What is a vital U.S. Interest?

[1776]

kook

Kook....and Putin's cocksucker.

here's how you do it. put your cursor at the bottom of the post you are replying to and start typing. even a moron like you should be able to grasp that.

you really don't know how to do it, do you?

kook

 

[Pheonixops]

Thanks for posting that, I heard it this afternoon. That song says a lot about the people who produced it and the people who like it. It demonstrates their (your) mindset in a myriad of ways.

RUSH: Putin Sings 'Come Back Barry, When You Grow A Pair' - SPOOF - YouTube

 

[Pheonixops]

So says the guy with a shirtless Putin in his avatar! Or were you referring to yourself?

Kook....and Putin's cocksucker.

Obama being dumber than a rock, is smarter than you....kook.

here's how you do it. put your cursor at the bottom of the post you are replying to and start typing. even a moron like you should be able to grasp that.

 

[Pheonixops]

Do you know just HOW CLOSE we were to actually WINNING???



A Better War: The Unexamined Victories and Final Tragedy of America's Last Years in Vietnam: Lewis Sorley: 9780156013093: Amazon.com: Books



A Better War: The Unexamined Victories and Final Tragedy of America's Last Years in Vietnam: Lewis Sorley: 9780156013093: Amazon.com: Books


We snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

Who's to blame?

Congress.

Yes, we were very close to "winning". But what would we have won? the opportuity to have american troops in viet nam for the next 50 years?

There was nothing to win.

Goddam some of you children regard freedom so casually!

It will take having lost it for you to value it.

That is a lesson you should never have to learn first hand but I'm afraid you are going to write your own destiny.

You are not a Conservative at heart.

You sound like a Mullatto Liberal.

You guys are great, thank you!

Are you a republican or a conservative?

 

[Mojo2]

Yes, we were very close to "winning". But what would we have won? the opportuity to have american troops in viet nam for the next 50 years?

There was nothing to win.

Goddam some of you children regard freedom so casually!

It will take having lost it for you to value it.

That is a lesson you should never have to learn first hand but I'm afraid you are going to write your own destiny.

You are not a Conservative at heart.

You sound like a Mullatto Liberal.

You guys are great, thank you!

Are you a republican or a conservative?

Here's a clue.

American political history is defined by three great crises. The first crisis was the American Revolution, which was declared on July 4, 1776 but whose roots can be traced back at least to 1763. That period of crisis ended with the election of Thomas Jefferson as president in what has become known as the “Revolution of 1800.”

The second crisis was the crisis over slavery that culminated in the Civil War. While the Founders had opposed slavery in principle, but had been forced to compromise with the institution in practice for the sake of the Union, the rise of the “positive good” school of slavery in the South marked a turn away from the Founders’ principles, and their practice. In response, Abraham Lincoln explained and defended the Founder’s approach.

The third great crisis, which continues today, is the challenge of Progressivism, a movement founded by Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, and others.

The Progressives rejected the Founders’ principles, including their notions of a fixed human nature and inalienable natural rights.

Instead, they believed in a human nature that evolved and changed, which in turn justified their efforts to break down separation of powers in order to expand the size and scope of government far beyond the Founders’ intent.

In order to understand fully the previous crises, and to be able to respond well to the current crisis, we must understand the causes of America.

America has four causes—a material cause: primarily the land and the people; an efficient cause: the Founding Founders who led the Revolution in the name of the American people; a formal cause: the Constitution, especially the structure of government it establishes; and a final cause: the principles of free government outlined in the Declaration of Independence.

With this background, we can answer the question: Was the American Founding revolutionary or conservative? In fact it was both: It sought to conserve the oldest and highest law, which according to the Declaration of Independence is “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” The Founders compared the natural law to the conventional law under which they lived, and—as described so eloquently and succinctly in the Declaration of Independence—determined that a revolution was justified in the name of this higher law.

Constitution 101 - Part 1 - Lecture - Hillsdale College Online Courses

 

[DriftingSand]

The libs here, and their fellow travelling narco-libertarians, maintain that Ukraine is not a vital US interest and we need to stay away.
So what is a vital U.S. interest? Philippines? Cuba? Hawaii? California? At what point is action of any kind a necessity?

I think it depends on whether America holds the land as a US territory or not. I don't personally see the Ukraine as being much different than Russia territorially speaking. Had Russia left that region and grabbed land belonging to France or San Salvador or some other non-Russian region then there would be reason for concern (in my opinion).

 

[Redfish]

Do you know just HOW CLOSE we were to actually WINNING???



A Better War: The Unexamined Victories and Final Tragedy of America's Last Years in Vietnam: Lewis Sorley: 9780156013093: Amazon.com: Books



A Better War: The Unexamined Victories and Final Tragedy of America's Last Years in Vietnam: Lewis Sorley: 9780156013093: Amazon.com: Books


We snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

Who's to blame?

Congress.

Yes, we were very close to "winning". But what would we have won? the opportuity to have american troops in viet nam for the next 50 years?

There was nothing to win.

Goddam some of you children regard freedom so casually!

It will take having lost it for you to value it.

That is a lesson you should never have to learn first hand but I'm afraid you are going to write your own destiny.

You are not a Conservative at heart.

You sound like a Mullatto Liberal.

We were not fighting for "freedom" in viet nam. we were fighting for a stupid idea that viet nam was a domino and that if the far east all went communist it would somehow hurt the USA. Kennedy and Johnson's war was a stupid waste of 58,000 american lives and billions of dollars.

I neither a mulatto or a liberal-----------I am an anglo saxon conservative who loves this country and freedom. I am very saddened at what is happening in DC over the last 20 or 30 years.

We are losing freedom in this country because of stupidity like viet nam, Iraq, ACA, gay marriage, ever increasing welfare rolls, unemployment, stupid energy policy, NSA spying, IRS targeting, presidential lying, corruption, bribery via lobbyists, insane fiscal policy.

But idiots like you want us constantly involved in someone else's wars.

 

[Redfish]

The libs here, and their fellow travelling narco-libertarians, maintain that Ukraine is not a vital US interest and we need to stay away.
So what is a vital U.S. interest? Philippines? Cuba? Hawaii? California? At what point is action of any kind a necessity?

I think it depends on whether America holds the land as a US territory or not. I don't personally see the Ukraine as being much different than Russia territorially speaking. Had Russia left that region and grabbed land belonging to France or San Salvador or some other non-Russian region then there would be reason for concern (in my opinion).

exactly right

 

[editec]

what 'vital U.S. interest' did Obama protect in Libya.......?

Setting up Lubya to STEAL the world's largest aquifer project.

Yeah check it out..

Momar's government spend $87 billion building this massive project, but he FAILED to borrow money from the BANKSTERS to build it. (the people of Libya paid for it)

That means that the BANKSTERS couldn't control the water, so suddenly Momar -- who has been our ally, suddenlym once again, became a terrible tyrant who had to be removed.

Some of us paying attention note that the MASTERS are now doing two things all over the world

DESTROYING NATURAL WATERS sources (through things like fracking) and BUYING UP EVERY WATER SOURCE they can get their hands on.

Momar understood that and prevented WESTERN BANKSTERS from controlling Libya waters (by finance, the bankrupcy) so they got rid of him.

Watch and see how the BANKSTERS now get control over that water.

I guarantee you that they will find a way to get control of this precious resource.

 

[Redfish]

what 'vital U.S. interest' did Obama protect in Libya.......?

Setting up Lubya to STEAL the world's largest aquifer project.

Yeah check it out..

Momar's government spend $87 billion building this massive project, but he FAILED to borrow money from the BANKSTERS to build it. (the people of Libya paid for it)

That means that the BANKSTERS couldn't control the water, so suddenly Momar -- who has been our ally, suddenlym once again, became a terrible tyrant who had to be removed.

Some of us paying attention note that the MASTERS are now doing two things all over the world

DESTROYING NATURAL WATERS sources (through things like fracking) and BUYING UP EVERY WATER SOURCE they can get their hands on.

Momar understood that and prevented WESTERN BANKSTERS from controlling Libya waters (by finance, the bankrupcy) so they got rid of him.

Watch and see how the BANKSTERS now get control over that water.

I guarantee you that they will find a way to get control of this precious resource.

Oh, geez, here we go again------the evil BANKSTERS are destroying the world and hoarding all of its money in secret accounts in switzerland. then they are going to hide away in a secret underwater cave and eat cavier while the rest of the world starves.



you are an idiot. better watch out, goldfinger, dr no, and scaramanga are about to descend on you and take all of your stuff.

 

[velvtacheeze]

I have an example from history: Ending slavery and bringing the treason states to heel through military force. It was time to get brutal.

It's sad really. So many southern conservatives whine about Obama being weak, but then throw a major pity party about General Sherman. The South deserved to get hit hard, and probably deserved to get hit harder than it did. They only have themselves to blame for it all.

your understanding of history is as empty as your understanding of current events. you know nothing about the south, the north, or the civil war.

but I bet you can sing the obama fight song------------------lets hear it--------------"barack hussein obama mmm mmm mmm"

I understand the Civil War. Some states wanted to continue slavery, and committed armed, high treason against the United States to do just that. Disgraceful.

 

[Redfish]

I have an example from history: Ending slavery and bringing the treason states to heel through military force. It was time to get brutal.

It's sad really. So many southern conservatives whine about Obama being weak, but then throw a major pity party about General Sherman. The South deserved to get hit hard, and probably deserved to get hit harder than it did. They only have themselves to blame for it all.

your understanding of history is as empty as your understanding of current events. you know nothing about the south, the north, or the civil war.

but I bet you can sing the obama fight song------------------lets hear it--------------"barack hussein obama mmm mmm mmm"

I understand the Civil War. Some states wanted to continue slavery, and committed armed, high treason against the United States to do just that. Disgraceful.

as I said, you have no idea what the civil war was all about, your last post confirms it.

Hint; it was not about slavery.

 

[Darkwind]

The libs here, and their fellow travelling narco-libertarians, maintain that Ukraine is not a vital US interest and we need to stay away.
So what is a vital U.S. interest? Philippines? Cuba? Hawaii? California? At what point is action of any kind a necessity?

Philippines: Nope.

Cuba: Nope.

Hawaii: Yep.

California: Yep.

At what point is action of any kind a necessity?

When someone threatens the actual U.S., including its formally recognized territories/districts, or a country with which we have a border that asks for our support.

So, our economic livlihood and well being is not part of your list. Not surprising.

 

[Darkwind]

what 'vital U.S. interest' did Obama protect in Libya.......?

Setting up Lubya to STEAL the world's largest aquifer project.

Yeah check it out..

Momar's government spend $87 billion building this massive project, but he FAILED to borrow money from the BANKSTERS to build it. (the people of Libya paid for it)

That means that the BANKSTERS couldn't control the water, so suddenly Momar -- who has been our ally, suddenlym once again, became a terrible tyrant who had to be removed.

Some of us paying attention note that the MASTERS are now doing two things all over the world

DESTROYING NATURAL WATERS sources (through things like fracking) and BUYING UP EVERY WATER SOURCE they can get their hands on.

Momar understood that and prevented WESTERN BANKSTERS from controlling Libya waters (by finance, the bankrupcy) so they got rid of him.

Watch and see how the BANKSTERS now get control over that water.

I guarantee you that they will find a way to get control of this precious resource.

You're losing it....

 

[zeke]

what 'vital U.S. interest' did Obama protect in Libya.......?

Setting up Lubya to STEAL the world's largest aquifer project.

Yeah check it out..

Momar's government spend $87 billion building this massive project, but he FAILED to borrow money from the BANKSTERS to build it. (the people of Libya paid for it)

That means that the BANKSTERS couldn't control the water, so suddenly Momar -- who has been our ally, suddenlym once again, became a terrible tyrant who had to be removed.

Some of us paying attention note that the MASTERS are now doing two things all over the world

DESTROYING NATURAL WATERS sources (through things like fracking) and BUYING UP EVERY WATER SOURCE they can get their hands on.

Momar understood that and prevented WESTERN BANKSTERS from controlling Libya waters (by finance, the bankrupcy) so they got rid of him.

Watch and see how the BANKSTERS now get control over that water.

I guarantee you that they will find a way to get control of this precious resource.

You're losing it....

That's right. losing it. There has NEVER been fighting over scarce water resources. And there has never in the history of the world been groups of wealthy individuals who have cornered the market on resources.Or tried to. And there have never ever been people who want to rule the world the way they want it done.

Where ever in the world could people come to believe that the ultra wealthy would seek to control water.

I mean, who in the fuck needs water and how could the control of water enhance the wealth of those who control access to the water.

Never happen in a zillion years. Right darkbreeze?

 

[velvtacheeze]

your understanding of history is as empty as your understanding of current events. you know nothing about the south, the north, or the civil war.

but I bet you can sing the obama fight song------------------lets hear it--------------"barack hussein obama mmm mmm mmm"

I understand the Civil War. Some states wanted to continue slavery, and committed armed, high treason against the United States to do just that. Disgraceful.

as I said, you have no idea what the civil war was all about, your last post confirms it.

Hint; it was not about slavery.

Oh no. You're one of those conservatives. Just a rung above the birthers on the ladder of conservative insanity. The sad myth that the treason states did not rebel to protect slavery is laughable. I suggest you not admit to believing this myth in polite society.

On Dec. 24, 1860, delegates at South Carolina’s secession convention adopted a “Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union.” It noted “an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery” and protested that Northern states had failed to “fulfill their constitutional obligations” by interfering with the return of fugitive slaves to bondage. Slavery, not states’ rights, birthed the Civil War.

Five myths about why the South seceded - The Washington Post

 

[Jughead]

What is a vital U.S. Interest?

Pakistan. It is a country that has nuclear weapons. Al-Qaeda and the Taliban have a strong presence in Pakistan. A vital interest is to make sure that those nuclear weapons continue to be safeguarded.

 

[1776]

Shitstain....it's called mockery, sarcasm, etc....yeah you are that fucking stupid.

Your boyfriend is riding on the back.

So says the guy with a shirtless Putin in his avatar! Or were you referring to yourself?

Kook....and Putin's cocksucker.

here's how you do it. put your cursor at the bottom of the post you are replying to and start typing. even a moron like you should be able to grasp that.

 

[Redfish]

I understand the Civil War. Some states wanted to continue slavery, and committed armed, high treason against the United States to do just that. Disgraceful.

as I said, you have no idea what the civil war was all about, your last post confirms it.

Hint; it was not about slavery.

Oh no. You're one of those conservatives. Just a rung above the birthers on the ladder of conservative insanity. The sad myth that the treason states did not rebel to protect slavery is laughable. I suggest you not admit to believing this myth in polite society.

On Dec. 24, 1860, delegates at South Carolina’s secession convention adopted a “Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union.” It noted “an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery” and protested that Northern states had failed to “fulfill their constitutional obligations” by interfering with the return of fugitive slaves to bondage. Slavery, not states’ rights, birthed the Civil War.

Five myths about why the South seceded - The Washington Post

the washington post version of history

 

[Pheonixops]

Goddam some of you children regard freedom so casually!

It will take having lost it for you to value it.

That is a lesson you should never have to learn first hand but I'm afraid you are going to write your own destiny.

You are not a Conservative at heart.

You sound like a Mullatto Liberal.

You guys are great, thank you!

Are you a republican or a conservative?

Here's a clue.

American political history is defined by three great crises. The first crisis was the American Revolution, which was declared on July 4, 1776 but whose roots can be traced back at least to 1763. That period of crisis ended with the election of Thomas Jefferson as president in what has become known as the “Revolution of 1800.”

The second crisis was the crisis over slavery that culminated in the Civil War. While the Founders had opposed slavery in principle, but had been forced to compromise with the institution in practice for the sake of the Union, the rise of the “positive good” school of slavery in the South marked a turn away from the Founders’ principles, and their practice. In response, Abraham Lincoln explained and defended the Founder’s approach.

The third great crisis, which continues today, is the challenge of Progressivism, a movement founded by Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, and others.

The Progressives rejected the Founders’ principles, including their notions of a fixed human nature and inalienable natural rights.

Instead, they believed in a human nature that evolved and changed, which in turn justified their efforts to break down separation of powers in order to expand the size and scope of government far beyond the Founders’ intent.

In order to understand fully the previous crises, and to be able to respond well to the current crisis, we must understand the causes of America.

America has four causes—a material cause: primarily the land and the people; an efficient cause: the Founding Founders who led the Revolution in the name of the American people; a formal cause: the Constitution, especially the structure of government it establishes; and a final cause: the principles of free government outlined in the Declaration of Independence.

With this background, we can answer the question: Was the American Founding revolutionary or conservative? In fact it was both: It sought to conserve the oldest and highest law, which according to the Declaration of Independence is “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” The Founders compared the natural law to the conventional law under which they lived, and—as described so eloquently and succinctly in the Declaration of Independence—determined that a revolution was justified in the name of this higher law.

Constitution 101 - Part 1 - Lecture - Hillsdale College Online Courses

"Unfortunately for us, our fathers adopted the common law of England—a law poisoned by kingly prerogative—by every form of oppression, by the spirit of caste, and permeated, saturated, with the political heresy that the people received their rights, privileges and immunities from the crown. The thirteen original colonies received their laws, their forms, their ideas of justice, from the old world. All the judicial, legislative, and executive springs and sources had been touched and tainted.

In the struggle with England, our fathers justified their rebellion by declaring that Nature had clothed all men with the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The moment success crowned their efforts, they changed their noble declaration of equal rights for all, and basely interpolated the word “white.” They adopted a Constitution that denied the Declaration of Independence—a Constitution that recognized and upheld slavery, protected the slave-trade, legalized piracy upon the high seas—that demoralized, degraded, and debauched the nation, and that at last reddened with brave blood the fields of the Republic.

Our fathers planted the seeds of injustice, and we gathered the harvest. In the blood and flame of civil war, we retraced our fathers’ steps. In the stress of war, we implored the aid of Liberty, and asked once more for the protection of Justice. We civilized the Constitution of our fathers. We adopted three Amendments—the 13th, 14th and 15th—the Trinity of Liberty."

"Before the adoption of this amendment, the Constitution had always been construed to be the perfect shield of slavery. In order that slavery might be protected, the slave States were considered as sovereign. Freedom was regarded as a local prejudice, slavery as the ward of the Nation, the jewel of the Constitution. For three-quarters of a century, the Supreme Court of the United States exhausted judicial ingenuity in guarding, protecting and fostering that infamous institution. For the purpose of preserving that infinite outrage, words and phrases were warped, and stretched, and tortured, and thumbscrewed, and racked. Slavery was the one sacred thing, and the Supreme Court was its constitutional guardian."
Volume 11 | The Ingersoll Times