On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 18:22:00 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:


He lost over half the neo cons simply because he was not Hillary. Then
he lost the rest because he was actually trying to stop these two un
winnable wars.



Uh-huh... We MAGA yet?

We were far "great" before the last 4 presidents mired us in
unwinnable wars against Islam.

On 12/22/2018 8:20 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 18:22:00 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:


He lost over half the neo cons simply because he was not Hillary. Then
he lost the rest because he was actually trying to stop these two un
winnable wars.



Uh-huh... We MAGA yet?

We were far "great" before the last 4 presidents mired us in
unwinnable wars against Islam.



You think it was a mistake to go after al-Qaeda, ISIS and other
terrorist organizations?

I don't recall any past president waging a war against Islam.

On 12/23/18 2:44 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 12/22/2018 8:20 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 18:22:00 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:


He lost over half the neo cons simply because he was not Hillary. Then
he lost the rest because he was actually trying to stop these two un
winnable wars.



Uh-huh...Â* We MAGA yet?

We were far "great" before the last 4 presidents mired us in
unwinnable wars against Islam.



You think it was a mistake to go after al-Qaeda, ISIS and other
terrorist organizations?

I don't recall any past president waging a war against Islam.




For whatever reasons you may wish to cite, this country has not won a
war against a large, seriously militarized opponent since WWII. We have,
of course, won against dip**** countries like Panama, Iraq, Grenada. If
we get into a war with the Russians or the PRC, and neither side
unleashes nukes, I'm not sure we'd win against them, either. And if
nukes are unleashed, no one wins. Which leads to the question of why do
we waste so much $$$ on a military that likely will not be used in any
large-scale war. If we had used half or more of the money wasted on the
military the last 40 years on infrastructure instead, we'd have a
first-class country with a good electrical grid, railroads, roads, dams,
sewage, energy usage, and environment.

On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 09:11:07 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 12/23/18 2:44 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 12/22/2018 8:20 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 18:22:00 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:


He lost over half the neo cons simply because he was not Hillary. Then
he lost the rest because he was actually trying to stop these two un
winnable wars.



Uh-huh...Â* We MAGA yet?

We were far "great" before the last 4 presidents mired us in
unwinnable wars against Islam.



You think it was a mistake to go after al-Qaeda, ISIS and other
terrorist organizations?

I don't recall any past president waging a war against Islam.




For whatever reasons you may wish to cite, this country has not won a
war against a large, seriously militarized opponent since WWII. We have,
of course, won against dip**** countries like Panama, Iraq, Grenada. If
we get into a war with the Russians or the PRC, and neither side
unleashes nukes, I'm not sure we'd win against them, either. And if
nukes are unleashed, no one wins. Which leads to the question of why do
we waste so much $$$ on a military that likely will not be used in any
large-scale war. If we had used half or more of the money wasted on the
military the last 40 years on infrastructure instead, we'd have a
first-class country with a good electrical grid, railroads, roads, dams,
sewage, energy usage, and environment.

People will pay any amount for a perceived defense. If Trump really
wanted his wall, he should have had the Pentagon build it. $5Billion
would disappear in the couch cushions of the DoD budget.

On 12/23/2018 10:21 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 09:11:07 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 12/23/18 2:44 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 12/22/2018 8:20 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 18:22:00 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:


He lost over half the neo cons simply because he was not Hillary. Then
he lost the rest because he was actually trying to stop these two un
winnable wars.



Uh-huh...Â* We MAGA yet?

We were far "great" before the last 4 presidents mired us in
unwinnable wars against Islam.



You think it was a mistake to go after al-Qaeda, ISIS and other
terrorist organizations?

I don't recall any past president waging a war against Islam.




For whatever reasons you may wish to cite, this country has not won a
war against a large, seriously militarized opponent since WWII. We have,
of course, won against dip**** countries like Panama, Iraq, Grenada. If
we get into a war with the Russians or the PRC, and neither side
unleashes nukes, I'm not sure we'd win against them, either. And if
nukes are unleashed, no one wins. Which leads to the question of why do
we waste so much $$$ on a military that likely will not be used in any
large-scale war. If we had used half or more of the money wasted on the
military the last 40 years on infrastructure instead, we'd have a
first-class country with a good electrical grid, railroads, roads, dams,
sewage, energy usage, and environment.

People will pay any amount for a perceived defense. If Trump really
wanted his wall, he should have had the Pentagon build it. $5Billion
would disappear in the couch cushions of the DoD budget.



He floated that idea but was convinced that the Democrats would make
it political suicide.

Funny thing is ... I don't think he cares about political suicide and
may still find a way to pull that off. I think he's trying to get as
much $$ as he can from Congress and will then supplement additional
programs costs from the DOD.

It's getting almost sickening to watch the "debates". It is obvious
to the most oblivious observer that the Dem's only reason for not
voting to fund any part of a wall/fence/slat/barrier is because they
want to deny Trump the ability to claim another campaign pledge met.

On 12/23/2018 9:11 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 12/23/18 2:44 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 12/22/2018 8:20 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 18:22:00 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:


He lost over half the neo cons simply because he was not Hillary. Then
he lost the rest because he was actually trying to stop these two un
winnable wars.



Uh-huh...Â* We MAGA yet?

We were far "great" before the last 4 presidents mired us in
unwinnable wars against Islam.



You think it was a mistake to go after al-Qaeda, ISIS and other
terrorist organizations?

I don't recall any past president waging a war against Islam.




For whatever reasons you may wish to cite, this country has not won a
war against a large, seriously militarized opponent since WWII. We have,
of course, won against dip**** countries like Panama, Iraq, Grenada. If
we get into a war with the Russians or the PRC, and neither side
unleashes nukes, I'm not sure we'd win against them, either. And if
nukes are unleashed, no one wins. Which leads to the question of why do
we waste so much $$$ on a military that likely will not be used in any
large-scale war. If we had used half or more of the money wasted on the
military the last 40 years on infrastructure instead, we'd have a
first-class country with a good electrical grid, railroads, roads, dams,
sewage, energy usage, and environment.


The reasons are obviously beyond your comprehension so therefore are not
worth trying to explain them to you again and again and again.

On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 02:44:17 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/22/2018 8:20 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 18:22:00 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:


He lost over half the neo cons simply because he was not Hillary. Then
he lost the rest because he was actually trying to stop these two un
winnable wars.



Uh-huh... We MAGA yet?

We were far "great" before the last 4 presidents mired us in
unwinnable wars against Islam.



You think it was a mistake to go after al-Qaeda, ISIS and other
terrorist organizations?

I don't recall any past president waging a war against Islam.



ISIS and Al-Qaeda were products of wars in the middle east although Al
Qaeda really came up in response to the Soviets invading Afghanistan.
They really don't see any difference.
If the Saudis were so concerned about Saddam taking their neighbor,
they should have led the fight to kick him out with the US only
providing limited logistic support, basically just selling them the
arms.
Was it really that important to us which dictators we bought oil from?
It turns out the Saudis are not as harmless as we thought either.

On 12/23/2018 10:18 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 02:44:17 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/22/2018 8:20 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 18:22:00 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:


He lost over half the neo cons simply because he was not Hillary. Then
he lost the rest because he was actually trying to stop these two un
winnable wars.



Uh-huh... We MAGA yet?

We were far "great" before the last 4 presidents mired us in
unwinnable wars against Islam.



You think it was a mistake to go after al-Qaeda, ISIS and other
terrorist organizations?

I don't recall any past president waging a war against Islam.



ISIS and Al-Qaeda were products of wars in the middle east although Al
Qaeda really came up in response to the Soviets invading Afghanistan.
They really don't see any difference.
If the Saudis were so concerned about Saddam taking their neighbor,
they should have led the fight to kick him out with the US only
providing limited logistic support, basically just selling them the
arms.
Was it really that important to us which dictators we bought oil from?
It turns out the Saudis are not as harmless as we thought either.



My question was not on policies and alliances that can be debated forever.

My question was, which of the 4 past presidents (plus the current one)
waged wars against Islam?

On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 10:25:17 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/23/2018 10:18 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 02:44:17 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/22/2018 8:20 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 18:22:00 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:


He lost over half the neo cons simply because he was not Hillary. Then
he lost the rest because he was actually trying to stop these two un
winnable wars.



Uh-huh... We MAGA yet?

We were far "great" before the last 4 presidents mired us in
unwinnable wars against Islam.



You think it was a mistake to go after al-Qaeda, ISIS and other
terrorist organizations?

I don't recall any past president waging a war against Islam.



ISIS and Al-Qaeda were products of wars in the middle east although Al
Qaeda really came up in response to the Soviets invading Afghanistan.
They really don't see any difference.
If the Saudis were so concerned about Saddam taking their neighbor,
they should have led the fight to kick him out with the US only
providing limited logistic support, basically just selling them the
arms.
Was it really that important to us which dictators we bought oil from?
It turns out the Saudis are not as harmless as we thought either.



My question was not on policies and alliances that can be debated forever.

My question was, which of the 4 past presidents (plus the current one)
waged wars against Islam?


Bush daddy and his 3 sons (including the "4th brother" and the tan
one)

On 12/23/2018 11:29 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 10:25:17 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/23/2018 10:18 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2018 02:44:17 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/22/2018 8:20 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2018 18:22:00 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:


He lost over half the neo cons simply because he was not Hillary. Then
he lost the rest because he was actually trying to stop these two un
winnable wars.



Uh-huh... We MAGA yet?

We were far "great" before the last 4 presidents mired us in
unwinnable wars against Islam.



You think it was a mistake to go after al-Qaeda, ISIS and other
terrorist organizations?

I don't recall any past president waging a war against Islam.



ISIS and Al-Qaeda were products of wars in the middle east although Al
Qaeda really came up in response to the Soviets invading Afghanistan.
They really don't see any difference.
If the Saudis were so concerned about Saddam taking their neighbor,
they should have led the fight to kick him out with the US only
providing limited logistic support, basically just selling them the
arms.
Was it really that important to us which dictators we bought oil from?
It turns out the Saudis are not as harmless as we thought either.



My question was not on policies and alliances that can be debated forever.

My question was, which of the 4 past presidents (plus the current one)
waged wars against Islam?


Bush daddy and his 3 sons (including the "4th brother" and the tan
one)



News to me.