Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Back Room
  4. Jack Kelly: Give Obama the potato test

Jack Kelly: Give Obama the potato test

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Back Room
com
133 Posts 14 Posters 5 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • I IamChrisMcCall

    Mike Mullikin wrote:

    Geee... since the thread is about Obama and Stan referenced the left and you said "we" I think it is only fair to assume that you meant Democrats.

    So since Stan meant "the left", and explicitly said "the left", and no one mentioned either party, you assumed I meant something else entirely that no one mentioned.

    Mike Mullikin wrote:

    It took a crooked Republican POTUS to respond.

    To respond to who?

    Mike Mullikin wrote:

    radical leftist protesters

    Oh, cool, so you'll be shutting up now. When we bail you out of Iraq, will you repeat the mistake of blaming us for "losing" or did you learn your lesson after 'Nam?

    L Offline
    L Offline
    Lost User
    wrote on last edited by
    #50

    IamChrisMcCall wrote:

    and no one mentioned either party, you assumed I meant something else entirely that no one mentioned

    Except the thread is about Obama [see his name in the title?], who is a Democrat and was not a leftist protester...

    IamChrisMcCall wrote:

    When we bail you out of Iraq

    Bail who out? I've never been to Iraq and I'm not too pleased the US is there right now.

    IamChrisMcCall wrote:

    will you repeat the mistake of blaming us for "losing"

    Show me where I repeated anything even close to that??!!

    I 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • O Oakman

      oilFactotum wrote:

      Irrelevant since the only question that matters is: Who won the war?

      Your post is a perfect example of why the left is blamed (and should be blamed) for losing a war that we were winning.

      Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

      O Offline
      O Offline
      oilFactotum
      wrote on last edited by
      #51

      Winning? What a laff! A dozen years and 50,000 dead and nothing had changed. The Vietnamese had been fighting for over 30 years, why would they surrender? What would we have 'won' and how would we have won it?

      O 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • S Stan Shannon

        I give it two years to get rolling pretty good. The left has simply worked too hard to engineer the current political situation, and it is succeeding beyond their wildest expectations if Obama wins and uncontested control of congress goes to the democrats. There is no way they are going to be moderate about anything. The rush of power will simply be too much for them to restrain. They will be falling all over themselves to implement a full blown European social welfare state as quickly as they possibly can. And I do not believe that American society is ready for it. As the truth finally becomes obvious to everyone, there will be open, armed, rebellion. (I subscribe to the notion of historic cycles, so a civil war of some form or other isn't due until about 2020 or so)

        Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

        O Offline
        O Offline
        Oakman
        wrote on last edited by
        #52

        Stan Shannon wrote:

        I subscribe to the notion of historic cycles, so a civil war of some form or other isn't due until about 2020 or so

        Well, Obama only makes it to 2016. Or do you predict that we'll repeal the 22nd amendment before then? (I'm sure it will make your heart go pitty-pat to hear that the word is out that Jimmy Carter will declare for Obama either tonight or tomorrow.)

        Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • O oilFactotum

          Winning? What a laff! A dozen years and 50,000 dead and nothing had changed. The Vietnamese had been fighting for over 30 years, why would they surrender? What would we have 'won' and how would we have won it?

          O Offline
          O Offline
          Oakman
          wrote on last edited by
          #53

          oilFactotum wrote:

          What a laff!

          Most folks don't laugh at the concept of men dying, Vietnamese or American. Glad you were so easily amused.

          oilFactotum wrote:

          What would we have 'won' and how would we have won it?

          Do a quick study on the difference between North and South Korea.

          Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

          O I 2 Replies Last reply
          0
          • L Lost User

            Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote:

            I find Europe to be a pretty nice place to live in

            As is your right. The people are generally nice, the culture and food are great, the scenery and historic architecture is awesome. But despite all that, its just too damn socialist for my tastes. Hell, current US policy is too damn socialist for me.

            A Offline
            A Offline
            Al Beback
            wrote on last edited by
            #54

            Mike Mullikin wrote:

            too damn socialist for my tastes.

            Please explain what that means. How would you prefer it? And what would be the risks associated with that?

            - Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is impotent. - Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. - Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil? - Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? Epicurus

            L S 2 Replies Last reply
            0
            • O Oakman

              Stan Shannon wrote:

              The only thing your side did was to turn a victory into a defeat. Just as you will do in Iraq

              We don't have the manpower or the materials we did in Vietnam. Because A. We financed this war with tax breaks instead of tax increases; B. We are rotating the same half-million or so soldiers through Iraq over and over again, rather than instituting a draft - which we have had for every full-fledged war since the 1860's.

              Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

              S Offline
              S Offline
              Stan Shannon
              wrote on last edited by
              #55

              On the other hand, the military of the 1960's was designed to fight two major wars simulataneously. It is difficult to believe that we have gone from that to being incapable to taking out a few minor backwater nations without a draft. (However, I do concur with the need for a draft). The problem is that we have not maintained the offensive. If we had kept these assholes in front of us rather them letting them infiltrate the society we are trying to stabilize it would have been much better. Still, things are not looking all that bad in Iraq right now dispite our incompetence.

              Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

              I O 2 Replies Last reply
              0
              • S Stan Shannon

                I give it two years to get rolling pretty good. The left has simply worked too hard to engineer the current political situation, and it is succeeding beyond their wildest expectations if Obama wins and uncontested control of congress goes to the democrats. There is no way they are going to be moderate about anything. The rush of power will simply be too much for them to restrain. They will be falling all over themselves to implement a full blown European social welfare state as quickly as they possibly can. And I do not believe that American society is ready for it. As the truth finally becomes obvious to everyone, there will be open, armed, rebellion. (I subscribe to the notion of historic cycles, so a civil war of some form or other isn't due until about 2020 or so)

                Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                A Offline
                A Offline
                Al Beback
                wrote on last edited by
                #56

                Stan Shannon wrote:

                They will be falling all over themselves to implement a full blown European social welfare state as quickly as they possibly can. And I do not believe that American society is ready for it.

                Really? You may be right. American society does seem quite content with expensive endless wars, expensive gasoline, expensive health insurance, expensive food prices, plumetting real estate values, and a worthless currency. God forbid our next administration and Congress takes steps to curtail those things. :rolleyes:

                - Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is impotent. - Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. - Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil? - Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? Epicurus

                L S 2 Replies Last reply
                0
                • O Oakman

                  oilFactotum wrote:

                  Well, if you look at Milikins link a little further down this thread there were only 50 Americans in Vietnam in 73.

                  There were actually a lot more than that but you are right; almost all units had pulled out by the end of 73.

                  Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                  S Offline
                  S Offline
                  Stan Shannon
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #57

                  Active combat units were pulled out by November of '72. After that it was basically only advisors and Naval operations.

                  Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                  O 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • O oilFactotum

                    The Tet Offensive? Irrelevant since the only question that matters is: Who won the war?[^]

                    S Offline
                    S Offline
                    Stan Shannon
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #58

                    We achieved victory by every meaningful military measure. We were not defeated militarily but politically thanks to people with attitudes such as your own.

                    Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                    O I 2 Replies Last reply
                    0
                    • S Stan Shannon

                      Active combat units were pulled out by November of '72. After that it was basically only advisors and Naval operations.

                      Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                      O Offline
                      O Offline
                      Oakman
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #59

                      We had some groups, or so I was told, that were with the tards up in the mountains, but basically, you are right. I had a senior moment. I guess the image of the fall of Saigon is so burned into my memory, I forget that the guards there were the only uniforms left.

                      Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                      S 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • A Al Beback

                        Mike Mullikin wrote:

                        too damn socialist for my tastes.

                        Please explain what that means. How would you prefer it? And what would be the risks associated with that?

                        - Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is impotent. - Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. - Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil? - Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? Epicurus

                        L Offline
                        L Offline
                        Lost User
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #60

                        Al Beback wrote:

                        Please explain what that means. How would you prefer it?

                        I want way less government in my life, way less social programs and less entitlement programs and therefore way less taxes taken from me.

                        Al Beback wrote:

                        And what would be the risks associated with that?

                        The risks of too much socialism is apathy and everything that leads to... The risks of too little government is that people who refuse to even make an effort to be self sufficient may die early.

                        A 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • A Al Beback

                          Stan Shannon wrote:

                          They will be falling all over themselves to implement a full blown European social welfare state as quickly as they possibly can. And I do not believe that American society is ready for it.

                          Really? You may be right. American society does seem quite content with expensive endless wars, expensive gasoline, expensive health insurance, expensive food prices, plumetting real estate values, and a worthless currency. God forbid our next administration and Congress takes steps to curtail those things. :rolleyes:

                          - Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is impotent. - Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. - Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil? - Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? Epicurus

                          L Offline
                          L Offline
                          Lost User
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #61

                          Al Beback wrote:

                          expensive gasoline, expensive health insurance, expensive food prices, plumetting real estate values

                          Been to Europe lately? :rolleyes:

                          A 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • O Oakman

                            Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote:

                            I'm just waiting for him to do something in the name of god, like Assnan's butt buddies.

                            You've considered that possibility, too? I wonder if Chris has a plan of action if he starts posting messages saying the angel of the Lord has told him to lock and load. . . .

                            Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                            M Offline
                            M Offline
                            martin_hughes
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #62

                            Oakman wrote:

                            the angel of the Lord has told him to lock and load. . . .

                            Is that a religious euphemism for the five-knuckle-shuffle? :)

                            ***The collected future Mrs. Martin Hughes***

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • O Oakman

                              oilFactotum wrote:

                              What a laff!

                              Most folks don't laugh at the concept of men dying, Vietnamese or American. Glad you were so easily amused.

                              oilFactotum wrote:

                              What would we have 'won' and how would we have won it?

                              Do a quick study on the difference between North and South Korea.

                              Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                              O Offline
                              O Offline
                              oilFactotum
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #63

                              Oakman wrote:

                              Most folks don't laugh at the concept of men dying,

                              I'm not, and you know it. Yet you seem to be quite cavalier with the lives of 10's of thousands of young American lives to 'win' a war that would accomplish nothing.

                              Oakman wrote:

                              Do a quick study on the difference between North and South Korea.

                              Don't have to. I'm well aware of the differences. Perhaps you need to look at Vietnam today. Strong emerging economy and no threat to it's neighbors. I doubt that American occupation could have created a better result. So, it appears that what you are saying is that what we would have won would have been a South Vietnam not terribly different than what it is now - the only difference is the 10's of thousands of additional American casualties(as well as 100's of thousands of Vietnamese casualties) and billions of American tax dollars spent on the effort. And you haven't addressed how we would have gotten there. Your comparison to Korea suggests that your idea of an American victory would not need to include the conquest of North Vietnam. Without an invasion how could we have possibly compelled them to surrender? No matter how successful COIN could have been, with NV unoccupied and the Ho Chi Minh trail(are you going to advocate for the invasions of both Cambodia and Laos?) still active, when would it have ended?

                              O 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • L Lost User

                                IamChrisMcCall wrote:

                                Are you planning on thanking us for getting America out of Vietnam

                                :omg: Nixon was a lefty? :omg:

                                I Offline
                                I Offline
                                Ilion
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #64

                                Mike Mullikin wrote:

                                :omg: Nixon was a lefty? :omg:

                                Whatever Nixon was, he wasn't a "conservative."

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • S Stan Shannon

                                  We achieved victory by every meaningful military measure. We were not defeated militarily but politically thanks to people with attitudes such as your own.

                                  Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                                  O Offline
                                  O Offline
                                  oilFactotum
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #65

                                  Stan Shannon wrote:

                                  We were not defeated militarily but politically

                                  Absolutely true. The people who waged the war failed to provide a strategy for victory or even a reason to try.

                                  Stan Shannon wrote:

                                  thanks to people with attitudes such as your own.

                                  Again, absolutely true. The American people recognized the pointlessness of sending their children to fight and die for no purpose.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • S Stan Shannon

                                    On the other hand, the military of the 1960's was designed to fight two major wars simulataneously. It is difficult to believe that we have gone from that to being incapable to taking out a few minor backwater nations without a draft. (However, I do concur with the need for a draft). The problem is that we have not maintained the offensive. If we had kept these assholes in front of us rather them letting them infiltrate the society we are trying to stabilize it would have been much better. Still, things are not looking all that bad in Iraq right now dispite our incompetence.

                                    Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                                    I Offline
                                    I Offline
                                    Ilion
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #66

                                    Stan Shannon wrote:

                                    (However, I do concur with the need for a draft).

                                    No we don't (#). When I was a kid and the draft was ended ... by the "evil" :rolleyes: Nixon ... just before it was time for me to register (*), I would have agreed that the US needs a draft. Now that I am old, I vehemently opposed to a draft (**). (*) I went down to register, they told me to come back in a month. When I came back, they had pretty much closed up shop and told me to go away. (**) Which, of course, puts the lie to one of the favorite leftist propaganda canards with which they "educated" us teenagers in the '70s. (#) First, consider how lefties look at "free" "government" money. Now, can you seriously believe they will not regard "free" soldiers in the same way?

                                    O S 2 Replies Last reply
                                    0
                                    • O Oakman

                                      oilFactotum wrote:

                                      Irrelevant since the only question that matters is: Who won the war?

                                      Your post is a perfect example of why the left is blamed (and should be blamed) for losing a war that we were winning.

                                      Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                                      I Offline
                                      I Offline
                                      Ilion
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #67

                                      Oakman wrote:

                                      Your post is a perfect example of why the left is blamed (and should be blamed) for losing a war that we were winning.

                                      And more importantly, the leftists should be blamed for the multiple millions of human beings who were slaughtered directly because we, the US, listened to their lies.

                                      O I 2 Replies Last reply
                                      0
                                      • S Stan Shannon

                                        On the other hand, the military of the 1960's was designed to fight two major wars simulataneously. It is difficult to believe that we have gone from that to being incapable to taking out a few minor backwater nations without a draft. (However, I do concur with the need for a draft). The problem is that we have not maintained the offensive. If we had kept these assholes in front of us rather them letting them infiltrate the society we are trying to stabilize it would have been much better. Still, things are not looking all that bad in Iraq right now dispite our incompetence.

                                        Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                                        O Offline
                                        O Offline
                                        Oakman
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #68

                                        Stan Shannon wrote:

                                        On the other hand, the military of the 1960's was designed to fight two major wars simulataneously

                                        That was the theory. However, it was not tested.

                                        Stan Shannon wrote:

                                        It is difficult to believe that we have gone from that to being incapable to taking out a few minor backwater nations without a draft

                                        We have allowed Putin and Wen Jiabao to forge bonds with Iran which puts limits on how much taking out we can do - though I have no doubt that we could return them to the stone age if no other consideration besides miliary might was present.

                                        Stan Shannon wrote:

                                        If we had kept these assholes in front of us rather them letting them infiltrate the society we are trying to stabilize it would have been much better.

                                        Bremer and Rumsfeld hurt this country as badly as if that was their purpose. It wasn't, of course, and I am sure they think of themselves as patriots, but their monumental ineptness did more damage to the U.S. that anyone could have thought possible.

                                        Stan Shannon wrote:

                                        the society we are trying to stabilize

                                        We would have done far better to leave Saddam in power and begun to support him again, if that was our goal.

                                        Stan Shannon wrote:

                                        Still, things are not looking all that bad in Iraq right now dispite our incompetence.

                                        Petreus is a miracle worker. That he has done so much with so little is amazing. I only hope his deputy is at least half as good. But, and 'tis a big but, our troops are being used up. Even though casualties have been reduced, they are still in harm's way 24/7. No-one, no matter how good a soldier, no matter how professional a soldier, can keep going day after day, month after month, tour after tour. Nor is my reading that Iraq is more stable. Just safer. There are still three factions, none with the upper hand, all believing they deserve to rule the other two, and all planning on getting sole power as soon as we leave, whether that's next month, next year, or three years from now. Joe Biden had the right of it awhile back - the only hope for what is left of Iraq is to create a three-state confederation - and the oil geography make that pretty impossible.

                                        Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                                        S 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • I Ilion

                                          Oakman wrote:

                                          Your post is a perfect example of why the left is blamed (and should be blamed) for losing a war that we were winning.

                                          And more importantly, the leftists should be blamed for the multiple millions of human beings who were slaughtered directly because we, the US, listened to their lies.

                                          O Offline
                                          O Offline
                                          Oakman
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #69

                                          Ilíon wrote:

                                          And more importantly, the leftists should be blamed for the multiple millions of human beings who were slaughtered directly because we, the US, listened to their lies.

                                          Put down your matches. We're not burning anyone at the stake tonight, Torquemada.

                                          Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

                                          I 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups