Something Random

Gilbo said:
Stereodude, Obama has already frozen executive staff pay. That doesn't seem particularly socialist.
Click to expand...
It doesn't seem particularly capitalist either. I'm not sure you can draw any conclusions of his belief in economic theory based on one action.
 
Guantanamo Bay closes within a year... Good, but I guess we'll all have to help each other sorting out the mess GWB created. Or maybe Obama could give the prisoners some free land in Texas, next to GW's estate? That would be funny...
 
fb said:
Guantanamo Bay closes within a year... Good, but I guess we'll all have to help each other sorting out the mess GWB created. Or maybe Obama could give the prisoners some free land in Texas, next to GW's estate? That would be funny...
Click to expand...
What will be really funny is when those terrorists who are now in custody at Club Gitmo go on to commit some heinous terrorist act after being released and the same people who have been clamoring for Club Gitmo to close will suddenly be steaming mad about why it was closed.

My only hope is the next terrorist attack occurs someplace predominantly filled with Obama voters. That way they can personally reap the change delivered by the man they elected.
 
You're pretty far out there SD, that's a fairly hateful post. I'm certainly not wishing you harm based on who you voted for even though I might disagree.
 
Stereodude said:
What will be really funny is when those terrorists who are now in custody at Club Gitmo go on to commit some heinous terrorist act after being released and the same people who have been clamoring for Club Gitmo to close will suddenly be steaming mad about why it was closed.

My only hope is the next terrorist attack occurs someplace predominantly filled with Obama voters. That way they can personally reap the change delivered by the man they elected.
Click to expand...
I'm sure that some will end up in prison or whatever, remember that three terrorists are already successfully convicted (out of 800 potential ones, but still.) And the receiving countries will probably keep an eye on the other ones, so I hope they can prevent any terrorist attacks before they happen.
 
Handruin said:
You're pretty far out there SD, that's a fairly hateful post. I'm certainly not wishing you harm based on who you voted for even though I might disagree.
Click to expand...
I don't see how it's a hateful post. I'm simply connecting the dots.

1) Obama is doing things that will weaken the fight against terror.
2) That means terrorists will be more likely to succeed in an attack against the US.
3) The terrorists most likely targets are the places who voted predominantly for Obama (large cities and urban areas).

How's that for irony?

Personally, I'd rather "educate" Obama voters than have them end up dead. I'm afraid that some of them will get educated by watching others die though.
 
Stereodude said:
I don't see how it's a hateful post. I'm simply connecting the dots.

1) Obama is doing things that will weaken the fight against terror.
2) That means terrorists will be more likely to succeed in an attack against the US.
3) The terrorists most likely targets are the places who voted predominantly for Obama (large cities and urban areas).

How's that for irony?

Personally, I'd rather "educate" Obama voters than have them end up dead. I'm afraid that some of them will get educated by watching others die though.
Click to expand...

cynical, glib exchange from both SD & fb. But SD is misguided (unless he voted for...??? the green party candidate :p ).

If McCain where to have won the presidency, same result...yes? So might as well include the vast majority of people in the USA for your retribution SD :).

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/06/60minutes/main2658405_page5.shtml

MCCAIN: I think the greatest threat this nation faces is this radical Islamic extremism. I think it is now morphed into Iraq. I think every briefing that we have here, al-Qaeda is very active. And so now, it's part of it. And if al-Qaeda gains a strong foothold here, I think that it increases the likelihood of an attack on the United States.

PELLEY: Would you close Guantanamo Bay?

MCCAIN: Yes. I would close Guantanamo Bay. And I would move those prisoners to Fort Leavenworth. And I would proceed with the tribunals.

PELLEY: Why? What's wrong with the way it was handled?

MCCAIN: Guantanamo Bay has become an image throughout the world which has hurt our reputation. Whether we deserve it or not, the reality is Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib have harmed our reputation in the world, thereby harming our ability to win the psychological part of the war against radical Islamic extremism.

PELLEY: There have been a lot of semantics over the last few years about what is torture, what isn't torture, whether American tortures prisoners.

MCCAIN: Yeah.
Click to expand...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/06/60minutes/main2658405_page6.shtml

PELLEY: What would you bring to that as President?

MCCAIN: I would never allow any technique which would not be publicly known to be used. We are better than our enemies. We are morally superior. That's why we will win this struggle. And I am confident that we will.

PELLEY: Do you believe that the United States has tortured its prisoners over the last few years?

MCCAIN: I do not have that evidence. But I have reason to believe -- and I've [got] no classified information -- that they have mistreated prisoners. How seriously, I don't know. By the way, that's why I felt compelled to pass the Detainee Treatment Act to make sure that we wouldn't.

PELLEY: You feel like it's a blight on the American reputation?

MCCAIN: I think it's harmed our reputation enormously in the world, yes, sir.
Click to expand...
Still, I wonder if the CIA & Senate Intelligence committee leaders will do things 'underground' now with complicity of foreign country 'actors' on their behalf or encouragement...looking the other way of course...seeing how Obama says he's not going to allow the CIA to do what it's been alleged to have done in other countries ;).

The only Bush Administration officials asked by Obama to stay on, are those in the military arena. Obama has said many times Afghanistan is where the greater threat is now, and he intends to get advisement with the military leaders/Sec. of Defense as to how quickly to increase numbers of USA forces to Afghanistan from those pulling out of Iraq.

Binladen is no fan of Obama either, don't think the many terrorists are Obama supporters :p.

Obama has been in office for how many days? The Bush Admin had 8yrs to work on a peace deal with the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Seems only correct to judge Obama Admn, after they've been given enough time to actually do something.

I don't think much of Clinton, but she has wisely tapped two people who have more experience than she does:

Clinton Taps 2 Envoys To World Hot Spots


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/22/politics/main4747680.shtml
 
Yeah, and your point? McCain was a sack of manure too. There were two democrats running for office and no conservatives.

Oh, and I don't follow how you're connecting any of this to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Israeli should keep their country and pound the crap out of the terrorists who are attacking them. Instead the world is pressuring them to keep giving away land to people who turn around and then use the land to attack them.
 
1. Israel and the Palestinians are children that cannot play with others. They need to keep pounding each other until it is unpalatable enough that they are willing to compromise.

2. You really believe that we are safer now than 9-10? That all the wars and reduced freedom has made life better? Even so, not worth the price. Even if we had a terrorist attack the scale of 9-11 EVERY MONTH it wouldn't make the top-10 list for leading causes of deaths. As a country we suffered the equivalent of a stubbed toe and everyone panics. I suppose we deserve what we get.
 
ddrueding said:
Even if we had a terrorist attack the scale of 9-11 EVERY MONTH it wouldn't make the top-10 list for leading causes of deaths. As a country we suffered the equivalent of a stubbed toe and everyone panics. I suppose we deserve what we get.
Click to expand...
So we shouldn't do anything about it? This is a completely ludicrous argument. How many Americans had died when we decided to get involved in WWII? If you don't respond when you're attacked you'll just keep getting attacked.

How many people have to die before we should engage people who want to kill each and every last one of us? What number of civilian casualties is unacceptable and would warrant a response?
 
It wasn't the death toll of 9/11 that mattered. As horrific as it was, that many people die in traffic accidents in under 4 weeks. Rather, it was the collateral damage, both in terms of actual physical damage, and damage to the economy. The physical damage was well into the tens of billions. Estimated cost to the economy was $1 trillion. Now imagine a few attacks like that each year. I didn't like a lot of Bush's policies, but at least they kept us safe. And I question whether some of them were even 100% necessary, or just an overreaction to a horrible event. But right or wrong, there haven't been any major attacks on American soil for over 7 years.

What I really fear from an Obama administration isn't socialism or Keynesian economics. In fact, it seems he intends to govern from the center if his inaugural address is any indication. Rather, what I fear most is that he'll be so caught up in the economy and other domestic affairs that he'll lose sight of his duty to defend the shores. His policies could work all the economic magic in the world. All you need are one or two suitcase nukes detonated in major cities, and it'll all be undone before the mushroom clouds dissipate. Keeping us safe matters above all else. If he can do so by making us less hated in the world so radicals don't have popular support, then wonderful. But if diplomacy fails you need to be prepared to do what is necessary, unpopular, and ugly, in order to preserve the nation. Whether or not his idealism can accept this harsh reality, I don't know. That's what really scares me.
 
Stereodude said:
Oh, and I don't follow how you're connecting any of this to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Israeli should keep their country and pound the crap out of the terrorists who are attacking them. Instead the world is pressuring them to keep giving away land to people who turn around and then use the land to attack them.
Click to expand...

The problem is that Israel is dropping US made bombs from US made fighter jets and killing a shitload of women and children. It needlessly increases the risk of attack against US targets.
 
Stereodude said:
How many people have to die before we should engage people who want to kill each and every last one of us?
Click to expand...

Point them out and I will pull the trigger myself. But targeting those that aren't a credible threat (people with rocks and light weapons on the other side of the world) is just dicking around. Further, I don't believe for a minute that taking off my shoes, being limited to small bottles of liquid, or being tracked and monitored 12 different ways makes me measurably safer.
 
Pradeep said:
The problem is that Israel is dropping US made bombs from US made fighter jets and killing a shitload of women and children. It needlessly increases the risk of attack against US targets.
Click to expand...
As opposed to their opponents with weapons from Iran, Russian, and China???

There are too many people who don't understand that the radical kooks in the Muslim world hate the west because it's not Muslim. It's has no connection to what we do. Trying to live ours life as to not make them upset will fail because they will still hate us and still attack the west and our way of life regardless. To assume different defies all logic and shows we don't have any understanding of our enemy.
 
ddrueding said:
Point them out and I will pull the trigger myself. But targeting those that aren't a credible threat (people with rocks and light weapons on the other side of the world) is just dicking around.
Click to expand...
You mean those people taking flying lessons in the 2000 who later armed themselves with box cutters on September 11th 2001? Those are light weapons right? I guess they were just dicking around... :rolleyes:
Further, I don't believe for a minute that taking off my shoes, being limited to small bottles of liquid, or being tracked and monitored 12 different ways makes me measurably safer.
Click to expand...
Well, that's all about the illusion of safety to keep the general public happy. The public demanded it and the gov't gave it to them.
 
Stereodude said:
I don't see how it's a hateful post. I'm simply connecting the dots.

1) Obama is doing things that will weaken the fight against terror.
2) That means terrorists will be more likely to succeed in an attack against the US.
3) The terrorists most likely targets are the places who voted predominantly for Obama (large cities and urban areas).

How's that for irony?

Personally, I'd rather "educate" Obama voters than have them end up dead. I'm afraid that some of them will get educated by watching others die though.
Click to expand...

You used the word hope, which means you wish for it. If you were to have simply connected the dots you wouldn't have wished harm on people.
 
Stereodude said:
You mean those people taking flying lessons in the 2000 who later armed themselves with box cutters on September 11th 2001? Those are light weapons right? I guess they were just dicking around...
Click to expand...

You're just being a smartass now. I meant the 10,000-100,000 (who knows?) that we've killed in Iraq that had no way of hurting Americans until we sent American troops within range of their weapons (And weren't pissed enough to attack us until we invaded their country). How stupid was that?

Stereodude said:
Well, that's all about the illusion of safety to keep the general public happy. The public demanded it and the gov't gave it to them.
Click to expand...
 
F N Egg...communicationally challenged?

STD postcards: You've got mail — and more

Early data shows it helps to have partners break bad news online



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27205681/
The site, www.InSPOT.org , is a way for people newly diagnosed with an STD to notify their partners to be tested, too. The e-cards, a sort of greeting card you’d rather not receive, are direct and to the point.
Click to expand...

Losers! If you can't tell a person, in a more direct way...for something as serious as this kind of medical problem...yer an F'in loser! This is the 'easy' way out of responsibility for unsafe sex practices that can result in death. IMHO, very irresponsible behavior to even get to this point...typical of Americans with shoddy values of course :p
 
Now come on already! 1st it was the now ubiquitous 'California roll'

Now it's 'authentic' Korean-American tacos!!! Give me a break.

You're all twitterized here on SF, yes (you too jtr, I know you've read all of her twitter acct posts :p )?

Lines of a thousand people waiting for $2 Korean tacos, FFS! Only in LA???

Unbelievable!

(well it ties in with dd's initial starting post for this thread :p ).


http://kogibbq.com/

Presidential Specials....LOL.

ah well, I know practically no one reads or clicks on links...so




What does this have to do with pizza you ask LM...Frack if I know :D
 
Reading the fine print :)

Why the Gitmo policies may not change



http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17841.html


Also, al Qaida Gitmo prisoners have already been released under the Bush admn, guess SD hopes a terrorist attack happens in Dallas and faults Bush too???

Ex-Gitmo detainee joins al-Qaida in Yemen



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090123/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_yemen_al_qaida


CAIRO, Egypt – An Internet posting purportedly by al-Qaida in Yemen says the group's No. 2 is a Saudi national who is a former Guantanamo detainee.


The Yemeni group — known as "al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula" — posted the statement this week on a militant Web site that regularly carries al-Qaida messages.


It says the man returned to his home in Saudi Arabia after his release from the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba about a year ago and from there went to Yemen to join the terror group.


The Internet statement identified the man as Said Ali al-Shihri and says his prisoner number at Guantanamo was 372.


The posting could not immediately be verified, and Yemen and Saudi Arabian authorities would not immediately comment on it.
Click to expand...


One thing I don't get, if al Qaida & Taliban in Afghanistan/Pakistan are those who promote the extremism around the world. Why are not more of England & Spain's military in those countries along with the USA? Then again, Saudi Arabia & Kuwait owe the USA military a debt for our forces in the area...shouldn't they be footing more of the bill the USA bears, given their riches? And how much are those countries spending in the rebuilding of Afghanistan's infrastructure...Taliban supposedly now controls a large part of the opium market in Afghanistan...I suppose the extreme interpretation of the Koran approves of that :p ? Why does the USA do the lion's share of all the dirty work...I ask all the hatrs of the USA around the world, I don't see them doing anything constructive other than complain?
 
Stereodude said:
What will be really funny is when those terrorists who are now in custody at Club Gitmo go on to commit some heinous terrorist act after being released and the same people who have been clamoring for Club Gitmo to close will suddenly be steaming mad about why it was closed.
Click to expand...
Alleged or suspected terrorists. You have no way of knowing if the remaining prisoners are guilty or not, seeing as how they have not had trials and been convicted. We may assume some, most, or even all are guilty but we do not know it until a verdict has been reached. A verdict in court, not in your head.
 
udaman said:
I ask all the hatrs of the USA around the world, I don't see them doing anything constructive other than complain?
Click to expand...
So the rest of the world are not doing anything? One example: Sodertalje, a small town in Sweden has received more fugitives from Iraq than USA and Canada together since the war started. If lets say, Dallas, would welcome the same amount of fugitives in relation to their population, there would be around 74000 Iraqis living in Dallas right now. Wouldn't that be nice?

You can do other things than sending more soldiers you know.
 
Stereodude said:
So we shouldn't do anything about it? This is a completely ludicrous argument. How many Americans had died when we decided to get involved in WWII? If you don't respond when you're attacked you'll just keep getting attacked.

How many people have to die before we should engage people who want to kill each and every last one of us? What number of civilian casualties is unacceptable and would warrant a response?
Click to expand...
No one said to not do anything about it. Where did you read that?

What dd mentioned is a standard risk mitigation strategy. The government has a limited budget with which to mitigate risk. Hence, they should examine the known risks, their relative probabilities, our current vulnerabilities, and the potential mitigation plans. Spending should be done for maximum risk avoidance. Spending billions of dollars to mitigate rare events that cause a comparably small amount of loss is f**king dumb when the same investment could save a hundred times as many if directed elsewhere.

The problem is, the government under Bush lied about the risks so that they could spend as they saw fit. Michael Chertoff Claims that Hijackings were Routine Prior to 9/11
And in the process they've shifted resources from where they would be useful to the war on terror. (BTW, you won't ever win a war against a concept.) Allocating Resources: Financial Fraud vs. Terrorism
And they've acted as recruiters for the terrorist organizations. Matthew Alexander on Torture
And they were trying to keep the public in a constant state of fear. FBI Stoking Fear

Thankfully, Obama at least seems to understand. Barack Obama Discusses Security Trade-Offs
 
Because those sensible enough to understand that concept have long given up on Stereodude. BTW, no matter what your security level will be, a smart organisation will always be able to get through. The increased security measures since 9/11 have mostly limited the free of honest people. They've done nothing to improve the public safety.

Funny how 9/11 happened during Bush's term and not during the previous Democrate government...

The chance an attack occurs doesn't depend on who's leading at Washington. It only depends on the motivation and smartness of the freaks planning it.
 
CougTek said:
Funny how 9/11 happened during Bush's term and not during the previous Democrate government...
Click to expand...
And the first WTC bombing and the USS Cole happened during which administration? That lack of a response to those attacks led Bin Laden to think the US was a paper tiger and that led to 9/11.
 
Fushigi said:
Alleged or suspected terrorists. You have no way of knowing if the remaining prisoners are guilty or not, seeing as how they have not had trials and been convicted. We may assume some, most, or even all are guilty but we do not know it until a verdict has been reached. A verdict in court, not in your head.
Click to expand...

Though I agree with you you picked a minor quibble in his argument instead of addressing the substantial concern.
 
Fushigi said:
Alleged or suspected terrorists. You have no way of knowing if the remaining prisoners are guilty or not, seeing as how they have not had trials and been convicted. We may assume some, most, or even all are guilty but we do not know it until a verdict has been reached. A verdict in court, not in your head.
Click to expand...
Uh... They were caught on the battlefield. That makes it a military matter, not a civil matter. They are not entitled to a trial in civil court represented by ACLU lawyers. Did the military people Mirandize them when they were arrested? If not you might as well let all of them go right now.

But I'm sure they're really innocent and just happened to be out for a walk with their AK-47... :rolleyes:
 
Striker said:
Your opinion doesn't make this fact.
Click to expand...
If you did any research instead of just spouting off nonsense you read online you'd know Bin Laden actually called the US a paper tiger. But I guess I'm expected too much from you.

In 1996 in his "Declaration of War Against the Americans," Osama bin Laden said about Somalia "You have been disgraced by Allah and you withdrew. The extent of your impotence and weaknesses has become very clear... When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature they will like the strong horse.”

Bin Laden in an interview with ABC News reporter John Miller said, “After leaving Afghanistan, the Muslim fighters headed for Somalia and prepared for a long battle thinking that the Americans were like the Russians. The youth were surprised at the low morale of the American soldiers and realized, more than before, that the American soldier was a paper tiger and after a few blows……would run in defeat.”

Later in the same interview, "We have seen in the last decade the decline of American power and the weakness of the American soldier who is ready to wage Cold Wars, but unprepared to fight long wars. This was proven in Beirut in 1983 when the Marines fled after two explosions. It also proves they can run in less than 24 hours, and this was also repeated in Somalia (in 1993)."

But yeah, it's just my opinion... :rolleyes:

I for one welcome a return to the Clinton era policy of pursuing the war on terror in court with lawyers instead of boots on the ground. That will certainly prove to radical Islam that we're not a paper tiger to will run and cower.
 
Gaaah! Stop arguing like little children. This is like the SR B&G was a few years ago when I gave up on that one. :( -Later-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top