Ron Paul Wins CPAC Straw Poll...Again

#76
#76
IPorange said:
So are you against women in the armed services, sjt?
Click to expand...

In certain instances but not as a whole. I was actually in when some liberal "thinker" decided that standards that prevented women from getting into some MOS's might inhibit their careers and therefore were WRONG. One of those MOS's- 105 howitzer loader. Guess how many women could actually handle an 80 lb shell every 5 seconds? Solution: add another member to the crew... and make sure it is a man.

I don't think it made it through but one liberal congressman was bucking for reducing the difficulty of Ranger School so women could make it through.

Once again, the military is not a social experiment or lab.

PS- Are you for segregation of homosexuals for training and limiting their roles when their behavior might be disruptive to unit discipline and morale? Military experts and commanders warn that this WILL be the case.
 
#77
#77
sjt18 said:
The military isn't a social experiment or a lab for them.
As someone who has never served, I will concede this decsion for those that are better informed and are more likely to be affected by it.
He opened his mouth and personally made these BIG issues in the campaign. The MSM set him up by running Bush and the war down as often and as vigorously as they could. He then stepped on the scene to say he'd reverse these terrible policies.

His Iraq withdrawl program may actually be BEHIND the one Bush and Rumsfeld had worked out.

No one force Obama to make those big promises. He's fully accountable.

Again, these are issues/promises that should only be viewed as mistakes/weaknesses within the DNP. Neo-cons should be thrilled.

They have actually done part of it lately by cyber warfare. That was actually something he should get credit for. If it weren't so embarrassing to Iran's leadership, they'd be out beating their chest about it being an act of war.

However it does not destroy the physical infrastructure. Iran with nukes changes the whole geopolitical balance. ALL necessary means should be used to prevent them from getting them. That would include air and cruise missile strikes.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry for the misunderstanding as I meant "what to do" in the general sense, not just Iran. My point was the Nuke problem didn't begin or get discovered after BO took office.

Please don't take this as a personal attack or aggression as I enjoy civil discourse and you seem to present your opinions with informed logic. My question basically, related to the discussed topics, is how could he have approached these things differently to prevent them appearing as "weaknesses" to the general electorate. My point was the average joe just wants to work hard and take care of his family. If things are looking up economically, many will view some of these issues as trivial and reward BO for putting them back to work whether he deserves the credit or not. FYI, I'm neither Dem. or Rep. just like to hear different opinions.
 
#79
#79
CSVol said:
I'm sorry for the misunderstanding as I meant "what to do" in the general sense, not just Iran. My point was the Nuke problem didn't begin or get discovered after BO took office.

Please don't take this as a personal attack or aggression as I enjoy civil discourse and you seem to present your opinions with informed logic. My question basically, related to the discussed topics, is how could he have approached these things differently to prevent them appearing as "weaknesses" to the general electorate. My point was the average joe just wants to work hard and take care of his family. If things are looking up economically, many will view some of these issues as trivial and reward BO for putting them back to work whether he deserves the credit or not. FYI, I'm neither Dem. or Rep. just like to hear different opinions.
Click to expand...

Iran has been trying since the 80's. Reagan, Bush 1, and, to a lesser degree, Clinton did a decent job of preventing them from making advances on nukes.

The media with their 24 hour condemnation of Bush for Iraq pretty much made it impossible for him to take decisive action against Iran. He should have had the courage to do it anyway but they would have crucified him.

Obama has just flat out failed. I don't know if he's just naive concerning the threat, does not care, thinks America and the west deserve it, or what. It has to be either ignorance, stupidity, or treason. I don't know of any other options.

But like I said, the cyber attack was a good move... insufficient, but good.
 
#81
#81
Weezy said:
What did other presidents do to slow them down?
Click to expand...

Prevented import of nuclear materials, nuclear parts, nuclear technology, etc.

Seems like I remember GWB or Clinton having Navy vessels intercept some nuke materials or parts headed toward Iran.
 
#82
#82
I'm not sure about that, and I'm really not sure about any of the details, that's why I asked. I knew we have used economic sanctions and pressured other countries to refrain from providing equipment and technology as well. I actually did some research on these types of things a while back, and I vaguely remember something about our intelligence agencies facilitating the transfer of old Russian enrichment technology to the Iranian gov't. Mostly because we assumed if they kept shopping around they would eventually get the technology, so it was best for us to provide them with old ****ty technology that we were familiar with and would provide them with lots of headaches. And I always thought that sounded smart in light of the Stuxnet worm. I have no links for that, but it did lead me to some fun reading material:

https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/archived-reports-1/july_dec2000.htm

https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/archived-reports-1/july_dec2001.htm
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top