OBAMA'S CIVIL DEFENSE FORCE, OR NEW AMERICAN GESTAPO

[Gutshot John]

Uh, buddy...the WTC was bombed the first time ONE MONTH after Clinton took office. How did he need hindsight to take something that happened previous to the military cuts into account? Yeah, that sentence is oddly constructed, but I'm too stupid to word it any differently.

I think you're intentionally being obtuse, but you're not Tom Brokaw, and I'm not your average TV viewer...you know full well Clinton had knowledge of the Islamic threat BEFORE he made massive defense cuts. And even if he didn't 'know' anything specific, the fact that we had a Islamic attack on our own soil should have been the impetus to start FINDING OUT. Not cutting our defense and intelligence budgets. But hey, there's the way it was, and there's the way CNN would put it. Guess which one you're following?

One more time...the military cuts began BEFORE Clinton took office AND we don't need a Cold War military budget (meant to counter a SUPERPOWER) to deal with terrorism.

If we do, then tautologically we are losing the strategic fight.

PS. Please check the definition of obtuse. I don't think you're employing it correctly.

[RTA]

One more time...the military cuts began BEFORE Clinton took office AND we don't need a Cold War military budget (meant to counter a SUPERPOWER) to deal with terrorism.

If we do, then tautologically we are losing the strategic fight.

You seem very selective on both your memory and facts.

Bush I made cuts in a military that had just BUILT UP for war...in other words, it was going back to being a peacetime military. In any event, they were NOTHING like the gutting Clinton gave the military, and neither can you trace Clinton's cuts back to Bush. Please show me how you can trace it...hell, I guess technically, Lincoln gutted the military, no wait, it was Washington, no, it was Wilson...shit, no, it was Eisenhower.

Making cuts in a military on a war footing to make the transition back to a peacetime military is nothing like massively gutting the PEACETIME BUDGET. You seem to have a real hard time understanding that. Bush WON THE WAR....and then cut back because that's how its been ****ing done since the ****ing Athenians were fighting the ****ing Spartans. Clinton GUTTED the military despite the fact that there was a major Islamic threat, BECAUSE HE WANTED THE MONEY ELSEWHERE. I guess the two are equal to you...

What does an army do in peacetime? A lot of things, but the simple answer is, they TRAIN. What happens to that army when their training budget is cut? The answer is, their readiness level drops.

In any event, I've laid the timeline out, and you just keep repeating the words of a impeached, known liar at face value, a man who has repeatedly shown his and his party's disdain for both the military in particular and national defense in general. I don't think we're going to agree, so I'll just say, Lewinsky's for everyone, her treat.


I replied before you added the obtuse request, so here you go...

ob·tuse (ŏb-tōōs', -tyōōs', əb-) Pronunciation Key
adj. ob·tus·er, ob·tus·est

1.
1. Lacking quickness of perception or intellect.
2. Characterized by a lack of intelligence or sensitivity: an obtuse remark.
3. Not distinctly felt: an obtuse pain.
4. Not sharp, pointed, or acute in form; blunt.
5. Having an obtuse angle: an obtuse triangle.
6. Botany. Having a blunt or rounded tip: an obtuse leaf.
2.
1. Not sharp, pointed, or acute in form; blunt.
2. Having an obtuse angle: an obtuse triangle.
3. Botany. Having a blunt or rounded tip: an obtuse leaf.


See 1 up there? Being intentionally obtuse means you're playing dumb. Thinking I used the word incorrectly without bothering to check if you're correct about my improper usage is just being dumb.

[Gutshot John]

You seem very selective on both your memory and facts.

Funny that this annoys you given your own predilection for doing the same.

Constitutionally the President has ZERO control over spending. The "power of the purse" resides in Congress. From 1995-2000, Clinton dealt with a REPUBLICAN congress. Apparently they didn't share your foresight.

I'll concede the ground to your obviously superior intellect.

[RTA]

Funny that this annoys you given your own predilection for doing the same.

Constitutionally the President has ZERO control over spending. The "power of the purse" resides in Congress. From 1995-2000, Clinton dealt with a REPUBLICAN congress. Apparently they didn't share your foresight.

I'll concede the ground to your obviously superior intellect.

Oh Lord...constitutionally, we have the RTKBA. Make sure when you're blaming the Republican Congress for the defense cuts that you maintain your intellectual honesty and give them credit for balancing the budget and the surplus. Oh wait, everyone says Clinton did that. How does one need foresight to LOOK BACK at radical Islamic attacks?

Sweet, I hold the field. Don't get butt hurt because you tried to call me stupid for using a word you don't know. I never said nor implied that I was superior to you, just that it is stupid to call someone out on something that you don't know 100% yourself.

Have a good weekend, I'm drinking a killer homebrew right now, if you're anywhere near Raleigh, NC we should have this discussion over a couple some time, because here we're just repeating ourselves. At least in person one of us could punch the other one in the mouth.

[Gutshot John]

Oh Lord...constitutionally, we have the RTKBA. Make sure when you're blaming the Republican Congress for the defense cuts that you maintain your intellectual honesty and give them credit for balancing the budget and the surplus. Oh wait, everyone says Clinton did that. How does one need foresight to LOOK BACK at radical Islamic attacks?

Sweet, I hold the field. Don't get butt hurt because you tried to call me stupid for using a word you don't know. I never said nor implied that I was superior to you, just that it is stupid to call someone out on something that you don't know 100% yourself.

Have a good weekend, I'm drinking a killer homebrew right now, if you're anywhere near Raleigh, NC we should have this discussion over a couple some time, because here we're just repeating ourselves. At least in person one of us could punch the other one in the mouth.

Seriously...did you actually read what I wrote? I don't recall blaming the Republican Congress for anything.

I simply pointed out that virtually NO ONE in government with power over the purse had the foresight to make terrorism a national defense priority. You made claims that Clinton slashed defense spending...something he couldn't have done without Republicans in Congress. Now you want to bring in the balanced budget? Can't have your cake and eat it too.

Like I said your hindsight is 20/20.

[RTA]

Seriously...did you actually read what I wrote? I don't recall blaming the Republican Congress for anything.

I simply pointed out that virtually NO ONE in government with power over the purse had the foresight to make terrorism a national defense priority. You made claims that Clinton slashed defense spending...something he couldn't have done without Republicans in Congress. Now you want to bring in the balanced budget? Can't have your cake and eat it too.

Like I said your hindsight is 20/20.

Every post from you is a different argument. You should go back and read how many questions I've presented you that you've totally dodged. The record is clear, like my hindsight, and like the hindsight of our leaders in 1995 when they looked back to 1993 when the WTC was bombed.

By the way, you keep mixing up hindsight and foresight, or you're being obtuse again and just accusing me of either to play both sides of the field. Don't believe me? Go back and read your posts.

Mmm, beer foam. Its delicious. Have a nice weekend, enjoy the last (meaningless) word.

[Gutshot John]

Every post from you is a different argument.

Physician heal thyself. You're confusing what you do with what I'm doing. Don't believe me? Look back at your posts.

You should go back and read how many questions I've presented you that you've totally dodged.

Uhm no I just didn't respond to the Lewinsky/Waco nonsense simply because it wasn't relevant.

The record is clear, like my hindsight, and like the hindsight of our leaders in 1995 when they looked back to 1993 when the WTC was bombed.

Take it up with them.

By the way, you keep mixing up hindsight and foresight, or you're being obtuse again and just accusing me of either to play both sides of the field. Don't believe me? Go back and read your posts.

blahblahblah. No I'm not confusing them. Hindsight means that you look backwards after events and point out that everything was obvious...sorry but it wasn't.

Now who's being obtuse?

[Lumpy196]

We risk discrediting ourselves with much of I what I keep seeing posted over and over on the internet gun forums.

Yes be weary of their intentions. But jumping to far reaching conclusions is only going to convince the unconvinced that we're a bunch of wack jobs.

[Outlander Systems]

I called into a radio show a few months ago about this one.

I'll lay it out, again.

Based on the unemployment numbers over the last few months, the O-Man can probably entice people to serve that are not cut out for the military. Like, handing out bottles of water during a Hurricane or something of the sort.

I didn't vote for the O-Man, but I'm not going to cast him as guilty until proved innocent. I'm not exactly slobbering on myself, hailing him as the Messiah with spiralling zombie eyes, but I'm not throwing him in as the Antichrist either.

In all fairness, his policy on the 2A sucks ass, his referral to the Constitution as a set of "negative values" sent chills down my spine, and I'm not 100% sure he's not a wolf in sheep's clothing, but I don't see him as evil incarnate either. I think he lucked out that the bulk of the US population had become fed up with the country's direction, and voted out of emotion, instead of logic. Personally, I don't think anyone should hold the rank of CIC without having prior service, and I find the fact that Americans effectively bitch-slapped a war hero in favour of an unknown figure, who's been surrounded by terrorists, gangsters, and generally unsavory folk throughout his adult life, but I guess it goes to show that this little popularity contest shows where the bulk of America's backbone lies.

I think the fact that neither candidate's refusal to support the bankster bailout bill, shows what a mass of gutless suckers we all are for even electing any of these swindling hucksters; but I've digressed.

I'll let the new boss prove me wrong, or prove me right, but I'm not going to totally flip out over a CDF that probably couldn't get the funding to have a marching band, let alone become some sort of secret police.

On that conspiratorial little note, does anyone honestly believe the military, full of patriotic, and heroic Americans, sit by idly whilst a Tyrant's enforcement arm be created for the repudiation of the freedoms they fight and die for?

[texasrangers]

[QUOTE=citizensoldier16;294465]That may be the case, but like you said, SCOTUS says otherwise. Reference BUTLER v. PERRY, 240 U.S. 328 (1916).

And the Heller decision proved that 4 out of our 9 "constitutional experts and interpreters" have absolutely no respect for the 2nd amendment to our Bill of Rights. If you may recall, one year after that SC decision, Woodrow Wilson entered us into another needless war, one that he said he would "not send our boys over there to fight" but did anyway once he got elected on the rhetoric. It didn't matter though, because the propaganda of the day depicted poor innocent women and children drowning after the Lusitania had been sunk, so millions of brave men volunteered, and hundreds of thousands never came back. Again, how were these conflicts in Europe a TRUE threat to American security? In reality however, those passengers on the Lusitania traveled at their own risk because the German consulate had taken out ads in major New York newspapers saying that ships carrying arms, ammunition and supplies to Great Britain would be fired upon. Wilson is also the same marxist pig who signed off on the Federal Reserve System (the 5th plank of the communist manifesto - look it up), and a heavy, progressive income tax (the 2nd plank of the manifesto - again, please look it up). At the time of course, it was not heavy, merely 1% of income of over $20,000 (off the top of my head, but I'm pretty sure). Wilson is also the same marxist imbecile who tried to enter America into the League of Nations, the first tangible form of world government. But that didn't work, so another war was needed, and then the United Nations treaty was ratified by the Senate and passed. Alger Hiss, a convicted communist spy, played a very important role in the creation of the UN. So, in conclusion, just because an unaccountable group of men who clearly do not understand individual liberty tell me that being forced to be in the military and risk my own life for the benifits of the State is NOT involuntary servitude, doesn't mean that I have to accept it as fact, or the truth, or what I have to do.