Anyone watching...
 

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...

For Putin it's a "national security" issue.
The internal "Russian" domestic issues were exacerbated by Bush's
lame-ass missile defense plans in that part of the world.
Putin doesn't want American missiles right on his border, and I don't
blame him. I don't want Russian missiles in Mexico or Canada.
American missiles in the Czech Republic today, Georgia tomorrow.
Bush refused to listen to Putin's protests about those missiles, and
now is getting spanked.
Simple diplomacy and strategic vision could have avoided this BS.
BTW, I heard Putin talking the other day about the "Georgian
Terroists" and making equivalencies with our invasion of Iraq.
Whether you buy that or not, it was George Bush who gave Putin that
card to play.

--Vic

No argument from me on your post or thoughts. I think you are 100%
correct.

Eisboch

Anyone watching...
 

"hk" wrote in message
. ..


There's nothing we can do with the Russians that involves taking military
measures against them. We can only beat up bitty nations, and not even
those sometime.



Let's assume for a moment that you are correct.

What do you suggest we do about that?

Eisboch

Anyone watching...
 

On Aug 13, 5:17*pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
"hk" wrote in message

. ..

There's nothing we can do with the Russians that involves taking military
measures against them. *We can only beat up bitty nations, and not even
those sometime.

Let's assume for a moment that you are correct.

What do you suggest we do about that?

Eisboch

Call Bush names???

Anyone watching...
 

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 21:12:03 GMT, John H.
wrote:



That last line was written by George Soros, no?

I said my piece on this, John, right or wrong.
BTW, I asked what ramp on the Potomac those catfishers
launch from, but it might be a while before they answer.
Probably out fishing.

--Vic

Anyone watching...
 

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:17:47 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


"hk" wrote in message
...


There's nothing we can do with the Russians that involves taking military
measures against them. We can only beat up bitty nations, and not even
those sometime.



Let's assume for a moment that you are correct.

What do you suggest we do about that?

Eisboch


Argue with Eisboch?
--
** Good Day! **

John H

Anyone watching...
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"hk" wrote in message
. ..


There's nothing we can do with the Russians that involves taking military
measures against them. We can only beat up bitty nations, and not even
those sometime.



Let's assume for a moment that you are correct.

What do you suggest we do about that?

Eisboch


(Harry must be waiting for a return email from the DNC on how to answer)

Eisboch

Anyone watching...
 

Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..


There's nothing we can do with the Russians that involves taking military
measures against them. We can only beat up bitty nations, and not even
those sometime.



Let's assume for a moment that you are correct.

What do you suggest we do about that?

Eisboch



What, that we can only take on bitty nations, or what can be done with
big nations capable of fighting back ?

--
Join the growing number of Republicans putting country ahead of party by
voting for Barack Obama!

Anyone watching...
 

On Aug 13, 7:21*pm, hk wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
...

There's nothing we can do with the Russians that involves taking military
measures against them. *We can only beat up bitty nations, and not even
those sometime.

Let's assume for a moment that you are correct.

What do you suggest we do about that?

Eisboch

What, that we can only take on bitty nations, or what can be done with
big nations capable of fighting back ?

--
Join the growing number of Republicans putting country ahead of party by
voting for Barack Obama!


Sorry Harry but you have no idea what you are talking about.

Anyone watching...
 

JimH wrote:
On Aug 13, 7:21 pm, hk wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
There's nothing we can do with the Russians that involves taking military
measures against them. We can only beat up bitty nations, and not even
those sometime.
Let's assume for a moment that you are correct.
What do you suggest we do about that?
Eisboch
What, that we can only take on bitty nations, or what can be done with
big nations capable of fighting back ?

--
Join the growing number of Republicans putting country ahead of party by
voting for Barack Obama!


Sorry Harry but you have no idea what you are talking about.

Here are the names of two large countries capable of fighting back:

Russia
China

Please explain how we could take on either of these nations and have our
nation survive?

Certainly, we are capable of attacking either (the neocon dream)
but...then what?

The Russians have enough nukes to flatten us, and the Chinese are no
strangers to nukedom, either.

Thus, my posit remains: we are only capable of taking on bitty countries
that have little ability to fight back, and even then, our winning is
not a sure thing.




--
Join the growing number of Republicans putting country ahead of party by
voting for Barack Obama!

Anyone watching...
 

On Aug 13, 7:45*pm, hk wrote:
JimH wrote:
On Aug 13, 7:21 pm, hk wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
om...
There's nothing we can do with the Russians that involves taking military
measures against them. *We can only beat up bitty nations, and not even
those sometime.
Let's assume for a moment that you are correct.
What do you suggest we do about that?
Eisboch
What, that we can only take on bitty nations, or what can be done with
big nations capable of fighting back ?

--
Join the growing number of Republicans putting country ahead of party by
voting for Barack Obama!

Sorry Harry but you have no idea what you are talking about.

Here are the names of two large countries capable of fighting back:

Russia
China

Please explain how we could take on either of these nations and have our
nation survive?

Certainly, we are capable of attacking either (the neocon dream)
but...then what?

The Russians have enough nukes to flatten us, and the Chinese are no
strangers to nukedom, either.

Thus, my posit remains: we are only capable of taking on bitty countries
that have little ability to fight back, and even then, our winning is
not a sure thing.

--
Join the growing number of Republicans putting country ahead of party by
voting for Barack Obama!

Sorry Harry but as I said previously.......you have no idea what you
are talking about.