Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yep you are clueless, did you look at what this poster was quoting? I guess not....
Ok sparky, show me the transcript from the debate where the POTUS specifically spoke about the Marines and k bars.
I'll wait.
Think I'll take a nap, I know its gonna be a long wait.
His statement was still ignorant at best. Obama brings up the most stupid of things. Why does he not tell us why we have 4 dead Americans, seems he does not want to bring that up! does he?
His statement was still ignorant at best. Obama brings up the most stupid of things. Why does he not tell us why we have 4 dead Americans, seems he does not want to bring that up! does he?
Because thats not what they were speaking of in that portion of the debate.
You do understand that they cant just talk about whatever they want to during the debate, right?
But please, dont let logic get in the way of you disliking Obama because he didnt talk about what you wanted him to.
I'd hope combat vets and soldiers in general are smarter than that, that they know what Obama was talking about when he responded to a rather lame "build battleships like it is 1917 again" argument by the kind of person you identify with.
Actually I am 100% for a smaller Navy. Less carriers and more subs. Bang for the buck the sub is a clear winner.
What I take exception to is a man making humor about things he has no clue about.
Fact all soldiers and Marines are trained to use Bayonets. Why? Because they might need them. Why because civilian leaders send them into harms way often without regard for the loss of military lives.
Blackhawk down comes to mind.
I no more Identify with Romney than I do Obama. Neither are men I would opt for if given a choice.
Why is it Obama needs a team of supporters to follow him around and explain what he really meant?
I understood his attempt at humor, but it was lame at best.
Here try this explanation.
Todays ships are more modern and automated. Ships no longer require the man power that they did even 30 years ago to be mission capable. The weapons platforms used today are more powerful, more accurate and more effective. That is why we need less of them.
Wanting is one thing, going about it is another. Sorry, I see 1920s and I drive past Eisenhower's birthplace, I can't help but wonder how high for a cliff he would look for, to jump off it, to see the state of republicanism today, and for 2-3 decades now. And you can thank FDR too. Let us not forget the birth of military industrial complex and its influence, the push for cold war, "fear the commies rhetoric" and what not.
Ideologies don't make realities. And especially based on ideas from people who personally benefited from policies in post-WWII period that lasted 2-3 decades, and now support the exact opposite for the future generations.
That isn't what my Dad said the night of Sputnik I on October 4, 1957 when he took me at 6 years old, soon to be 7 in the front yard.
That cold war you speak of was real. it isn't like now where you lefties tell a different tale made up of nothing but hype and spin.
I want my grandson to live in a world where people work and earn what they have, and a SMALLER Govt that either leads, follows or gets out of the way.
I am not into Romney, how could i be he is a gun grabber from Mass, but i am not into the failed Obama puppet man either.
That was the real Obama on the 1st debate.... The little guy looking down taking that spanking.
Debate 2 and 3 did nothing to earn him any support because no one can stand on a record that isn't there.
But right now it's still to early to tell....... You just might have your little red commie for 4 more years.
Be fine by me, as by the end of that time the USA will really need to be rebuilt anyway.
Funny though you and I would agree on Eisenhower. I grew up for a early time in a town were Patton once lived too. A place called Hamilton in Mass..... ever hear of the place? i also recall Eisenhower as president but i was a wee lad back then.
You seem like a intelligent person so I would assume that you understand the difference between quantitative and qualitative which is basis for the current debate regarding the number vs the quality of warships needed by the Navy. So, let's not pretend that the argument is between a strong and a weak naval force.
It is probable 'we' don't have to, but Obama does..... The real question is, what is it Obama does NOT have to pretend ?
So far his guessing isn't working... The guy couldn't run a lemon aid stand. He knows nothing of ships, bayonets, or what trucks burn as fuel.
Evidently he doesn't know which end of a horse is the front end either, because all we get from him comes out the other end of a horse.
All that tuff guy talk is no more than garbage. Not even good high school BS....
Quite frankly I would like to see him debate a New York city wh ore....... I would bet money she would win. (nannied word go figure)
After all she would know what working IS.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
