bama had gotten from the Russians something of value, as for example and unwavering support to prevent Iran from going nuclear, then the deployment of the ballistic missile shield could be reviewed - but even then I would not scrap it - trust but verify.
The only question is, why Gates, the lone GW holdover has gone so far out to say that it was his suggestion to scrap the system. I suspect that he is not looking at it from a geopolitical perspective, but rather as a purely military commander having to deal with severe budgetary constrains.
“It may look like Obama is losing checkers with the Middle eastern bad guys but hopefully we as the world are winning the chess match. That is what I have to believe in order to sleep at night.”
I hate to interfere with your good sleep but the sad fact is that the 0 befriends America’s enemies and punishes our friends, just as Carter did.
You seem to believe that US ought to kiss bleeep of any enemy so-long as it does not impact / involve ……… … .?
ps: For the Russians to invade the Czech Republic, they would have to cross / invade at least two other countries, unless they could recreate the August 21st of 1968.
Oldlegodad: You’d best direct your DA comment at Ramirez because it’s his cartoon that is being questioned.The ‘toon is saying Eastern Europe will be be defenceless by removing this missile defence shield.
Why does Ramirez think it specifically leaves Eastern Europe unprotected? From whom and from what exactly?
By the way, why does the US populance continue to think it is altruism remaining in Europe protecting poor, defenceless Europe?
Shouldn’t those lazy arsed Europeans defend their own continent?
Czechoslovakia has some experience with being sold by the West as a chattel:
Munich, to the peace loving Nazis - for “peace in our time”.
Yalta, to the peace loving Soviets and 60-year bondage.
Ramirez is not wrong: “The system was designed to protect the entire western hemisphere, and Western and formerly Socialist Europe.”
More importantly however is the geopolitical effect of the physical disconnection - the liquidation of US presence in Czech Republic and Poland, which gives the Russians a major victory.
That said though, I agree that the Western Europe has ridden our defense chuchu train for far too long - they have the means and reasons to put up … .but they tald the adored 0, no … .
Hungary also has experience with being sold out by the west- like Dwight Eisenhower.(1956)
The other factor I alluded to is many articles in “Aviation Week” that show Gates/Obama/and the Joint Chiefs are supporting the most EFFECTIVE method, which also happens to be CHEAPER than the Bush “plan”.
There is wisdom in keeping your friends close, and your enemies closer- if we don’t understand them, or talk to them, we’re inserting the knife in our own backs, which is exactly what Reagan, Bush 41 and 43 did.
Arrogance is a bad defense when your inside the bear, tiger, or behind the eight ball.
Your power of comprehension and grasp of issues you insist on writing about is way too advanced for my limited intellect, so forgive me, but I rather have a talk with your dog.
Machado, it’s not hard at all to keep up. I read all the editorials here, and the ones from the right tend to hit the same few notes over and over. It’s not like we’re trying to hum along with Bach here … more like Mozart … “Twinkle Twinkle Little Star”, that is.
“That was a direct consequence of the aforementioned Yalta Agreement, cooked up against the warnings of Churchill, by your beloved FDR.”
By then the Cold war was in full force, the Berlin blockade had come and went, there had been a war in Korea, and the US and the USSR were anything but friendly.
We don’t know what passed through Eisenhower’s head, but I very much doubt he gave a rat’s bum for Yalta. More likely he didn’t think it was something going to war over.
As for this system, Iran has no need to target Poland or Czechoslovakia in the near future. If it wants to hit NATO bases, Greece, Turkey and the Balkans are much nearer. Of course, it has things closer to home to keep in mind. And North Korea - do you honestly think that if it ever launched missiles it would be to Europe? Give me a break. The way the missile system was put would have meant little for any short/medium-range Iranian missiles, and done nothing about North Korea. Now, Russia - then it would have mattered. Apparently Obama does not see the wisdom in alienating Russia over something as vague as that. Good on him.
“0 befriends America’s enemies and punishes our friends, just as Carter did.”
You have a very interesting definition of “befriend”. Bush refused to talk to Iran and North Korea - fat lot of good it did him, or all of us.
Peter, it has also been said (although far less often), that a rightist is defined by feelings - mostly fear and anger - over reality or facts, i.e. the volcanic outbursts of rage driven by fear of non-existent “death panels” (or any of the other imminent forms of doom Obama is allegedly bringing down the pike).
And it has been said even less often, unfortunately, that it’s best not to indulge in generalizations when discussing groups of millions of discrete individuals each with their own rational / emotional balances.
“… the of rage driven by fear of non-existent “death panels” (or any of the other imminent forms of doom Obama is allegedly bringing down the pike).”
Is this intellectually honest?
“volcanic outbursts” - there was not a single arrest for disorderly conduct at the DC anti 0bama protests, which is interesting to note, whether there were 60k or 1.5 million people there. Which is of course exactly what you would expect from a like gathering of leftists, right?
Peter, comparing arrest statistics at protest rallies is hardly a reliable statistical gauge of the respective emotional stability of the many millions who label themselves “right” or “left”.
The leftist with the Bush as Hitler T-shirt who smashes a window and the rightist with the Obama as Hitler T-shirt who limits himself to screaming himself hoarse are both being driven by similar out-of-whack emotions.
It’s just that it’s not illegal to scream yourself hoarse at a protest rally.
scottfreitas
You really think he’d send t he F-22? I’d think he’d find an old ghost graveyard and re-build some P-51’s and maybe a few P-47’s for defense.
parkersinthehouse
You are the perfect example. You liberals (maybe not you directly) expect we conservatives to show your boy Obama respect as president, when you’ yourselves, can not show Bush any respect as president or even former president. Also you and Obama need to remember this past election was between Obama and McCain, not Bush.
McCain’s only saving grace was that he actually made dubya look nearly innocent and thoughtful, rather than bissfully ignorant and arrogant. Well, that, and he proved that the picking of running mates, regardless of public promise of intention, can and will change, determined by statistical realities, and without care to the ultimate outcome of choice. Regan did the same, when he promised not to choose Bush (meaning Bush the secret society AND CIA member, not the failed alcoholic oilman wanna be doughnut maneuvering reservist to whom I see here some would demand we should respect simply because he managed to get into yet another job he was clearly at a loss as to know how to handle.) I’m not a leftist by the way…I’m a realist. And really…trickle-down ecosystems are no worse or better than that trickle-down theory put into practice was helping the system of economics. Give someone, regardless of party line, race, age, or otherwise, a CHANCE to try to fix at least 8 years of debt, fear, and utter despair in what was once a place for opportunity. Let SOMEONE TRY and regain the lost respect and care that was ours, here in the US, before personal and private agendas re-thought this country’s efforts and intentions, at least totally by the beginning of the millennium.
SPDworks
First off, you are a leftist, I don’t care what you call yourself.
Then you call McCain ignorant and arrogant??? Yet you seem to like Obama? He is more arrogant then any president EVER.
Your mentality worries me. Give someone a chance because they are nothing like Bush is what I am getting for you.
BTW You are another liberal leftist that insults Bush. Further backing me up when I say, you liberals (maybe not YOU directly) expect us to show Obama respect and you never show Bush respect yourselves?
Hypocrites!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@mytinytown - “He is more arrogant then any president EVER.”
Quite the outburst. Care to offer facts on how a magna bleeep laude Harvard graduate is “ignorant?” Because just as you can claim he is ignorant, SPD could call that anyone else. And vice versa - I don’t have much of an opinion on McCain’s intelligence, myself.
@ Petergrt - I don’t care much for appelations. I gave what I consider my objective opinion, I don’t know where you saw any “feelings.” If you think that your reality is more accurate than my own, be my guest. Now, you told me that a missile shield in Poland is any use against North Korea, and I find your opinion rather unrealistic. Same for Iran - Poland or Hungary is far from the best place to put a missile system if it’s Iran you are worried about. Now, if you want to debate whether putting a missile system against Russia is a good idea, sure.
Churchill, it only sounds moronic if you can’t (or won’t) grasp the concept that any two equally unhinged people won’t necessarily act out in an equal fashion. If one of them does something to get himself arrested, it doesn’t make the other one any less unhinged.
I fully acknowledge the loonies on my side of the spectrum. You appear to be in denial about your own. These things happen when you insist on seeing “the other side” as a monolith instead of a group of individuals.
I’ll be sure to notify the APA of your radical new approach of using property damage at protests as a key indicator in diagnosing degrees of mental illness.
ChuckTrent64 almost 15 years ago
Dumb point, telling only half the truth.
believecommonsense almost 15 years ago
^ if it’s a half truth, that’s twice as much as Ramirez usually musters.
HUMPHRIES almost 15 years ago
Scotty, BS. The government of Poland has changed and is also part of the EU. They don’t care for the ham-fisted “my way or the high way” diplomacy of 43. Get out of Po Dunk Union or where ever and see a little of the world.
rowemnmike almost 15 years ago
Dear GOComics,
I am disabled with restricted mobility. Shopping on the Web; learning on the Web, and now I have discovered gocomics. Thank you for the smiles!Mike (rowemnmike)
Doreen Rice Premium Member almost 15 years ago
The bleeep 43 wnted to install in Czech and Poland does not even work.
What is being deployed works and has much more firepower.
Try looking at the facts instead of reacting in tired lazy way of neocons.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#32905502
parkersinthehouse almost 15 years ago
oh misguided ramirez
sabre rattling bring it on dubya you meddled in poland and russia iran and iraq we gotta attack t’il finally somebody shut upya
4uk4ata almost 15 years ago
@ HQ: I never quite understood it, myself; but I will tell you what I think. Bush Jr. was selling the shield as a protection from any missiles launched by Iran, but that made no sense. If Iran did get nukes (I’m still not convinced it wants to) and wanted to hit anything it would be Israel, not Poland, the Czech Republic, Germany or the like. If you put it a missile defense system against rogue states in the Middle East, it should be in Turkey, the Balkans, or the Caucasus.
If anything, imo the system was more of a measure against Russia, instead. The Russians were pissed, as the US was effectively trying to negate their missile potential. Now, you may think that’s a good thing (though I doubt many Americans would be happy if the Russians put on a battery of S-400s in Cuba, Canada, and Mexico), but there was an old doctrine from the Cold war called MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction. Basically, it went ” If you bomb me, I bomb you, we’re both screwed, so let’s not do it.” More paranoid Russians maybe thought the US could, if it came to that, attack them without repercussions.
IMO the Russians were just sensitive against anyone hedging them in, geopolitically, just like the whole situation with the NATO expansion in Ukraine and the Caucasus. The EU was kinda edgy about the entire thing. I don’t think anyone seriously believed the shield was needed, much less against Iran. Technically it could work in case of a conflict with Russia, and maybe get them to be a little less aggressive, but I think it was more likely to backfire and just PO Moscow. Mind you, when Russia is PO’d enough it takes it out in other ways - such as stopping natural gas deliveries during the winter, which happened just last year.
HUMPHRIES almost 15 years ago
wolski2, You think ! Gee an awful lot happens out there and one can learn alot. More than most history books in po-dunk union texas, or where ever, teach.
dsped almost 15 years ago
In actuality: “Well, we can theoretically put up a privacy screen so that nobody can see Mr. Eastern Europe naked, but we’ve never actually figured out how to hang it up. Give us a few billion more and we might figure out how to attach the rings to the curtain.”
CorosiveFrog Premium Member almost 15 years ago
Sooky here will lay eggs before western Europe admits it needs american help. They are a proud continent with millenias of history.
Sooky Rottweiler says; Uh? I’ll do what?
4uk4ata almost 15 years ago
In related news - http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090919/apon_reeu/eurussiamissile_defense
petergrt almost 15 years ago
The system was designed to protect the entire western hemisphere, and Western and formerly Socialist Europe. The positioning of the radars in Czech republic and missiles in Poland was dictated by possible trajectories of the missiles from Iran and/or North Korea, or anywhere in the East. Many in those countries feared that they would become the targets in an attempt to destroy the systems, which is why the majority of population of those countries opposed the placement of the systems.
Russia vehemently opposed the systems for a variety of reasons, though certainly not because they didn’t expect it to be effective. The main issue was geopolitical - they regard Eastern Europe as theirs - given to them by Yalta Agreement.
The assertion that the system is being ‘replaced’ with a more modern one, designed for shorter range missiles, is a blatant lie!!! The short range missile defense systems have existed and been continually developing for decades, and have been deployed in various theaters, including Desert Storm I, and etc. Indeed, when North Koreans were testing the last batch of rockets, a mobile defense shield has been deployed near Hawaii.
New intelligence? Is this the same ‘intelligence’ community that told us with absolute certainty about the Iraq’s WMD’s; missed the fall of European Communism; was surprised by North Korean progress on their nuclear weaponry?
If 0bama had gotten from the Russians something of value, as for example and unwavering support to prevent Iran from going nuclear, then the deployment of the ballistic missile shield could be reviewed - but even then I would not scrap it - trust but verify.
The only question is, why Gates, the lone GW holdover has gone so far out to say that it was his suggestion to scrap the system. I suspect that he is not looking at it from a geopolitical perspective, but rather as a purely military commander having to deal with severe budgetary constrains.
NoFearPup almost 15 years ago
Hegemonies and deals…who do you think supplies the Taliban with their ammo?
Dtroutma almost 15 years ago
I repeat, can ANYONE explain why Iran wants to nuke and invade POLAND! As Gates noted, the Obama plan is cheaper, and more effective.
petergrt almost 15 years ago
“It may look like Obama is losing checkers with the Middle eastern bad guys but hopefully we as the world are winning the chess match. That is what I have to believe in order to sleep at night.”
I hate to interfere with your good sleep but the sad fact is that the 0 befriends America’s enemies and punishes our friends, just as Carter did.
petergrt almost 15 years ago
I am not going to dignify your moronic question.
You seem to believe that US ought to kiss bleeep of any enemy so-long as it does not impact / involve ……… … .?
ps: For the Russians to invade the Czech Republic, they would have to cross / invade at least two other countries, unless they could recreate the August 21st of 1968.
OmqR-IV.0 almost 15 years ago
Oldlegodad: You’d best direct your DA comment at Ramirez because it’s his cartoon that is being questioned.The ‘toon is saying Eastern Europe will be be defenceless by removing this missile defence shield. Why does Ramirez think it specifically leaves Eastern Europe unprotected? From whom and from what exactly?
By the way, why does the US populance continue to think it is altruism remaining in Europe protecting poor, defenceless Europe? Shouldn’t those lazy arsed Europeans defend their own continent?
petergrt almost 15 years ago
Czechoslovakia has some experience with being sold by the West as a chattel:
Munich, to the peace loving Nazis - for “peace in our time”. Yalta, to the peace loving Soviets and 60-year bondage.
Ramirez is not wrong: “The system was designed to protect the entire western hemisphere, and Western and formerly Socialist Europe.”
More importantly however is the geopolitical effect of the physical disconnection - the liquidation of US presence in Czech Republic and Poland, which gives the Russians a major victory.
That said though, I agree that the Western Europe has ridden our defense chuchu train for far too long - they have the means and reasons to put up … .but they tald the adored 0, no … .
Dtroutma almost 15 years ago
Hungary also has experience with being sold out by the west- like Dwight Eisenhower.(1956)
The other factor I alluded to is many articles in “Aviation Week” that show Gates/Obama/and the Joint Chiefs are supporting the most EFFECTIVE method, which also happens to be CHEAPER than the Bush “plan”.
There is wisdom in keeping your friends close, and your enemies closer- if we don’t understand them, or talk to them, we’re inserting the knife in our own backs, which is exactly what Reagan, Bush 41 and 43 did.
Arrogance is a bad defense when your inside the bear, tiger, or behind the eight ball.
petergrt almost 15 years ago
“Hungary also has experience with being sold out by the west- like Dwight Eisenhower.(1956)”
That was a direct consequence of the aforementioned Yalta Agreement, cooked up against the warnings of Churchill, by your beloved FDR.
petergrt almost 15 years ago
DrCanuck:
Your power of comprehension and grasp of issues you insist on writing about is way too advanced for my limited intellect, so forgive me, but I rather have a talk with your dog.
dsped almost 15 years ago
Machado, it’s not hard at all to keep up. I read all the editorials here, and the ones from the right tend to hit the same few notes over and over. It’s not like we’re trying to hum along with Bach here … more like Mozart … “Twinkle Twinkle Little Star”, that is.
4uk4ata almost 15 years ago
“That was a direct consequence of the aforementioned Yalta Agreement, cooked up against the warnings of Churchill, by your beloved FDR.”
By then the Cold war was in full force, the Berlin blockade had come and went, there had been a war in Korea, and the US and the USSR were anything but friendly.
We don’t know what passed through Eisenhower’s head, but I very much doubt he gave a rat’s bum for Yalta. More likely he didn’t think it was something going to war over.
As for this system, Iran has no need to target Poland or Czechoslovakia in the near future. If it wants to hit NATO bases, Greece, Turkey and the Balkans are much nearer. Of course, it has things closer to home to keep in mind. And North Korea - do you honestly think that if it ever launched missiles it would be to Europe? Give me a break. The way the missile system was put would have meant little for any short/medium-range Iranian missiles, and done nothing about North Korea. Now, Russia - then it would have mattered. Apparently Obama does not see the wisdom in alienating Russia over something as vague as that. Good on him.
“0 befriends America’s enemies and punishes our friends, just as Carter did.”
You have a very interesting definition of “befriend”. Bush refused to talk to Iran and North Korea - fat lot of good it did him, or all of us.
petergrt almost 15 years ago
4uk4ata:
It has been said that a leftist is defined by feelings - not reality or facts.
Your post is illustrative of that theory.
A gem:
“Hungary also has experience with being sold out by the west- like Dwight Eisenhower.(1956)”
“By then the Cold war was in full force, the Berlin blockade had come and went, there had been a war in Korea, …”
dsped almost 15 years ago
Peter, it has also been said (although far less often), that a rightist is defined by feelings - mostly fear and anger - over reality or facts, i.e. the volcanic outbursts of rage driven by fear of non-existent “death panels” (or any of the other imminent forms of doom Obama is allegedly bringing down the pike).
And it has been said even less often, unfortunately, that it’s best not to indulge in generalizations when discussing groups of millions of discrete individuals each with their own rational / emotional balances.
petergrt almost 15 years ago
“… the of rage driven by fear of non-existent “death panels” (or any of the other imminent forms of doom Obama is allegedly bringing down the pike).”
Is this intellectually honest?
“volcanic outbursts” - there was not a single arrest for disorderly conduct at the DC anti 0bama protests, which is interesting to note, whether there were 60k or 1.5 million people there. Which is of course exactly what you would expect from a like gathering of leftists, right?
dsped almost 15 years ago
Peter, comparing arrest statistics at protest rallies is hardly a reliable statistical gauge of the respective emotional stability of the many millions who label themselves “right” or “left”.
The leftist with the Bush as Hitler T-shirt who smashes a window and the rightist with the Obama as Hitler T-shirt who limits himself to screaming himself hoarse are both being driven by similar out-of-whack emotions.
It’s just that it’s not illegal to scream yourself hoarse at a protest rally.
Joe Snedaker almost 15 years ago
scottfreitas You really think he’d send t he F-22? I’d think he’d find an old ghost graveyard and re-build some P-51’s and maybe a few P-47’s for defense.
parkersinthehouse You are the perfect example. You liberals (maybe not you directly) expect we conservatives to show your boy Obama respect as president, when you’ yourselves, can not show Bush any respect as president or even former president. Also you and Obama need to remember this past election was between Obama and McCain, not Bush.
SPDworks almost 15 years ago
McCain’s only saving grace was that he actually made dubya look nearly innocent and thoughtful, rather than bissfully ignorant and arrogant. Well, that, and he proved that the picking of running mates, regardless of public promise of intention, can and will change, determined by statistical realities, and without care to the ultimate outcome of choice. Regan did the same, when he promised not to choose Bush (meaning Bush the secret society AND CIA member, not the failed alcoholic oilman wanna be doughnut maneuvering reservist to whom I see here some would demand we should respect simply because he managed to get into yet another job he was clearly at a loss as to know how to handle.) I’m not a leftist by the way…I’m a realist. And really…trickle-down ecosystems are no worse or better than that trickle-down theory put into practice was helping the system of economics. Give someone, regardless of party line, race, age, or otherwise, a CHANCE to try to fix at least 8 years of debt, fear, and utter despair in what was once a place for opportunity. Let SOMEONE TRY and regain the lost respect and care that was ours, here in the US, before personal and private agendas re-thought this country’s efforts and intentions, at least totally by the beginning of the millennium.
Joe Snedaker almost 15 years ago
SPDworks First off, you are a leftist, I don’t care what you call yourself. Then you call McCain ignorant and arrogant??? Yet you seem to like Obama? He is more arrogant then any president EVER. Your mentality worries me. Give someone a chance because they are nothing like Bush is what I am getting for you. BTW You are another liberal leftist that insults Bush. Further backing me up when I say, you liberals (maybe not YOU directly) expect us to show Obama respect and you never show Bush respect yourselves? Hypocrites!!!!!!!!!!!!!
4uk4ata almost 15 years ago
@mytinytown - “He is more arrogant then any president EVER.”
Quite the outburst. Care to offer facts on how a magna bleeep laude Harvard graduate is “ignorant?” Because just as you can claim he is ignorant, SPD could call that anyone else. And vice versa - I don’t have much of an opinion on McCain’s intelligence, myself.
@ Petergrt - I don’t care much for appelations. I gave what I consider my objective opinion, I don’t know where you saw any “feelings.” If you think that your reality is more accurate than my own, be my guest. Now, you told me that a missile shield in Poland is any use against North Korea, and I find your opinion rather unrealistic. Same for Iran - Poland or Hungary is far from the best place to put a missile system if it’s Iran you are worried about. Now, if you want to debate whether putting a missile system against Russia is a good idea, sure.
petergrt almost 15 years ago
” … Poland or Hungary is far from the best place to put a missile system if it’s Iran you are worried about …”
And you know this how? Have you studied ballistics (as I have)? Have you any idea what a trajectory is?
Yet you have the hubris to think that the radar and intersection rockets were to be placed - arbitrarily.
Piglet, you are controlled by feelings.
believecommonsense almost 15 years ago
SPDWorks, interesting post, well-written and succinct descriptions of Bush 41 and 43,
dsped almost 15 years ago
Churchill, it only sounds moronic if you can’t (or won’t) grasp the concept that any two equally unhinged people won’t necessarily act out in an equal fashion. If one of them does something to get himself arrested, it doesn’t make the other one any less unhinged.
I fully acknowledge the loonies on my side of the spectrum. You appear to be in denial about your own. These things happen when you insist on seeing “the other side” as a monolith instead of a group of individuals.
dsped almost 15 years ago
I’ll be sure to notify the APA of your radical new approach of using property damage at protests as a key indicator in diagnosing degrees of mental illness.
dsped almost 15 years ago
^ If such juvenile personal insults are all you can muster, I’d seriously consider changing your screen name.
Who you’re really insulting is your namesake, a man who truly knew how to wield the insult effectively.