State of mind

Alleycat wrote:IMO Obama has done some real stupid things. It is obvious that he suffers from narcissism. Now his attitude toward ISIS  suggests that he is slowly sinking into insanity. There is no other way to explain it. Suggesting that what is needed to stop ISIS are social programs is just wacko. ISIS is a murder cult International criminal operation.

Jammer wrote:

Alleycat wrote:IMO Obama has done some real stupid things. It is obvious that he suffers from narcissism. Now his attitude toward ISIS  suggests that he is slowly sinking into insanity. There is no other way to explain it. Suggesting that what is needed to stop ISIS are social programs is just wacko. ISIS is a murder cult International criminal operation.

It is called the progressive liberal thought process and really should not surprise us.  And it is for this very reason that progressive liberals in this country, from the one occupying the White House to the nut jobs on here who support him, are the most dangerous enemy this country faces.  And it is shame on us if we treat these people as anything other than enemies.  They are evil people.

Alleycat wrote:IMO Obama has done some real stupid things. It is obvious that he suffers from narcissism. Now his attitude toward ISIS  suggests that he is slowly sinking into insanity. There is no other way to explain it. Suggesting that what is needed to stop ISIS are social programs is just wacko. ISIS is a murder cult International criminal operation.

Skeptical wrote:

Alleycat wrote:IMO Obama has done some real stupid things. It is obvious that he suffers from narcissism. Now his attitude toward ISIS  suggests that he is slowly sinking into insanity. There is no other way to explain it. Suggesting that what is needed to stop ISIS are social programs is just wacko. ISIS is a murder cult International criminal operation.

Let's face it, that MT suit HMWAIC is a few cards short of a full deck!

Darth Cheney wrote:

Skeptical wrote:

Alleycat wrote:IMO Obama has done some real stupid things. It is obvious that he suffers from narcissism. Now his attitude toward ISIS  suggests that he is slowly sinking into insanity. There is no other way to explain it. Suggesting that what is needed to stop ISIS are social programs is just wacko. ISIS is a murder cult International criminal operation.

Let's face it, that MT suit HMWAIC is a few cards short of a full deck!

Actually, he is openly dismantling freedom in this country without any resistance. The framers feared this could happen and gave us the Second Amendment..."The tree of liberty needs watering with the blood of tyrants from time to time".

Alleycat wrote:IMO Obama has done some real stupid things. It is obvious that he suffers from narcissism. Now his attitude toward ISIS  suggests that he is slowly sinking into insanity. There is no other way to explain it. Suggesting that what is needed to stop ISIS are social programs is just wacko. ISIS is a murder cult International criminal operation.

BUSH, September 14, 2005: Yet we know that this war will not be won by force of arms alone. We must defeat the terrorists on the battlefield and we must also defeat them in the battle of ideas.

We must change the conditions that allow terrorists to flourish and recruit by spreading the hope of freedom to millions who've never known it. We must help raise up the failing states and stagnant societies that provide fertile ground for the terrorists. We must defend and extend a vision of human dignity and opportunity and prosperity, a vision far stronger than the dark appeal of resentment and murder.

To spread the vision of hope the United States is determined to help nations that are struggling with poverty.

We are committed to the Millennium Development goals. This is an ambitious agenda that includes cutting poverty and hunger in half, ensuring that every boy and girl in the world has access to primary education, and halting the spread of AIDS, all by 2015. We have a moral obligation to help others and a moral duty to make sure our actions are effective. In Monterrey in 2002, we agreed to a new vision for the way to fight poverty and curb corruption and provide aid in this new millennium. Developing countries agreed to take responsibility for their own economic progress through good governance and sound policies and the rule of law. Developed countries agreed to support those efforts, including increased aid to nations that undertake necessary reforms.

Caitlyn Piltover wrote:

Alleycat wrote:IMO Obama has done some real stupid things. It is obvious that he suffers from narcissism. Now his attitude toward ISIS  suggests that he is slowly sinking into insanity. There is no other way to explain it. Suggesting that what is needed to stop ISIS are social programs is just wacko. ISIS is a murder cult International criminal operation.

President Bush agrees with Obama.

A little birdy reminded me kindly yesterday, a nice statement that was as true 10 years ago as today.

BUSH, September 14, 2005: Yet we know that this war will not be won by force of arms alone. We must defeat the terrorists on the battlefield and we must also defeat them in the battle of ideas.

We must change the conditions that allow terrorists to flourish and recruit by spreading the hope of freedom to millions who've never known it. We must help raise up the failing states and stagnant societies that provide fertile ground for the terrorists. We must defend and extend a vision of human dignity and opportunity and prosperity, a vision far stronger than the dark appeal of resentment and murder.

To spread the vision of hope the United States is determined to help nations that are struggling with poverty.

We are committed to the Millennium Development goals. This is an ambitious agenda that includes cutting poverty and hunger in half, ensuring that every boy and girl in the world has access to primary education, and halting the spread of AIDS, all by 2015. We have a moral obligation to help others and a moral duty to make sure our actions are effective. In Monterrey in 2002, we agreed to a new vision for the way to fight poverty and curb corruption and provide aid in this new millennium. Developing countries agreed to take responsibility for their own economic progress through good governance and sound policies and the rule of law. Developed countries agreed to support those efforts, including increased aid to nations that undertake necessary reforms.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/14/international/14text-bush.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

nightlight88 wrote:

Caitlyn Piltover wrote:

Alleycat wrote:IMO Obama has done some real stupid things. It is obvious that he suffers from narcissism. Now his attitude toward ISIS  suggests that he is slowly sinking into insanity. There is no other way to explain it. Suggesting that what is needed to stop ISIS are social programs is just wacko. ISIS is a murder cult International criminal operation.

President Bush agrees with Obama.

A little birdy reminded me kindly yesterday, a nice statement that was as true 10 years ago as today.

BUSH, September 14, 2005: Yet we know that this war will not be won by force of arms alone. We must defeat the terrorists on the battlefield and we must also defeat them in the battle of ideas.

We must change the conditions that allow terrorists to flourish and recruit by spreading the hope of freedom to millions who've never known it. We must help raise up the failing states and stagnant societies that provide fertile ground for the terrorists. We must defend and extend a vision of human dignity and opportunity and prosperity, a vision far stronger than the dark appeal of resentment and murder.

To spread the vision of hope the United States is determined to help nations that are struggling with poverty.

We are committed to the Millennium Development goals. This is an ambitious agenda that includes cutting poverty and hunger in half, ensuring that every boy and girl in the world has access to primary education, and halting the spread of AIDS, all by 2015. We have a moral obligation to help others and a moral duty to make sure our actions are effective. In Monterrey in 2002, we agreed to a new vision for the way to fight poverty and curb corruption and provide aid in this new millennium. Developing countries agreed to take responsibility for their own economic progress through good governance and sound policies and the rule of law. Developed countries agreed to support those efforts, including increased aid to nations that undertake necessary reforms.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/14/international/14text-bush.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Anyone who is/has been in the military knows you cannot be a peace keeper until you become a PEACE MAKER.  

nightlight88 wrote:
Anyone who is/has been in the military knows you cannot be a peace keeper until you become a PEACE MAKER.  

Caitlyn Piltover wrote:

nightlight88 wrote:
Anyone who is/has been in the military knows you cannot be a peace keeper until you become a PEACE MAKER.  

You cannot force peace, just ask the British, French, Spanish, & Portuguese how well that worked for them.

Caitlyn Piltover wrote:

nightlight88 wrote:
Anyone who is/has been in the military knows you cannot be a peace keeper until you become a PEACE MAKER.  

You cannot force peace, just ask the British, French, Spanish, & Portuguese how well that worked for them.

nightlight88 wrote:

Caitlyn Piltover wrote:

nightlight88 wrote:
Anyone who is/has been in the military knows you cannot be a peace keeper until you become a PEACE MAKER.  

You cannot force peace, just ask the British, French, Spanish, & Portuguese how well that worked for them.

I see you have never served this country in the military.  

Skeptical wrote:

nightlight88 wrote:

Caitlyn Piltover wrote:

nightlight88 wrote:
Anyone who is/has been in the military knows you cannot be a peace keeper until you become a PEACE MAKER.  

You cannot force peace, just ask the British, French, Spanish, & Portuguese how well that worked for them.

I see you have never served this country in the military.  

Oh, Puhleeze do not get her started on the military!

nightlight88 wrote:

Skeptical wrote:

nightlight88 wrote:

Caitlyn Piltover wrote:

nightlight88 wrote:
Anyone who is/has been in the military knows you cannot be a peace keeper until you become a PEACE MAKER.  

You cannot force peace, just ask the British, French, Spanish, & Portuguese how well that worked for them.

I see you have never served this country in the military.  

Oh, Puhleeze do not get her started on the military!

does she hate the military like her hero obama?

Skeptical wrote:

nightlight88 wrote:

Skeptical wrote:

nightlight88 wrote:

Caitlyn Piltover wrote:

nightlight88 wrote:
Anyone who is/has been in the military knows you cannot be a peace keeper until you become a PEACE MAKER.  

You cannot force peace, just ask the British, French, Spanish, & Portuguese how well that worked for them.

I see you have never served this country in the military.  

Oh, Puhleeze do not get her started on the military!

does she hate the military like her hero obama?

If she is who I think she is then the answer is yes.  It is too bad you never read her rants about the military on the old GPV.

Skeptical wrote:
Quick, please tell us how peace is obtained.

Hint:  Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Europe as a whole did not achieve peace when Neville Chamberlain uttered those infamous words, "Peace for Our Time" on 30 September 1938 when Hitler was appeased.

Peace or a good measure of peace in Europe was obtained when Nazi Germany was defeated militarily and US troops among others kept the peace.

Caitlyn Piltover wrote:

Skeptical wrote:
Quick, please tell us how peace is obtained.

Hint:  Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Europe as a whole did not achieve peace when Neville Chamberlain uttered those infamous words, "Peace for Our Time" on 30 September 1938 when Hitler was appeased.

Peace or a good measure of peace in Europe was obtained when Nazi Germany was defeated militarily and US troops among others kept the peace.

How well did that work out for Germany in the end? I seem to recall a certain wall being put up.

Caitlyn Piltover wrote:

Skeptical wrote:
Quick, please tell us how peace is obtained.

Hint:  Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Europe as a whole did not achieve peace when Neville Chamberlain uttered those infamous words, "Peace for Our Time" on 30 September 1938 when Hitler was appeased.

Peace or a good measure of peace in Europe was obtained when Nazi Germany was defeated militarily and US troops among others kept the peace.

How well did that work out for Germany in the end? I seem to recall a certain wall being put up.

Skeptical wrote:
Who invaded Germany after May, 8 1945 and engaged in armed conflict?

Caitlyn Piltover wrote:

Skeptical wrote:
Who invaded Germany after May, 8 1945 and engaged in armed conflict?

Soviet Union did a wonderful job in Germany(sarcasm), and I think the date you were looking for is May 10th.

Victory in Europe Day, generally known as V-E Day, VE Day, or simply V Day was the public holiday celebrated on 8 May 1945 (7 May in Commonwealth realms) to mark the formal acceptance by the Allies of World War II of Nazi Germany's unconditional surrender of its armed forces.[1] It thus marked the end of World War II in Europe.

Caitlyn Piltover wrote:
How long did the Soviet Union occupy all of Germany?

Caitlyn Piltover wrote:

Skeptical wrote:

Caitlyn Piltover wrote:
How long did the Soviet Union occupy all of Germany?

You and I both know it wasn't all of Germany, but their half didn't fair so well, which is the point of how peace cannot be forced.

Meanwhile if you look at the other half, it wasn't attempted to be forced.

How well did that work out for Germany in the end?

Skeptical wrote:
When you said,

How well did that work out for Germany in the end?

really wasn't sure if you actually knew what you were talking about.

Caitlyn Piltover wrote:

Skeptical wrote:
When you said,

How well did that work out for Germany in the end?

really wasn't sure if you actually knew what you were talking about.

Well that is just silly.

At the Potsdam Conference (17 July to 2 August 1945), after Germany's unconditional surrender on 8 May 1945,[1] the Allies divided "Occupation Zone Germany" into four military occupation zones — France in the southwest, Britain in the northwest, the United States in the south, and the Soviet Union in the east