Barry Otero vs Vlad the Impaler

[Guest TankerHC]

I like boxing, been following it since I was a kid and my dad fought for Joe Poodles. I especially like the old stuff from the 40's and 50's. But none of it compares to the ass whoopin that the "Most Powerful Man in the World" just took. This was a Tyson - Marvis Frazier moment if I ever saw one (Politically). 

 

Headline

 

In Just 24 hours...

Russia seizes peacemaker role

Assad accepts weapons proposal

COngress backs off Obama Vote

Putin tells US to reject use of force

 

WHAT DOES HE SAY NOW?

 

 

I predict he will take credit for "Working closely with the Russians and Chinese" (Meaning they dictated to him what to do) and will become the hero of the Libs...oh wait...he's already the hero. Left-Right and Center McCain will talk about how the use of force was always on the table, but the great negotiating skills of the current Administration averted war.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/10/obama-facing-pressure-from-putin-hill-to-back-off-syria-strike-ahead-speech/

 

Why is it I also get the feeling the "Flags" were doing some negotiating themselves and Barry took their advice?

Edited September 10, 2013 by TankerHC

[Guest TankerHC]

Almost forgot. Does anyone else agree that Vlad also negated the authority and "so called" power of the UN? While the Ban-Ki Moon was wringing his hands and fretting (Every head of the UN has been a worthless POS, Ban is no exception), old Vlad was laying the groundwork on the illegal strike by Obama on a sovereign power. 

 

This is not our, the Russians, the Chinese or anyone else's Civil War, it's Assad's civil war. And Putin is no amatuer. I suspect after reading our new President (Since yesterday) Madame Hillary Rodham Clinton, that they may attempt a strike even though Congress may fail to pass the authority. if they do, Putin now has every right to respond.

 

http://youtu.be/sUU5rMgSj_I

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Kerry and Obama are already taking credit for it. I also heard an incredibly childish statement from Obama, yesterday.

It was one of those dumb kid remarks, "I'm not insignificant, they are!" Something to that effect, anyway.

[gun sane]

I wonder what it's going to cost us when it's time to pay up to the Rooskies.  Oh, well, we didn't need those missile bases anyway. 

[Oh Shoot]

Well, it's pretty simple.

 

Putin is simply brokering a deal to leave Assad regime in power, as he figures Assad can eventually quell things with whatever conventional weapons he has, and with whatever else Putin may send him.

 

Why? Preserves a Russian port in Mediterranean, airfields and consequent boots on ground access to the region.

 

If Russia wants Assad out, they'll take him out one way or the other.

 

- OS

Edited September 10, 2013 by Oh Shoot

[greenego]

I can't wait for the movie, "How Barack Hussein Obama Saved The World".

[Guest TankerHC]

Well, it's pretty simple.

 

Putin is simply brokering a deal to leave Assad regime in power, as he figures Assad can eventually quell things with whatever conventional weapons he has, and with whatever else Putin may send him.

 

Why? Preserves a Russian port in Mediterranean, airfields and consequent boots on ground access to the region.

 

If Russia wants Assad out, they'll take him out one way or the other.

 

- OS

 

Can you blame him? The Middle East is not the United States. We removed Saddam Hussein. Look how that turned out for Iraq. We supported the Muslim Brotherhood and helped remove Mubarak, turned out pretty well. We helped Muslim Extremists (Along with the Muslim Brotherhood, who are also extremists) take down Khadaffi, another success story. Obama wants Israel to give back all the land it won in the 67 war and give half of Jerusalem to the Muslims (Obama should take note, Muslims already have half of Jerusalem) and he wants to get involved in Syria's Civil War in support of Muslim extremists and terrorists.

 

I suspect that would turn out as well as the rest. 

[Oh Shoot]

Can you blame him? The Middle East is not the United States. We removed Saddam Hussein....

 

Yeps, it's all an immoral business, and laughable viewed over a longer context for anyone to call the US as the "good guys".

 

We armed and supported Shah Pahlavi, a dictator not any better than the ayatollahs that followed. Then armed Sadaam in Iraq to take on Iran. And incidentally, supplied some of the chemical WMD components that Sadaam used on the Kurds due to Reagan removing Iraq from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list.

 

If you throw in our overt and covert involvements all over the world in undeclared wars the US has been complicit in killing untold numbers of innocents, but of course the rallying cry here is always "It's For the Children". Right.

 

It's never really for "defense", but "American Interests". There is real justification for us being called "imperialists" by revolutionary groups around the world for 150 years. I suppose ultimately we can't be strict isolationists, but I give a lot of credence to the idea that we should be such as much as possible.

 

- OS

[Guest TankerHC]

Yeps, it's all an immoral business, and laughable viewed over a longer context for anyone to call the US as the "good guys".

 

We armed and supported Shah Pahlavi, a dictator not any better than the ayatollahs that followed. Then armed Sadaam in Iraq to take on Iran. And incidentally, supplied some of the chemical WMD components that Sadaam used on the Kurds due to Reagan removing Iraq from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list.

 

If you throw in our overt and covert involvements all over the world in undeclared wars the US has been complicit in killing untold numbers of innocents, but of course the rallying cry here is always "It's For the Children". Right.

 

It's never really for "defense", but "American Interests". There is real justification for us being called "imperialists" by revolutionary groups around the world for 150 years. I suppose ultimately we can't be strict isolationists, but I give a lot of credence to the idea that we should be such as much as possible.

 

- OS

 

 

 

Remember Soldier Of Fortune Magazine? I was an avid reader in the 70's, especially when they were reporting on the South African Civil War (Angola) and the Mercenaries and the CIA. We were overthrowing small African nations and South and Central American nationa "at will" in the 60's and 70's. Wonder whatever happened to those guys. We need them again today. Some Middle East Nations need overthrowing without complete involvement. Of course that was back when the US could keep secrets). Actually I do know what happened to them. Those guys got old. They were former members of the OSS and did things that would make peoples hair stand on end, like walking around Tokyo in disguise in 43 and 44 collecting Intelligence. Got Balls? Of course those were the same guys responsible for making changes in governments in Southeast Asia with boolits. 

 

Diem - 63 (Proven CIA involvement), Van Mihn -64, (Only he did survive, his aide was executed, proven CIA involvement, WH denial, but we agreed to "stay out of it"), Khan -65, Proven CIA involvement, Used to be "The US doesnt like you, well looks like your own Officers will be throwing a Coup Party. Today, we dont like you.......well, we will do SOMETHING, we just dont know what.  

Edited September 11, 2013 by TankerHC

[Dolomite_supafly]

Remember Soldier Of Fortune Magazine? I was an avid reader in the 70's, especially when they were reporting on the South African Civil War (Angola) and the Mercenaries and the CIA. We were overthrowing small African nations and South and Central American nationa "at will" in the 60's and 70's. Wonder whatever happened to those guys. We need them again today. Some Middle East Nations need overthrowing without complete involvement. Of course that was back when the US could keep secrets). Actually I do know what happened to them. Those guys got old. They were former members of the OSS and did things that would make peoples hair stand on end, like walking around Tokyo in disguise in 43 and 44 collecting Intelligence. Got Balls? Of course those were the same guys responsible for making changes in governments in Southeast Asia with boolits. 

 

Diem - 63 (Proven CIA involvement), Van Mihn -64, (Only he did survive, his aide was executed, proven CIA involvement, WH denial, but we agreed to "stay out of it"), Khan -65, Proven CIA involvement, Used to be "The US doesnt like you, well looks like your own Officers will be throwing a Coup Party. Today, we dont like you.......well, we will do SOMETHING, we just dont know what.  

 

There is a new breed that can do the same today. Problem is, like everything else, people cannot keep their mouths shut when they use them or no one has the balls to make the call to use them. They are used now but in such a small scale that it has no effect and are more of intelligence gathering roles than anything else.

 

The capabiilties of some of the civillian contracting companies is amazing. One even said they could stand up an armed force and have that force anywhere in the world quicker than our military. Pretty bold statement except they had all the equipment, aircraft and their own private airstrips to take off and land their own 747's. They said they could assist any of our allies with men, supplies and arms then bill them after assisting them. One of them even bought a fleet of Close Air Support fixed wing aircraft. I will say that they are generally better equipped than most of the military units they were embeded with. They also had more outside assets as a general rule depending on where they were.

 

 

Every single conflict we involve ourselves in creates more countries that gravitate toward those who seek to destroy or control us. We are getting involved in all these conflicts that drain our resources while those who want us to topple sit back and continue to build up. Our leaders are bowing down to other major players while stripping our military's budgets and capabilities. It is almost like those in power want us to fail when something big comes our way. Every major war that has been fought in the last 200 years has been fought on someone else's soil, this will not be the case for the next one. I only hope that nuclear weapons are not used. We are, and have been, at war with China for a very long time. They have been involved in industrial espionage as well as covertly assisting our enemies for a very long time. Our troops have found Chinese special forces imbedded with Al Qaeda and Taliban types in Afghanistan. As well as the Chinese arms that are routinely showing up in conflicts we are involved in. Al Qaeda and the Taliban are not buying these, they are being supplied. China has oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico while our government forbids US companies from drilling in the same locations.

 

What should have happened 30+ years ago is mind our own business when it comes to other country's affairs. Instead we have continually tried to "help" those counties by taking their stable government and destabilizing it. Then we throw our money at them hoping to buy their love which never happens. This drains our resources and contributes to the financial situation our country is in. And if for nothing else we should help our own citizens before helping out other countries.

 

We are heading towards a place we do not want to be. The teams are picking their players and it seems like more and more players are heading to the other team. We are at the top of most of most lists as far as military strength but Russia and China are number two and three. Those two combined are likely stronger than our own forces. We have replaced actual personnel with technology, I believe a huge mistake. We should not replace but suppliment our troops with technology. It takes boots on the ground to win ANY conflict. And when it comes to numbers of troops China has at least 4x what we do.

[Clod Stomper]

It is almost like those in power want us to fail when something big comes our way.

It's almost EXACTLY like that, isn't it. That has been my suspicion for a while now.