55 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

You're absolutely right about biden and the stair stumble. The wind is a stupid excuse, but he should just take it easy. 

 

But, lets not forget how the media attacked Trump when he didn't walk fast enough down a ramp. Every word misspoken every single detail was blown out of proportion by the media. Why should biden be any different.

Jeez...give it up, please.  You are so one sided it gets boring....and this is way off topic.

16 minutes ago, ICELANDMAN said:

 

Maybe you don't quite understand what Putin meant, when you sends soldiers to the front you are automatically a murderer. And as you can see, there are many honorable killers around the world.

He directed the murders of many journalists and political dissidents.  None of which were on the front line.  None were soldiers.  And there was nothing honorable about it.

 

Do some research on how many journalists have been killed in Russia.  It's stunning.  And how many dissidents have been killed while in other countries.  A few recently in the UK.  You are aware of them, right?

4 minutes ago, ICELANDMAN said:

Maybe you don't quite understand what Putin meant, when you sends soldiers to the front you are automatically a murderer. And as you can see, there are many honorable killers around the world.

 

You quoted sputnik and that is what I requoted. Not Prince Vlad

 

As for honorable killers ... that means assassinations, poisonings and others are not honorable (?), interesting freudian slip. BTW I like the 'jumped out of window' ones myself.  

On 3/19/2021 at 11:26 AM, Dmitry2222 said:

Example, please. Are you talking about fake poisoning of the Navalniy? At any case he is just blogger who produces low quality videos and has 3% rating on the peak.  Do you think a person with 3% rating and blowing western money may pose a threat?

How about using a chemical warfare nerve agent against a dissident living in the UK 

(Salisbury)?

24 minutes ago, LomSak27 said:

 

You quoted sputnik and that is what I requoted. Not Prince Vlad

 

As for honorable killers ... that means assassinations, poisonings and others are not honorable (?), interesting freudian slip. BTW I like the 'jumped out of window' ones myself.  

 

Yes, exactly what I wrote these honorable killers are because the people like you and I consider them honorable heads of state elected more or less like honest citizens, so they have acquired the honorary title whether you want it or not.

 

2 hours ago, ICELANDMAN said:

 

Maybe you don't quite understand what Putin meant, when you sends soldiers to the front you are automatically a murderer. And as you can see, there are many honorable killers around the world.

Few people would agree with your broad definition of murderer.

On 3/19/2021 at 2:04 AM, blazes said:

Whereas it's ok if American presidents give the order to assassinate or attempt to assassinate foreign leaders (like Salvador Allende or Fidel Castro).

It's like Animal Farm:  Americans assassinate good.

Foreigners assassinate bad.

Got any examples from the last fifty years, preferably post-cold war? 

On 3/19/2021 at 12:26 AM, Dmitry2222 said:

Example, please. Are you talking about fake poisoning of the Navalniy? At any case he is just blogger who produces low quality videos and has 3% rating on the peak.  Do you think a person with 3% rating and blowing western money may pose a threat?

Are you arguing that Navalny wasn't poisened?  Or that it is ok if he was because you don't consider him important?

On 3/19/2021 at 1:36 AM, bluehippie said:

If the US is to stand up to China it needs Russia.
I think Putin has Joe's number this is true however about most people most of all Democrats were generally ignorant of their political rivals thanks to the bubble of their own fawning media.

Alienating Russia is a needless and enormous mistake that puts the USA in a very bad position.

Trump was smart enough to recognize Russia's role in effecting US policy against China, Biden unfortunately is way out of his depth and the world knows it.

Comically wrong in so many ways.  How did Trump get help from Russia in standing up to China?  Why didn't Trump seek help from other free market democracies in standing up to China?  Why would Russia be of any significance to China?

On 3/18/2021 at 6:25 PM, talahtnut said:

Biden talks with Putin live broadcast, that would be really funny,

but the US administration could never allow that.

How often do world leaders have live broadcasts with the leaders of hostile countries?  Not scripted and controlled press conferences, but actual debates?  How often did Trump?

9 hours ago, Jingthing said:

It's kind of a meaningless metric. Wars aren't created equal. Some are necessary like World War 2 and some are mistakes like Iraq. 

 

Each of us will have their own opinion about the "necessity" of any war but the truth is that both Republican and Democrat presidents have been in office when the USA has become active in them. Democratic presidents were in charge at the start of both the Korean and Vietnamese campaigns.

 

The  main mistake in Iraq was that the the US + Allies did not follow through into Iraq in 1991 to stop Saddam then and there - there would have been less of a problem plus more acceptance right after Kuwait had been invaded. 

38 minutes ago, heybruce said:

How often do world leaders have live broadcasts with the leaders of hostile countries?  Not scripted and controlled press conferences, but actual debates?  How often did Trump?

 

How often do political leaders publicly call each other ""killers"? The truth is that most of them might do so and have a valid case.

 

But it is just not PC. is it?

6 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

How often do political leaders publicly call each other ""killers"? The truth is that most of them might do so and have a valid case.

 

But it is just not PC. is it?

Killing during a war is one thing.  Extra judicial killings like done by Putin is another.  So yes, he's a killer.  In league with leaders of other authoritarian countries.  Like Saudi Arabia.  MBS is a killer also.  That's been proven.

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

How often do world leaders have live broadcasts with the leaders of hostile countries?  Not scripted and controlled press conferences, but actual debates?  How often did Trump?

It's not done.

It was just a troll suggestion by Putin.

The obvious dig is Biden isn't fit to do it.

Biden was plenty fit to debate the former president guy.

Putin was actively involved in promoting the Biden dementia narrative in the recent election to try to prop up his useful idiot former president guy.

You have live debates in elections.

Enemy powers don't have live debates.

 

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/russia-spreading-disinformation-bidens-mental-health-dhs/story?id=72879355

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

 

How often do political leaders publicly call each other ""killers"? The truth is that most of them might do so and have a valid case.

 

But it is just not PC. is it?

Political leaders use that kind of language when they want to drive home a point ("axis of evil" by Bush) or when they speak without thinking (always by Trump).  Biden was driving home a point.

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

 

Each of us will have their own opinion about the "necessity" of any war but the truth is that both Republican and Democrat presidents have been in office when the USA has become active in them. Democratic presidents were in charge at the start of both the Korean and Vietnamese campaigns.

 

The  main mistake in Iraq was that the the US + Allies did not follow through into Iraq in 1991 to stop Saddam then and there - there would have been less of a problem plus more acceptance right after Kuwait had been invaded. 

What makes you think winning the peace in Iraq would have been easier in 1991 than in 2003?  Other than the fact that Bush Sr was much smarter than Bush Jr?

2 hours ago, heybruce said:

Few people would agree with your broad definition of murderer.

 

Sarcasm is not for everyone

6 hours ago, heybruce said:

Political leaders use that kind of language when they want to drive home a point ("axis of evil" by Bush) or when they speak without thinking (always by Trump).  Biden was driving home a point.

 

Well it looks like he hit his thumb with the hammer. 

6 hours ago, heybruce said:

What makes you think winning the peace in Iraq would have been easier in 1991 than in 2003?  Other than the fact that Bush Sr was much smarter than Bush Jr?

 

Everything was in place and ready to go. Iraqi forces were already in disarray. 

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

 

Everything was in place and ready to go. Iraqi forces were already in disarray. 

You mean they weren't able to mount the kind of fierce and prolonged offense when they engaged with Americans in the 2nd Iraq war? Those of us who actually followed the events know that the Iraqi army was not going to be able to withstand an American invasion in that war. The probably always was what would happen after its defeat.  As General Powell remarked in dissuading George H.W. Bush from invading Iraq "If you break it, you own it." 

8 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

Everything was in place and ready to go. Iraqi forces were already in disarray. 

Winning the war is the easy part.  I posted "winning the peace", which is the hard part, as has been demonstrated in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Bush Sr understood this, as did the military under both Bush Presidencies (and now as well).  Unfortunately Bush Jr and his administration of chicken-hawks didn't understand this, and the result was and is an ongoing disaster.

 

Unfortunately a great many Americans also don't understand how hard it is to win the peace, regardless of how recently the difficulties have been demonstrated.  They keep expecting real wars to play out the way they do in movies.

8 hours ago, placeholder said:

You mean they weren't able to mount the kind of fierce and prolonged offense when they engaged with Americans in the 2nd Iraq war? Those of us who actually followed the events know that the Iraqi army was not going to be able to withstand an American invasion in that war. The probably always was what would happen after its defeat.  As General Powell remarked in dissuading George H.W. Bush from invading Iraq "If you break it, you own it." 

 

I mean what I said. The consequences post invasion are a different matter. 

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

Winning the war is the easy part.  I posted "winning the peace", which is the hard part, as has been demonstrated in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Bush Sr understood this, as did the military under both Bush Presidencies (and now as well).  Unfortunately Bush Jr and his administration of chicken-hawks didn't understand this, and the result was and is an ongoing disaster.

 

Unfortunately a great many Americans also don't understand how hard it is to win the peace, regardless of how recently the difficulties have been demonstrated.  They keep expecting real wars to play out the way they do in movies.

 

Not sure about easy but I see your point. But leaving Saddam free in Iraq for another 12 years did not remove the threat of a repeat invasion of Kuwait.

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

 

Not sure about easy but I see your point. But leaving Saddam free in Iraq for another 12 years did not remove the threat of a repeat invasion of Kuwait.

The clear demonstration of how easy it was to destroy Saddam's military removed the threat of another invasion of Kuwait.

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

I mean what I said. The consequences post invasion are a different matter. 

 

 

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

Not sure about easy but I see your point. But leaving Saddam free in Iraq for another 12 years did not remove the threat of a repeat invasion of Kuwait.

Actually, Iraq's armed forces had greatly deteriorated since the Kuwait War. So the danger posed by Iraq was minimal. 

News flash! It is moronic to call the leader of a Super Power "a killer." Begging the question, why is he being  hailed as a strong intelligent leader? The following site has info' that helps me understand the answer.

https://kreativcopywriting.com/10-logical-fallacies-know-spot/

54 minutes ago, rcuthbert said:

News flash! It is moronic to call the leader of a Super Power "a killer." Begging the question, why is he being  hailed as a strong intelligent leader? The following site has info' that helps me understand the answer.

https://kreativcopywriting.com/10-logical-fallacies-know-spot/

Moronic to call a killer a killer?  Who cares what his position is.  He's a proven killer.  No denying that.

 

Congrats to Biden for calling him out.  Time for these poisonings and mysterious deaths while in jail to stop.  Russians deserve better.

3 hours ago, rcuthbert said:

News flash! It is moronic to call the leader of a Super Power "a killer." Begging the question, why is he being  hailed as a strong intelligent leader? The following site has info' that helps me understand the answer.

https://kreativcopywriting.com/10-logical-fallacies-know-spot/

Were you equally concerned when Trump called the erratic despot of a nuclear state "little Rocketman"?

4 hours ago, rcuthbert said:

News flash! It is moronic to call the leader of a Super Power "a killer." Begging the question, why is he being  hailed as a strong intelligent leader? The following site has info' that helps me understand the answer.

https://kreativcopywriting.com/10-logical-fallacies-know-spot/

Biden calls him a killer because he has nothing better to say, typical his from the Clinton drone and machine gun helicopter supporters camp who's not so clever. 

7 minutes ago, Kwasaki said:

Biden calls him a killer because he has nothing better to say, typical his from the Clinton drone and machine gun helicopter supporters camp who's not so clever. 

You prefer Trump saying “he gets along with Putin well” or “ I love the King (Salman)” even both are killers. That’s pretty dumb.