One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
This Is What Winning Looks Like
Page 1 of 2 next>
Jun 1, 2013 10:40:52   #
The Dutchman
 
This Is What Winning Looks Like (Part 1of 3)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKHPTHx0ScQ

This Is What Winning Looks Like (Part 2 of 3)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S77dCAZzcLM

This Is What Winning Looks Like (Part 3 of 3)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8rRqRoCUsg

Or you can watch the full 1 1/2 hour video here:.

This Is What Winning Looks Like (Full Length)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja5Q75hf6QI

Reply
Jun 1, 2013 13:33:33   #
usmc4
 
The Dutchman wrote:
This Is What Winning Looks Like (Part 1of 3)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKHPTHx0ScQ

This Is What Winning Looks Like (Part 2 of 3)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S77dCAZzcLM

This Is What Winning Looks Like (Part 3 of 3)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8rRqRoCUsg

Or you can watch the full 1 1/2 hour video here:.

This Is What Winning Looks Like (Full Length)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja5Q75hf6QI



I just watched part 1, and this is what the American people need to know. You could see the disgust on the Marine advisors face and hear it in his voice. This is what our troops are dying for, a bunch of whacked out drugies, perverts who don't give a crap. Once we leave the country their leaders will vanish with all the wealth of the country and the Tliban will take over again. Business as usual and of course Karzia will blame the U.S. as they all do. The t***h is that the people in the countries we interfere with don't want the form of democracy that were forcing on them. The U.S. should just let them be. But no, the politicians always know best, just like Viet Nam.

Reply
Jun 1, 2013 14:13:27   #
The Dutchman
 
usmc4 wrote:
I just watched part 1, and this is what the American people need to know. You could see the disgust on the Marine advisors face and hear it in his voice. This is what our troops are dying for, a bunch of whacked out drugies, perverts who don't give a crap. Once we leave the country their leaders will vanish with all the wealth of the country and the Tliban will take over again. Business as usual and of course Karzia will blame the U.S. as they all do. The t***h is that the people in the countries we interfere with don't want the form of democracy that were forcing on them. The U.S. should just let them be. But no, the politicians always know best, just like Viet Nam.
I just watched part 1, and this is what the Americ... (show quote)


The i***tic politicians need to keep their noses & opinions out of things they know nothing about Eh? "The Military and how they do their job!"

Reply
 
 
Jun 1, 2013 15:14:19   #
oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)
 
The Dutchman wrote:
The i***tic politicians need to keep their noses & opinions out of things they know nothing about Eh? "The Military and how they do their job!"


It is very sad to watch the mid-range commanders telling the t***h and knowing that the higher ups aren't telling that to people like John (head RINO) McCain when they come around. It makes me sick to see those fools with all the drugs in them having a good time shooting up ammo just to hear the noise.

One thing about that one that bothers me most is that although the Marines know about that one commander they aren't allowed to do anything about him.

I wonder when someone will tell old I Won that his war has been lost because nobody seems to be able to find out how to deal with those people. Yep, his war has been lost, like it or not.

Reply
Jun 1, 2013 16:33:22   #
straightUp Loc: California
 
The Dutchman wrote:
The i***tic politicians need to keep their noses & opinions out of things they know nothing about Eh? "The Military and how they do their job!"

If it wasn't for the i***tic politicians, the military wouldn't have any wars to fight, eh?

Reply
Jun 1, 2013 17:05:14   #
The Dutchman
 
straightUp wrote:
If it wasn't for the i***tic politicians, the military wouldn't have any wars to fight, eh?


No, because there will always be people like the muslims and socialist liberals creating trouble and trying to restrict freedoms. If the politicians would keep there noses out of things they know nothing about the Military would sweep in and get it done and over with instead of these i***tic politicians d**gging things on.

Give this a look:
http://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-2601-1.html

Reply
Jun 1, 2013 19:02:19   #
straightUp Loc: California
 
usmc4 wrote:
The t***h is that the people in the countries we interfere with don't want the form of democracy that were forcing on them. The U.S. should just let them be. But no, the politicians always know best, just like Viet Nam.

I agree with you. Most people in the countries we interfere with don't want us there and I don't blame them. Would you want some foreign army coming here to force us into their way of going things? F that. Even if our country was as f-ed up as Afghanistan we would still want the dignity of solving our own problems our own way. These people are no different. They might not have money or education but they have p***e.

I think the problem starts with businesses with close friends in Washington that want to exploit resources locked up in closed markets overseas. They think it's a drop kick to send in the military to get rid of whoever it is that's keeping the market closed and then "rebuild the nation" into compliance with the interested business. Oh, and let's hide this "compliance" in the folds of "democracy" because that's so much more politically correct even though democracy isn't something anyone can or should force on people with guns.

When you have a defense budget that outweighs all the defense budgets in the rest of he world, it's easy to go in and destroy a small country, but the "nation building" is something we have never been good at. Probably because it's such a stupid idea to start with. People don't WANT their nations to be rebuilt by foreigners. So eventually after years of putting the military in an impossible position the politicians loose their support st home and start calling the troops back.

What a mess. And Afghanistan of all places... the infamous "graveyard of empires". I guess that pipeline is really important.

Reply
 
 
Jun 1, 2013 19:03:25   #
straightUp Loc: California
 
The Dutchman wrote:
No, because there will always be people like the muslims and socialist liberals creating trouble and trying to restrict freedoms. If the politicians would keep there noses out of things they know nothing about the Military would sweep in and get it done and over with instead of these i***tic politicians d**gging things on.

Get what done?

Reply
Jun 1, 2013 20:13:32   #
The Dutchman
 
straightUp wrote:
Get what done?


Go in there and make the whole s**t hole a glow in the dark! That's the only way to put a stop to what has been going on over there for eons...

I'll bet this makes the bleeding heart liberal useful i***ts scream!

Reply
Jun 1, 2013 22:05:25   #
straightUp Loc: California
 
The Dutchman wrote:
Go in there and make the whole s**t hole a glow in the dark! That's the only way to put a stop to what has been going on over there for eons...

I'll bet this makes the bleeding heart liberal useful i***ts scream!

I dunno about bleeding heart liberal useful i***ts... but *I* just don't know why we would want to stick our noses in their business. Besides, even if we did "make the place glow in the dark" - it wouldn't change anything.

Now politicians, I understand - because their corporate masters are getting something out of it (not that I agree with it). But to simply go in there for no other reason than to destroy them just sounds stupid to me.

Reply
Jun 1, 2013 22:40:03   #
The Dutchman
 
straightUp wrote:
I dunno about bleeding heart liberal useful i***ts... but *I* just don't know why we would want to stick our noses in their business. Besides, even if we did "make the place glow in the dark" - it wouldn't change anything.
It sure as hell would just like it did to Japan.
Now politicians, I understand - because their corporate masters are getting something out of it (not that I agree with it). But to simply go in there for no other reason than to destroy them just sounds stupid to me. That is the only way to cure these inbred muslim bastards
I dunno about bleeding heart liberal useful i***ts... (show quote)

Reply
 
 
Jun 2, 2013 01:17:20   #
oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)
 
straightUp wrote:
I agree with you. Most people in the countries we interfere with don't want us there and I don't blame them. Would you want some foreign army coming here to force us into their way of going things? F that. Even if our country was as f-ed up as Afghanistan we would still want the dignity of solving our own problems our own way. These people are no different. They might not have money or education but they have p***e.

I think the problem starts with businesses with close friends in Washington that want to exploit resources locked up in closed markets overseas. They think it's a drop kick to send in the military to get rid of whoever it is that's keeping the market closed and then "rebuild the nation" into compliance with the interested business. Oh, and let's hide this "compliance" in the folds of "democracy" because that's so much more politically correct even though democracy isn't something anyone can or should force on people with guns.

When you have a defense budget that outweighs all the defense budgets in the rest of he world, it's easy to go in and destroy a small country, but the "nation building" is something we have never been good at. Probably because it's such a stupid idea to start with. People don't WANT their nations to be rebuilt by foreigners. So eventually after years of putting the military in an impossible position the politicians loose their support st home and start calling the troops back.

What a mess. And Afghanistan of all places... the infamous "graveyard of empires". I guess that pipeline is really important.
I agree with you. Most people in the countries we ... (show quote)


Do you support Obama signing the ATT of the UN next Monday? Is that thing not aimed at changing our nation by the UN? It wants us to stop allowing the second amendment to be in effect and of course that is to stop our citizenry from having guns that may well be used against blue helmeted UN troops.

The Senate has said they won't ratify that treaty and the makeup of the Senate says they sure won't especially since some Dem Senators come from "red states'' and want to be re-elected in 2014 but know that v****g for that UN rule will throw them out of office.

Now it seems that some people think that if the President and the Secretary of State sign that thing it becomes law. Hillary has already signed it and then resigned. The Constitution says that treaties must be ratified by 2/3 of the Senate (67 of them) and they just aren't going to get that number. I think that Obama is trying to work with the UN to ram this thing through when there has never been a treaty that became law in the US without ratification by the Senate as the Constitution requires. How does he think he can do one of his famous end runs to amend the Constitution to get this thing in effect?

Reply
Jun 2, 2013 10:10:18   #
straightUp Loc: California
 
The Dutchman wrote:

I dunno about bleeding heart liberal useful i***ts... but *I* just don't know why we would want to stick our noses in their business. Besides, even if we did "make the place glow in the dark" - it wouldn't change anything.
It sure as hell would just like it did to Japan.

Sure as hell won't... First of all the Afghans aren't Japanese. Two totally different types of people. Unlike the Japanese, the Afghan's are born fighting. Their entire world has been a war zone for centuries. You can reduce them to craters and caves and they wouldn't even notice a difference. Secondly, Japan was already trying to surrender by the time we murdered those millions of innocent people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Afghans simply don't surrender.

Also, if we did to Afghanistan what we did to Japan, China would step in and turn our economy off like a light switch. Then we wouldn't be able to fund anything including our $$$ military.

I understand saying things like we should just blast them off the face of the planet is a fantasy... makes us feel better. But I just like to piss on those fantasies with doses of reality because they are stupid fantasies.

The Dutchman wrote:

Now politicians, I understand - because their corporate masters are getting something out of it (not that I agree with it). But to simply go in there for no other reason than to destroy them just sounds stupid to me.
That is the only way to cure these inbred muslim bastards

Cure them of what? Being conservative? Being religious? I agree that they're harsh, especially toward their women, but that's how they have been for centuries. All of a sudden now we want to "fix" it?

Reply
Jun 2, 2013 10:29:30   #
straightUp Loc: California
 
oldroy wrote:
Do you support Obama signing the ATT of the UN next Monday? Is that thing not aimed at changing our nation by the UN? It wants us to stop allowing the second amendment to be in effect and of course that is to stop our citizenry from having guns that may well be used against blue helmeted UN troops.

The Senate has said they won't ratify that treaty and the makeup of the Senate says they sure won't especially since some Dem Senators come from "red states'' and want to be re-elected in 2014 but know that v****g for that UN rule will throw them out of office.

Now it seems that some people think that if the President and the Secretary of State sign that thing it becomes law. Hillary has already signed it and then resigned. The Constitution says that treaties must be ratified by 2/3 of the Senate (67 of them) and they just aren't going to get that number. I think that Obama is trying to work with the UN to ram this thing through when there has never been a treaty that became law in the US without ratification by the Senate as the Constitution requires. How does he think he can do one of his famous end runs to amend the Constitution to get this thing in effect?
Do you support Obama signing the ATT of the UN nex... (show quote)


According to the Constitution, any international treaty ratified by the U.S. is to be considered a "law of the land", which is why Bush is technically impeachable. So the question I don't have an answer to at the moment is what process has to be followed for an international treaty to be ratified?

I haven't read the details of the ATT... Maybe I will do that today. Until then I can't tell you if I support Obama's signing.

I am familiar with the 2nd Amendment however...

I support the 2nd Amendment for one reason and one reason only, so we can defend ourselves (or try to) against the U.S. Armed Forces. Which in my mind is the most likely military force to threaten the American people.

I believe that was the reason for the 2nd Amendment. However, I don't think that bearing arms is as much of a defense against an oppressive government as it once was... There's just so many ways our government can oppress us now without even using physical force. So, I'm reconsidering the value of the 2nd Amendment in it's current form. I think it's biggest value is it's symbolism as a marker for the spirit of the Constitution in the face of tyranny. That being said, I think we need a new Amendment to provide better insurance.

Reply
Jun 2, 2013 13:48:50   #
oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)
 
straightUp wrote:
According to the Constitution, any international treaty ratified by the U.S. is to be considered a "law of the land", which is why Bush is technically impeachable. So the question I don't have an answer to at the moment is what process has to be followed for an international treaty to be ratified?

I haven't read the details of the ATT... Maybe I will do that today. Until then I can't tell you if I support Obama's signing.

I am familiar with the 2nd Amendment however...

I support the 2nd Amendment for one reason and one reason only, so we can defend ourselves (or try to) against the U.S. Armed Forces. Which in my mind is the most likely military force to threaten the American people.

I believe that was the reason for the 2nd Amendment. However, I don't think that bearing arms is as much of a defense against an oppressive government as it once was... There's just so many ways our government can oppress us now without even using physical force. So, I'm reconsidering the value of the 2nd Amendment in it's current form. I think it's biggest value is it's symbolism as a marker for the spirit of the Constitution in the face of tyranny. That being said, I think we need a new Amendment to provide better insurance.
According to the Constitution, any international t... (show quote)


Let me help you with how treaties become law in the United States. I will give you a link to the US Senate itself where the treaty approval is discussed.

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Treaties.htm

You can find here that although the Senate doesn't ratify treaties they do give approval or disapproval of resolutions for ratification of treaties. I have some trouble separating actual ratification and what the Senate does in giving its advice and consent, but maybe I am not smart enough or well educated enough to understand things like this.

The Senate has already given The One their advice and consent about the UN Small Arms Treaty, commonly called ATT, and it has showed that the necessary super-majority, (2/3) of them won't v**e for it. Of course, once he signs it he will have the State Department draw up the resolution for the Senate in hopes that it can ride to 2015 when he may see enough Dems get seats in the Senate to give approval.

This treaty will be considered law by all UN members when Obama signs it but our Constitution isn't theirs to control, yet. I say yet because things like Agenda 21 that they have afloat are looking to that happening and too many of our progressives are in favor of Agenda 21.

Reply
Page 1 of 2 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.